3dMark03, really low scores! HELP!

[qckbeam]

I just built a brand new computer. It's:

P4 3.00GHz, 800 MHz fsb
Ati Radeon 9700 Pro,
1024MB of DDR-RAM,
ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe motherboard,
Sound Blaster Audigy 2,
Thermaltake Xaser III case with 7 fans

My 3dmark 03 score is only 1683. What's goin on with this computer? It has DirectX9b installed and doesn't run the DX9 demos and the score is really, really low for this type of computer, similar computers (not overclocked) run at over 5000. What the hell is wrong with my system?

 

[qckbeam]

Ok, I installed brand new drivers and now have a score of 5126, sorry to post this here, it can be deleted.

 

[SidewinderX]

dnt think about 3dmark 03. it gives you your ps1.4 score, and no games have ever used ps1.4

 

[gMANiac]

Ahem...
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/3dmark03/post/index.php?p=3

 

[SidewinderX]

nice find.

..official list of supported PS1.4 titles and engines...

supported is the key word. that doesn't mena that the games/engines use it, it menas that they could use it.

 

[gMANiac]

Look again...same source.

"UT2003 uses PS 1.4 for terrain rendering which allows a shorter pixel shader program than using PS 1.1 though isn't a noticeable performance improvement (FWIW, it's 4 vs 7 instructions). In theory PS 1.4 would allow us to render 5 terrain layers at once though due to state change overhead caused by different triangulation (more, smaller batches) the sweet spot is rendering 3 layers at once which both the PS 1.1 and PS 1.4 codepath are capable of doing.

So, to sum it up, we do use PS 1.4 though it doesn't result in a noticeable performance improvement in normal scenarios. You can actually limit the engine to only use pixel shader version 1.1 if you want to play with that.

-- Daniel, Epic Games Inc."

Also, there's a reference to a .pdf in that article somewhere, written by FutureMark explaining why they went with 1.4 over .2 or .3. It basically says the same thing Daniel of Epic says: "isn't a noticeable performance improvement". So it's really an irrelevant point, anyway.

However, I did agree with your basic argument in the "...is crap" thread. Just not for all the same reasons.

 

[KiNG]

delete this thread yourself by going to edit your first post and click the little box that say delete then "delete now"

 

[Doobz]

dude, when you run 3dMark03, go under the control panel and make sure vsync is off and all image quality options such as FSAA and AF are set to application preference or it will hinder your 3dMark score

 

[Xenome]

I hate the ' bugs ' in the graphics without vsync turned on

 

[jAkUp]

3dmarok03 gives a pixel shader 2.0 score... only game to use it is star wars galaxies, but in the future there will be more.

 

[oMarKs]

can anyone tell me the programs that let you run these tests?

 

[Murray_H]

I know somebody that holds all the answers for you oMarks, he my friend and yours and he's called Mr Google He suggests you search for 3DMark 03

 

[nmiken]

did u ever realize that Benchmarks are just for bragging rights...

 

[TrueWeltall]

So my 2071 3d marks on 2001 owns? Im on an old computer right now.

800mhz
384mb ram
geforce mx200
20gig hd

Ive got a Dell 8100 minus motherboard and cpu im gonig to use hte parts and put together a new computer around the time hl2 is out.