AGP & x800 XL

jtrory · Oct 20, 2005, 12:22 AM

Hi everyone,

I'm curious to know what anyone has to make of these 3dMark05 bench scores for my x800 XL. They seem pretty bad to me. I had this thread going here and despite all the great advise, nothing ever worked out. I still have the same problem, and now it seems my 3dMark05 scores are kinda confirming that.

I was wondering, is the problem perhaps that I'm using AGP instead of PCI-E?

Thanks again for all the great help.

Dyre Straits · Oct 20, 2005, 01:01 AM

My X800 XL is also AGP and my scores are considerably better than yours. I've posted elsewhere in this forum about those. My last score was in the low 5000s. Very similar system, too.

What I did notice about your scores, though, is that you're using 'filters'. Not sure if that's having an impact.

EDIT: Here's the link to my latest: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1314219

jtrory · Oct 20, 2005, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dyre Straits

My X800 XL is also AGP and my scores are considerably better than yours. I've posted elsewhere in this forum about those. My last score was in the low 5000s. Very similar system, too.

What I did notice about your scores, though, is that you're using 'filters'. Not sure if that's having an impact.

EDIT: Here's the link to my latest: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1314219

The first test in my compare is 1280x1024 with 2x AA and trilinear filtering. The second is 800x600 with no AA or filtering. The reason I posted these two is to highlight that even at a minimum resolution and no added effects, I get a crappy score. Your score at 1280x1024 is better than mine at 800x600. Doesn't make much sense to me. What do you think?

ReDGuiTaR · Oct 20, 2005, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtrory

Hi everyone,

I'm curious to know what anyone has to make of these 3dMark05 bench scores for my x800 XL. They seem pretty bad to me. I had this thread going here and despite all the great advise, nothing ever worked out. I still have the same problem, and now it seems my 3dMark05 scores are kinda confirming that.

I was wondering, is the problem perhaps that I'm using AGP instead of PCI-E?

Thanks again for all the great help.

Your score sounds good to me according to your spec ... a P4 400 mhz FSB is a bit limited.

PCI-E wont give you more performance since your CPU is the weakest part .

Anyway to move to PCI-E you have to change CPU, MoBo and video card ...

My X800XL score around 4500 on 3dmark05 with the above spec ( except card at default speed ) .

Dyre Straits · Oct 20, 2005, 01:24 AM

And, please, keep the question restricted to one location. It doesn't make sense to scatter it all over the forums. You'll get plenty of help and it will be kept in one location for easy reference.

As RG said above, it could very well be the CPU and bottlenecks in your system.

ReDGuiTaR · Oct 20, 2005, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dyre Straits

My X800 XL is also AGP and my scores are considerably better than yours. I've posted elsewhere in this forum about those. My last score was in the low 5000s. Very similar system, too.

What I did notice about your scores, though, is that you're using 'filters'. Not sure if that's having an impact.

EDIT: Here's the link to my latest: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1314219

huh ... you got a 3.2ghz proc --------- he got a 2.8.....
your x800xl is at 420core 564 memory --------- his at 398core 492 memory

you call that similar ??? your syatem should score more than he score by a whole lot !
My system is really closer than yours and i got around 4500 score (when i run my card at default speed 398 core 490 memory)

jtrory · Oct 20, 2005, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dyre Straits

And, please, keep the question restricted to one location. It doesn't make sense to scatter it all over the forums. You'll get plenty of help and it will be kept in one location for easy reference.

I understand. I thought breaking it up might get me more specific answers to the two questions, but I guess you're right.

Quote:

As RG said above, it could very well be the CPU and bottlenecks in your system.

Hmm. So we're saying CPU, MOBO... all that stuff? Geez. I may as well buy a new PC.

I'm curious to know what scores anyone with a 9600XT got. If my system is really that incapable of using the x800 XL to it's fullest capacity, is it even worth having? Perhaps I should just stick with my 9600XT? Unless I'm willing to do some serious upgrading, which I'm really not at this point. Not until the next gen cards and Intel's new CPU start pushing prices down.

Dyre Straits · Oct 20, 2005, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReDGuiTaR

huh ... you got a 3.2ghz proc --------- he got a 2.8.....
your x800xl is at 420core 564 memory --------- his at 398core 492 memory

you call that similar ??? your syatem should score more than he score by a whole lot !
My system is really closer than yours and i got around 4500 score (when i run my card at default speed 398 core 490 memory)

There are plenty of slower CPUs, P-4s, scoring in the upper 4000 range using this card and 1GB of DDR RAM. I wouldn't expect his system to score over 5000 in 3DMark05. Definitely, not! But, it may be able to do better....and maybe not...due to his particular setup.

Dyre Straits · Oct 20, 2005, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtrory

I understand. I thought breaking it up might get me more specific answers to the two questions, but I guess you're right.

Hmm. So we're saying CPU, MOBO... all that stuff? Geez. I may as well buy a new PC.

I'm curious to know what scores anyone with a 9800XT got. If my system is really that incapable of using the x800 XL to it's fullest capacity, is it even worth having? Perhaps I should just stick with my 9800XT? Unless I'm willing to do some serious upgrading, which I'm really not at this point. Not until the next gen cards and Intel's new CPU start pushing prices down.

You can easily find the answer to that question by going back to www.futuremark.com and doing a Project search and Compare at the ORB. Just where it asks for the video card, select the 9800XT as your selection and then also give the P4 as the CPU and a range of speeds....something like 2600 - 3000. Then select the Show me.... option at the bottom of that page and you'll get plenty of results to look at.

jtrory · Oct 20, 2005, 02:11 AM

Can this be explained? According to 3dMark05 my FSB is 200MHz and yet the program SiSoftware Sandra says I have a "4x 200MHz (800MHz data rate)" FBS, which is what I thought I had. Then it says "Memory Bus Speed - 2x 166MHz (322MHz data rate)". What does that mean? How can one program say 200MHz FBS and the other say 800MHz? Am I missing something? Is it possible that FSB dropped for some reason? Might explain why my old card seemed to perform better than this new one....

CDsDontBurn · Oct 20, 2005, 02:40 AM

what kind of memory are you running? DDR333 or DDR400? your p4 is an 800Mhz FSB CPU. the bus speed is set to 200Mhz, but it's quad pumped. 200Mhz x 4 = 800Mhz FSB. I ask what kind of memory you have because it could be a limiting factor in your system's overall performance. if you're running DDR333, then your memory controller is running a weird ratio like 5:4 or something like that, whereas if you have DDR400, then your controller is running at the desired ratio of 1:1.

@ redguitar: the systems are similar. though, the only real difference is the default clock speeds and whatever the difference is on the OC clocks on top of that

@ jtory: try running the benchmark at the standard mode of 1024x768 like everybody else does, with AA/AF turned off, and everything set to "performance" in your CP. Once you've done that, i think your scores should jump up to a more desirable level

Dyre Straits · Oct 20, 2005, 05:16 AM

Let me try to answer the question about PCI-e and AGP: You cannot use a PCI-e card in a normal PCI slot. Nor can you use a PCI-e card in an AGP slot. It's a totally new kind of slot and you have to have a motherboard that supports PCI-e (PCI Express).

So, more to what you're driving at, you would have to get a new motherboard, CPU, and, possibly, new memory, in order to upgrade to PCI-e. So, for your situation, AGP is going to be 'it' if you want any performance at all. Depending on what your motherboard can support, you 'might' be able to upgrade the CPU. That may require a BIOS update if there is one for your mobo.

EDIT: Is this the motherboard you have? http://www.superwarehouse.com/Asus_P...800S/pf/325695

If so, as CDs asked above, which Memory are you using? PC 2700 or PC 3200? That makes a big difference. It also makes a big difference as to how you have it setup in the BIOS.

Additionally, which specific CPU do you have? Are you sure it's a P-4 with Hyperthreading Technology, or is it a Celeron?

As I mentioned previously, and CDs verified, our systems are quite similar. Both are 478-based, P-4 systems and capable of very nice performance. But, if you put in a cheap Celeron CPU (that often shows up as P-4 in some cases), and you put in a cheaper RAM (PC 2700) then you're definitely not going to see the kind of benchmarks and performance that CDs and I are showing.

So, be sure to post accurately what is actually 'under the hood' and then we can make a better assessment of the situation.

jtrory · Oct 20, 2005, 09:39 AM

I have two sticks of DDR400 PC3200 RAM, one 512MB, the other 1GB. I opened up and checked, so this is definitely the right info.

My CPU is P4 2.8GHz HT. To be specific, CPU P4/2.8CGHz 800M 478P/512K HT RT as quoted on the ABS website (which is where I bought my comp).

Uh, what else....? Yes, that is the motherboard I have.

I wonder perhaps whether it's the BIOS then? That may explain why my old card seems to work better than the new one. The BIOS was set up for that, not the x800 XL. I wouldn't have the first clue where to start with that, though.

Things I think I have eliminated so far:

The video card itself and the fact that it is AGP
Memory & BUS speed
Drivers or peripheral programs
The PSU
Defrag, adware, spyware etc.
My desktop or in-game graphics settings

Things that it COULD be:

BIOS setup
Motherboard/CPU
Expecting way too much of my system

To CD: unfortunately I don't have my default benchmark test to hand, but it was not good. I think I scored something like 4300 on 3dMark05. The FPS was still rotten as Hell.

BTW, thanks everyone for your help on these forums, I am slowly narrowing down the problem and I really appreciate all of your help getting me this far. Maybe before the New Year I will have figured this out

CDsDontBurn · Oct 20, 2005, 11:41 AM

your video card is not set up in the BIOS. that is auto detected in windows, and drivers installed are supposed to give out the desired performance and game quality accordingly to each video card.

To know how your rig is running, d/l a program called CPU-Z. it tells you your default clock speed, the clock speed you're running at (if your CPU is OCed), the type of CPU you have, how much memory you have installed, the default memory timings, the memory ratio you're running at, etc.

speaking of memory, you said you're running 1.5Gb of memory. try pulling out your 1Gb stick when you benchmark. i say this because 1Gb sticks generally (not always nowadays) have very relaxed timings compared to their 512Mb counterparts. the faster stickwill clock itself down to the slower stick's timings if the timings are different. say for example your 512Mb stick has timings of 2-3-3-6, and your 1Gb stick has timings of 3-4-4-8. your faster stick will by default clock itself down to the 1Gb's 3-4-4-8 timings. now you may not think this is important, but when benchmarking it is. having lower memory timings does give you an increase in your 3Dmark scores, and in games your FPS will also go up some if your timings are tight.

that's about all i have to say for now

Dyre Straits · Oct 20, 2005, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtrory

Can this be explained? According to 3dMark05 my FSB is 200MHz and yet the program SiSoftware Sandra says I have a "4x 200MHz (800MHz data rate)" FBS, which is what I thought I had. Then it says "Memory Bus Speed - 2x 166MHz (322MHz data rate)". What does that mean? How can one program say 200MHz FBS and the other say 800MHz? Am I missing something? Is it possible that FSB dropped for some reason? Might explain why my old card seemed to perform better than this new one....

According to this, and per your most recent post stating that you have 1 GB + 512 MB of PC 3200 DDR RAM, something seems very wrong about the way your memory is setup in the BIOS. This memory 'should' be running at 2x 200MHz = 400 MHz data rate.

If you go into the BIOS settings menu look for the 'page' where your CPU settings are shown. Look down around for the Memory settings. It should be set to 1:1 ratio. If it's anything else, change it to 1:1.

There's also another location specifically for Memory Timings. If your memory can handle it, try changing the settings manually for TURBO or faster. It might take several reboots to see which it can do. Some people can use GAMING as a setting. I'm not sure how ASUS lists these settings, so, you'll have to improvise if the information is different than what I get on my ABIT board.

But, it does definitely appear that your memory isn't set up properly in the BIOS. Likely, it's using some default settings that need to be changed manually.

Good luck!