Probably, the most rediculus native Win98SE machine that has a score with 3DMark01 SE :

😀

Imperious wrote:

Pentium M 770@2.712 on P4P800 Deluxe and 6800gt @425-1000
Nvidia driver says 2ghz for the memory, it's got it's facts wrong.

Actually those video cards use GDDR3 ram, which doubles ram speed. If it's running at 1000 mhz Ram speed, then yes, it is functionally working at 2 Ghz ram speed in reality. So yes, that is correct there.

agent_x007 wrote:

Probably, the most rediculus native Win98SE machine that has a score with 3DMark01 SE :
XoxT7lA.png
😀

Have you tried doing anything with this system other than 3dmark? Like real games. Is it actually stable at all in normal games with this setup?

I'm not trying to be mean/rude but that system is incredibly "out of spec" for Win98se in several places well beyond what is "native" For win98se. I would guess that it's likely extremely unstable / crashing a lot. That ram and video card isn't possible "natively" in win98se at all.. not sure what you did to get it to work enough to even do 3dmark.. but more than likely won't work for anything else as a real, usable Win98 SE system.

It is stable-ish enough...
So far I tried to run Doom 3 (v1.0), but it crashes upon startup (I did mod .exe file - still crashes) 🙁

I didn't run other games because it would be similar to gaming on Quad SLI of GTX 1080's...
Really, REALLY, experimental/non possible stuff.

I can try running Quake III Arena, StuntGP, Dethkarz, Worms World Party, but they aren't exacly "meant to be played" on 7900 GX2 with a Core 2 Extreme and Win 98 SE setup tho 😉
BTW: "Native" to me means that it runs without VM/Virtualisation and/or other type of emulator "on top". In short : A moded Win 98 SE, is still a Win 98 SE.
You can't mod a DOS into Win NT (for example) 😀

PS. I did ran 3DMark03 (v3.4) to see how far it can be pushed in DX9 : LINK

Pentium M and HD3850 this time. 35769 3D Marks

Alright, even though i created a bunch of these charts for various games and benchmarks and it's own thread for them, i believe this one belongs in here:

All hail the great Geforce 3 TI200 that overclocked can surpass the Geforce 3 TI500 and almost match the TI4200!

All this on a Athlon X2 4200+ and a motherboard with support for both AGP and PCI-E.

Here's a a KT400 system I recently came across. Gigabyte GA-7VAXP, XP 2200+, 1GB DDR400, Radeon 9800 Pro. All parts are from ~2003 except the HDD, which is from 2005. The RAM is running at 200Mhz, though I didn't notice much difference in results compared to setting the RAM to 133 or 166. If I leave the RAM set to AUTO in the BIOS, it ends up at 166Mhz.

I was too fast to conlusion... THIS is the craziest Win 98 SE setup 😀

Additional test :

Did someone ever got 3DMark 2001 SE running on Windows Server 2003?

I can't find any solution and i have DirectX and 3D acceleration all the way. All Dxdiag tests passed without problems.

Specs:
Pentium E2140 1.6 Ghz
1 GB DDR400 CL2.5
ASUS P5PE-VM (i865G)
ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP
Windows Server 2003

Hint : LINK 😀

agent_x007 wrote:

Hint : LINK 😀

That was i did before running 3Dmark, but no luck

dxwebsetup.exe ?
If it will not work, try offline version : LINK
PS. Service Pack's are installed ?

agent_x007 wrote:

dxwebsetup.exe ?
If it will not work, try offline version : LINK
PS. Service Pack's are installed ?

DirectX upatated to June 2010 release, Installed lastet Service Pack for Server 2003 (SP2) and some updates. Seems to be a 3DMark 2001 SE bug since i tried 3DMark2000 and it ran fine, also as i said before, all Direct3D dxdiag tests passed

You got 3DMark01 SE v330, or is it v300 ?
If it's the older one, install latest patch.

EDIT : What driver you are using for 4650 ?

agent_x007 wrote:

You got 3DMark01 SE v330, or is it v300 ?
If it's the older one, install latest patch.

v330. 3DMark 2000 passed at default settings. 15647 score. Catalyst 12.6

Try Catalyst's 10.2 or older.

agent_x007 wrote:

Try Catalyst's 10.2 or older.

didn't work

Running out of ideas...
Compatibility mode ?
Newer Futureinfo ?

agent_x007 wrote:

Running out of ideas...
Compatibility mode ?
Newer Futureinfo ?

Same here, Futuremark info doesn't work in 3Dmark 2001 SE and older, copatibility mode doesn't work, i was reseacrhing and aparently 3DMark 2001 SE runs on Windows XP Professional x64 which uses the same kernel as 2003

Carlos S. M. wrote:

agent_x007 wrote:

Running out of ideas...
Compatibility mode ?
Newer Futureinfo ?

Same here, Futuremark info doesn't work in 3Dmark 2001 SE and older, copatibility mode doesn't work, i was reseacrhing and aparently 3DMark 2001 SE runs on Windows XP Professional x64 which uses the same kernel as 2003

I just wanted to comment that technically, there -ARE- quite a few different versions of windows server 2003: Web, Standard, Enterprise, DataCenter, Enterprise x64, DataCenter x64. And although they are similar, and they are -based- on the windows XP core, server 2003 is completely different.

A little overview of the different versions of server 2003 and what they do: http://winsupersite.com/windows-server/window … itions-compared

In general, it is a rather poor idea to use server 2003 today for any actual "server work" hosting anything. It's old and insecure and not updated anymore. And anything you have that should run server 2003 that you are trying to do benchmarks on, should probably be running XP instead.

Dumpster find laptop: HP Compaq NC6220, Pentium M 750 1,86 GHz, 512Mb DDR2, Intel GMA 900, Windows XP full of toolbars and crap that I spent over an hour cleaning. Score: 4689 3DMarks.