Page 2 of 3
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:48 pm
by J. Baker
2991 @ 640x480x16
Pent. lll 850mhz, 512MB Sdram, Geforce2 MX400, FSB 100mhz, Hard Disk 5400rpm, WIN XP
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:32 pm
by Num3
2992 - 640x480x32 <-- Record
2409 - 800x600x32
1871 - 1024x768x32
Win2k - DX9 - Gforce 2 MX400 64Mb - AMD Atlhon XP2000+
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:50 pm
by Manne
2992 - 640x480x32 <-- Record
Not really
640*480*32 2990
Manne
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:56 pm
by lethalpolux
megalol
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:10 am
by Manne
megalol
ups, i think it was an good idea for me to get some sleep.
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:51 am
by Mark1Up
Time to raise the bar
640x480x32 = 15,498
1280x1024x32 = 5,074
AMD 1700
512MB
ATI Radeon 9100 (64MB)
Win2K Pro (DX9)
Nice graphics btw,
Mark
My Result
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 1:12 am
by cabaptista
1024x768x32 = 1545
NoteBook Compaq Presário 2516EA, Pentium IV 2.53Ghz, 704 Mb RAM, ATI Radeon IGP 45M, 64 Mb.
I think my computer could do it better, but i think it's not optimized !
Any Ideas for Optimizing it ?
Thanks in Advance.
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:16 pm
by blueznl
ah, forgot to run it in different resoultions... I'LL BE BACK...
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 1:42 pm
by J. Baker
Mark1Up wrote:Time to raise the bar
640x480x32 = 15,498
1280x1024x32 = 5,074
AMD 1700
512MB
ATI Radeon 9100 (64MB)
Win2K Pro (DX9)
Nice graphics btw,
Mark
Nice
, I'm waiting on my Visiontek ATI Radeon 9100 (64MB). It's coming UPS today, can't wait. Been using a Geforce 2 MX400.
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 9:55 pm
by Num3
ATI Boards are better...
It's unfair to compair a 2 year old GFX board with them
@Cab, you can disable Vsync from DX to let the board pump at full speed and not be restricted to the monitor refresh rate, also try changing the clock frequencie to give out a few extra Mghz (very gently)
Gonna tuneup my board now!
Muahahah
Yes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 12:08 am
by cabaptista
Thank You Num3 For the Tip !
My Score Now : 1024x768x32 = 3406 !!!!!!
Very Good !
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 12:55 am
by Mark1Up
Another thing to try is to update your video card driver. This site is a good one for getting the latest.
http://www.guru3d.com
Mark
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 9:01 am
by Max.
21137 @ 640x480x32
10726 @ 1024x768x32
Looks very nice & seems as if the ATI cards give you the edge in the benchmark...
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 4:59 pm
by blueznl
the difference in speed reported between ati and nvidia is more than one would expect, very strange this... my machine isn't a slouch (although i should kill virus scanner firewall etc. when running the test) but scores always stay around or below 3k
something in the code appearently appeals to ati cards
is there some specific code in the test that ati does better than nvidia? (running regular games / benchmarks has not shown any problems with my current setup thus far, so i'm somewhat puzzled
)
i had a machine with an ati card, but it behaved rather... unpredictable in my multi monitor setup, probably buggy drivers (6 months ago or so) so i settled for my current gforce, the next machine *will* have an ati card though, but that's still a little bit into the future
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 5:26 pm
by blueznl
did some checking on an older gforce256 on a p3-800, which is quite a standard card and machine: only part of the display gets shown, looks like there is an issue with waiting for the vertical blank or something like that? could this be in purebasic, or in the drivers?