NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Dell Notebook Forums › Dell Notebook Reviews › Comprehensive 3D Mark 05 Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Comprehensive 3D Mark 05 Thread - Page 2

post #21 of 66
3/16/05 at 1:41pm
What are the differences between the 3dMark0? scores? I mean what is the difference between 3dMark03 and 3dMark05?
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 66
3/16/05 at 2:02pm
1279 - Inspiron 9200 with Omega drivers
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 66
3/17/05 at 3:05pm
Now I'm not sure that you can compare something like a score of 5200 in 3Dmark05 to a score of 4200 in 3Dmark 05, I was under the impression that the score differences in 3dmark didn't vary linearly. Like saying that f=ma, anyone who's worth the shoes they are standing in should know that f=ma, not f=m(a*a). I'm not so sure if the same holds true for 3dmark scores, is a score of 5200 roughyl a 1/4 better than a score of 4200 for running games or is 1/2, 1/3, 3/2 times better? Or does it even vary exponentially, I'm very curious about the unit system used in 05 and how it describes system performance.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 66
3/17/05 at 3:33pm
Thread Starter 
Spalding: I think you're missing the point.. Even if it isn't perfect we still get a very clear picture of what is better than what, and a strong indication of by how much..

In the end..

6800 Ultra > 6800 go > x800 > 9800 > 1400 > 6600 > x700 > x600 > 9700 > 9600 > x300 > 6200

How much in terms of gaps there are in between each notch, is fairly irrelevant..
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 66
3/17/05 at 3:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dextius
Spalding: I think you're missing the point.. Even if it isn't perfect we still get a very clear picture of what is better than what, and a strong indication of by how much..

In the end..

6800 Ultra > 6800 go > x800 > 9800 > 1400 > 6600 > x700 > x600 > 9700 > 9600 > x300 > 6200

How much in terms of gaps there are in between each notch, is fairly irrelevant..
You are kidding right? What is the point of having the score if there is no indication of much better something is than the other? If I have a measurement of speed and say object a is travelling at 20 flavits and that object b is traveling at 300 flavits towards object a, but I have no way of discerning the difference in magnitude except for the fact that 300 flavits is greater than 20 flavits I think there is a problem. My point was that I would like to know what a unit increase in score generally gives in a performance increase, you know the rate of change in performance in terms of score. The derivative of performance with respect to score. If its constant my question is answered, I would expect that performance is a function of score. That's just an opinion, maybe the people at futuremark could give an answer.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 66
3/17/05 at 5:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaldingEx
maybe the people at futuremark could give an answer.
A score around 1000 on 3d mark show a fps rate that varies between 1-20 fps.
A scope around 4500 shows a fps rate around 40-60 fps.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 66
3/18/05 at 1:33am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaldingEx
You are kidding right? What is the point of having the score if there is no indication of much better something is than the other? If I have a measurement of speed and say object a is travelling at 20 flavits and that object b is traveling at 300 flavits towards object a, but I have no way of discerning the difference in magnitude except for the fact that 300 flavits is greater than 20 flavits I think there is a problem. My point was that I would like to know what a unit increase in score generally gives in a performance increase, you know the rate of change in performance in terms of score. The derivative of performance with respect to score. If its constant my question is answered, I would expect that performance is a function of score. That's just an opinion, maybe the people at futuremark could give an answer.
Umm, that's not what I said.. The scores do show degrees of margin of, one over another. They are not entirely indicative of the true overall performance of a chipset, but since the test is the same for all, you get an idea of how much faster one card is over another.. They're simply calculating the numbers of frames your system is capable of rendering, it's not live game play, which is why sites like Hard OCP have switched to something a bit more realistic..

It also takes the CPU into account, providing an insight on whether or not the system is being limited by a weak GPU (as the Dothan has proved to be, until it's connection with the 6800 ultra)..

Stop trying to transform 3dmark's into some sort of concrete "you'll get SOLID 50fps in doom 3 @ 1600x1200" type results, that's not what 3dmark is for. It's a good benchmark, and IS reliable for discerning the performance differences in video chipsets.

cheers,

dextius
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 66
3/18/05 at 1:01pm
3d mark 2005 score : 3726

Clock speed:

Core - 497
Memory - 445

http://service.futuremark.com/servl...rojectId=634353
__________________
inspiron 9100 / pentium 4 3.2 GHz (prescott) / 1024 mb ram / 60 Gb @ 7200 / ati mr9800
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 66
3/18/05 at 6:17pm
What about a 256MB X700, what is its score
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 66
3/19/05 at 3:53pm
Your X800 scores are way off, I easily get with very little overclocking 4800+ ... If I really wanted to get higher, I could run a score busting max overlcock no big deal.. The X800 is more powerfull than the earlier 6800go's either version, perhaps not the new one comming out, but definately the other two.
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 66
3/20/05 at 2:56am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spires
Your X800 scores are way off,
Well, what laptop do you have, and what is your score? (I'll add it)
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 66
3/20/05 at 3:04am
Sager 9860 3.8ghz (overclocked to 4.1ghz using clockgen), X800 clocked to 510chip, 530mem. My 3dmark03 score is 11838. There is a screenshot in the sager forums under the overclocked 3dmark03 scores.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 66
3/21/05 at 11:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dextius
nvidia 6800 = 4209 (Shinji U, inspiron 9300), 4431 (maxbelgium), 3246 (stock, michaelx30)
nvidia 6800 = "1432'' (SirBA)

http://notebookforums.com/showthread...1&page=3&pp=15
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 66
3/22/05 at 12:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlinkin

I doubt that's his score for his 9300 - the post was from November 2004 (unless he had another 6800 lappy then).
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 66
4/21/05 at 11:34pm
Got 2660 with my m70 and the quadro 1400, and the 76.50 driver.

Tellerve
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 66
4/22/05 at 12:04am
3DMark05: 5231

XPS 2
GeForce Go 6800 Ultra (stock speed)
P-M 2.0
512 MB DDR2
60GB 5.4K HD

76.50 laptop2go driver, nVidia Performance/Quality slider on Performance. Clean install of Windows XP Pro SP 2. I'm not sure how much RAM and HD affect the score, but I ordered the base options in both categories. I plan to upgrade both.

screenshot
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 66
4/22/05 at 12:34am
4732
NVIDIA slider set to performance, using 76.50 from laptopvideo2go.com with normal services running.
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 66
4/24/05 at 9:56pm
Dell I9300
6800 GO


http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=799643



Currently #3.

19 Points from #2 Slot
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 66
5/4/05 at 1:54am
Nice to see the top 7 Go 6800 on ORB are all i9300.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 66
5/5/05 at 8:40pm
why would i go from 4363 to 4090 after a fresh install of xp pro? am i missing something!!! i also updated bios to a02. please help!!!
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dell Notebook Reviews
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Dell Notebook Forums › Dell Notebook Reviews › Comprehensive 3D Mark 05 Thread