rec.autos.simulators

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

Mar

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

by Mar » Wed, 24 Jul 2002 17:22:31


> >Is there a way on enabling fast writes?  Do you know if it makes a
> >difference?

> No idea, haven't seen the option for that or SBA in the BIOS. Maybe a
> BIOS update would help, but I'm not sure about that. I'll try to check
> some forums for more info.

I couldn't find reference to SBA or FW in the BIOS either, but I know
SBA is enabled by looking at RivaTuner.  The installation of the AGP
driver sorted that out for me.  The performance increase is
substantial in both 3DMark and the real world application that is
N2K2.

Next time you're in Reading I owe you a pint or two!

I still find D3D to give better performance and image quality that
OpenGL in N2K2 which is not the norm for GF cards, I believe.  I'd
certainly be interested to know what OGL setting people around here
use...

Thanks again, Greger,

Mark
Reading, UK

Greger Hut

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

by Greger Hut » Thu, 25 Jul 2002 07:53:28



Both are definitely disabled on my system. The "SiSoft Sandra" util
says that there's no Side Band Addressing support so I guess that's
because of my GF2 MX then? It also says there's support for FW
transfers but I don't know if it's enabled on my system at the moment.

Well, the system performance is what I would expect so I'll worry
about these later when/if I get my GF4.

I'll take up that offer one day! :)

On my old system I had better performance with OGL, haven't even tried
D3D since I got the new mobo and CPU.

I use the GeForce Tweaker (http://www.guru3d.com/) for changing the
OGL settings etc. I don't think I have any "special" tweaks. Most
important fast linear-mipmap-linear filtering enabled, v-sync off and
maximum number of frame buffers 3. FSAA off. I've changed the level of
texture detail to -1.3, which makes the graphics a little crisper.

 - Greger

Eldre

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

by Eldre » Thu, 25 Jul 2002 09:10:25

Ok, I just ran 3DMark2001se on my system.  It's an Athlon 1.2 with a V5 card.
Benchmark was a 'sizzling'....

1368.

There has to be something wrong here.  I'd think that the V5 would out-perform
the GF2.  My *system* is certainly faster that your 866...
Anyone out there have the same CPU/vid combo with better results?

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
My .sig file is in the shop for repairs...

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Dave Henri

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

by Dave Henri » Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:22:54

"EldredP"
   Whats wrong is YOU are using a DX8 based test for a card that does not
officially support dx8.  Yes there are drivers out there that are compatible
with dx8 but they do not enable all of dx8's features nor do they improve
the performance of the card.
  I seem to remember when they first updated the benchmark to 2001 they
specifically warned against using older cards with that new test suite.
  USE the 3dmark 2000 version and you will get a more realistic number to
grade your system with.
dave(oops I said it again)henrie

Goy Larse

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

by Goy Larse » Thu, 25 Jul 2002 17:05:34


> >System - 3DMark score

> >GF2MX PCI in 866Mhz P3 - 1960

> >GF2MX PCI in AMD 1800 XP - 1960

> >GF4MX440 in AMD 1800 XP - 4255

> Ok, I just ran 3DMark2001se on my system.  It's an Athlon 1.2 with a V5 card.
> Benchmark was a 'sizzling'....

> 1368.

> There has to be something wrong here.  I'd think that the V5 would out-perform
> the GF2.  My *system* is certainly faster that your 866...
> Anyone out there have the same CPU/vid combo with better results?

What DH said, in addition, on my OC'ed 1.4 my V5 scored about 1800 or so
in 3DMark2001SE

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

"The Pits"    http://www.theuspits.com/

"A man is only as old as the woman he feels"
--Groucho Marx--

Eldre

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

by Eldre » Fri, 26 Jul 2002 05:16:54



>   Whats wrong is YOU are using a DX8 based test for a card that does not
>officially support dx8.  Yes there are drivers out there that are compatible
>with dx8 but they do not enable all of dx8's features nor do they improve
>the performance of the card.
>  I seem to remember when they first updated the benchmark to 2001 they
>specifically warned against using older cards with that new test suite.
>  USE the 3dmark 2000 version and you will get a more realistic number to
>grade your system with.

Phooey.  Since I've run games that need DX8 or higher(Star wars, N2002), I
couldn't understand the problem.  Oh well, I won't be upgrading any time
soon...

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
My .sig file is in the shop for repairs...

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Mitch Alatorr

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

by Mitch Alatorr » Fri, 26 Jul 2002 08:54:25

Sure ya will..  At least a small part :)


 <>>Oh well, I won't be upgrading any time

Eldre

OT: Help me with these curious benchmark results...

by Eldre » Fri, 26 Jul 2002 11:35:01



>Sure ya will..  At least a small part :)




> <>>Oh well, I won't be upgrading any time
>> soon...

Hehe...

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
My .sig file is in the shop for repairs...

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.