nope. 4500 will kill 3750.Quote:
Originally posted by charlie
But how about this
15 x 250 1:1 = 3750
15 x 300 5:4 = 4500
Is someone trying to say 3750 can be faster than 4500 ?????
C
Printable View
nope. 4500 will kill 3750.Quote:
Originally posted by charlie
But how about this
15 x 250 1:1 = 3750
15 x 300 5:4 = 4500
Is someone trying to say 3750 can be faster than 4500 ?????
C
of course. it's 750mhz we're talking about.
just hit 10k someone please:D
Nope...Quote:
Originally posted by charlie
But how about this
15 x 250 1:1 = 3750
15 x 300 5:4 = 4500
Is someone trying to say 3750 can be faster than 4500 ?????
C
18x250 1:1 is faster than 15x300 5:4 ;)
Well, of course :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by Bennah
Nope...
18x250 1:1 is faster than 15x300 5:4 ;)
But since most peeps have P4 CPU with 1 multi....
let's say a 2.8... if you have very good BH-5 and can run 270 1:1 for 3780mHz. Now the CPU is not at it's limit. Let's push the CPU farther to 295 or 4130mHz 5:4 or 236mem speed, of course in practice the 5:4 is faster. P4 1:1 benching is totally irrelevant (except if you have 18X ES like Macci) because the CPU's are capable of more raw speed.
The 4130 5:4 will be speedier than 3780 1:1 all day long.
C
we know, what you said has no relevance to what anyone said, however. :) (although true)Quote:
Originally posted by charlie
Well, of course :rolleyes:
But since most peeps have P4 CPU with 1 multi....
let's say a 2.8... if you have very good BH-5 and can run 270 1:1 for 3780mHz. Now the CPU is not at it's limit. Let's push the CPU farther to 295 or 4130mHz 5:4 or 236mem speed, of course in practice the 5:4 is faster. P4 1:1 benching is totally irrelevant (except if you have 18X ES like Macci) because the CPU's are capable of more raw speed.
The 4130 5:4 will be speedier than 3780 1:1 all day long.
C
Who's crapping this thread, and why are you rolling your eyes?Quote:
Originally posted by QuadDamage
:rolleyes:
OPP's faster in 3DMark2001 right? why because his chip is more powerfull. So why does OPP lose in '03 even though his chip's faster? WinXP maybe?
I don't know the vid clocks OPP had on his card though. Anyways let's not crap this thread.
We are having a discussion...what's wrong with that?
You realize what i'm saying is, I don't think OPP has a disadvantage because of running Win2k. His GT1 score is higher even though the rest are lower (because of lower card clocks).
GT1 is much more CPU dependant. That shows its chugging along just fine...IMO if he had macci's clocks he would be pulling at LEAST the same or higher score.
yes it did....one guy said one thing, another said something different... and blah.Quote:
Originally posted by unrealneo
we know, what you said has no relevance to what anyone said, however. :) (although true)
in orian's computer, running 3.9Ghz 3:2, 325FSB was faster in 3d01 than 3.5GHz 5:4 (not sure on the fsb on that one...)
Is it only me or is 3dmark03 search facility really really slow at the moment ? I've done a search on XT9800 and macci's score is 9923 ..is this the latest, i thought it was closer to 10k than that ?
If I do a search on all it just times out.
I'm surprised that 5:4 is so much of a hindrence that 50MHz FSb still does not get it above 1:1, good to know though.
I know what Charlie is saying, with a locked multiplier you just have to bite the bullet and 1:1 will be the first thing to go so that the cpu is not speed capped artificially.
I've been thinking the same thing about AMD64, at present I have a VIA Abit board that does not like clockgen so it runs at 240x10 or so 1:1. If I moved over to the nforce3 Gigabyte K8N that is still sitting on the shelf and run it 300x8 6:5 would the 6:5 and slightly slower nforce3 chipset mean it is not much quicker ?
Regards
Andy
Soulburner, let me explain it.
XP gives better GPU scores in 03' than 2K, even at the same clocks. GT1 will favor 2K, as its mostly all system.
