Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 84

Thread: A7N8X Mult. settings




  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,393

    Default

    I guess people must have very old computers...then :rolleyes:
    CPU: Opteron 165 @ 311x9 - 2817.8 mhz - 1.47v
    Mobo: Abit KN8-SLI
    RAM: 2x512 Crucial Ballistic Tracers500 @ 202 mhz 2-2-2-5 T1
    GFX: Asus EAX1950pro @ 648/1408
    PSU: Thermaltake 500w
    SC: Audigy 2 zs
    LCD: 22' Samsung 225bw
    Speakers: Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 Ultra
    Mouse: Logitech G5

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,393

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by homeworld1031tx
    okay i jsut ran 3DMrark01SE on settings that i would consider actually playing a game with, and i got 14066. the settings were not the great though, there was no AA and it was on 800x680(32 bit of course:devil: ) But overall it looked pretty good. that still doesn't compare to the scores that you guys are getting though, and im at 195*11=2145MHz, DDR390 2T-3-3-6 and stock TI4400 speeds(275/553). Is that about normal???
    Yes that is normal for a ti4400 =D. I was wonder, for the benchmark, do you change the resolution in the benchmark itself or desktop settings? thx in advance
    CPU: Opteron 165 @ 311x9 - 2817.8 mhz - 1.47v
    Mobo: Abit KN8-SLI
    RAM: 2x512 Crucial Ballistic Tracers500 @ 202 mhz 2-2-2-5 T1
    GFX: Asus EAX1950pro @ 648/1408
    PSU: Thermaltake 500w
    SC: Audigy 2 zs
    LCD: 22' Samsung 225bw
    Speakers: Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 Ultra
    Mouse: Logitech G5

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AsianBatman
    I guess people must have very old computers...then :rolleyes:
    Dell Dimension 486 SX 25mhz, 161mb HD, 512k video made in 1991 baby :smokin:.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,393

    Default

    Emachine monster 634 256l2 cache :p
    CPU: Opteron 165 @ 311x9 - 2817.8 mhz - 1.47v
    Mobo: Abit KN8-SLI
    RAM: 2x512 Crucial Ballistic Tracers500 @ 202 mhz 2-2-2-5 T1
    GFX: Asus EAX1950pro @ 648/1408
    PSU: Thermaltake 500w
    SC: Audigy 2 zs
    LCD: 22' Samsung 225bw
    Speakers: Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 Ultra
    Mouse: Logitech G5

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AsianBatman
    Emachine monster 634 256l2 cache :p
    That certainly whips the hell out of the 486 SX!

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,393

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Soulburner
    That certainly whips the hell out of the 486 SX!
    Do you mean it in a good way or a bad way? :p
    CPU: Opteron 165 @ 311x9 - 2817.8 mhz - 1.47v
    Mobo: Abit KN8-SLI
    RAM: 2x512 Crucial Ballistic Tracers500 @ 202 mhz 2-2-2-5 T1
    GFX: Asus EAX1950pro @ 648/1408
    PSU: Thermaltake 500w
    SC: Audigy 2 zs
    LCD: 22' Samsung 225bw
    Speakers: Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 Ultra
    Mouse: Logitech G5

  7. #37
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Soulburner
    Woody, I hate to break this to you but...

    1. XP 3000+ was their first CPU to get a 200x2=400FSB
    I'd really like you to point me to a link that says that AMD Athlons 3000+ ship with a stock FSB of 200MHz like the 3200+. Every 3000+ I've seen runs 166MHz defualt with a 13x multiplier for 2.16GHz core speed. Remember I'm not talking about overclocked CPUs I'm talking stock. I'm sure the 3000+ runs very comfortably at 200MHz if asked. The 3200+ runs at 200x11 for 2.2GHz core and that is the speed I run my 2500+ at.

    Quote Originally Posted by Soulburner
    2. You say you beat 3.0 P4s in 875 boards? Well, my P4 @ 3.0 in an 865 did 17,800 with no video or RAM overclock (100mhz core and 50mhz memory boost only got me a lousy 300 points).
    Keep in mind Soulburner that the 3DMark benchmark is only relevant for CPU/shipset comparison purposes if you run the identical graphics card since these are gaming benchmarks they are highly graphics dependent. You are running the latest vid card (5900) which will generally outperform my much older 9700.

    Since my system consistently scores over 17000 (5000 in '03) with a max score of 17571 (5507 in '03) (default 3200+ settings but with a very slight clock on the 9700) it is still clear that it would beat a stock 3.0P4 on an 875 running the same graphics card. Current issue of MaximumPC they did series of testing of all the high end 875 boards with the exact same RAM/vid card config as I have running 3.0GHz P4s and none of them scored near 17,000 in '01 except the ASUS board which scored 16743. In fact across all the tests my system beats every benchmark with stock 3200 speeds. The 3000+ however fell short in these tests because of the 333MHz memory bus speed. Like you say all the time.....FSB is critical!

    Obviously the 875 chipset and the latest P4s are the newer technology and could probably be overclocked better than my 2500+ can but that wasn't the point I'm making.

    Quote Originally Posted by Soulburner
    please, let's NOT get into price wars here.

    Also, 3dmark isn't everything.
    I disagree with you here. For gamers who build custom systems, price and 3DMark scores are everything. 3DMark is a gamers' benchmark and is the bottom line as far as I'm concerned.

    As far as running games in lower resolutions. Every graphics card is different and the resolution your are able to run at is highly dependent on your graphics card's memory. A 32MB graphics card will probably find optimum performance at 800x600 with a drop of frame rate noticeable at 1024x768. I used to run a 64MB card at 1200x1600 for one game because frame rates were less critical. When you get into today's high end cards you can safely run at normal desktop resolutions or higher with good performance. If you run high resolutions your performance will drop but you can get away with turning off the FSAA to even things out. It's all personal preference.
    ASUS A7N8X Deluxe, Athlon Barton 2500+ with SLK-800 and 4800rpm 80mm fan, ATi 9700Pro(AIW), Dual 256MB Corsair XMS 3200c. Seagate Barracuda SATA. 200MHz fsb with 11X multiplier, RAM latency: 2,2,2,5

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AsianBatman
    Yes that is normal for a ti4400 =D. I was wonder, for the benchmark, do you change the resolution in the benchmark itself or desktop settings? thx in advance
    I ran it in a special setting. I run my desktop at 1024x768-32bit on a 17" CRT Gem Monitor.

    :cheers:
    <font color=orange>AMD Athlon XP 2500+ Barton (166*11=1883MHz) -|- Asus A7N8X Deluxe Rev2.0 -|- Corsair XMS PC3200 512 MB RAM 2T-3-3-6 @DDR333 -|- Leadtek A250 TD GF4 TI 4400 300/630 -|- 40 Gig Quntaum Fireball AP+ -|- 52x Samsung CD-ROM Drive -|- SB Live Digital 5.1 -|- Antec SG case w/350 Watt Power-Up PSU</font>

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Woody_87th
    I'd really like you to point me to a link that says that AMD Athlons 3000+ ship with a stock FSB of 200MHz like the 3200+. Every 3000+ I've seen runs 166MHz defualt with a 13x multiplier for 2.16GHz core speed. Remember I'm not talking about overclocked CPUs I'm talking stock. I'm sure the 3000+ runs very comfortably at 200MHz if asked.
    Your right and wrong. 3000+ sells in Japan at 400 MHz FSB. But thats not the point, what is the point is:
    Quote Originally Posted by Woody_87th


    Keep in mind Soulburner that the 3DMark benchmark is only relevant for CPU/shipset comparison purposes if you run the identical graphics card since these are gaming benchmarks they are highly graphics dependent. You are running the latest vid card (5900) which will generally outperform my much older 9700.
    That is EXACTLY right. a P2 with a Radeon 9700 ***** slaped a P4 with a R9600. Off course at fist i didnt believe it, but it was Ace's Hardware so I was inclined to do so.
    <font color=orange>AMD Athlon XP 2500+ Barton (166*11=1883MHz) -|- Asus A7N8X Deluxe Rev2.0 -|- Corsair XMS PC3200 512 MB RAM 2T-3-3-6 @DDR333 -|- Leadtek A250 TD GF4 TI 4400 300/630 -|- 40 Gig Quntaum Fireball AP+ -|- 52x Samsung CD-ROM Drive -|- SB Live Digital 5.1 -|- Antec SG case w/350 Watt Power-Up PSU</font>

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    214

    Default

    Japan eh? Haha! I wonder why they do that.

    I presume because only recently did mobos officially support 200MHz settings for Athlon CPUs.
    ASUS A7N8X Deluxe, Athlon Barton 2500+ with SLK-800 and 4800rpm 80mm fan, ATi 9700Pro(AIW), Dual 256MB Corsair XMS 3200c. Seagate Barracuda SATA. 200MHz fsb with 11X multiplier, RAM latency: 2,2,2,5

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •