X300SE 3DMark03 Scores (Comments?)

**X300SE 3DMark03 Scores (Comments?) -** 08-13-2004, 17:40 | posts: n/a

I've had a hard time finding quantitative info on Dell's X300SE and X800SE offerings so I decided to run 3DMark on my new 8400 (P4 3.0G / 512M DDR2) with an X300SE. Here are the results. I'm new at this so I don't know how they compare.

I'm considering calling Dell and requesting a trade up to the X800SE which I could not get when I ordered.

I'd like to know what you think?

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 1829 3DMarks
CPU Score 637.0 CPUMarks

Detailed Test Results

Game Tests
GT1 - Wings of Fury 68.0 fps
GT2 - Battle of Proxycon 9.8 fps
GT3 - Troll's Lair 9.2 fps
GT4 - Mother Nature 13.9 fps

CPU Tests
CPU Test 1 67.9 fps
CPU Test 2 11.8 fps

Feature Tests
Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 322.1 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 1184.7 MTexels/s
Vertex Shader 8.1 fps
Pixel Shader 2.0 18.0 fps
Ragtroll 6.6 fps

Display Information
Graphics Chipset Generic VGA
Driver Name RADEON X300 Series
Driver Version 6.14.10.6444
Driver Status WHQL - FM Approved
Video Memory 128 MB
Core Clock 115 MHz
Memory Clock 115 MHz

Benchmark Settings
Program Version 3DMark03 Revision 4 Build 0
Resolution 1024x768@32 bit
Texture Filtering Optimal
Pixel Processing / Antialiasing None
Post Processing false
Vertex Shaders Optimal

arnie · 08-13-2004, 17:52 | posts: 1,386

to be blunt, thats very poor for a system like yours. the x300se wasnt made for anything but word processing, so, you will struggle in nearly every game you play

Treblig · 08-13-2004, 17:59 | posts: 3,265 | Location: Mesa , AZ .

Yeah , that score is dismal . A Geforce4 will outscore that new card you got there , and they can't even run all the tests !

I would be on the phone with Dell and give them some hell . They do this to people all the time . " Yeah we will upgrade you to this:; " It's brand new and will run games real well " HA !!!

It will play solitare pretty good but you got ripped . Tell them you want a new box with a 9800 Pro or the X800 if you can get it but I wouldn't pay for that . Good luck .

Edit : BTW , Welcome to Guru3d !

Breakout · 08-13-2004, 18:06 | posts: 588 | Location: USA...Texas

Looks like you got the bottom of the barrel...here's a chartshowing the specs of the different models.

Chart courtesy of Hot Hardware

08-13-2004, 18:08 | posts: n/a

Hmmmm. I was doing some comps on Futuremark and 1829 is pretty bad

So far I had run BF1942, CFS2, Morrowind and Madden 04. They looked pretty good and played well too.

I think I'll call Dell.

I'd like to see a comp to the 8400 with the X800SE if anyone knows where to find one.

Treblig · 08-13-2004, 18:13 | posts: 3,265 | Location: Mesa , AZ .

Good luck finding the SE but I can not believe that ATI even makes a card with 64bit memory anymore !!! That is terribly sad . 256bit is where it's at !

WildStyle · 08-13-2004, 18:22 | posts: 15,235 | Location: UK

@Boz, this should be in the benchmark section.

@breakout, your sig is distracting me.

Treblig · 08-13-2004, 18:24 | posts: 3,265 | Location: Mesa , AZ .

Wild it's fine you moved it but I think it did pertain to overall ATI performance for a new comer !

The 3d score was just a matter of referance .

stefanovicho · 08-13-2004, 19:01 | posts: 1,471 | Location: the netherlands

fff :S that card issn't even better than a fx 5200 :S what a crappy **** dude

SorienOR · 08-14-2004, 02:34 | posts: 6,454 | Location: Oregon

Dude, you got a Dell!

NAJMI ADNAN · 08-14-2004, 03:30 | posts: 2,177 | Location: Malaysia

Quote:

Originally posted by WildStyle
................

@breakout, your sig is distracting me.

It distracting me too

ross · 08-14-2004, 07:01 | posts: 718 | Location: Kansas

Quote:

Originally posted by SorienOR
Dude, you got a Dell!

ROFLE COPTER

**Update -** 08-15-2004, 21:28 | posts: n/a

I got Dell to agree to send me an X800SE and allow me to return the X300SE. It took a little persistence and persuasion, but I got it worked out. Should have the X800SE by the end of the month. I'll re-run the benchmarks and post for comparison.

stefanovicho · 08-16-2004, 02:17 | posts: 1,471 | Location: the netherlands

good job

Elanzer · *Last edited by Elanzer; 08-16-2004 at 05:15.*

Those fillrate numbers are almost half of what my $20 geforce 3 gets, and those 3dmarks are only 250 points higher than what my FX5200 gets. How much did that card cost you? It would be ok for $70 or so (even though you can get better for $70), but keep in mind it's basically a Radeon 9600SE with 3dc support. That's all really, since the main part that made the X800's different from the r9800s is that they had more pipelines, but there is no pipeline difference on the x300 so it's almost the same card.

Jeeze, OEMs always astonish me how they can even think of building these machines, but I guess people will see "3000mhz" and buy it, even though it has a video card that is equal to card's made from like 5 years ago..