So basically the question is do you run XP on the AMD and lose system power for better clocks, or get the GT1 boost with 2K and suffer a few tenths of a frame in the latter tests? Intel works best on XP so it has that first advantage.
Sucks about OPP's lack of cooling. Its a 2-man race now. :(
zakelwe, I havent uploaded any new results to the ORB yet. the 9967 run is still on my bench HDD.
Have to try the 10k again later today.
Ok, starting to lose track of what is going on , so much is happening.Quote:
Originally posted by macci
zakelwe, I havent uploaded any new results to the ORB yet. the 9967 run is still on my bench HDD.
Have to try the 10k again later today.
have to agree with Hallowed, shame Opp is seemingly out, must be frustrating if you can't bench with a chance of getting the title back. Maybe CC and Opp have a good plan B. FUGGER being quiet again maybe a new run soon.
Good luck macci.
Regards
Andy
It has nothing to do with card clocks? :DQuote:
OPP's faster in 3DMark2001 right? why because his chip is more powerfull.
If you take the total FPS number from car hi and lobbys you'll see that P4 EE ES and FX are pretty much equal on that one too.
A64 at 11x275 1:1 2-2-2-5-8-16 (it runs SuperPi 8M at that speed) should come quite close to EE and FX thou.. ;)
Some just pop the cap allready :)
I wouldn't discount Oppainter just yet. He still might have a few more pts up his sleeve. I think Macci is wise to wait and see what his challengers are going to do next. 10K will be broken, but Fugger and Oppainter will have to push Macci to get it.
I didn't know anybody was? I'd be glad to see any of the three get it.Quote:
I wouldn't discount Oppainter just yet.
What a nonsensical statementthat is. He should wait for the other guys, to see what they do, and possibly pop 10k? ;) He should just go for it, they all should.Quote:
I think Macci is wise to wait and see what his challengers are going to do next.
Sheesh man.....errr...ummmm.....jah ;)
"You're almost at the top of Mt. Everest, but I think you should wait to see what the other guys are gonna do"
;)
His Cascade is dead. Unless he gets new one built, like today, he isn't going to be in the race for 10k im afraid :(.Quote:
Originally posted by Kanavit
I wouldn't discount Oppainter just yet. He still might have a few more pts up his sleeve.
Macci was first to 10k in 3DMark2001...and its looking like he will be in 2003 as well.
Heh, I can imagine CC working doubletime trying to get a new cascade rolling...
Its nearly an endurance race, first to 10k, and times running out for two teams here. :stick:
If the 4.2's are 150 points over the 4.1's then OPP would have it, too. :(
i didn't say card clocks are not important, i said i didn't know what clocks OPP runs his at.Quote:
Originally posted by macci
It has nothing to do with card clocks? :D
If you take the total FPS number from car hi and lobbys you'll see that P4 EE ES and FX are pretty much equal on that one too.
A64 at 11x275 1:1 2-2-2-5-8-16 (it runs SuperPi 8M at that speed) should come quite close to EE and FX thou.. ;)
Also macci, i wasn't talking about A64, timings and superpi, i was stating FX-51 is simply the most powerful 3D chip and EE wins in '03 only because '03 is optimised for WinXP that's it.
I have to agree:toast:Quote:
Originally posted by QuadDamage
i was stating FX-51 is simply the most powerful 3D chip and EE wins in '03 only because '03 is optimised for WinXP that's it.
OPP
Here it is:Quote:
can u post a pic? lol
http://www.akiba-pc.com/broken.jpg
It was not designed for 657MHz 2.28V :D
damn, this 10k race seemed a lot longer than most had expected :p:
damn macci, saw that and almost had a heart attack. (before pic came up)Quote:
Originally posted by macci
Here it is:
I thought you'd done it! :D
This hardware doesn't want to go to 10k very easily it seems. I've got 9962, 9965, 9966 and 9967 now - all with different GPU/RAM/CPU clocks... :brick:
The card has taken insane amount of punishment and it still keeps on going :D I'm sure she'll get 10k in the end...if not.. :bsod:
I'm sure the magic number will appear when you're least expecting it. :)