Real low 3DMark2001SE score

[wrburns]

Here's my score, build 330:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7499274

Dell Dimension 2350, P4 2GHz, 256MB PC2100, GF4MX440-SE on PCI bus (no AGP). I checked some other people's scores, and they are getting double my score on similar hardware. Any ideas? I have already tried updating my mobo drivers, but that seemed to only give me 100 points.

 

[Woodman]

Haven't seen very many, but your score of 3654 seems reasonable I think, with the kind of card you have and at the resolution you're running with.

You ought to run at default settings though for a better comparison.

As for scores that are double yours, did you make sure the specs were similar as well? Because someone with an XP 2000+, faster/bigger/lower-latency memory, a better mobo than Dell, AGP MX440 card, etc... should be able to score better than yours, even though the specs "sounds" similar (which they're not).

-----
Do not spit.

 

[sirak]

Yeah, that score sounds about right.

----------------------
PIV 2.4c @ 2.89ghz
1gig PC3200 (512mbx2)
ASUS P4P800
GF3 Ti200 64mb (soon to be replaced)
WinXP Pro
3DMark2001SE: 6300
3DMark2003: 688

 

[wrburns]

Firstly, thanks for not flaming me. 🙂

I would expect a better score from a higher quality system, but 7000 vs. ~3600 is pretty extreme. I can't help but think there is a problem on the software side.

Also, please check out my vertex shader scores!!! It looks like vertex shaders are running in software mode...

 

[Woodman]

Yea, you probably should ignore the 7000 score, and probably scores in the 6000 range as well. Can't really expect to get that sort of score with a Dell systems mate. Besides, most of the higher scores seem to have 512MB of memory.

You're right on the VS score, it should be higher. Did you check what AGP speed you're running with? Make sure it's the highest you can take it. Try setting your frame buffer at double instead of triple too. All that should give you some improvements in your score.

-----
Do not spit.

 

[GeneticWeapon]

I had a machine at my old house that was a 1.2 Duron/pc133/mx440 setup, and it would get around 4,300 2001Se marks. Your mx440Se has only a 64bit memory bus though, which cripples it badly.

<b>I help because you suck</b>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1819095" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[markgun]

but 7000 vs. ~3600 is pretty extreme

AGP is significantly faster than PCI, even with low-end cards. You can't really compare your PCI variant to an AGP variant and expect them to be the same. There's nothing wrong with your system!

<b>Qui habet aures audiendi audiat</b>

 

[Woodman]

*smacks head*
Oh yes, what he said. Forgot you had a PCI card heh.

-----
Do not spit.

 

[Mloot]

If you switched out that SE MX440 PCI with a Visiontek 9100 PCI, your score will jump up to ~7,000. Being that it's the best PCI card currently on the market, that's just about the limit you can get with your current setup.

 

[wrburns]

MLoot, I know. I needed the card to run flawlessly on Linux though, and ATI's drivers are somewhat wanting.

 

[Mloot]

Well, if you were to get something like Mad Dog Multimedia's FX 5200 PCI (about the fastest one made) or Inno3D's FX 5600 PCI, then you would see a definite improvement. When I did my PCI review, I couldn't use the 5x.xx drivers, because they came out after I had already tested half the cards. The FX PCI cards, especially the 5600 PCI, were somewhat held back by the 45.23 drivers, but they showed definite speed improvements with the 53.03's. And at 1024x768 and below the 5600 PCI was very close to the 9100 in performance, if not faster in some tests.

 

[JEZZAAA]

MY NAME IS JEZZAAAaaaaaAAAAAAAaaaaaaaAAAAAAAaaaaaaaAAAAAA!!! i owN J00 aLL in the Face!! With my geforce 2 MEX i get 245000 on 3dmaRK 2003 and i won you all noobs. YOU GOI*NGDSOW~{IH sdb{DBSA cos My gEFOrce mX WitH P2 1.3 GHz (overclcked to 2.9GHZ) wILl kilL yOur SCORES !!!!

 

[Guest]

Wow dood you sound smart could you tweak my system like you did?

 

[coylter]

But the guy scored 3500 in 800x600, it seem low to me even for a dell

My own beast: Athlon 2700xp+ (oc: 3200xp+ with 200fsb) , Radeon 9800pro (oc: 410/370) , 512mb ddr400. SO MUCH faster than my last computer (pIII 550......)

 

[Wolfy]

god i know im not adding anything positive to this topic but ouch thats a horrible score....

"Its only when you look at ants closely with a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames"

 

[coylter]

This guy scored similar to him with a 900mhz cpu and a geforce 2 mx

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=2379720

My own beast: Athlon 2700xp+ (oc: 3200xp+ with 200fsb) , Radeon 9800pro (oc: 410/370) , 512mb ddr400. SO MUCH faster than my last computer (pIII 550......)

 

[wrburns]

You're not making me feel better, coylter. LOL Look, the thing that really bothers me is the Vertex Shader score. That is a real Out of Whack Stat.

 

[Woodman]

Did you try running with double, instead of triple frame buffering yet?

-----
Do not spit.

 

[coolsquirtle]

WOOT!! CALLING GENETIC WEAPON, I'VE FOUND ANOTHER RETARD WE CAN FLAME! OVER!!



RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
never tried to go crazy when it comes to o/cing.
THGC's resident Asian and Graphics Forum's resident nVboy 😀

 

[coolsquirtle]

ahhh.... YOU GOT DELLED......

Don't worry, you're just amount thousand of other people that think "hey.. its a GeForce 4, must be good like the Ti4200"

RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
never tried to go crazy when it comes to o/cing.
THGC's resident Asian and Graphics Forum's resident nVboy 😀