PCMark05 Results ...

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

06-28-2005, 08:52 AM
LilGator

PCMark05 Results ...

PCMark05 has hit, let's see what you got :banana:

Download mirrors here: http://www.futuremark.com/download/?pcmark05.shtml

BTW Requires WM10 installed, and WM9 Encoder: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/win...r/default.aspx
06-28-2005, 09:08 AM
Magnj

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y132/Magnj/pcm5.jpg
Detailed Test Results

System Test Suite
HDD - XP Startup 8.06 MB/s
Physics and 3D 170.53 FPS
Transparent Windows 1007.91 Windows/s
3D - Pixel Shader 132.9 FPS
Web Page Rendering 3.13 Pages/s
File Decryption 43.84 MB/s
Graphics Memory - 64 Lines 1428.68 FPS
HDD - General Usage 5.4 MB/s
Multithreaded Test 1 / Audio Compression 1447.71 KB/s
Multithreaded Test 1 / Video Encoding 179.6 KB/s
Multithreaded Test 2 / Text Edit 87.26 Pages/s
Multithreaded Test 2 / Image Decompression 12.34 MPixels/s
Multithreaded Test 3 / File Compression 2.53 MB/s
Multithreaded Test 3 / File Encryption 11.84 MB/s
Multithreaded Test 3 / HDD - Virus Scan 23.84 MB/s
Multithreaded Test 3 / Memory Latency - Random 16 MB 12.02 MAccesses/s
06-28-2005, 09:37 AM
LilGator

1 Attachment(s)

Don't laugh, this is my PC at work :p:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=617

http://xtremesystems.org/forums/atta...id=33265&stc=1
06-29-2005, 01:59 AM
Venom21

Mine:

(I need some CD-KEY :p: )

http://rotter.name/User_files/nor/42c267a50878d866.jpg

Dothan b1 2mb ch' @ 133*18
Aopen Gmem-LFS i855
256*2 Micron 2.5-2-2-5
X800 pro VIVO @ 16pp 520/550
06-29-2005, 12:23 PM
Technonut

5451
06-29-2005, 06:07 PM
Poki

4740 rig in sig
06-29-2005, 06:54 PM
Frisch

:sick: http://service.futuremark.com/servle...projectId=6729
06-29-2005, 09:18 PM
fatfreepork

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=8895
06-30-2005, 03:21 AM
LenniZ

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=4072
06-30-2005, 03:25 AM
eva2000

well here's where i am... so far

Pcmark05 = 4,787
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=9867

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...09_4787_tn.jpg
06-30-2005, 04:07 AM
Charles Wirth

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=3351

Not sure how I am still holding the #2 spot.
06-30-2005, 04:33 AM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=3351

Not sure how I am still holding the #2 spot.

huh i thought you already achieved 9+ k in pcmark05 ???
06-30-2005, 04:49 AM
LilGator

^ PCMark04 ?
06-30-2005, 05:35 AM
nando19

Here is mine http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/10/pcmark6nu.th.jpg

http://service.futuremark.com/servle...projectType=13
06-30-2005, 06:51 AM
SamHughe

Mine is 4747.
Here's the link

SamHughe
06-30-2005, 08:36 AM
Charles Wirth

SamHughe, Welcome to XS!
06-30-2005, 08:55 AM
agenda2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

well here's where i am... so far

Pcmark05 = 4,787

At your clock speed on A64(2840MHz) and the high speed low latency memory you are scoring about the same thing as someone with P4 EE at 3200MHz. That is insane!
A 2800MHz A64 should give an EE at 4.2GHz a run for its money.
This benchmark is bogus to say the least. When A64 X2 users shattered the PCMARK 04, so the only thing they could do to save the intel users(after they clock the CPUs to the limit without catching up) is to re-compile the code and name it PCMARK05.

WHAT A BOGUS BENCHMARK.

I learnt Sandra 2005 was recompile with an intel compiler and that's why we are seeing Prescott having better scores on them. It's a SHAME on all these people.
06-30-2005, 09:01 AM
SamHughe

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

SamHughe, Welcome to XS!

Thanks! It is good to be here. Looks like there are alot of people here who know what they are doing.

SamHughe
06-30-2005, 09:06 AM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by agenda2005

At your clock speed on A64(2840MHz) and the high speed low latency memory you are scoring about the same thing as someone with P4 EE at 3200MHz. That is insane!

you know why,

1. multi-threaded tests you'd win easily and boosts P4 systems
2. the hdd related tests skew the results i.e. raid 0 will give you at least 200+ extra pts

using my spreadsheet calculator http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=787

if i raid 0 my system my HDD Virus scan test will jump from 15.41MB/s to 32MB/s which equates to jump from 4787 to 5010! :eek:
06-30-2005, 10:24 AM
dimcar

And here is mine: 6118... The XE is FAASSST with this!
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=3351
06-30-2005, 10:27 AM
Kristian

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=1321

Just watercooled. My RAM sucks so I was limited to 214 mhz at 3 4 4 8......

I'll try a little more later tonight.
06-30-2005, 10:33 AM
dimcar

FUGGER, how do you know you have #2? Anyway to see it?
06-30-2005, 10:39 AM
Charles Wirth

Check the orb, project search under PCMark2005

http://service.futuremark.com/servle.../projectsearch
06-30-2005, 10:47 AM
dimcar

Thank FUGGER!!!
Its nice to compete in a new Benchmark!!! 2morrow i will make a RAID setup to see the difference!!! I will keep you informed!
06-30-2005, 12:00 PM
oC|-TiTaN

5218
06-30-2005, 03:08 PM
Kristian

7236

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=12248
06-30-2005, 03:58 PM
EvlUndrWareNome

Quote:

Originally Posted by agenda2005

At your clock speed on A64(2840MHz) and the high speed low latency memory you are scoring about the same thing as someone with P4 EE at 3200MHz. That is insane!
A 2800MHz A64 should give an EE at 4.2GHz a run for its money.
This benchmark is bogus to say the least. When A64 X2 users shattered the PCMARK 04, so the only thing they could do to save the intel users(after they clock the CPUs to the limit without catching up) is to re-compile the code and name it PCMARK05.

WHAT A BOGUS BENCHMARK.

I learnt Sandra 2005 was recompile with an intel compiler and that's why we are seeing Prescott having better scores on them. It's a SHAME on all these people.

No its not. It takes advantage of HT. And last I checked that wasn't "bogus". And didnt know if you knew, BUT AMD A64 doesnt have HT, only the X2 can make use of those isntructions.

-EvlNome
06-30-2005, 06:29 PM
mr_knowitall15

im amazed that theres not more people with higher scores than me... i ran at stock speeds, (3.4, 200fsb) with the vid card at 406/1.12 and got this http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=8862 . it may be worth mentioning that OCin the vid card gained me a mere 69 points over running everything at stock, compared to 04 where the vod card OC gained me about 200. i tried running at 4 ghz to see just how much this benchmark likes speed, but for some reason, the same settings i use for all the scores in my sig, with 1.4625VCore in BIOS, it crashes in PCMark05, dont know what the problem is. it always crashed at the same test, the one where it does video encoding and audio compression. upping the voltage didnt help. cant wait to get a new PSU, this P.O.S. thermaltake has 18 measly ****in' amps on the 12V Rail :slapass: :nono: :mad: . have a feeling that will help loads.
06-30-2005, 07:22 PM
Peen

I run all the tests, but never get a score. sometimes it crashes too :rolleyes:
says you must run system suite to get score, but im running all the tests available!!! stupid benchmarks
07-01-2005, 12:19 AM
Kristian

Well, mr_knowitall15 & Peen maybe you should downclock your systems a bit.

I too have expirenced that PCmark05 is more demanding to run than PCmark04. It crashed easier, but that's just because our systems are not 100% stable at the speed we are running those other benchmarks.

If I need to be 100% Prime95 stable (over night stable) I need to run no higher than 3.8 Ghz, but PCmark04 could be run at 3.93Ghz and PCmark05 can be run at 3.85 Ghz.

So try running stock speed and see if you can get a score before blaming the benchmark.
07-01-2005, 01:23 AM
Peen

I know when my system is stable, thank you. It runs prime95 24hrs+ and games all the time and encodes when its not gaming. It has never crashed once. Im blaming the benchmark :rolleyes:
07-01-2005, 01:38 AM
Kristian

Well do what you want, but I'd suggest start trouble shooting the problem instead of just blaming the benchmark.
07-01-2005, 01:43 AM
Peen

Well I wanted to try it, but its not a big deal and I dont really care what 4 digit numbers it gives me
07-01-2005, 01:50 AM
Kristian

Some people have problems with the harddrive virus scan failing. That could very well be because of a bug in the benchmark.

I had to unplug my firewire/USB disks otherwise the system would bluescreen during the hardware detection.

My point is I think it's unfair to blame the benchmark before trying the obvious things first.

But it's a free world.
07-01-2005, 01:59 AM
Peen

It works with a different video card, not sure why though. It ran all the tests but I guess the 3D parts were whacked somehow. All other benchies worked fine on it though. Only got 3970 with system in sig with stock 9800Pro :(

edit: Messed up video card settings screwed up 3d parts so low score, and my HD is dying so low score there too :(
07-01-2005, 02:29 AM
Kanavit

1 Attachment(s)

Here is mines. 2nd system specs:

a64 3400+ stock
1gb ram
Gigaybte Nforce3 250gb
PNY geforce 6800 GT

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=14148= 3358
07-01-2005, 02:39 AM
Peen

Heres mine http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=14145
but for some reason my videocards performance is extremely low on pixel shader part :eek:
07-01-2005, 03:01 AM
Andrewv

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kristian

7236

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=12248

nice
07-01-2005, 03:12 AM
Peen

Fixed my 9800 Pro drivers, put Cat 4.12's on

got 4341 this time http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=14315
07-01-2005, 09:23 AM
Poki

w00t broke 5k with my 3000+ and 6600gt! Link
07-01-2005, 11:13 AM
eva2000

Pcmark05 = 4,935

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...10_4935_tn.jpg
07-01-2005, 04:19 PM
[Cipher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

Pcmark05 = 4,935

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...10_4935_tn.jpg

235s your memory maxxed Eva2000 ?
if not, get them maxxed ( combined with your cpu max ) :)
07-02-2005, 01:08 AM
Shakermaker

Okay my score is 4158.
Compared to some of your results I feel really bad... ;-)

I'll upload a pic later.
07-02-2005, 01:36 AM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Cipher]

235s your memory maxxed Eva2000 ?
if not, get them maxxed ( combined with your cpu max ) :)

nah not max just slowly building up as i only had cpu for a few days but mem bandwidth doesn't make much diff in pcmark05

i just tried 283HTT/257mhz 2-2-2-6 and got 4944

Pcmark05 = 4,944
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=17687

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...10_4944_tn.jpg
07-02-2005, 08:07 AM
pancake

lol am i missing something... i got around 1400 with a x2 @ 2900 1gb g skill la
07-02-2005, 08:11 AM
[Cipher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pancake

lol am i missing something... i got around 1400 with a x2 @ 2900 1gb g skill la

yes, you missed the bug.

check page 1 ( i think it's mentioned inside this topic )
07-02-2005, 10:51 AM
Gray Mole

Thought I'd run it on my 24/7 rig just to see how it fared...

3200 newcastle
Max3 mobo
9800xt
120gb ide
512 ddr 2.5-4-4-8

All bone stock on air

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=19049

3300 marks...not bad I guess for a rig that only surfs the net and plays a game here and there...

Not exactly 'Xtreme' but I'm a week away from the benching rig being done, so may as well bench what I've got lol
07-02-2005, 03:56 PM
Peen

I think I can break 5k easy with single cpu. I noticed 9800Pro seems to suck at this test, and impacts it pretty good. different vid card and some more cpu clocks should give me more then 5k maybe?? :) I noticed 6600GT's rock at this too
07-03-2005, 12:36 AM
Sucka

My best so far.

http://suckasd.com/computer/toledo/pcmark05.jpg
07-03-2005, 01:19 AM
nando19

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Cipher]

yes, you missed the bug.

check page 1 ( i think it's mentioned inside this topic )

Yeh I have been getting really low scores sometimes how do u fix the bug
07-03-2005, 11:09 AM
eva2000

cracks the 5k barrier with OCZ PC3500 PLAT LE BH-5 :D

PCmark05 = 5,009
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=21327

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...10_5009_tn.jpg
07-03-2005, 02:56 PM
SamHughe

Here's my updated score: 5136 (broke 5k with mild overclocking) :p:

SamHughe
07-05-2005, 01:06 AM
kiwi

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

you know why,

1. multi-threaded tests you'd win easily and boosts P4 systems
2. the hdd related tests skew the results i.e. raid 0 will give you at least 200+ extra pts

using my spreadsheet calculator http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=787

if i raid 0 my system my HDD Virus scan test will jump from 15.41MB/s to 32MB/s which equates to jump from 4787 to 5010! :eek:

Yeah, A64 can't really compete with multi-threaded cpus (overall score)

I get only 4657 at 2.9Ghz 2.5-3-3-6 and raid 0
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=24695
07-05-2005, 03:29 AM
pancake

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Cipher]

yes, you missed the bug.

check page 1 ( i think it's mentioned inside this topic )

i cant see anything... anyone got a link to a fix???
07-06-2005, 08:56 AM
TuKo

6534 (X2 4400+ @ 2820Mhz)

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=12734
07-06-2005, 12:28 PM
mr_knowitall15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peen

I know when my system is stable, thank you. It runs prime95 24hrs+ and games all the time and encodes when its not gaming. It has never crashed once. Im blaming the benchmark :rolleyes:

i agree. i am able to run at the settings in my sig all day. 3dmark 03 and 05, AM3, PCmark04, sandra, all right after the other stable as can be. looking back though, 3DMark05 did the same thing to me until they came out with the patch. hopefully a revision of some sort will fix the weird problem :slap:
07-07-2005, 06:12 AM
dimcar

1 Attachment(s)

New Score:14183

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=28449

Rig: 3,2 Xtreme Edition 840, 2x7800GTX, RAID 0 and.... Gigabyte i-RAM
It is a valid result, although the RAM Drive gives EXTREME FAST numbers.
07-07-2005, 07:05 AM
pancake

extreme fast... damn thats twice as fast as the next highest score... infact its higher then 04 highest score
07-07-2005, 07:25 AM
eva2000

ramdisks are :cool: :D
07-07-2005, 07:39 AM
paakkis

4733
P4 570J Abit Fatal1ty AA8XE XFX 6800U/512MB
07-07-2005, 07:44 AM
.sentinel

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=25487
AMD Athlon XP 2800 and FX5200
07-07-2005, 01:33 PM
nando19

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimcar

New Score:14183

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=28449

Rig: 3,2 Xtreme Edition 840, 2x7800GTX, RAID 0 and.... Gigabyte i-RAM
It is a valid result, although the RAM Drive gives EXTREME FAST numbers.

Ramdisks are amazing can I ask where you bought that from or was it given to you for a review
07-07-2005, 02:51 PM
dimcar

Got it for review... Not yet available in the market.
07-07-2005, 05:53 PM
TuKo

About the iRam, what memory are you running on it ? PC3200 ? I've seen that Gigabyte updated his specs to support 8Gb, is this right ?
07-08-2005, 12:40 AM
Kristian

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimcar

Got it for review... Not yet available in the market.

Does it run SATA II ? Otherwise you'd need quite a lot of those drives to get more than 1GB/S through put.

If it's not SATAII how have you configured it ?
07-08-2005, 12:46 AM
GoriLLakoS

Ι think he is using software....not hardware.....:)
07-08-2005, 12:47 AM
Kristian

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoriLLakoS

Ι think he is using software....not hardware.....:)

Well the Gigabyte iRAM IS hardware. But the score seems a bit high for SATA.
07-08-2005, 02:23 AM
nando19

If it doesnt use sata II there would be a major bottleneck so I would say it should support sata II
07-08-2005, 02:49 AM
Kristian

It's just that in the specifications that have been made public nothing has been mentioned about SATA II support.

But I agree it seems stupid to make a drive like that and not make it SATA II
07-08-2005, 09:05 AM
dimcar

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kristian

Does it run SATA II ? Otherwise you'd need quite a lot of those drives to get more than 1GB/S through put.

If it's not SATAII how have you configured it ?

Sorry for the misleading post.... I just got confused between many scores of iRam and soft ramdrive and having a job in the same time.... :confused:
This result IS with a soft ramdrive.. iRam is scoring lower...
Sorry again and Kristian sorry for not replying to your mail but i had TOO muck work today and a lot of meetings...
07-08-2005, 09:56 AM
Kristian

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimcar

Sorry for the misleading post.... I just got confused between many scores of iRam and soft ramdrive and having a job in the same time.... :confused:
This result IS with a soft ramdrive.. iRam is scoring lower...
Sorry again and Kristian sorry for not replying to your mail but i had TOO muck work today and a lot of meetings...

That's ok. Which program are you using to make the ram disk ?
07-08-2005, 10:11 AM
dimcar

QSoft ramdisk
07-08-2005, 05:40 PM
boshuter

Quote:

Originally Posted by agenda2005

At your clock speed on A64(2840MHz) and the high speed low latency memory you are scoring about the same thing as someone with P4 EE at 3200MHz. That is insane!
A 2800MHz A64 should give an EE at 4.2GHz a run for its money.
This benchmark is bogus to say the least. When A64 X2 users shattered the PCMARK 04, so the only thing they could do to save the intel users(after they clock the CPUs to the limit without catching up) is to re-compile the code and name it PCMARK05.

WHAT A BOGUS BENCHMARK.

I learnt Sandra 2005 was recompile with an intel compiler and that's why we are seeing Prescott having better scores on them. It's a SHAME on all these people.

Oh please... :rolleyes:
07-08-2005, 11:14 PM
Andrewv

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sucka

My best so far.

http://suckasd.com/computer/toledo/pcmark05.jpg

nice 7200+
07-11-2005, 09:51 PM
pifreak

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimcar

QSoft ramdisk

are you sure about that one ;)
07-12-2005, 12:42 AM
dimcar

Quote:

Originally Posted by pifreak

are you sure about that one ;)

Maybe it is not QSoft... I cannot remember... anyway, FM has decided to ban results with ramdrives....
07-12-2005, 06:55 AM
agenda2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

you know why,

1. multi-threaded tests you'd win easily and boosts P4 systems
2. the hdd related tests skew the results i.e. raid 0 will give you at least 200+ extra pts

using my spreadsheet calculator http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=787

if i raid 0 my system my HDD Virus scan test will jump from 15.41MB/s to 32MB/s which equates to jump from 4787 to 5010! :eek:

Objetive reasoning should tell you why the benchmark is not a true measure of a processor capability. I know about HDD test. The benchmark is obviously skewed towards applications that run better on one processor than the competition. Thank goodness A64 X2 helps to debunk that.
Upon that the benchmark was compiles with an Intel compiler which is known to cripple performance on competitors CPUs (http://www.swallowtail.org/naughty-intel.html).

Assuming you have the choice, thank goodness you have a clue about CPUs, will you rather pick a P4EE at 3200MHz over an Athlon 64 at 2840MHz, if both of them will not run an hair over that speed.
07-13-2005, 01:02 PM
p0tempkin

5604: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=33510
07-14-2005, 03:57 PM
krille

Obviously a bogus benchmark, not blaming FM though. Intel's the bad guy here. Sad, but ovious.
07-15-2005, 06:08 AM
JBREAKS

nice score
07-15-2005, 01:33 PM
heater918

3.4EE@3.9 5367
07-18-2005, 08:42 PM
davidsk2001

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=5344
07-18-2005, 09:17 PM
JfRsQ

ORB - 4603 with the system in sig

http://perso.ksurf.net/JfRsQ/PCMark05.JPG
07-28-2005, 12:02 PM
eva2000

smashed my old record with cpu still at stock speeds LOL

Pcmark05 = 5,765

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...386_SLI_tn.jpg
07-28-2005, 12:59 PM
eva2000

How's breaking 6k on single core :)

Pcmark05 = 6,007

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...94-1386_tn.jpg
07-28-2005, 02:54 PM
heater918

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

How's breaking 6k on single core :)

Pcmark05 = 6,007

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...94-1386_tn.jpg

Very nice, & i thought it was optimized for Intel :)
08-03-2005, 10:51 AM
Major

see sig (work) 6,585

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=58269
08-06-2005, 09:40 PM
J-Rock

1 Attachment(s)

I need 4.4Ghz stable :(
08-10-2005, 11:54 AM
BigStan

My PCM05 score is 7243

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=65061
08-10-2005, 10:34 PM
nando19

I run this benchmark and am only getting 1500 Pcmarks on my Pentium D 830 but I looked at the details and noticed that the HDD tests are only gettting 0.001Mb/s anyone know how to fix this problem
08-11-2005, 05:26 AM
BigStan

Quote:

Originally Posted by nando19

I run this benchmark and am only getting 1500 Pcmarks on my Pentium D 830 but I looked at the details and noticed that the HDD tests are only gettting 0.001Mb/s anyone know how to fix this problem

Edit your boot.ini file - add the switch ~ /usepmtimer ~ right after the switch ~ /fastdetect ~ reboot and try PCMark05 again. Worked for me
08-11-2005, 05:53 AM
IluvIntel

5515 for me, suprised I could get a 1.29Ghz Overclock on air inside a case and keep it stable enough for the test... can't unlock multiplier on CPU or disable C1 contol in Bios.
08-11-2005, 01:57 PM
0verl0ad

Pentium Mobile 730 @ 2678MHz (11*243); RAM 1:1 @ 2,5-3-3-7; 6800GT @ 420/1113MHz

4592 Punkte
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=45957
08-13-2005, 09:41 PM
J-Rock

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigStan

My PCM05 score is 7243

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=65061

WOW!!! How did you do that. That is extremely high.
:clap: :clap: :clap:
08-20-2005, 12:05 AM
IluvIntel

This benchmark is heavily influenced by the kind of HD setup you have and the interfacing of it, just as much as the CPU almost.

If you had say for example, Raptors in Raid-0 config - you would get about a 1000 more points alone compared to single HD, pata or sata.
08-20-2005, 12:12 AM
Vapor

Quote:

Originally Posted by IluvIntel

If you had say for example, Raptors in Raid-0 config - you would get about a 1000 more points alone compared to single HD, pata or sata.

That is QUITE wrong! <500 points gained going from 1 drive to 4 in RAID0 from what I've seen. HDDs only have a large effect when they're REDICULOUSLY fast (iRAM and software RAMDrives can only manage).
08-20-2005, 12:15 AM
IluvIntel

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vapor

That is QUITE wrong! <500 points gained going from 1 drive to 4 in RAID0 from what I've seen. HDDs only have a large effect when they're REDICULOUSLY fast (iRAM and software RAMDrives can only manage).

Depends on the mobo,cpu and drivers.

For example this thread from my home forum spells it out using FX-57 cpu as an example AND they were not even using Raptors to get more than extra 1000 points with Raid-0 config.

http://forums.overclockers.com.au/sh...16#post4894616
08-23-2005, 09:32 AM
vhco

How about...
PCMark05 - 7518
08-23-2005, 09:30 PM
Vapor

Quote:

Originally Posted by IluvIntel

Depends on the mobo,cpu and drivers.

For example this thread from my home forum spells it out using FX-57 cpu as an example AND they were not even using Raptors to get more than extra 1000 points with Raid-0 config.

http://forums.overclockers.com.au/sh...16#post4894616

I'm not a member and thus can't see that page....do you happen have a compare link of his? I'm in SERIOUS doubt that RAIDing a set of Raptors together could boost it 1000 points, especially from all the 100-400 point boosts I've seen.
08-23-2005, 09:41 PM
.sentinel

Someone try a dual opteron 275 dual core setup with 2 7800GTX you would pwn everyone. But why did futuremark ban ram disks. It is just like os tweaks.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:48 AM.

XtremeSystems