Acceptable 3dMark06 score?

B

BoostFrenzy

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
119
e6420 @ 3.2ghz, P35 chipset, 2gb ram, BFG 8800GT @ 675/950/1750, vista 32bit

12004 points

seems low, i keep reading 13k+? need quadcore cpu?
 
Quads push up 3Dmark scores like crazy. 12k with that setup is actually very good. (So long as it isn't really low (like 6k, enough that there's clearly something wrong) you're better off just ignoring 3DMark. It's pretty, but useless.
 
card now at 700/1750/1000 and fan on auto, no artifacts score was 12,250

3DMark Score 12196 3DMarks

SM 2.0 Score 5730 Marks

SM 3.0 Score 5577 Marks

CPU Score 2746 Marks

...looks like i need penryn :)

cpu score is definitely dragging the score down that's ok, i'm happy :)
 
well i have stock e6420, 4 GB ram, 8800GT (512 MB, 640 Mhz) and Vista 64 and I only get just over 9000 on my 3dmark06

so consider yourself lucky. If I could figure out how to OC my CPU, i might actually get a more respectable score.
 
I get 9048 with e6400, 2GB, eVGA 8800GT.

My mobo sucks, so can't oc my e6400 for those crazy inflated CPU scores.
 
Spoonmaster said:
I get 9048 with e6400, 2GB, eVGA 8800GT.

My mobo sucks, so can't oc my e6400 for those crazy inflated CPU scores.
Click to expand...

I get the feeling that more memory doesn't help on the 3dmark score lol. I guess CPU will be the next thing I upgrade but I'm gonna wait until core 2 extremes drop in price a few times.
 
I don't feel slow anymore. For some reason I thought 8800 in 3dmark06 was low for me. Stock E4400 and 8800GT. I'll try to do some overclocking and see what improvements I get.
 
I'm not sure what I should be getting. I haven't run 3D Mark 06 in close to a year or more. I just stopped caring at some point.
 
Your score is about where it should be. My video card is a little faster than yours (Ultra at 675/1710/2340) and with my E6850 @ stock 3.0 ghz I get just over 13K on 3Dmark06. When I overclock my CPU to 3.6 I get about 14,700. 3dmark06 is very CPU dependent. The difference between a dual core and a quad core is pretty large. Actually I haven't really seen that many scores above my overclocked score with people using only a dual core and a single GPU. All the really high scores are usually done with quad cores and/or SLI set-ups.

But don't worry too much about that though. You may score a lot higher on a synthetic bench like this with a quad core CPU but the real world appreciable difference is negligible if anything at all. That may change in the future but for now that's the case.
 
I agree with the posts already on this forum. 3dmark06 is a decent benchmark in showing you waht is wrong or not wrong with your system. Like for example if you have SLI setup but you are getting 10k scores then that is an indication something is wrong. I mainly use it for diagnostic purposes.

Here is my score btw on my brand new rig:
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/resultanalyzer.jsp?projectType=14&XLID=0&UID=12968965

Like you said quads do push the scores up a lot.
 
i just stepped up to the GT from a GTS 640MB. Here's a comparison which shows the validity of 3DMark06 relative to actual gaming:

8800GTS 640 @ 675/1728/1044
- 3DMark06 (Vista 32bit) = 11.6K
- Crysis benchmark_gpu, DX9 in Vista @ 1280x1024 HIGH settings: 34fps

8800GT 512 @ 702/1750/950
- 3DMark06 (Vista 32bit) = 12.1K
- Crysis benchmark_gpu, DX9 in Vista @ 1280x1024 HIGH settings: 41fps

so i got a relatively small increase in 3DMark06 score (~4.3%) and a more significant increase in Crysis fps (~20%). As it's been said many times 3DMark is a great benchmark for comparison purposes but not all that reflective of real world gaming. Our 3DMark06 scores are almost identical and i'm running a quadcore. I would be interested in seeing your Crysis timedemo results compared to mine. I would bet they are almost identical as well.
 
Well when you compare it that way Porter_ yes 3dmark06 scores are meaningless. I prefer to look at the individual scores like for example what is your SM3.0 score? Before and after? Is that translating more so to the 7fps bump in performance in Crysis?
 
Dan_D said:
I'm not sure what I should be getting. I haven't run 3D Mark 06 in close to a year or more. I just stopped caring at some point.
Click to expand...

What an exceptionally helpful post!:rolleyes:

Guy, try at the futuremark forums.
 
surya said:
Well when you compare it that way Porter_ yes 3dmark06 scores are meaningless. I prefer to look at the individual scores like for example what is your SM3.0 score? Before and after? Is that translating more so to the 7fps bump in performance in Crysis?
Click to expand...

my SM3.0/SM2.0 scores are increasing while my CPU score is staying approximately the same. I upgraded my video card not my CPU. I was just pointing out that 3DMark is good for comparison basis and doesn't always reflect real world gaming...which is a statement made pretty often here at [H].
 
surya said:
I agree with the posts already on this forum. 3dmark06 is a decent benchmark in showing you waht is wrong or not wrong with your system. Like for example if you have SLI setup but you are getting 10k scores then that is an indication something is wrong. I mainly use it for diagnostic purposes.

Here is my score btw on my brand new rig:
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/resultanalyzer.jsp?projectType=14&XLID=0&UID=12968965

Like you said quads do push the scores up a lot.
Click to expand...

is that a single ultra? or sli?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top