New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

8887 3dmark results

post #1 of 54
2/4/03 at 3:41pm
Thread Starter 
ok I installed windows ME and did all the updates etc..I used the drivers off the included cd for all devices..I ran 3d mark at lowest resolution/settings with the ati drivers configured for performance in the direct3d section..My 8887 has a 2.4 ghz cpu with 256 meg memory..I have a 512 stick from crucial coming tonight..ready for the score?

9568

My Ti4600 with a 1600 AMD T-Bird scores the same. Same settings.

edit:
at default settings I get 7309

at 270 mhz core 205 mem I get a 7736 score

Clocked any higher and it will crash or show distortion

edit#2:

Per Zachquiel's instructions here..

http://sagerforums.com/forums/showth...3?threadid=406

...I was able to get the new Radeon Catalyst 3.0 driver installed. Although choosing the 9000 PRO gave me a 4700 3dmark score. Going to just a Radeon 9000 gave me the same score as using the driver on the 8887 CD.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 54
2/4/03 at 3:46pm
lol, jeez, you got it today? :-) That's awesome... Woulda recommended against Windows Me :-) But that's just me... no pun intended. You should post the results with default settings, that's what everyone compares against. They are 1024x768x32 if I'm not mistaken. I believe there is a button for default settings. Glad to hear you're likin it!
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 54
2/4/03 at 3:50pm
Thread Starter 
I will have a dual ME and XP install setup later today. I only want ME because some older programs won't run on XP..I'm in the process of running default settings right now..I'll edit in the results shortly
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 54
2/4/03 at 3:59pm
7300's is not bad without any overclocking out of the box.

Do you have any idea what the clock speed of the core and memory are?
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 54
2/4/03 at 4:07pm
That's actually pretty good if this was using the default drivers and no overclocking. I think PCTorque scored a 6849 on the 8886 using the default drivers and no overclocking.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 54
2/4/03 at 4:09pm
Thread Starter 
powerstrip shows standard clock rates as

core : 258.75

memory : 180 (360 ddr?)
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 54
2/4/03 at 4:35pm
You can use XP on compatability mode to get older games to run... It actually works fairly well on most things. You might try that :-)

Glad to see the 3dmark went up!
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 54
2/4/03 at 4:59pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the tip..I'm currently overlclocking.. at 210 memory setting I'm getting slight artifacts..205 seems max stable so far..now I'm playing with the core..currently at 270 mhz core 205 mem for a 7736 score..
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 54
2/4/03 at 5:06pm
Thread Starter 
Had a lockup at 275 core..must also have that lame heatplate on this version of the M9 ..I'll just leave things at 265/200 and call it a day I think. I remember seeing a post about putting a small heatsink/fan (chipset fan) on the radeon core to get a higher overclock..I'll try that some other time..
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 54
2/4/03 at 8:15pm

interested

So, basically, im still interested, is it juste better to get the ati m9 128 or not? I do want to run doom 3...but id like to on my 5660. I mean, is it just a numbers game or will it actually run better (the added sixty four megs of ddr...okay)but, is it one of those you have to upgrade type situations. Like the difference in having a 500megahertz cpu and a 1ghz cpu? Yall see what im gettin at here? Essentially, is it a must have? i see the HT pentium as a possible must have...but most the seem like numbers. For me personally, i dont think id really need a hdd over sixty gigs. Unless one does video editing. Anything more is just numbers, heh you know, wanting to have the best and all. And, a 4ghz pentium? I really dont see how id see the difference..thats just numbers. But the HT, that seems like it would be worth it though. Still waitin on the mobo upgrade on those issures. But, what do yall think. Must have or no?
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 54
2/4/03 at 8:43pm
The 128 megs are not a must have for now. Eventually, it will be a must have for some games. Doom3 will be fine with 64, but games after that in the next year may start requiring more...
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 54
2/4/03 at 8:45pm
basically the extra memory allows you to turn on a couple more goodies in the video menu, or move the texture realism slider up a little more. If the game wasnt going to run on the 64mb it wont run on the 128mb either, the extra ram just lets the processor crunch more data until you have to start using your system memory (or when the game wants > 128mb from your video card for textures etc) and thats when you start seeing major framerate loss. So must have upgrade? No. Useful? Probably.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 54
2/4/03 at 11:18pm
Well, Carmack got a very nice 460 extra points in 3DMark [7309 -6849], which is a 7% boost. That's not a lot, but given that it's the default settings, its something to consider. In essence, you get what an overclocked 5660 will give you. And besides, many people don't want to overclock, so it's like a free improvement. Maybe Sager (or Clevo, rather) tuned in the 8887 all around in addition to giving it the 128 MB. Finally, the extra memory will certainly give you more longevity, so as a yes/no issue, YES, it IS better to get the 128 MB. However, when other things are taken into account, like size, weight, etc. [of a bigger and heavier 8887], your mileage may vary.

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 54
2/4/03 at 11:21pm
I would also suggest trying to use the compatability feature in XP to run your older programs, or use Windows 98 SE....just my opinion, i haven't heard of too many people--or anyone for that matter, including myself--who has had any success with Windows ME. Just a thought.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 54
2/4/03 at 11:38pm
Lol, definitely, 98se before Me any day. I'm also pretty impressed with the default driver results on 3dmark... can't wait to try them with different drivers and with dx9 and its drivers to see what we can muster out of it.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 54
2/5/03 at 12:13am
Quote:
Originally posted by beebster83
Lol, definitely, 98se before Me any day. I'm also pretty impressed with the default driver results on 3dmark... can't wait to try them with different drivers and with dx9 and its drivers to see what we can muster out of it.
Can you install DX9 and then uninstall to go back to DX8 if the thing slows you down?

Or as an alternative, could you "re-install" DX8 on top off DX9?

Thanks and Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 54
2/5/03 at 12:28am
That brings up one of those really bugging questions. Have you ever installed one of those old games with, for example, DirectX 2, and it just HAD to install it over your latest drivers? Does it actually do it, or does the system fake out the installer? (I wish it were the latter.)
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 54
2/5/03 at 1:25am
You can't go back to dx8 in any simple way... I think there are long and drawn out procedures for it, but I'd never want to follow them, lol. If I install dx9 and see that it does more harm than good, I'm gonna format and reinstall. In fact, I plan on testing the benchmarks first and then decided which I'm going to keep, lol, before I install the games and programs that require activation, lol, aka Office.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 54
2/5/03 at 10:55am
There is actually a program (freeware) that will uninstall dx9...I just saw it last week I think, I'll try to find it and post it for you so you can use it if you want.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 54
2/5/03 at 11:14am
Here is the uninstaller for DX9, read the README first: http://www.iexbeta.com/files/directx...ninstaller.zip

This uninstaller is for DirectX9 on Windows XP and .NET Systems. It removes DirectX9 and installs DirectX 8.1 direct from your Windows XP/.NET CD. In Windows ME and XP you can also create a system restore point before you install it to go back to if need be.
I haven't had any problems with dx9 at all though--I'm using XP. I've heard there are some conflicts between DX9 and Messenger and that Microsoft was releasing a patch to fix that issue.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebook Reviews