PCMark05 Results ...

[Kristian]

7236

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

[EvlUndrWareNome]

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

[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 . have a feeling that will help loads.

[Peen]

I run all the tests, but never get a score. sometimes it crashes too
says you must run system suite to get score, but im running all the tests available!!! stupid benchmarks

[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.

[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

[Kristian]

Well do what you want, but I'd suggest start trouble shooting the problem instead of just blaming the benchmark.

[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

[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.

[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

[Kanavit]

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

[Peen]

Heres mine http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=14145
but for some reason my videocards performance is extremely low on pixel shader part

[Andrewv]

7236

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

nice

[Peen]

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

got 4341 this time http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=14315

[Poki]

w00t broke 5k with my 3000+ and 6600gt! Link

[eva2000]

Pcmark05 = 4,935

[[Cipher]]

Pcmark05 = 4,935

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

[Shakermaker]

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

I'll upload a pic later.

[eva2000]

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

[pancake]

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

[[Cipher]]

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 )

[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

[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

[Sucka]

My best so far.

[nando19]

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