61.72 300% slower

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

3DMark2001 SE

53.03: 13449
61.76: 4388

Yes, it's due to some stupid driver bug with certain BIOS (I believe the FX
cards which don't have a seperate 2D/3D speed settings) but still, that's
some kinda record for a driver release.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

The subject line say's 61.72 the message say's 61.76, which one is it?


"Darkfalz" <darkfalz@xis.com.au> wrote in message
news:2m7k3qFjscl7U1@uni-berlin.de...
> 3DMark2001 SE
>
> 53.03: 13449
> 61.76: 4388
>
> Yes, it's due to some stupid driver bug with certain BIOS (I believe the
FX
> cards which don't have a seperate 2D/3D speed settings) but still, that's
> some kinda record for a driver release.
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 02:30:08 +1000 there was darkness, "Darkfalz"
<darkfalz@xis.com.au> floated above the darkness and said :

>3DMark2001 SE
>
>53.03: 13449
>61.76: 4388
>
>Yes, it's due to some stupid driver bug with certain BIOS (I believe the FX
>cards which don't have a seperate 2D/3D speed settings) but still, that's
>some kinda record for a driver release.

not on my machine (msi FX 5900)

no issues so far, Far Cry excellent!
--
Elaine Dickinson: "There's no reason to become alarmed, and we hope
you'll enjoy the rest of your flight. --- By the way,
is there anyone on board who knows how to fly a plane?"
('Airplane!', 1980)
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Darkfalz wrote:
> 3DMark2001 SE
>
> 53.03: 13449
> 61.76: 4388
>
> Yes, it's due to some stupid driver bug with certain BIOS (I believe
> the FX cards which don't have a seperate 2D/3D speed settings) but
> still, that's some kinda record for a driver release.

Mines actually improved.

I went from a 3DMark 2001SE score of 12004 under 56.72 to a score of 12130
with 61.76

I have a GeForce 4 4200Ti with 8x AGP

Matt
--
Collection: http://users.ign.com/collection/GLYTCH_2K4
MSN: GLYTCH_2K4(at)msn.com
Xbox Live: (Coming September)
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Darkfalz wrote:

> 3DMark2001 SE
>
> 53.03: 13449
> 61.76: 4388
>
> Yes, it's due to some stupid driver bug with certain BIOS (I believe the FX
> cards which don't have a seperate 2D/3D speed settings) but still, that's
> some kinda record for a driver release.
>
>

It's impossible to have greater than a 100% slowdown.
Timedemos would have to run backwards, undoing frames they have already
rendered. :)

Jeff B
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Cole Turner" <REMOVEMEcole.turner@liwest.at> skrev i en meddelelse > not on
my machine (msi FX 5900)
>
> no issues so far, Far Cry excellent!

A lot of corrupted blank (white) textures here trying Far Cry ( without game
patch ) and 61.72...POV 5900XT....so-back to Omega drv.. ;-)

Do you have installed any game patches ?
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Jeff B" <fake@addy.com> wrote in message
news:aDyLc.134890$a24.116868@attbi_s03...
>
>
> Darkfalz wrote:
>
> > 3DMark2001 SE
> >
> > 53.03: 13449
> > 61.76: 4388
> >
> > Yes, it's due to some stupid driver bug with certain BIOS (I believe the
FX
> > cards which don't have a seperate 2D/3D speed settings) but still,
that's
> > some kinda record for a driver release.
> >
> >
>
> It's impossible to have greater than a 100% slowdown.
> Timedemos would have to run backwards, undoing frames they have already
> rendered. :)
>
> Jeff B
>
QUite true, he probably meant 67% slower, which isnt actually true either.
From his posted info, the only statements that can be made is it scores 67%
lower benchmark number in a 3DMark...
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Jeff B" <fake@addy.com> wrote in message
news:aDyLc.134890$a24.116868@attbi_s03...
>
>
> It's impossible to have greater than a 100% slowdown.
> Timedemos would have to run backwards, undoing frames they have already
> rendered. :)
>

Probably putting an extra "0".
By looking at it ratio.... Seem to be 1/3.

CapFusion,...
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:51:53 +0200 there was darkness, "N´far"
<rudiFJERNkols@mail.dk> floated above the darkness and said :

>
>"Cole Turner" <REMOVEMEcole.turner@liwest.at> skrev i en meddelelse > not on
>my machine (msi FX 5900)
>>
>> no issues so far, Far Cry excellent!
>
>A lot of corrupted blank (white) textures here trying Far Cry ( without game
>patch ) and 61.72...POV 5900XT....so-back to Omega drv.. ;-)
>
>Do you have installed any game patches ?

1.1 and the no-cd patch from gamecopyworld (yes, I do own the
original, I just am too lazy to put the cd in)
--
Elaine Dickinson: "There's no reason to become alarmed, and we hope
you'll enjoy the rest of your flight. --- By the way,
is there anyone on board who knows how to fly a plane?"
('Airplane!', 1980)
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Martin S." <mart@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:10ft80q9ko6j655@corp.supernews.com...
> The subject line say's 61.72 the message say's 61.76, which one is it?

New WHQL 61.76
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Darkfalz" <darkfalz@xis.com.au> wrote in message
news:2m7n7aFk3e82U1@uni-berlin.de...
> "Martin S." <mart@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> news:10ft80q9ko6j655@corp.supernews.com...
> > The subject line say's 61.72 the message say's 61.76, which one is it?
>
> New WHQL 61.76

Try reinstalling the benchmark program.

Tony.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Er, hang on guys. I thought 3DMark2001SE only ran with Directx 8? Or am I
missing something here... It wont run on my PC with Directx 9 installed.
Surely you need Directx 9 for the drivers to run at their best?

"The Black Wibble" <scanner@free.net.nz> wrote in message
news:vhDLc.9740$NA1.918333@news02.tsnz.net...
> "Darkfalz" <darkfalz@xis.com.au> wrote in message
> news:2m7n7aFk3e82U1@uni-berlin.de...
>> "Martin S." <mart@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
>> news:10ft80q9ko6j655@corp.supernews.com...
>> > The subject line say's 61.72 the message say's 61.76, which one is it?
>>
>> New WHQL 61.76
>
> Try reinstalling the benchmark program.
>
> Tony.
>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Quietman" <quietman1968 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
news:TMmdnYXNgbyoA5zcRVn-vw@nildram.net...
> Er, hang on guys. I thought 3DMark2001SE only ran with Directx 8? Or am I
> missing something here... It wont run on my PC with Directx 9 installed.
> Surely you need Directx 9 for the drivers to run at their best?

You not missing anything.
If you run a non FX card with 3DMark03, it will tell you to use 2001SE
instead. 3DMark03 will use DX9 function on the VGA card.

CapFusion,...
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

It runs fine on DX9, which is backwardly compatible with DX8.

If it won't run on your system you have a problem somewhere...



"Quietman" <quietman1968 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
news:TMmdnYXNgbyoA5zcRVn-vw@nildram.net...
> Er, hang on guys. I thought 3DMark2001SE only ran with Directx 8? Or am I
> missing something here... It wont run on my PC with Directx 9 installed.
> Surely you need Directx 9 for the drivers to run at their best?
>
> "The Black Wibble" <scanner@free.net.nz> wrote in message
> news:vhDLc.9740$NA1.918333@news02.tsnz.net...
> > "Darkfalz" <darkfalz@xis.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:2m7n7aFk3e82U1@uni-berlin.de...
> >> "Martin S." <mart@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> >> news:10ft80q9ko6j655@corp.supernews.com...
> >> > The subject line say's 61.72 the message say's 61.76, which one is
it?
> >>
> >> New WHQL 61.76
> >
> > Try reinstalling the benchmark program.
> >
> > Tony.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Quietman" <quietman1968 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
news:TMmdnYXNgbyoA5zcRVn-vw@nildram.net...
> Er, hang on guys. I thought 3DMark2001SE only ran with Directx 8? Or am I
> missing something here... It wont run on my PC with Directx 9 installed.
> Surely you need Directx 9 for the drivers to run at their best?

I can't answer that last question, but 3DMark2001SE is supposed to work with
DX8.1 and ~above~.

From the 3DMark2001 SE FAQ:
"Q: I installed DirectX 9 and now 3DMark2001 SE tells me that I need DirectX
8.1, what gives?

A: We have noticed this behavior and the solution is quite easy. Uninstall
your 3DMark2001 SE, download the latest version (Build 330) if you don`t
have it already, reboot your machine and install 3DMark2001 SE again."

Tony.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Thanks guys. I will download the 2001SE version again and give it go :)

"The Black Wibble" <scanner@free.net.nz> wrote in message
news:RslMc.99$zS6.15618@news02.tsnz.net...
> "Quietman" <quietman1968 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
> news:TMmdnYXNgbyoA5zcRVn-vw@nildram.net...
>> Er, hang on guys. I thought 3DMark2001SE only ran with Directx 8? Or am I
>> missing something here... It wont run on my PC with Directx 9 installed.
>> Surely you need Directx 9 for the drivers to run at their best?
>
> I can't answer that last question, but 3DMark2001SE is supposed to work
> with
> DX8.1 and ~above~.
>
> From the 3DMark2001 SE FAQ:
> "Q: I installed DirectX 9 and now 3DMark2001 SE tells me that I need
> DirectX
> 8.1, what gives?
>
> A: We have noticed this behavior and the solution is quite easy. Uninstall
> your 3DMark2001 SE, download the latest version (Build 330) if you don`t
> have it already, reboot your machine and install 3DMark2001 SE again."
>
> Tony.
>
>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom