View Full Version : Poor 2001se result with a 9800 pro!
A friend of mine just got himself a brand spanking new Radeon 9800 pro, installation went fine with no hiccups & seemingly no driver conflicts with his old Nvidia card. Now we fired up 2001 se in the hope it would achieve a decent result (I presumed 16k or so considering the spec, but the result was awful, 11738. I've tinkered with the Cat drivers and changed a few settings that should be on in the bios (fast writes, 8x agp etc) but it made no difference. A further search into the driver options we discovered that the card was only running in 60hz so we changed it to 85 (same as the monitor) & ran CoD in 1024x768 and high detail and I was astonished to see the fps was still capped at 60 and would only go higher when we looked down the sight of the rifle:confused: very strange indeed.
Spec,
A7N8X-X (VIA)
2200+ XP
512 Crucial PC2700
Sapphire Rad pro 128mb
CATALYST version 03.10
Any advice would be much appreciated, any other info needed just say.
Same here I just get over 10k on 3Dmark2k1 with my 9800 pro :(.
its a joke mate, there must be an explanation for it.
Sounds like sommut serious is wrong:(
I am running an AMD3200+, 512Mb DDR400 Ram on a cheapo Sparkle maninbaord and I have achieved 17120 in 2001SE. I used CAT4.2 drivers.
Before running a benchmark make sure you have nothing running in the background, as that will criple your performance.
Just out of interest is that running 2001 at default settings as when I pushed everything to maximum I only acheive a little under 12000.
I would say that becnhmarks are so clinical that if the card does what you want forget 3D mark but from what you have said about CoD I think you def need to have a closer look at whats going on
If you are running 3Dmark at default and nothing is running in the background (eg MSn messenger, antivirus other crap) then I would say there is def something a miss. What card have you got be it Sapphire, Asus etc etc?
You have to remeber that 3DM2001 is CPU dependent, unlike 3DM2003.
The highest score with an 1800MHz CPU is only 14K and that is with card and CPU overclocked.
Is anything overclocked? Make sure that you aren't using AA or AF.
Uninstall & re-install the drivers & control panel.
& as DT1 says make sure that you aren't running with any AA or AF.
bleecher
25-03-2004, 01:23
jack dont u mean the 9500 is softmodded into a 9700np, becuase u cant turn a 9500 into a 9800 due to the completely different chipset design and structure?
id say ur score is wayyyy to low, i think u may have ur quality settings on high, that takes a huge chunk outta benchmarking and like mentioned above so does AA and high mipmap settings
[edit] have u installed ur mobo drivers aswell?
TheFallenAngel
25-03-2004, 01:35
ye if its a Via chipset they have a thing called....*racks memory*.......ah ha.......Via 4 in 1. Might be wrong chipset but I had a KT400 board and it mad world of difference. But thats about right I used to get about 12,000 with my 9800xt and my cpu @ 1466mhz. Yet i was still able to get 6500 in 3dmark2003.
and with my current setup i get 19,000 in 3dmark 2001. I have yet to download 3dmark2003 to test it/
its a Sapphy Pro, everythings disabled in the background, benchmarking afaik is on 1048x768, 32bit no aa etc etc. Not check the texture quality we just left it to the default. Nothing is overclocked. I will try 03 on his comp and report back :)
ffs why is this moved i need help .. its not to compare.
Ok, I've just set my Barton back to 13.5x133 to emulate an XP2200 & done a 3DMark2K1SE score.
With this being a Barton I should score slightly higher than a T'bred but I ran at Cas2.5 when i could have run CAS2.
14391 at 380/340 so your friends is definitely low if he isn't running any AA or AF.
Originally posted by dirk
ffs why is this moved i need help .. its not to compare.
It was moved because you "need help" with benchmarking. Your card is working perfectly. People have told you that the botleneck is your processor and your score is average. 3Dmark 2001 is dependant on processor more than graphics card. You'll get more help here aswell.
COD apparently locks the FPS at 60, so there's your problem. Use google (you know what that is right?) and serach for COD fps lock
why the sarcasm, just no need for it is there
why the "ffs"? there was no need for that either!
...and really, it kind of is to 'compare'. Because your saying "my card's getting a ****e mark, or is it?"
So the real question is: Is there any need for me to be so pedantic?
The "ffs" was for the thread being moved for no reason. Secondly its not my card its friends which I am trying to get help for, note: he nor I wish to compare the result with any of yours we only wish to get to the bottom of the low score. If anything it should have been moved to "Troubleshooting" but I guess the admin didn't get that far. Sorry if i've said the wrong bloody thing but its annoying when you find threads get shuffled around when granted its benchmarking related but more so hardware because he clearly has a problem with his hardware hence the low score.
Take a pill!
I'm sure if you look around the forums you'll find that I am the last person who could adversely comment on the use of 'ffs'. ;) - 'twas just an amusing twist on your comment about sarcasm.
The reason it was 'shuffled' was because you will get a quicker diagnosis on your bottle-necking hardware within this room than you will wherever else you posted it. I hadn't even read the thread before it moved here, although to be fair by now your question should be answered.
Originally posted by Forthy
although to be fair by now your question should be answered.
but it hasn't, other than proving that his mate's PC is about 3,000 points short of where it should be.
btw:
"A7N8X-X (VIA)" can't be that.
It is either an A7V8X-X (VIA) or an A7N8X-X (nVidia), which is it?
If an A7N8X-X has he got CPU Interface enabled - that should be good for 1000pts difference?
Sorry thats my mistake, he's got the VIA one as you rightly pointed out. :)
oweneades
28-03-2004, 21:47
Don't worry too much about synthetic benchmarks as like processors they all differ. A amd athlon thrashes the ass off of a p4 in some tasks whereas a p4 thrashes a athlon. Just play some games and if they work at max everything which they should on that card then don't worry.
bleecher
28-03-2004, 22:18
Originally posted by oweneades
Don't worry too much about synthetic benchmarks as like processors they all differ.
but 3D mark isnt a "synthetic" benchmark, it uses the max payne engine and renders a full, yet automatic game, it uses AI scripts, Runtime scripts and all available resources, all things used in any game- it is a realworld benchmark, its like saying the Halo benchmark is synthetic - there not!!1 there realworld
ok guys, another look into the driver options revealed this :-
http://www.danielm.plus.com/dirksdocs.htm/9800driveroptions.jpg
Now when we change it to fast writes and 8x it resets itself on bootup, we've also installed the new cats and the 3dmark score has now dropped from 11k to 10k. Any thoughts on this ?
bleecher
30-03-2004, 17:58
when u benchmark u supposed to reset ur graphics(direct3D) to performance,
although it isnt, it should be set to performance, same with mipmap details etc
http://server5.uploadit.org/files/thebleecher-0.JPG
bleecher
30-03-2004, 17:59
soz could b arsed to re-size it
thats not my question, his comp wont allow him to put fast writes and 8x agp on, I'm thinking thinking this is part of the problem. Performance is selected under direct3d anyhow.
bleecher
30-03-2004, 18:34
right well i was addressing the performance aspect of it, also u didnt mention about the direct3D being on performance i said it was on defualt!.
right well have u tried installing the motherboard drivers yet? as i had this probel when i didnt insatll them, it wouldnt address the AGP correctly.
and have u tried the fast-writes in the bios?
Put fast writes in the bios but again it just resets itself, haven't tried reinstalling the mobo drivers.
Yup, that could well be the root.
Daft question, but he does have his mobo drivers loaded?
what do you mean by loaded ? installed ?
Originally posted by dirk
what do you mean by loaded ? installed ?
Yup, does he have the VIA Hyperion/4-in-1 installed?
I think the score is about right if the CPU is running at stock. It's increasing the fsb where you start to see benefits and large increase in the scores.
bleecher
30-03-2004, 20:53
even at stock thats way to low, you should expect higher with a 9600XT, ive built a very similar system for a friend, and it easily hits 16k and 13K with a 9700Pro
They seem like very good scores. I've just put a 9800Pro in my system, not tweaked the card yet but my 2100 is running at 2.33Ghz (11.5x202) with my ram on very tight timings and I got 16575. Are you saying you easily got over 16k with a 9600XT at a 133fsb? Or is the stock system using a higher fsb CPU?
bleecher
30-03-2004, 21:17
its a barton 2500 running @ 2100 thats the only overclocking, i was amazed when i saw the scores, we did save a futuremark url but it the project has disapeared, il do another one when im round his house next and i post the url
Originally posted by conan
think the score is about right if the CPU is running at stock.
I set my board up to simulate a 2200 at stock speed (OK, you can take a few hundred points off because my CPU is a Barton) & got 14,400 - several thousand more than he is getting.
I've just put a 9800Pro in my system, not tweaked the card yet but my 2100 is running at 2.33Ghz (11.5x202) with my ram on very tight timings and I got 16575.
You should be getting about 17.5-18,000 at stock 380/340 .
Originally posted by dirk
off topic!!!:)
well, we are still waiting to find out if he has his mobo drivers installed ;)
Originally posted by BUFF
well, we are still waiting to find ou if he has his mobo drivers installed ;)
lol he must have to run the bugger surely??!
bleecher
30-03-2004, 22:25
Originally posted by dirk
lol he must have to run the bugger surely??!
nope, windows uses native drivers at best, so to take full advantage of ur system tis best to install ur chipset manufacturers chipset drivers
some guy built his PC so I doubt he'll know, is there a way of telling through control panel/system perhaps, I'm not even sure if he's got the disks either :eek:
There is probably an entry in Control Panel, Add or remove programmes.
Best to go & download latest anyway
http://www.viaarena.com/?PageID=300
Originally posted by BUFF
If an A7N8X-X has he got CPU Interface enabled - that should be good for 1000pts difference?
out of interest how would you enable this ?
It's in the BIOS on nForce systems - it's VIA equivalent is the 1T command.
I just installed a 9800 PRO 128MB DDR card in my machine (see sig). I ran 3dmark01SE with 1024x768 , 32 bit colour. I got about 9.5k! I think this shows how much the CPU and RAM affects the result ( because my CPU and RAM are not very good at all). Will soon be upgrading the CPU to a 2.8 prescott core P4, the RAM to 1GB dual channel PC 3200 and getting a new motherboard (one that supports 8X AGP and dual channel DDR). I think this will give a vast improvement in results!
Haha!
I just ran 3Dmark2001SE, with my 9800 Pro Radeon installed, and got a score of 6604! haha!
Bet you cant guess what other monster hardware i'm running :p
bleecher
01-04-2004, 14:01
i bet whatever it is, mines just as monster
I reckon its a monster AMD Athlon 900mhz
bleecher
01-04-2004, 22:02
dammit, guessed first time :D
well, suprisingly, it's a 1.4 P4, with 512mb ram, but it's SDRAM :(
When i next upgrade, what do you think is the minimum cpu required to take full advantage of the card? about a 2.5 gig?
anything above 2Ghz I reckon would be sufficient :)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.