Why is my 3D Mark score so low ???

05-13-2002, 16:02 | posts: n/a

Hi, wazzup everyone! 
 
I have been testing my system with the 3D Mark 2001 SE to find out that it performs very badly for it’s type. This is my system: 
 
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Microsoft Windows XP 
DirectX Version 8.1 8.1 
 
Mobo Manufacturer CHAINTECH Inc. 
Mobo Model KJD - 761-8231 
AGP Rates 
(Current/Available) 4x / 1x 2x 4x 
 
CPU AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 1533 MHz 
FSB 133 MHz 
Memory 512 MB 
 
Graphics Chipset NVIDIA GeForce3 Ti 200 NVIDIA GeForce3 Ti 200 
Driver Version 6.13.10.2832 
Video Memory 64 MB 
 
These are my 3D Mark 2001 SE settings : 
 
Program Version 3DMark2001 SE 3DMark2001 SE 
Resolution 1024x768 32bit 1024x768 32bit 
Texture Format Compressed 
FSAA Disabled 
Z-Buffer Depth 24bit 
Frame Buffer Double 
Rendering Pipeline D3D Pure Hardware T&L 
 
My score is 4838 and I looked around and found that almost everyone with almost identical systems (different MoBo and maybe different VGA manufacturer) with exact same CPU speeds, amount of RAM etc. had scores up to 7000 or even higher. Here is a comparision pic of someone with a pc almost identical to mine except for the mobo: 
<IMG SRC="http://www.euroharmony.com/new/3dmark1.gif"> 
 
As you see, this is not good at all, his pc kicks mine’s ass in all tests (except for nature, but that one is still close). So what am I doing wrong? Is there anyone who can see if there is some tweak I can do to change this? 
 
Thanks, 
 
Razor

Cockbender · 05-13-2002, 16:25 | posts: 874 | Location: Arkansas

yikes, 4838 is VERY low for your system. your system is almost identical to mine, and i got 7300. 
 
make sure to disable antialiasing, and turn v-sync off. those are located in the display settings. 
 
really, that should bring you up to the norm, which should be around 6500 to 7000. some tweaking here and there and you can get a little bit higher, even.

Joshua · 05-13-2002, 20:15 | posts: 6,830 | Location: Seattle, WA

Your systems are similar, but I'd say a SoyoDragon+ is much better than any chaintech. As for razorx8. It's all about tweaking and the OCing. . . .

05-13-2002, 20:44 | posts: n/a

razorx8 you want to make sure that everything is the same when you try and compare a system. A big thing I noticed, just because they have the same cpu speed, say 733(like mine), they may actually have a 500mhz chip overclocked to run at 733mhz, which means that everything else in the system is overclocked too. Do like Milenko suggested, make sure you turn off vsync and aa, then try it again. Also turn off all other programs you have running in the background too. And something I just noticed but am not 100% sure on, but your OS could make a difference as well, so try to compare your system with another that is identical as well as running the same OS.

Cockbender · 05-14-2002, 08:29 | posts: 874 | Location: Arkansas

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by priz: 
Also turn off all other programs you have running in the background too<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 
 
That's a really good point made by priz. A lot of people don't realize the amount of small junk running in the background, things like that realplayer quickstart thingy, antivirus background scanning, etc. 
 
Norton Utilities' "System Doctor," for example, can suck up 5-8% of your system resources.

Joshua · 05-14-2002, 08:31 | posts: 6,830 | Location: Seattle, WA

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> That's a really good point made by priz. A lot of people don't realize the amount of small junk running in the background, things like that realplayer quickstart thingy, antivirus background scanning, etc. 
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 
Excellent. And if you're runnin' xp, you got all those crappy services. lol

05-14-2002, 13:15 | posts: n/a

Actually OCing would not help a bit at all, because the score difference is over 5000 pts. This is a hardware issue, if you have tried all driver upgrades and yielded no results. Check to see if you have the latest AGP driver (or VIA 4-in-1 driver installed). Apparently the GF3/gf4 have lots of problems on Athlon systems. 
 
I have a similiar problem with a GF4 ti4400 scoring low in 3dmark2001se, and overclocking would only increase the score, by a maximum of 2000pts (if you overclock over component in the PC that is..) 
However the difference between my score (5809) on default settings, and the average benchmark score of my system, there is about a 4000-5000pt discrepancy. 
 
strange. If anyone can find a hardware/software quickfix this would be awesome <IMG SRC="smileys/smile.gif">. 
 
PS: FSAA and V-Sync are turned off by default 3dmark2001se if you benchmark with default settings. This message was edited by djHerbaL on 14 May 2002 05:18 AM

Joshua · 05-14-2002, 13:31 | posts: 6,830 | Location: Seattle, WA

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Apparently the GF3/gf4 have lots of problems on Athlon systems. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 
Where'd you hear this? 
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> the average benchmark score of my system, there is about a 4000-5000pt discrepancy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 
And again, where'd you here this? Athlon XP systems, on better motherboards, with better chipsets score about 9k default with a Ti4600. Your processor isn't an AthlonXP, your board is runnin' the Ali chipset, and you aren't runnin' a Ti4600. So For a default score without OCing, the max I could see you getting is 7k.

Cockbender · 05-14-2002, 13:32 | posts: 874 | Location: Arkansas

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by djHerbaL: 
PS: FSAA and V-Sync are turned off by default 3dmark2001se if you benchmark with default settings.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 
 
you sure?

Joshua · 05-14-2002, 13:33 | posts: 6,830 | Location: Seattle, WA

They are turned off for the application, but if they have use AA always on enabled, then it would still be a performance hit.