Aquamark is here!

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
F

fragglefart

Distinguished
Sep 5, 2003
132
0
18,680
Okey Dokey boys and girls, how is everyone finding this spangly new benchy then?
Hows everyone doing at default settings?

I hit 41,791

with a 5900Ultra, P4 3.0Ghz and 2Gig DDR400.
Rendering was okaaaay, a bit sluggish, nice quality graphics though (although admittedly i havnt seen it running on a 9800Pro 😀 ), its calmed my Half Life 2 fears a bit.

Oh and im running Omega 45.23 "quality" drivers
Not Nvidia performance ones >:) (dont trust 'em!)

............................................
Render times? You'll find me down the pub...
 
You know what would be funny?

If you looked in the Detonator FXs with the current crap DX9 performance, and found out in the registry a key named: "DirectX 9 extensions=0"

:lol:

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>Are you ugly and looking into showing your mug? Then the THGC Album is the right place for you!</b></font color=blue></A>
 
I think there's an anomaly with the benchmark. Clock speeds on FXs not reporting right.

Hey Fraggle Post your Benchmarks. I hit 30K with my R9600P on an XP2000+.

At Stock I beat all FX5600U's so far, and OC'd I beat them by a long shot.

I can't figure out the FX5600U megahertz ratings the one that's close to my stock performance (with an FSB OC 134-135) reports the speed ratings as: 115 / 198 MHz. Which can't be right. All the FX5600s I've ssen sofar report weird MHZ ratings. The FX5900s seem to reporting normal looking numbers. Check yourself in the compare section.

Mine are reported correctly (398 / 297 MHz), but I don't understand that.

Do you think you could check your, or maybe post a compare link?


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new"><font color=green>RED</font color=green> <font color=red>GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK :evil:
 
this means only one thing.

NVIDIOTS PACK YOUR STUFF, WE'RE LEAVING!!!

takes out M16
heads to ATi with 10 tons of firepowder


Proud Owner the Block Heater
120% nVidia Fanboy
PROUD OWNER OF THE GEFORCE FX 5900ULTRA <-- I wish this was me
I'd get a nVidia GeForce FX 5900Ultra... if THEY WOULD CHANGE THAT #()#@ HSF
 
14500 or so for me
ti 4600 with dual mons... -_- i went down to 4fps lol.
i attribute it to the very fraggy system drive but damn.
 
I will look into timings later but i gotta go help a mate with something first.
Um, the net is on a different PC in my house, to the one i benched on.. perhaps if i save the results page i can upload it on this pc?
If not, i will stick up a more detailed breakdown anyway. Ran the test again and hit 41666
I prefer that number!
Hail Satan (lols) 😀

............................................
Render times? You'll find me down the pub...
 
My score : 17956

GPU : Radeon 8500LE (277/300)
CPU : AMD Athlon XP 1800+ overclocked to 1917 MHz (about 2200/2300+)

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
My 8500LE RAM is rated 3.6 nanoseconds = 275 MHz, I run it at 300 MHz.

And many 8500LE have memory modules rated 3.3 nanoseconds = 300 MHz. On these board you can often run it at 320/330 MHz.

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by TheRod on 09/16/03 12:33 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
sigh..i have bad luck then..my 8500LE is rated 4 ns = ???Mhz (sorry i don't know :tongue: ),the default was 230Mhz, i make it run at 250Mhz, I can't make it run at 275Mhz, it would distored the image in 3Dmark..
 
The 8500LE specs are around 250/250. The most lucky got 8500LE with 300 MHz rated memory modules.

To convert ns to MHz...

1000 / 4 (ns) = 250 MHz
1000 / 3.6 (ns) = 278 MHz
1000 / 3.3 (ns) = 303 MHz

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
not necessarly, they built some 8500LE 128 Megs with high quality memory, because of the BGA package of the momory modules they used on those board.

I can't remember the link or the site, but it was posted here... An article talked about the design difference between 8500 and 8500 LE. Because of the LE board design, ATI actually installed better meory on those board that were supposed to be "slower" version of 8500.

When you campare board design, ATI removed a lot of electronic component from the 8500 design to reduce cost. And to be able to put 128 Megs of RAM on the board, they used BGA chips instead of conventionnal chips (I can't remember the name of this package).

And the article pointed out, that BGA chip were usually an evolution of the older package, se basically, it was hard to find BGA chips with slow timing. So, it's why 8500LE, like mine, have better memory than it should have.

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
I have the 128 Megs version.

For what I remember, they removed components that were used for DVI output or something like that.

On my 8500 LE, I have 2 output: S-VHS and VGA. But I don't have the second VGA, or DVI output. I think it's what they removed.

Damn, I really want to find the lik to the article about this card!

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
Ta dam!!! I found the article!

<A HREF="http://www.hwextreme.com/reviews/videocards/ati_radeon8500le/index.shtml" target="_new">http://www.hwextreme.com/reviews/videocards/ati_radeon8500le/index.shtml</A>

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
hm..pretty interesting, they said that Radeon8500 used 4ns? there is some mistake or? since 4ns is rated for 250Mhz..
but whatever..
my 8500LE is actually made by Sapphire, so it's not totally the same to that one, mine has 64MB and DVI-out..
dunno if it has dual ramdac or that 165Mhz integrated TMDS transmitter..(btw, what's this TMDS stuff? :tongue: )
 
hm..pretty interesting, they said that Radeon8500 used 4ns? there is some mistake or? since 4ns is rated for 250Mhz..
Click to expand...
The official spec for Radeon 8500LE are 250MHz memory. But card makers had only faster ram or these module were cheaper. So they built 8500LE with memory from 250 to 300 MHz. But, by default Radeon 8500LE should be clock to 250 Mhz (memory).

And for the TMDS...
<A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=what+is+TMDS+transmitter&btnG=Google+Search" target="_new">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=what+is+TMDS+transmitter&btnG=Google+Search</A>

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
they used BGA chips instead of conventionnal chips (I can't remember the name of this package).
Click to expand...
TSOP II was the other package. (Don't ask me what TSOP means).

Radeon 8500 (talking ATI brand only) originally had 4 basic models each with two size memory complements. The 8500 and 8500 OEM (often called BBA, meaning built by ATI but usually Sapphire was contracted) and the 8500LE and 8500LE OEM (also so called BBA). You could get either 64MB or 128MB models of all cards.

I can only recall the official speeds of the 64MB models. In the order of the above list of cards the speeds were 275 core/275 memory, 250/275, 250/250, and 250/230.

Other manufacturers selected their own speeds.

Supposedly the Retail models were the better overclockers because slightly higher voltages were supplied to the cores and memory. I don't really know if this is rumor or fact (about the voltage that is).

My 8500 OEM (64MB) is pretty good overclocker. It has 3.3ns Hynix TSOP II memory. With some extra cooling (just a fan) it can run all day at 300/325. I have pushed it to 308/340 but I got almost no performance gain on my old KT133A mobo over 300/325 and it's not stable unless my room is very cold.

My 8500 OEEM is lacking one feature, a second RAMDAC, so a second CRT can not be used. Though the card has a DVI port (and will work with a digital flat panel) it is not a DVI-I port which would have the RGB signals needed for CRT's. The old DVI is officially now called DVI-D and differs from DVI-I which carries the extra pinouts.

After the 8500LE's were first introduced their was a short period when 8500 LELE's were available. These were even slower than the LE's. The clocks I recall were 200/230 and 200/200 plus one company made one at 200/166.

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom