Printable View
http://www.expreview.com/img/news/071011/05.jpg
http://www.expreview.com/img/news/071011/06.jpg
OS: Windows XP SP2
CPU: E6600 OC 400MHz X 9
mobo: NV 650i Ultra
memory: DDR2-800 5-5-5-15
graphic card: GeForce 8800GT (512MB 256bit)
driver: 167.26
[FF warning :(]http://news.expreview.com/2007-10-11...9246d3907.html
Wow, 12K on a e6600 @ 3.6ghz is impressive. With my GTS and q6600 @ 4.0ghz I only pull 13.7K ish.
I wonder how AMD's 2950 will fair in comparison to this!
FF warning ? how come non of the links from this site work in FF, nice scores though with a dual core even
ATI w/ 3G C2Q = 12K '06.
However, I don't know if that's the $299 version or $229 version, seeing as the 8800GT should end up on the lower side of the price range (hopefully).
So they're equally matched in benchies.
Usually when that happens ATI loses out in games :p But these two should be the quintessential Crysis video cards.
Perkam
Off topic but... What version do you use? I have no issues in FFQuote:
Originally Posted by Rattle
@Perkam - thanks for that.
Roll on November :)
newest version 2.0.0.7 FF
I might have to get a 680i again and grab 2 of these lol
So seems the the earlier INQ scores were somewhat accurate then too with probably a bit lower cpu power. Would mean the slightly expensier 2950 scores ~12.6k then probably with E6600 @ 3.6GHz.
It's been a while since it's been this clear for me which gfx cards to look at, 2950 Pro or 8800GT, the actual game benchmarks will have to decide which of these but I'm not hesitating a bit picking either of these.
Both should have nice shader processing peformance for their price (amount SPs are good and shader clock is high while core clock on 8800GT remains fairly low which we overclockers like especially taking into account 65nm shrink goodness) which is good for the latest games which shows only more complex and heavier shader usage.
NO, how could this be. scored about the same as mine sys @3.6Ghz and card oced to 620/1067.. if this is what the lesser card perform imagine what the next highend will score. njam njam.....
Has there been a picture leaked of a G92 card yet?
yep not naked though, its in the link but its not the first one
Man with my cpu oced to 3.5ghz and my 8800 oced to 600/900 I can only pulll 10400 :(. If this card is not too expensive this maybe a great purchase
i was thinking the same :( my card doesn't do that !Quote:
Originally Posted by `danny
8148 CPU score? How come I only get like 200 in there? My Q6600 runs it at 1FPs all the time, what the...
thats 3148 and thats mormal for a c2d at that speed
wow my computer can score about half of that!
not surprising though, but then again kinda pointless with newer more powerful cards on the way.
12k is on a 3.6 C2D.
Most of us will score 10-11k stock.
Sidenote: Everyone should remember when the 7xxx came out how impossible 10k 06 single card was :p
I also still remember Nvidia touting first to 10k 05 with two 6800 Ultras in SLI :p:
Perkam
3DMark06 looks nice and all but bring on the gaming benchmarks already!!!:D
What ?!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillo-kun
You have the same system, same CPU speed, but with a 8800GTX.
Which means 8800GT > 8800GTX ?????? :eek: :eek: :eek:
it must be the end of 8800GTS A2 :D
Very close to what I score with my gtx as well flashed with the AC3 bios (626/1000) & q6600 at 3.2ghz, I get like 126xx in 06 with Vista.
Have they improved the memory controller or something to get this kind of performance on a 256bit memory bus?
Definitely need to see some gaming comparisons to see if the performance translates into real gaming performance.
So nobody noticed this was run at 1024x768?
3D Mark06 screenshot shows up 1280x1024.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
Unless you're referring to the 3D Mark05 run, which was run at 1024x768 indeed, but that's the default resolution for 3D Mark05.
Thats for 05 which is normal, 06 was 1280x1024Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
Thats what happens when you work 12H a day for a weekQuote:
Originally Posted by BenchZowner
3dmark 2003 & 2005 scores >>> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...4&postcount=52
:up:
No worries m8, we've all been through various sh*te.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
Hope you get some rest time soon :)
so 256bit 512MB, 112 SP, how bout ROP, TMU??
w/e happen to D8E or that Dual G92 card??? how bout 9800GTX??
3dmark 06 is video limited unless you're in sli don't kid yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Boy Deluxe
That's true for the 4 game tests. The score still scales with more cpu power due to the 2 cpu tests.Quote:
Originally Posted by xlink
I have friend who benched @ 3Ghz core and 3.6Ghz core on an e6750. Difference was like 200 points.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scimitar
I thought SM2 scales well with a faster CPU. SM3 on the other hand doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by xlink
wow. this looks like it may be a killer card for $230. i just need to see real game benches before i decide on 8800gt or new 8800gts or 2950pro (or Xt) or wait for this new nvidia product coming out:D
I can hit 10800 and I am proud of it lol
8800gt 12k on stock clocks? :lol:
these lil cards are very impressive for the price.:eek:
>gtx with a little oc.
:lol2:
and wont everyone be getting one? it's a mass market dream.:lol2:
its not faster than a GTX, I have mine at stock clocks (575/1800) and it scores over 12.5k with my qx6700 @ 3.33ghz @ 1280x1024Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
EDIT: and that's running it on a single card (Vista Drivers Suck)
Someone with a yorkfield quad and two of these in SLI will pwn all the marks REAL soon X(
Perkam
lol; close enuf.Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperPysz
but has the gt been oced at all i wunda?
If these early numbers are close to right the gt's will definitely be killer for the price, two for an SLI rig will cost the same as one gtx.
Now if only there where more options for Intel based SLI boards....
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r191...ts-in-NovemberQuote:
September 25, 2007 13:36
In addition to the extensively-rumored G92 cards, November will see Nvidia release a few new high-end chipsets for both AMD and Intel platforms. On the AMD front we have already found out that Nvidia will be releasing the nForce 780a and 750a , the first being the highest-end offer, with support for three PCI-Express 2.0 x16 slots while the latter will boast only two such slots. Both will support AM2+ and AM2 processors and will come with DDR2-1066-ready modules.
On the Intel front, the C72 chipsets have finally received their 'official' names, nForce 780i (C72 XE) and nForce 750i (C72 P), both featuring support for Intel's upcoming 45nm processors and DDR2 memory. Also, Nvidia will release a DDR3-only chipset, the nForce 790i in Q1 2008. Expect this one to fearlessly battle Intel's upcoming X48 when it comes to performance and overclocking features.
I heard those chipsets use up to 48W (yes, MORE THAN A PENRYN)... this is getting rediculous...
is dat right?..another toaster of an nvidia chipset then :ROTF:
wtf when i was running a e6600 @ 3.6GHz and my 8800gtx i scored lower than that, stupid bs, but then again it might have been drivers cus i havent run it since, so i dont know, but still thats pretty gay if it is getting those kinds of scores.
It just means on somebody's machine it got those specs. If you have an 8800 GTX and you are scoring about 12k, then rest assured I doubt a 8800 GT will score 12k on your system.
Quad vs dual = 1-2K points difference in 06 :)Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperPysz