New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Crappy 3dMark?

post #1 of 23
2/6/03 at 12:38am
Thread Starter 
So I just got my Sager 5660 today and I was all ramped up until I saw my 3d Mark score - 6500. Whats the deal? Its a fresh install of XP Pro SP1 with the latest drivers. Even tried the Plutonium drivers and still little improvement. Am I missing something here? Most people I've seen get 7000-7500

My specs

Sager 5660
2.8ghz
Radeon M9 64mb
512 ram
40 gig 5200 rpm.

Any advice would be apprecieated

Thanks
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 23
2/6/03 at 1:13am

Re: Crappy 3dMark?

Quote:
Originally posted by spintheblack
So I just got my Sager 5660 today and I was all ramped up until I saw my 3d Mark score - 6500. Whats the deal? Its a fresh install of XP Pro SP1 with the latest drivers. Even tried the Plutonium drivers and still little improvement. Am I missing something here? Most people I've seen get 7000-7500

My specs

Sager 5660
2.8ghz
Radeon M9 64mb
512 ram
40 gig 5200 rpm.

Any advice would be apprecieated

Thanks
Why don't you try powerstrip? Here:

http://www.entechtaiwan.com/ps.htm

People getting higher results usually use it.

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 23
2/6/03 at 1:16am
Thread Starter 
Fair enough.

I guess the question to ask would be what is the norm for an 5660 with just the regular drivers etc?

Thanks
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 23
2/6/03 at 1:25am
Quote:
Originally posted by spintheblack
Fair enough.

I guess the question to ask would be what is the norm for an 5660 with just the regular drivers etc?

Thanks
Well, I think PCTorque got 7,100 initially. You can check it out here:

http://sagerforums.com/forums/showth...?s=&threadid=4

However, use powerstrip to find out if maybe your card is UNDER-clocked somewhat, given the lower score.

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 23
2/6/03 at 1:53am
Thread Starter 
Thanks for all your help

Powerstrip is giving me 258.75/ 159.75. I did some poking around the forums and this seems(?) to be underclocked. I'm not terribly concerned about the 3D mark score, just wondering if I might be doing something wrong/not doing something etc.

Thanks again
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 23
2/6/03 at 2:04am
yes!!!

I have mine clocked at that speed!!! I just got my 5600 How come the default memory clock has been taken down from 180 to 160???? My 5660 is stable at 210 memory clock lol.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 23
2/6/03 at 2:26am
Thread Starter 
I clocked it up to 180(Default on the PCTorque overclocking thread) and got

7152

Much better

I guess the newer 5660s are coming out under clocked?
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 23
2/6/03 at 2:54am
why are people so indulged with 3dmark scores? If the computer runs the programs you want to run well, then who cares about the 3dmark scores? I mean this software is just a subjective way to test speed.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 23
2/6/03 at 4:15am
I agree they're just numbers, and it hasn't been shown that those numbers translate into actual performance, but hey, it is fun to share them :-) and make sure your lappy is up to par :-)

Wonder why the 5660s are coming out underclocked...?
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 23
2/6/03 at 10:14am
Thread Starter 
Well, busting out 2 grand for this puppy wasn't exactly easy. Just have to make sure everything is running like it should( I have a uncanny ability to get the dud, even on a well reputed product).

I'm probably going to leave the clock speed at factory settngs until I need a little extra juice.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 23
2/6/03 at 2:22pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dacalo
why are people so indulged with 3dmark scores? If the computer runs the programs you want to run well, then who cares about the 3dmark scores? I mean this software is just a subjective way to test speed.
I think 3D Marks are indeed more of a show-off thing than anything else, but the clocking itself is different. PCTorque showed the 8887 recently using UT2K3, and with different clockings (which in fact yielded different 3DMarks), the machine DID show some real game gains.

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 23
2/7/03 at 3:46pm
Lol, the thing is, the game gains were like 4 frames per second... If the fps is really low, then that would be a good change and might be worth it. But if you're getting 45-60 fps, there's no need for an extra 4... At least that's my opinion.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 23
2/7/03 at 3:54pm
Thread Starter 
I agree.

Just good to know that if I do need it, I can pump up the frequency a wee bit.

Reply
Reply
post #14 of 23
2/7/03 at 8:01pm
Quote:
Originally posted by beebster83
Lol, the thing is, the game gains were like 4 frames per second... If the fps is really low, then that would be a good change and might be worth it. But if you're getting 45-60 fps, there's no need for an extra 4... At least that's my opinion.
Sure, at 200+ fps, who cares about 4 extra, but if you're getting ~30, then on average I would think it does make a big difference. Speaking of which, how come movies use 24? They certainly look sufficiently "smooth" to me. Shouldn't they pump that up til 30 or maybe even 60 for arguably "better" quality?

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 23
2/7/03 at 11:25pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Yale2006
Sure, at 200+ fps, who cares about 4 extra, but if you're getting ~30, then on average I would think it does make a big difference. Speaking of which, how come movies use 24? They certainly look sufficiently "smooth" to me. Shouldn't they pump that up til 30 or maybe even 60 for arguably "better" quality?

Cheers.

I am almost positive the standard at movie theaters is 32 FPS. I am somewhat positive the the standard for most other video is also 32 FPS.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 23
2/7/03 at 11:31pm
Ah... now I'm confused I just did some research and it looks like it is 24. But I asked a friend who is in movie production and he said it was 32. Will the resident video production man please let us know? ( Whoever this may be )
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 23
2/7/03 at 11:48pm
No you are correct movies are 24 fps. It's been pretty much standard for quite some time now.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 23
2/8/03 at 12:10am
Quote:
Originally posted by vanfanel
No you are correct movies are 24 fps. It's been pretty much standard for quite some time now.
I guess the question is, what happens if somebody plays Quake III @ 200+ fps in a movie?

Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 23
2/8/03 at 1:58am

Crappy score

When you are installing all your drivers, make sure you install the motherboard drivers on the CD that came with the laptop... that can make a big difference..............assuming of course you opted to recieve the laptop with no OS installed
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 23
2/8/03 at 11:20pm

underclocking

It seems obvious now that the 5660 is comming underclocked compared to its speed a few weeks ago...

i hope we can find out why.. maybe the new screen has something to do with it, or maybe sager didn't want it upstaging the new 8887 ;D

lol

-Hype
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home