New Bench comming in hmmm78 hours...

[Sabastian]

Any ideas? It says it isn't going to be 3DMark, so what gives?

http://service.madonion.com/counter.jsp

Sabastian

[pxc]

A new video benchmark is long overdue. Video2000 is almost 2 years old.

[Reverend]

Ah, so THIS is that secret goody Worm's been having fun teasing me telling me he's sending me. I have no idea what it is!

[Nappe1]

hmmh.... interesting...

Matrox rumoured tech release day is next tuesday...

[mat]

wow... a "real" (=gaming) Matrox card on tuesday? maybe they will have a 3dMark 2001 3rd Ed (Aka Matrox Edition :wink: )

[Nappe1]

On 2002-03-10 18:38, mat wrote:
wow... a "real" (=gaming) Matrox card on tuesday? maybe they will have a 3dMark 2001 3rd Ed (Aka Matrox Edition :wink: )


Mat: don't quote on me about that... it is just a rumour. :smile: and I said tech release. :smile: cards based on that tech may be released later.

Anyways, I am pretty sure that we will see something totally new before or at the GDC from matrox.

[Typedef Enum]

Nappe,

I was looking around the MURC to see if I could find anything relating to tech releases from Matrox, and didn't find anything...

Is this "next Tuesday" that you mentioned something that you heard, or something that you read somewhere?

I'm *very* interested in finding out anything about Matrox, as I've been following the happenings and/or goings-on @ the MURC for some years now (I, like many others, was totally dissapointed with the whole G800 debacle).

[Hyp-X]

I think Nappe1 means March 19 by "next Tuesday".

This is the day GDC starts and it is beleived on MURC that Matrox is announcing their next card at GDC.

This belief is based on two things:
1. Matrox appears at GDC as an exhibitor.
2. Haig said "All yee faithfulls, let the countdown begin" on February 12.

[Typedef Enum]

OK...

I went to the "Crystal Ball" forum there, and found that thread with the "Countdown" subject...

There isn't anything in the way of substance, as far as a definitive timeline (is there such a thing as definitive?)

I know I read a couple of things @ the MURC which indicated a possible May tech-release (preview boards and/or just spec release), with a possible July-ish release.

But that doesn't seem to have anything to do with GDC...?

[Nappe1]

Hyp-X: check out that thread where Haig said about begin the countdown... there is few Old school MURCers comenting it in very interesting way...

Type Def:
well, I really don't want to comment more on that, because that would heat up too much my and some my sources butts ;) , but I am pretty sure that Matrox shows something at GDC. And usually Matrox has made annoucements just before some big events.

12th of Feb is the day when Haig commented at MURC and 12th of March is next tuesday. But still, we week away from GDC, so is it too early? well only time shows.

anyways, Interesting week coming...

[Nappe1]

and once more clear up:
I believe that,
- Matrox announces chip/tech at or before GDC.
- Matrox announces cards at or before E3
- shipments could start in late june or july.

[Matt]

It's going to be PCMark 2002, similiar to Sisoft Sandra type benchmarking, i.e. a full PC benchmark (CPU, memory, hard drive, etc.)

[Thowllly]

Only ten seconds to go now :)

[Humus]

So, what score do you guys get?

This is with a 1700+, Radeon 8500, Samsung 60GB ATA100 5400 rpm disk.

CPU score: 4376
Memory score: 3263
HDD score: 408

[crypto1300]

FIC AD-11 pcb 1.2 w/ ABA46 BIOS
AMD Athlon 1600+ (1.4GHz) CPU non-overclocked
768MB PC2100 CL2.5 DDR-SDRAM
Maxtor 60GB 7200rpm ATA100 HD
NEC 8x4x32 CDRW
GeForce4 MX-440 64MB AGP @ 270MHz core & 450MHz memory
MS Windows XP Professional

PCMark2002:

CPU Score: 4069
Memory Score: 2687
HDD Score: 930

[Doomtrooper]

Just like 3Dmark this one belongs in the trash can, Madonion double standard trash :(

[Nexus]

Samsung 60GB ATA100 5400 rpm disk.
HDD score: 408

Maxtor 60GB 7200rpm ATA100 HD
HDD Score: 930


The HD benchmark is a farce, my IBM 45GB 7200rpm 2MB cache disk gets 1400-1600 points, probably just because I have a second 13GB HD in here.

[Mize]

I'd have to agree on the disk bench.
My Maxtor DMP60, 60GB, 7200 RPM drive gets a paltry 655. Now, granted, this is an NTFS partition (which is markedly slower than FAT32), but the disparity amongst similar performing drives is a bit hard to believe. It would also appear that SSE2 is vitally important to having a good CPU as the P4s (pre-Northwood) are trouncing Athlon XPs that, at least IMHO, are as fast or faster.

Hmmm....perhaps the paranoia about MadOnion promoting certain suppliers in subversive ways isn't all that unbelieveable after all.

But, hey, it's just a bench and my rig is still a screamer.

Mize

[Doomtrooper]

Original P4's are scoring higher than Athlon XP's, and we all know that a Athlon XP eats original P4's for breakfast , Northwoods are just starting to catch up. :roll:

[Randell]

sigh, one for the fanboy flamefests then...

AMD=3dfx
Intel=nVidia
SSE2=TnL

[Freon]

1.33ghz AMD, Shuttle AK31 Rev2 (KT266 non-A)
512mb Mushkin CAS2.5 + 256mb Crucial CAS 2.5 DDR266
Seagate Barracuda 80gb 7200rpm (factory default quiet mode)
Win2k with all the latest patches, Via 4.36 4in1, etc.

CPU: 3274
Mem: 2514
HDD: 873

[Windfire]

I have a Northwood P4 2GHz w/256MB Rambus 800, 120GXP IBM 40GB drive... My video is a standard Geforce2 GTS (Gladiac).

CPU: 4875
Memory: 4943
HDD score: 1022

I did no tweaking of my system in preparation for the test.

Steve

[Windfire]

I should mention I'm running WinXP Pro.

[Windfire]

I'm also running NTFS (for my 1022 score). The new 120GXP drives are fast.

FYI, it is a wrong assumption to state that NTFS is inherently slower than FAT32. The larger the partition, the more benefit to switching to NTFS in terms of Performance. Only in cases where you have small partitions with tons of small files will FAT32 have an advantage.

[Althornin]

Windfire, dont leave your system on for more than 333 hours each month, because thats all those IBM drives can handle...

[Windfire]

The new 120GXP drives are probably the best IDE drives you can get now. They are certainly the fastest. I've been installing Maxtor, WD and these new IBM drives (not the older 85GXP drives). The only drives I haven't tried yet (that I want to try) are the WD performance series w/ 8MB cache.

Where did you get the 333 hour thing?

[Windfire]

Althornin, I see what you are eluding to now. First, the box is not a server. Second, I have not had any more experience of failures with IBM than any other brand (Seagate, WD, Maxtor, etc.).

In the past 3 years I've had 3 Seagates, 1 WD and 1 Maxtor drive fail. So far I've had no failures with IBM--even some of the old 10GB 7200rpm drives are still going strong (if a bit slow).

Sometimes I think people take things too far out into left field. 333 hours a month is a lot of up time--more than a standard work week would require. In addition, to assume that if you break that you'll be in trouble is also a bit strong.

Along this same line, there have been arguments on both sides of the "never turn off your box" and "turn it off when you don't need it" issue for ages.

Thanks for the info though--even if it was just an attempt to put a buket of cold water on something. :wink:

[Althornin]

windfire, you havent been keeping up on current events, have you :)
I wouldnt touch another IBM drive with a 10-foot pole:

http://www.storagereview.com/
I recommend actually checking this place out, as its top-notch!
Read the first page news. IBM drives have accrued recent lawsuits dealing with reliability, and now this. No thanks.

Check the reviews of the WD 8MB cache drives, now those are impressivly fast!


Heres a nice quote from the front page of Storage review, a quote from talks they had with IBM folks.
Q: Would you recommend this drive in a server role?
A: No, the drive is intended to be on for no more than about 8 hours a day. If it were only used during that period and then shut down for the day, then it would be fine, but it definitely should NOT be used in a 24/7 role for those customers concerned with reliability.

Q: This spec is new with the 120GXP series, not other manufactures have used this specification. Was this spec introduced as a marketing strategy or a technical issue?
A: It's definitely a technical issue.

Q: Does the recommended power on hours have anything to do with "pixie dust" drives?
A: Well, we are certainly working to improve the pixie dust technology. Each drive generation has gotten better than the previous.

Q: Is this in response to the 75GXP reliability problems?
A: We aren't allowed to comment on that, but if you know what's going on with that, you will understand why.

Q: You mean the lawsuit on the reliability of 75GXP drives?
A: Yes.

Q: So have there been as many failures with the 120GXP as the 75GXP?
A: Not at all, In fact, I haven't heard of any 120GXP failures yet.

Q: Back to this recommendation of power on hours, why did IBM introduce it?
A: We want our customers to know that IBM drives are reliable and we are working to make our drives more reliable. One way to show this is to inform the customers of what usage is appropriate for the drive. Limiting the power on hours should significantly reduce failures.

I find the last answer nice and funny....Oddly enough, when our drives are only run 8 hours out of the day instead of 24, we have less failures :o
Holy Shit Batman!

[Althornin]

damn you!
I take the time to compose a nice informative post, and you crap on my hard work by posting while i'm composing it!
You SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
j00 teh l00z3R!!!!!!!!1111

(note, i am kidding :))
Not really attempting to put a bucket of cold water on ya, just saying that I leave my machine on 24/7 so i would never use a drive that is reccommended for 8 hours only a day. And your experience of failures goes counter to other annecdotal stories and my personal experience with friends systems and my own. I was honestly just rying to warn you incase you didnt know!


Personally, if i had the money, i'd want a nice RAID 1 of those WD 120GB 8MB cache drives....i have the mobo, just not the drives.
Also, sorry to Hijack this thread with HD stuff.


Note: i find PCmark2002 to be totally crappy. some people are scoring in the 13000's for HDD, mem, and CPU.
rediculous...

[Windfire]

Yes, I actually reviewed that information when you brought the information up.

Your point is taken. However, you need to realize the context of the entire issue. It is one thing to have a general problem, it is another to have a techy-site that by its very nature draws problem reports like ants to honey. In other words, issues are magnified and often exagerated because of the passion involved.

And lawsuits (class action or not) are not uncommon.

To be frank, it would be foolish to have a serious server using IDE storage anyway. That is where SCSI and RAID come in. I realized everyone can't afford a SAN, but even a moderate company can afford a reliable Raid SCSI system (we use RAID5) with drives that are created for that very purpose.

[LittlePenny]

I am curious why no one has ever used PassMark's Performance Test. http://www.passmark.com/download/index.htm

It is a small download and it's output is very descriptive in what it tests, and how your computer scored on each test.

[elimc]

CPU: 2028
Mem: 1605
HDD: 485

Intel 733
384MB PC133
Asus i815e
IBM 20GB 7200RPM HDD :evil:

Stupid IBM drive makes a high pitch ringing noise. Bugs the crap out of me. :cry: