why is my 3dmark2000 score (3577) so low????
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: why is my 3dmark2000 score (3577) so low????

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    127

    why is my 3dmark2000 score (3577) so low????

    all of my hardware is pretty decent, but i'm getting ridiculous scores (3577)??????

    PIII-600 (@750)
    Asus p3v4x bios 1005, the latest 4in1 via drivers)
    Asus v6800 geforce ddr (det3 v6.18)
    128mb hyundai pc133 ram (dunno anymore on ram, sorry)
    win2k professional


    first of all i can't even get the geforce to run in 4XAGP with my via chipsets even though the p3v4x is suppposed to support it. second, i'm pretty sure a celeron 500 with a 4mb video card can beat my score of 3577. what gives.



    [This message has been edited by yellowfungus (edited 10-16-2000).]

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Muncie, IN, USA
    Posts
    1,220
    Do your games run and look good? Do not let a benchmark score get to you! Most benchmarks are desighned to make a particular product look good.
    Inwin Q500 FT
    IWILL KK266
    640 mb PC-100
    Duron 1 Ghz
    Gforce 4 MX 420
    Mini Super Orb
    Pioneer 16x DVD
    Philips 24/12/40
    Philips 107S 17" Monitor
    Logitech Z-340s
    Win XP Pro

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Does it matter
    Posts
    153
    3577 is slow? Are you kidding. It will be good for most of the games out there. Well as for the Celeron thing goes, mine is Cel 300A with 64 MB and ATI Rage IIC card with 8 MB. Can you imagine what my 3DMark 2000 scores are? Well it is just 264. Any suggetions on where the problem is?

    Saurabh
    Intel Celeron 600@600
    XO i810 Motherboard
    On Board VGA and Audio
    196 MB PC100 RAM
    Motorola 56 Kbps PCI Modem
    Samsung 40GB ATA66 IDE
    IO/Magic 24x CDROM
    Samsung SyncMaster 17" Flat Monitor

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    127
    nah, the games don't run good at all, nothing in 3d anyways. i compared my scores to other peeps with the geforce and 750p3's. and they all pull scores of 6000+. granted most of those guys either have 512MB ram, or embellished slightly or both, but i'm nowhere close to 6000. i have to run diabloII in directdraw cuz it chugs like crazy in direct3d to the point it's unplayable.

    blah

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Right Behind You
    Posts
    329
    Not quite sure why your games are running so slow. However - I wouldn't use 3dmark as a guide. The only thing it's good for is it's pretty demo mode.

    How can a program designed to give the video card the hardest possible time, be a good benchmark for games - which are designed to give the best compromise of speed and quality? The two aren't the same.

    Actually, rereading your post: Have you tried your system on Win98? Win2k isn't exactly known to be a speed demon.

    Also don't worry about AGP 4x. It will only improve your frame rates by 1 or 2 fps.

    The third and final thing: You are getting a better score than I do. Once again don't hold much stock in these scores.

    ------------------
    P3 750 @ 750!?, 128MB of PC-150 SDRAM, Aopen AX63 Pro, V3 2000 @ 175, 13.6GB - 7200rpm WD Expert, SB Live Value, LG 40x CDROM, Jazz 300W Front Speakers + Sony SRS PC300D Rear Speakers / Sub Woofer, Sony CPDE200 17" Monitor, Full Tower Case, Win98 Original Edition.
    P3 750 @ 750!?, 128MB of PC-150 SDRAM, Aopen AX63 Pro, V3 2000 @ 175, 13.6GB - 7200rpm WD Expert, SB Live Value, LG 40x CDROM, Jazz 300W Front Speakers + Sony SRS PC300D Rear Speakers / Sub Woofer, Sony CPDE200 17" Monitor, Full Tower Case, Win98 Original Edition.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA / Baltimore, MD USA
    Posts
    1,992
    i would say that win2k is holding you back, but my system running win2k is gettin ~3700 in the defualt bench, and you have a better vid. card.

    p3 700@933
    abit sl6
    tnt2 ultra
    192 ram
    win2k

    ------------------
    Visit my website!
    look for me on AIM as gosanjose or on ICQ as #46997155

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    127
    well, this whole time i've been running nvidia's detonator 3 drivers, (6.18), and seeing it is afterall an ASUS card, i tried putting in asus' 5.33 drivers, but no improvement. =(

    it fixes the AGP4X problem, but the 3dmark scores are exactly the same. on top of that i'm one of those anal people that likes to clean his desktop of anything not necessary, and now i have that asus icon in my systray =) that i don't know how to get rid of. in win98 i disabled it with msconfig but dunno how in win2k.

    well now i'm just whining. if anyone can think of other things i can try to get it up to the 6000's like other people with my setup, lemme know please. thanx.

    GOSHARK: i'm hoping that your score being higher to mine is due to your faster cpu and more ram (600@750, 128MB). cuz it would really suck for a geforce to lose out to a tnt2 =)


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Calgary, Can.
    Posts
    422
    I'd have to agree with GOSHARKS, Win2K is not the OS you want to use if your into games. 98SE or ME arn't as stable as 2K but from what I've read there much better for a gaming platforum. If you don't mind the hassle of putting in a new OS, it might be worth a shot. Just my 2-cents.

    ------------------
    K6-3 400@450
    Gigabyte GA-5AX Rev. 4
    Voodoo3-2K@172mhz
    128 mb PC-100(AZEN)
    SB-16

    [This message has been edited by cratermaker (edited 10-16-2000).]
    2600Bartty@2284(208*11,1.75V)
    Abit NF7-S 2.0 (BIOS 1.4)
    Radeon 8500 128mb @199mhz
    256MB Corsair XMS 3200*2
    SK-7/Panaflo 32cfm
    WD 80G-8mb cache
    Toshiba 16x DVD
    lite-on 52* Burner
    Viewsonic G90f
    Antec TP 430W PSU

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    Austin, TX USA (currently in Bosnia)
    Posts
    4,647
    Whoever in the world told you people with PIII 750s w/GeForceDDRs get 6000+!?

    According to the results published on Madonion's site, NO ONE with that setup has yet gotten out of the 5000s. Your score may be a bit slow (most average around 4500), but it isn't the disaster you think it is, because that setup just isn't enough do 6000!

    4500-5000 is a more realistic expectation.


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA / Baltimore, MD USA
    Posts
    1,992
    what kind of programs do you have running when you bench? get rid of some unnecessary stuff before you bench.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    127
    First of all, i appreciate all the feedback, thanx.

    ok, in order:

    cratermaker: yeah, win2k isn't too good at games, but i just love the stability so much i can't go back. i was so used to getting the blue screen of death every day on win98se, the fact that i could run the computer for 5 days without rebooting and still have the performance i'd get on a fresh boot astounded me.

    i was wondering whether the win2k alone was enough to explain the huge discrepancy in the score, or if there were other factors.

    The main reason i'm concerned with the low score isn't cuz i wanna pull a 8000 and wave it around some o/c site, i was just concerned that i may have something configured really wrongly. the worst is when you buy a good system, then have it perform at half capacity cuz u forgot to turn something on.

    Baloney: my bad. actually, the 6000+ scores were slightly too high cuz i asked madonion for ranges from 700-800 (mine being 750). When i changed the range to 700-750, they were in the 5000's just like u said. how do i close that gap between 5000 and 3577 though? =)

    Gosharks: i disable everything when i run 3dmarks, and always test off a fresh reboot. i'm an anal user who disables any program from autolaunching in startup anyways, and double check in task manager before i run.

    if there's any more information i can post up, like screenshots of wcpuid, or microsoft.nfo files, lemme know. i'd love to get to the bottom of this.


  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 1999
    Location
    Portersville, Pa
    Posts
    1,462
    To be honest YellowF, I cant for the life of me see why you feel Win 9x is so unstable. Of course, 2k is a much more stable platform, but it is NO game OS, and dont let anyone tell you other wise. Just because they made the purchase, they fell a need to justify it. Even if only to make them feel better. I have personally seen, in my own little shop, 3D Mark scores drop by 1000 points on EXACT hardware. And that was simply by formatting the HDD and installing Win 2k. Even games made to work with Win 2K score about 25% slower than in Win 9x.

    Also, dont bum because you are not seeing the scores of 6000 some here claim, because I can tell you, they arent either. They just dont know WE know.

    This makes me wonder if Balonyflaps remembers the first time he and I ever wrote to each other. It was probably nearly 2 years ago, when some were claimimg to be getting scores of 60+ fps in Unreal in software mode. Which to this day is not even close to possible.

    Dave
    i7 2600k @ 4.6 ghz by Turbo multi - MSI Z68A-GD65-G3 - 8 gig GSkill Ripjaws @ 1600 8-8-8-24 - Corsair H100 Closed loop water cooling - 2 XFX 6870 DD Crossfire - 256 gig Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe and 250 Gig WD Blue Series - PCP&C Turbocool 850 SSI

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Bucharest, Romania
    Posts
    339
    Well. Win2k is very good in games IMO. I play only Q3 and with my p3-700e@1008 + gef2 gts + my cfg + q3 speed dll's i get 128 fps in 1024 all to the max. I have Win ME installed on my second hardware. With the same drivers, cfg, dlls... i get only 88 FPS. Win2k RuLeZ!

    BTW: I get a ****ty score in 3dMark2k too but who the hell cares 'bout 3dMark.

    [This message has been edited by AriciU_of_KoF (edited 10-17-2000).]
    AMD T-Bird 1400 @ 1577 @ 1.85v (9.5 x 166) AYHJA
    Abit KG7
    OCZ Gladiator
    256Mb Crucial PC2100 CL2@166
    Creative GeForce2 GTS
    SB Audigy
    Quantum AS 40Gb
    ADi Microscan E66 19"

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    53 08' 24" N 2 23' 39" W
    Posts
    760
    Well this is my setup and score

    ------------------
    The Ultim8_Evil System:
    PentiumII 400 Deschutes
    128 Stick NVRAM PC100
    128 Stick SDRAM PC100
    Supermicro P6SBA (BX)
    Geforce2 GTS @ 230/410
    3DMark2000 Score= 3712
    Not bad for a PII 400 eh?

    Any comments? Wanna take the piss? My ICQ# is 48398078
    Clevo P150HM - Intel Core i7-2760QM Sandy Bridge - 16Gb 1333Mhz DDR3 RAM - SanDisk Extreme 240Gb SSD - Radeon 6990M @ 740/1000

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 1998
    Location
    Winston-Salem,NC, US
    Posts
    289
    Known issue that W2K, GeForce and DirectX7 produce low 3DMark2000 scores, may be mentioned in the GeForce FAQ. There was a version of DirectX8 beta (brrr, gives me a chill to think of using it) actually got the scores up to where W98 systems were. The latest beta wasn't any better than DX7 so if you try it get the older version. Can't remember the version number but it did help to get the scores up so maybe the final release will get them on par with W98 systems. I personally wouldn't touch the beta because of potential bugs and the difficulty in un-installing DirectX.

    [This message has been edited by 23skidoo (edited 10-17-2000).]

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •