Late, noisy, HUGE!!! - makes 17k Mark...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wish I could find that joke chart showing the Radeon9700 with 15,000 3dmarks, the NV30 with 35,000 3dmarks, and the R400 with 45,000 3dmarks, lol.

If only that were so...
 
BoddoZerg said:
I wish I could find that joke chart showing the Radeon9700 with 15,000 3dmarks, the NV30 with 35,000 3dmarks, and the R400 with 45,000 3dmarks, lol.

If only that were so...

bah, 3dmarks are overrated
 
17K is nothing special. I overclocked my 9700pro to 378/344 which is not that extreme, and I barely overclocked my 2400+ at all, I just use a lower multiplier with a high fsb. I certainly wouldn't consider getting 17K on a GFX much of an upgrade. Really need more details of the score, what FSB, etc.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5494651 17K
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5597115 17K
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5572599 16.9K
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5596643 16.8K

At 1600x1200:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5608745 12K
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5572768 12K
 
16592 on my 2.0 GHz Athlon (2400)

Score: 16592 On Air/ AMB@2000MHZ 200MHZ* x 10
Date: 2003-1-15
Res: 1024x768 32bit
OS: Microsoft Windows XP
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 2005 MHz
GPU: ATI RADEON 9700/9500 Series
 
looking at this thread and this card puts me in mind of the comments we saw when the Voodoo 5500 and 6000 were released:

It takes a separate power supply!
It's fricken huge!

How the tables have turned :) Still, if I could afford it I would probably get one. I got a 5500 after all, since it was the best thing you could buy at the time. I also had 3 slots taken up when I had Voodoo 2 SLI.

If anything, the release of this monster ought to bring the price of a 9700 down to realistic levels. 300 bux is crazy amounts of cash for a video card. 400 is insane. I didn't spend that for SLI cause I got a card for free :)
 
3D Mxxx here and there....
The Most Useless Bench Ever, it can´t be told enough. And for sure its one of the Most Manpulating Bench Ever. You guys are so experienced in the 3d internet community, i cant still understand why your give all the time so lot of your attention to this and waste your time. Please do yourself a favour and boycott this "nothing saying about real world performance bench", if not this crap will never end.
It doesn´t matter if the 3d Mxxx is cpu limited or not, the point is its tell nothing about real world performance.

17k? holy crap what a score, i dreamed of this score since the day 3d mxxx was released, almost every night, NO EVERY NIGHT. So its true: some dreams really come true.


THE WAY ITS MEANT TO MADE YOUR DRAMS COME TRUE - HOLY, KISSED BY THE POPE - DUST BUSTER GEFORCE 17kFX MXXX (tm) BY NVIDIA
 
borzwazie said:
looking at this thread and this card puts me in mind of the comments we saw when the Voodoo 5500 and 6000 were released:

It takes a separate power supply!
It's fricken huge!

How the tables have turned :) Still, if I could afford it I would probably get one. I got a 5500 after all, since it was the best thing you could buy at the time. I also had 3 slots taken up when I had Voodoo 2 SLI.

If anything, the release of this monster ought to bring the price of a 9700 down to realistic levels. 300 bux is crazy amounts of cash for a video card. 400 is insane.

Taking a seperate power supply is good IMO, eliminates issues with cheap motherboards...the Voodoo 5 was big for a reason, it has two 0.25 micron VSA 100's
 
Personally, i think the score is complete BS.

Well see what happens when the RELEASE DRIVERS are tested be hardware sites. Then we will know something. As it is.. There is no info on any of the indiviudual scores, the quality, or an explanation on how the hell they gained 3000 3dmarks with virtually the same nature score as a 9700...

Please.. Less CPU dependant.. to the tune of 3000 points??? On tests that have been proven to be extremely CPU dependant? in ways that have nothing to do with driver support..

[edit]
20$ says the score was closer to mid 16 something and the demo was running lower than 1024x768..
[/edit]
 
I have a problem with the guys credibility who reported this in the futuremark post. He says he was too distracted by all the big breasted women to notice any of the individual scores. Yet he's not too distracted to get all of the details on the system the gffx was in, right down to the memory timings? What person in their right mind would ask about memory timings yet fail to get the individual scores? I'll believe it when I see it.
 
McElvis said:
It might just be me, but looking at the picture above the card appears to be covering the SECOND PCI slot as well :oops:


Notice on the sound card and even the nv30 itself (not the cooling device) the card does not extend beyond the bracket.

The cooling device itself goes right to the edge of the bracket.

Good luck putting anything in that PCI slot. It will fit, but it will probably be rubbing against that plastic.

on another note, Id be more concerned with the backplate and it coming close to northbridge cooling on alot of motherboards......
 
Evildeus said:
Mize said:
Evildeus said:
Well i put the reference afterward. But 14500 to 17k it's 15% more on this bench it's quite a lot in fact, if it's true :)

Well there are plenty of R300 scores over 17k running overclocked GPUs. I guess the interesting question is how much headroom the NV30 has for overclocking.

Mize
On a 2400+? ;)

Yes. A decently OC'd 9700 (say 370/350 ish) with a 2400 at 10x200 FSB all on an nf2 mainboard (irony) will do about 17000. Bump Vcore and push that 2400 to 2.3 GHz and you'll be flirting with 18k.

Like I said, it'll be interesting to see how much OC headroom the GFFX has...

Mize
 
I'm not expecting any great overclocking with the GFFX, as it seems to be already overclocked! Again, I'm guessing nVidia has clocked it as high as possible in order to get ahead of the 9700Pro.....
 
Evildeus said:
Mize said:
Yes. A decently OC'd 9700 (say 370/350 ish) with a 2400 at 10x200 FSB all on an nf2 mainboard (irony) will do about 17000. Bump Vcore and push that 2400 to 2.3 GHz and you'll be flirting with 18k.

Like I said, it'll be interesting to see how much OC headroom the GFFX has...

Mize
I'm doubting....
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5494651

WHy? It's not 350 memory and only 2.2GHz not 2.3GHz - and still 17135! Mize could be right: w/ +100MHz FSB and some memory push can be ok.
 
Some more info from 3D Chipset -

Myself as well as some of our viewers who emailed me wanted to know more about the offering BFG Technologies was offering for pre-order. I emailed them and John Malley sent this to us:


1) This is the GeForce FX (NV30) chipset. There is no ultra version that I am aware of.

2) We are selling the GeForce FX with the following specs:
128MB DDR2
500MHz Core Clock
1GHz effective DDR2 Memory Clock
Dual 400Mhz RAMDACS
VGA, VIVO, DVI-I connectors
16GB/sec memory bandwidth (32GB with compression)
Here is an update I received from John Malley. The Asylum GeForce FX will indeed be equipped with Nvidia's new Leaf Blower cooler. Below is the specs and requirements I received from John:


* Minimum 350W system power supply *required*
* Requires an AGP compliant motherboard (Some motherboards violate the AGP specification. The card may not physically fit in some systems for this reason.)
* Requires a vacant PCI slot adjacent to the AGP slot. This board occupies two slots: AGP and one PCI.
* Requires an available to hard disk drive power dongle (smaller floppy disk drive connector is not sufficient)

I guess that explains everything. Still, it was puzzling to see the ~ in front of the 500MHz core rating

http://www.3dchipset.com/index.php#1040
 
The problem with 3dMark2001 is that everyone always just looks at the overall score rather than the synthetic benchmarks to get an indication of performance. It's the users, not the product.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top