Your 3D Mark 06 scores

  • Thread starter Pebb
  • 345 comments
  • 24,457 views
Shannon
That's ****ed! I have a better system than you (X850XT and Athlon 64 3500+), and I only got 1555! :ouch:


You really do know nothing, do you? AGP is dead. Kaput.

The only reason they are still manufacturing AGP cards is to keep the low-end users happy. PCI-E = future. And the fact it can be used for more than just a graphics bus (unlike AGP), means it'll probably overthrow the archaic PCI bus.
Click to expand...

send me ur 3dmark comparison link and i might be able to tell you why.👍
 
Gabkicks
I ran the test at 1280x1024. i'll run it at lower resolution and repost my score. :)

Yeah... i'm hoping my x800gto can hold me off at least untill directx10 comes out. i dont have the money to drop 400 bucks on a card that isnt going to be able to take full advantage of Dx10


you guys should post ur scores on ocforums.com :) i've got my 3dmark05 scores up there. its a very nice, friendly, and extremely knowledgable community and i'm sure u guys could contribute.
Click to expand...


Do you have a link to the thread?


*edit* Nevermind. Found it.
 
I got 284, 1280x1024 res. Forgot to copy the link to my other results, sorry!

And Jon, you ran the 05 test not 06 you cheat. :P
 
Ohhh my... Looks like it'll soon be time for a serious upgrade.. AGAIN :grumpy:
 

Attachments

  • 3Dmark2006.jpg
    3Dmark2006.jpg
    23.9 KB · Views: 50
I'm waiting for donbenni to post his scores. Come on dude!

Sucks that you need 256mb Graphics Card. Otherwise I would have tried it out.
 
DODGE the VIPER
I'm waiting for Vista to buy a new computer. My sexy 6600 GT should hopefully tide me over until then. BUT WHY WON'T BF2 WORK ONLINE ON MEDIUM DAMNIT??? Moto GP3 runs max, all my other games I can run better...except for BF2. GRR.

I'm not even going to try 3dmark 06, it'd probably make my computer reset.

EDIT: Why do you want a motherboard with both? AGP is DEAD. It's utter **** compared to PCI-E.
Click to expand...
I can run bf2 on medium 1280x1024 all medium 2xAA(on my 6600gt)
maybe try and overclock your card?? it will really help.
I wont do 3dmark06 i know my score will be too low like 15xx or something like that, i need to get a new video card....
 
Integra Type R
You should have no problem at all then.

I have a 3.2ghz P4, 1gb Kingston PC3200, and some Intel (915P or soemthing like that) mobo and a 6600gt 128mb PCI-E card and I can run BF2 1280x1024 max settings with 4xAA perfectly online and offline.
Click to expand...


4xaa max setting at 1280x1024 on a 6600gt is impossible, screenshot please.
 
G.T
I got 284, 1280x1024 res. Forgot to copy the link to my other results, sorry!

And Jon, you ran the 05 test not 06 you cheat. :P
Click to expand...

Not my fault - the 06 required specs that my pc doesn't have :lol:

Then again, it ran on yours, and you don't have better specs. I'll take it again.

EDIT

ROFL, i took it on the new one.

3dmark0va.jpg
 
I know :lol:

Bear in mind, G.T has roughly the same specs as me - the only difference is that his card is an ATI, and mine is an Intel. That just shows how ridiculous my intel card really is ...
 
Why in gods name would someone play any game in anything higher than 1280x1024?? It seem like you'd be asking for low FPS as well as boging down the system.
 
Integra Type R
You should have no problem at all then.

I have a 3.2ghz P4, 1gb Kingston PC3200, and some Intel (915P or soemthing like that) mobo and a 6600gt 128mb PCI-E card and I can run BF2 1280x1024 max settings with 4xAA perfectly online and offline.
Click to expand...

I might try reinstalling then...PCI-E can't be that much better than AGP surely.
 
Jon.
Not my fault - the 06 required specs that my pc doesn't have :lol:

Then again, it ran on yours, and you don't have better specs. I'll take it again.

EDIT

ROFL, i took it on the new one.

3dmark0va.jpg
Click to expand...
:lol:

I'd LOVE to see anyone get lower than that! :)
 
TVR&Ferrari_Fan
Oh dear, I bet Jon. will not be upgrading now lol.
Click to expand...
He wont, he's only just got the Laptop recently. He doesn't really use it much for games anyway. :)
 
Maybe I should try that on my laptop and see how bad it does I might beat both of you together. :dopey: So how do I use that? :dunce: All I see is buy versions. Where's the free one?
 
That is strange, they seem to be ripping off laptop owners by not offering a free version yet.
 
DODGE the VIPER
I'm waiting for Vista to buy a new computer. My sexy 6600 GT should hopefully tide me over until then. BUT WHY WON'T BF2 WORK ONLINE ON MEDIUM DAMNIT??? Moto GP3 runs max, all my other games I can run better...except for BF2. GRR.

I'm not even going to try 3dmark 06, it'd probably make my computer reset.

EDIT: Why do you want a motherboard with both? AGP is DEAD. It's utter **** compared to PCI-E.
Click to expand...
AGP isnt dead.

BF2 wont run on medium because of how poorly it is programed. I call it cutting corners.
 
it really wouldnt be very smart to spend money on an agp motherboard and videocard... might as well wait untill you can afford pcie. or better yet see if you can hold out for DX10. AGP videocards and mobos are gonna get much cheeper in the next few months... but if you have the money to burn do what you want :P
 
BF2 now runs for me on high 1024x768! :) No lag whatsoever online I get around 50 fps constantly. So it appears I did need a reinstall...odd.
 
VIPFREAK
Why in gods name would someone play any game in anything higher than 1280x1024?? It seem like you'd be asking for low FPS as well as boging down the system.
Click to expand...
LCDs and native resolutions. See, good old CRTs work by a quick laser gun painting the image onto the back of the screen. However, LCDs have tiny little cells that change colour. At its native resoltion, 1 cell = 1 pixel. So, by running the screen in anything other than its native resolution, you're squashing more pixels into a single cell.

My 19" LCD has a native resolution of 1280x1024, and running it anything lower than that makes it look absolutely horrible. Setting all the details to low and turning off AA and AF make it look nicer than running it at 1024x768. So, I guess if you have a massive LCD monitor, you'd have to run it at a higher resolution.
 
Shannon
LCDs and native resolutions. See, good old CRTs work by a quick laser gun painting the image onto the back of the screen. However, LCDs have tiny little cells that change colour. At its native resoltion, 1 cell = 1 pixel. So, by running the screen in anything other than its native resolution, you're squashing more pixels into a single cell.

My 19" LCD has a native resolution of 1280x1024, and running it anything lower than that makes it look absolutely horrible. Setting all the details to low and turning off AA and AF make it look nicer than running it at 1024x768. So, I guess if you have a massive LCD monitor, you'd have to run it at a higher resolution.
Click to expand...
Yes, I get the exact same thing. My Laptop looks horrible and fuzzy at lower resolutions, and much better at higher ones. I'm at a disadvantage though, my native resolution is 1920x1200 which is pretty impossible to play with in games without slowdown.

The desktop upstairs isn't so bad at lower resolutions, but there still is a difference.
 
:odd: ok, good to know I guess... I still think a big monitor/big resolution is overkill just like HD t.v.s (at the moment) and a waste of money for non-commerical use.

Since were on the sub. of monitors, if I use the DVI to VGA adaptor that comes with my vid card will there be a significant degridation of quality?? I really do not have the money to buy a new one. :grumpy:
 

Latest Posts

Back