Filifjonk · 08-16-2004, 08:10 | posts: 29 | Location: Finland

I have a X600XT and that´s cr*ppy too, it´s almost a 9600XT!
Only 1-5% faster!

AJ²06 · 08-16-2004, 10:19 | posts: 4,890 | Location: USA

@ Boz.R , Nice to hear that ur getting an x800SE. U should notice a difference!

@breakout, your sig is distracting me also... nice

Elanzer · *Last edited by Elanzer; 08-16-2004 at 14:09.*

Ehh it's expected, since the only thing ATi really changed was the name, and the 3dc support. Without any games that use 3dc, they are effectively the old cards with a new name...

X300SE = 9600SE

X300 = 9600NP

X600PRO = 9600 PRO

X600XT = 9600XT + 140mhz memory clock speedup

X800SE = 9800 + clock speed increase (above 9800XT, but most likely does not have overdrive features enabled by default), some 128bit memory bus

X800PRO = 9800 + 4 pipelines

X800XT = 9800 + 8 pipelines

Is pretty much what I've found so far, ATi will be in trouble because they've made little modification to their cards speed wise, (they didn't even ramp up the speeds on most of the x600/x300 cards, so they're effectively the same cards as last round) which makes no sense at all. They shrunk the micron size, but did not raise clocks? They probobly overclock very nicely.

Just think of all the people who are going to upgrade from 9600pro/xt cards to x600pro/xt cards thinking they're going to get a huge boost, when little do they know they almost have the same cards... until 3dc actually happens.

Seketh · 08-16-2004, 14:13 | posts: 1,548 | Location: Coimbra, Portugal

ATI blew it in this generation of videocards IMO.

Filifjonk · 08-16-2004, 14:18 | posts: 29 | Location: Finland

Quote:

Originally posted by [-Neon-]
ATI blew it in this generation of videocards IMO.

Cheap cards = crappy...
X800 expensive and good! nothing wrong with that!
It´s just same if they change the name on a 9600XT
to X600XT and have a cheap price, or if they make a
brand new card with a new name with same performance
and same price!?

Breakout · 08-16-2004, 17:39 | posts: 588 | Location: USA...Texas

Quote:

Originally posted by WildStyle

Breakout, your sig is distracting me.

Quote:

Originally posted by NAJMI ADNAN
It distracting me too

Quote:

Originally posted by AJ²06
Breakout, your sig is distracting me also... nice

sigh...well, a guy can dream, can't he?

08-16-2004, 17:45 | posts: n/a

O_o very similar scores then my GF 4 TI...
106.3 fps

GT2 - Battle of Proxycon 12.5 fps

GT3 - Troll's Lair 11.8 fps

GT4 - Mother Nature Not Supported

Feature Tests
Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 764.4 MTexels/s

Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 2061.7 MTexels/s

Vertex Shader 7.3 fps

Pixel Shader 2.0 Not Supported

Ragtroll 7.0 fps

08-16-2004, 17:53 | posts: n/a

And hers my GeForce 2 TI's texturing speed (single texturing speed!)

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 471.3 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 886.2 MTexels/s
ATI is doing nice rip-offing here. Radeon x300 se = radeon 7500 whit SM2.0b support.

**New scores w/ X800SE -** 08-20-2004, 05:22 | posts: n/a

This is a follow up to the original post in this thread....

Well, I got the X800SE installed in my new Dell8400 and re-ran the 3DMark03 test. Here are the results. I think it was worth the extra $150.

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 6892 3DMarks (was 1829 w/ X300SE)
CPU Score 659.0 CPUMarks (was 637 w/ X300SE)

Detailed Test Results
Game Tests
GT1 - Wings of Fury 220.5 fps (was 68)
GT2 - Battle of Proxycon 45.6 fps (was 9.8)
GT3 - Troll's Lair 39.1 fps (was9.2)
GT4 - Mother Nature 45.4 fps (was13.9)

CPU Tests
CPU Test 1 73.1 fps
CPU Test 2 11.8 fps

Feature Tests
Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 1815.0 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 3211.7 MTexels/s
Vertex Shader 27.5 fps
Pixel Shader 2.0 67.7 fps
Ragtroll 31.0 fps

System Configuration

General Information
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
DirectX Version 9.0b
Mobo Manufacturer Dell Inc.
Mobo Model 0J3492
AGP Rates (Current/Available) 0x /
CPU Intel Pentium 4 2993 MHz
FSB 800 MHz
Memory 510 MB

Display Information
Graphics Chipset Generic VGA
Driver Name RADEON X800 SE
Driver Version 6.14.10.6444
Driver Status WHQL - FM Approved
Video Memory 128 MB
Core Clock 115 MHz
Memory Clock 115 MHz

Sound Information
Sound Adapter Driver Name SoundMAX Digital Audio
Sound Adapter Driver Version 5.12.1.4060

Benchmark Settings
Program Version 3DMark03 Revision 4 Build 0
Resolution 1024x768@32 bit
Texture Filtering Optimal
Pixel Processing / Antialiasing None
Post Processing false
Vertex Shaders Optimal

Breakout

Quote:

Originally posted by Boz.R
I think it was worth the extra $150.

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 6892 3DMarks (was 1829 w/ X300SE)

Yeah, a 277% increase in performance is definitely worth $150 bucks. Have fun!...