I don't have vista, so I'm using 3DMark06 on XP Pro x64 SP2

This is with my Core 2 Quad Q6600 at 3.2GHz (8x400), 3.6GHz runs too hot
nVidia 9800GTX overclocked to 725/1160/1813




I know some of you guys probably have 3 9800GX2's in triple-sli or some shit. Show me how bad my score is.

9/7/2008 1:22:14 PM

i can do 16000

on 3dmark2001

9/7/2008 1:35:51 PM

Give me a week for my computer to arrive and then we'll talk.

9/7/2008 4:29:11 PM

16,693
CPU @ 3465 MHz GPU2 @ 726 Core / 1055 Mhz
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=7864347

my biggest weakness is the E8400 versus Q6600 in cpu results.

9/7/2008 4:32:52 PM

Your GFX card can beat up my GFX card

9/7/2008 4:43:39 PM

i love my gx2, i don't think i'll be upgrading for quite awhile, and if i do it would be to just add another gx2

9/7/2008 5:40:15 PM

I don't have vista, so I'm using 3DMark06 on XP Pro x86 SP2

This is with my Core 2 Duo E6750 at 2.66GHz (8x333), I can overclock to 3.3GHz on the stock cooler, but I chose not to.
nVidia 8800GT overclocked(?) to 650/950/1620



[Edited on September 7, 2008 at 6:06 PM. Reason : dns issues?]

9/7/2008 6:05:47 PM

Mine was done last year when I was big into overclocking. Date of the screen capture was 07/29/07.

xp pro x32
e6600 3.825
ddr400 4.4.4.12
8800gts 640 690/970


[Edited on September 7, 2008 at 7:12 PM. Reason : photo]

[Edited on September 7, 2008 at 7:13 PM. Reason : ]

9/7/2008 7:11:19 PM

tt needs more vantage scores.

9/7/2008 8:53:30 PM

my laptop doesn't meet the minimum resolution

9/7/2008 9:13:40 PM

my e-peen is bigger than your e-peen

9/7/2008 11:04:57 PM

eleventy billion 3d marks

9/7/2008 11:08:45 PM

11828

I have an old 6600 c2d at 3.15ghz, and an 8800 GTX at 626/2000 running on vista 64. I'm sure the score would go up some if i ran it in XP. Can't wait to upgrade to a quad core and get a newer video card.

9/8/2008 1:52:58 AM

here's a history of my desktop, the only one that's not in there was my E8400/8800GTS that I ran for over a year.

9/8/2008 11:37:39 AM

Getting a graphics card with a new monitor pretty soon. I'm going to get a Dell 2408wfp and a GTX260. I am having trouble overclocking the Q6600 because I don't want to run higher than 1.45v and I don't have time to mess with it right now.

Note: Never get a Scythe Ultra Kaze fan, they are really fucking loud

System Specs:
Intel Q6600 @ 3.0GHz
Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme w/ Scythe Ultra Kaze
Corsair XMS2 CL4-4-4-12 @ 800Mhz
MSI P7N Platinum (nvidia 750i chipset)
XFX 7900GT
WD 320GB HDD
Samsung S203-B DVD Burner
Antec Neo HE 500W PSU
Cooler Master RC690 Case

9/8/2008 6:41:37 PM

get a fluid dynamic one, Scythe does make some wicked silent fans if you get the FDB's, keep your fan db below 25db.

best airflow with the lowest db level's:
http://www.svc.com/sy-fan-sff21e.html

if you want a little bit more airflow:
http://www.svc.com/sy-1225sl12m.html

9/8/2008 7:11:34 PM

yea the S-Flex series are so insane.

9/8/2008 8:43:14 PM

The reason that the Ultra Kaze was created was because the S-Flex series were not meant to be CPU Heatsink fans. I bought 8 of the Cooler Master 110cfm Blue LED fans for case fans.

As a side note, I have proven that 3DMark06 is not as CPU bound as it is graphics bound.

9/8/2008 9:15:31 PM

Quote :

"WHO FUCKING CARES"

9/8/2008 9:41:35 PM

^ because people like to see what setups offer the best performance, or ways to improve their own performance

^^ It only is if you run it at low resolution or have a single-core CPU.

9/8/2008 10:02:06 PM

Quote :

" As a side note, I have proven that 3DMark06 is not as CPU bound as it is graphics bound."

Quote :

"tt needs more vantage scores."

9/8/2008 10:16:21 PM

Quote :

"The reason that the Ultra Kaze was created was because the S-Flex series were not meant to be CPU Heatsink fans"

and i betcha the Ultra 120 was designed to be used without a cpu fan
(although they give you a fan clip as an "option")

[Edited on September 8, 2008 at 10:17 PM. Reason : .]

9/8/2008 10:16:39 PM

Quote :

""tt needs more vantage scores.""

I would be embarrassed to put up my vantage score. I think vantage waaay favors AMD. Anyone run vantage with a 4870/4870x2?

9/8/2008 10:17:57 PM

I don't understand the vantage scores.



after some googling, it looks like 4259 sucks.

[Edited on September 8, 2008 at 11:37 PM. Reason : .]



[Edited on September 8, 2008 at 11:49 PM. Reason : .]

9/8/2008 11:23:31 PM

^well post your hardware too.

9/8/2008 11:43:54 PM

^^lol yea, especially on the performance scale. Most people compare Extreme scale scores, I've never even fucking bothered with Vantage because the 06 average that I see is already well above my 06 score.

9/8/2008 11:48:25 PM

Windows Server 2008, kicked up the GPU a little, but backed off on the CPU:

Core 2 Quad Q6600 at 3.0GHz (9*334)
nVidia 9800GTX overclocked to 777/1252/1944

9/11/2008 9:27:24 PM

I can't believe my hardware is outdated already I'm never building a performance system again!

9/12/2008 8:42:50 AM

^ have you experimented with overclocking your GPU? They tend to overclock much better than CPUs. Overclocking my GPU core from 675 to 775MHz and overclocking the memory as well, I get about a 20% increase in framerates.

Just keep an eye out for signs of instability (corrupt textures, blotches on the image). These may only show up on one frame out of 100. The fan on my 9800 is powerful enough to keep the card cool even if I overclock it substantially into unstable territory.

9/12/2008 9:34:54 AM

I've had the 8800 GTS at 600MHz+/1GHz but ATITool is fucked on server 2008. nTune must not have saved/applied my changes before I ran 3dmark & GPU-Z

9/12/2008 9:58:45 AM

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=8332470


This is with the new GTX260 (stock) and the Q6600 @ 3.49GHz.


[Edited on September 28, 2008 at 12:14 AM. Reason : :]

9/28/2008 12:11:13 AM

^ Something's wrong with that picture. With my Q6600 clocked at 3.2, my CPU score is 10% higher than yours.

9/28/2008 12:36:50 PM

It must be because I am running it on vista. I looked at similar setups with Vista on them and they are getting in the same score range.

9/28/2008 5:03:55 PM

Anyone follow the guys at xtremesystems.org Here is FUGGERs newest Nehalem runs (makes me sick)

Intel I7 965
Gigabyte X58 UD5
3 Stage cascade -100c
Corsair 2133 Dominator DDR3

11/5/2008 2:07:44 PM

I assume that the processor in that system will last for about 2 hours running a voltage that high for not only on the processor, but also on the ram.

11/5/2008 7:02:47 PM

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-i7nehalem-memory-voltage,6464.html

1.5v is the standard for ddr3, so i don't think it would impact the memory much.

also i'm guessing to reach 5Ghz they are using nitrogen which also probably means that they won't have the computer on for more than 2 hours at a time, and that this is not your normal desktop.

11/5/2008 7:15:46 PM

^^you'd be assuming wrong then.
I'm still waiting for kingpin to post some shit.

edit: yea, what ^ said. You have to keep in mind that these guys are only booting up long enough to crunch through some benchies. Even if they do fry chips and memory controllers, they have shittons of sponsored backups. Fried processor or not, they will keep pushing until they find a golden chip in a batch.

[Edited on November 5, 2008 at 7:27 PM. Reason : .]

11/5/2008 7:17:56 PM

well kingpin is an evga man and since evga is reworking their i7 chipset (since nvidia isn't doing it) and going to intel, i'm not sure what we'll see from him (if we see it)

11/5/2008 7:25:03 PM

Quote :

"Corsair 2133 Dominator DDR3"

Unless they were underclocking the ram, it doesn't run a the the DDR3 standard of 1.5V. The screen shot shows it running at 1.936V.

11/6/2008 8:05:48 AM

It could be an incorrect voltage considering cup-z reports an incorrect voltage for my old e6600. And yes I know they are using ln2 but I figured everyone posting scores were maxing their equipment for the highest points possible then turning it back to normal settings for everyday usage.

11/6/2008 9:06:18 AM

lol, 2.24V Vdimm w/ DDR3, jeez

11/6/2008 10:39:08 AM

^^^unless you buy some really cheap/standard ram, MOST voltages are above standard

the DDR2 JEDEC spec is 800mhz @ 1.8v, DDR3 JEDEC spec is 1333mhz @ 1.5v, it doesn't mean that's what all memory modules are manufactured at, it just means the recommendation for maximum compatibility and stability.

so basically anything over 800mhz for DDR2, and anything over 1333mhz for DDR3 will most likely have a voltage higher than the standard to reach those frequencies. same goes for lower timings.

heck, my DDR2-1066 runs at 2.35v

1.9v sounds about right for a 2133mhz speed memory, considering the spec is 1333 and 1.5v.

^now 2.24v, that seems high for DDR3

what you have to understand is that on air/water, most components have a voltage limit strictly because of heat, this is written in to the thermal specs of the cpu/memory. if you go to liquid nitro or dry ice, you can push the voltages even further, so that's what allows these people to get that high on voltage (typically).

for instance, the default core2duo voltage is 1.25v, you can push it to about 1.5v on air/water (listed at 1.3625 in spec), and i've seen it as high as 1.65v with liquid nitro

[Edited on November 6, 2008 at 11:48 AM. Reason : m]

11/6/2008 11:39:36 AM