Thanks 😀

What!? Why? That's gonna be so weird man, at least keep the same avatar, give us a little time to get adjusted to the change 😜.

I finally got around to making some test runs. Credit 'em in the main post to "NamelessPFG" or "NamelessFragger", this is kinda an outdated take on the alias I'm stuck with here.

Specs:
-Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.2 GHz (Gallatin, Hyper-Threading disabled)
-2 GB (2x1 GB) DDR-400 (3-3-3-8 timings)
-GeForce 6800 Ultra AGP (440 MHz core/575 MHz or 1.15 GHz memory depending on how you like to read it, driver 91.31)
-Auzentech X-Fi Prelude (doesn't seem to matter much if sound's enabled when the timedemo runs silent)
-Windows XP Pro SP3

All tests run on High detail for aforementioned reasons, all advanced options on except Vsync and anti-aliasing.

800x600: 55.7 FPS
1024x768: 55.3 FPS
1152x864: 52.3 FPS
1600x1200: 46.2 FPS

I skipped 1280x1024 for monitor EDID reasons that could leave me blind to the system's doings. Why was Sun so stupid as to give the GDM-5410 1280x1024 at 112 Hz a "supported" resolution when that makes it go out of range? Dell didn't do that on the P1110, and that's the very same FD Trinitron G1 chassis!

Nevertheless, it's clear that the 6800 Ultra doesn't lose a whole lot of performance as you jack up the resolution and is very clearly CPU-bound at the lower resolutions. It's still not that constant 60 FPS that I strive for, but it's not bad considering that a benchmark game like Doom 3 takes a few graphics card generations after its release to really get manhandled at maximum detail settings.

Now I just have to ask how CPU-limited it really is. People with slightly weaker 6800 GTs are already claiming faster performance at Ultra settings, mainly with faster CPUs to show for it. I can't rule out the NVIDIA driver version being a potentially important variable, however.

NamelessPlayer wrote:

All tests run on High detail for aforementioned reasons, all advanced options on except Vsync and anti-aliasing. […]
Show full quote

All tests run on High detail for aforementioned reasons, all advanced options on except Vsync and anti-aliasing.

800x600: 55.7 FPS
1024x768: 55.3 FPS
1152x864: 52.3 FPS
1600x1200: 46.2 FPS

I put you behind the Ultra Quality scores that only had a few FPS less.
Not really an exact science how much the differeny settings affect the score.

Well the heat problem with my Geforce 6800 GT was not very hard to fix...
The card looked very clean when I bought it last year so I diddnt think it was clogged with dust... but it was.

Bye bye Geforce 6800 GT, Hello Geforce 6800 Ultra!
I gained 1.3 FPS 😜

I did a quick Quake III bench at default settings with the Prescott 540@4266, 446.3 FPS

Anything goes:
483.9 FPS, Elianda, i7 3930K@4.3 GHz (Sandy Bridge-E), 100MHz FSB, Gainward GTX 780 GLH Phantom, 32 GB DDR3 1600-10-10-10-30, Gigabyte X79-UD5, onboard Realtek HDA, Win7 Pro SP1

Question why is a P4 540\530 period correct? its prescott too, and has a socket 775 variant, its using DDR2.
While mine is limited to AGP? has no pci-e x16 slot.... that would technically be more period correct.

Really if thats the case, then my Socket 939 A64 NF4 machine when I get to it would be period correct, despite the fact it has a Geforce 550 ti in it.
Which is hardly period correct... but the rest of the machine is.

Draw a line I would start with anything using Core duo + Geforce 8xxx\ATI x1xxx+
Geforce 7 came out shortly after. Well within the fast paced release cycle back then, would consider it period correct, its something you would of likely upgraded to after the games release.

AlphaWing wrote:

Question why is a P4 540\530 period correct? its prescott too, and has a socket 775 variant, its using DDR2. While mine is limit […]
Show full quote

Question why is a P4 540\530 period correct? its prescott too, and has a socket 775 variant, its using DDR2.
While mine is limited to AGP? has no pci-e x16 slot.... that would technically be more period correct.

Really if thats the case, then my Socket 939 A64 NF4 machine when I get to it would be period correct, despite the fact it has a Geforce 550 ti in it.
Which is hardly period correct... but the rest of the machine is.

Draw a line I would start with anything using Core duo + Geforce 8xxx\ATI x1xxx+
Geforce 7 came out shortly after. Well within the fast paced release cycle back then, would consider it period correct, its something you would of likely upgraded to after the games release.

Im going after release dates.
Doom 3 was released August 3 2004.

The Intel chipsets i915 and i925X (with PCI-E) was released before Doom 3 so was the Prescott 540/541.
Nforce 4 was not released at the time.

But this is why there is also a less strickt list.
The only entry that is somewhat questionable in the strict period correct list is Steves Dothan, the Dothan was released by the time so was the i915 chipset but to get the combination (in August 2004) I guess you would have to do the motherboard modding and bios editing by your self.

Athlon XP 2600+ (2100mhz\256KB\166FSB) MSI-MS7021-VIAKT800 1GB DDR@166mhz-2-2-2-6 : Pny Geforce FX 5900 Ultra 256mb 8x-AGP - Forceware 93.71 : Sound PCI - Yamaha YMF724 : XP-SP3.

Medium Quality
640x480=48.7
800x600=48.3
1024x768=43.9

High Quality
640x480=48.5
1024x768=39.4

Ultra Quality
640x480=47.2
800x600=44.3
1024x768=38.9
1280x1024=27.4

Not much difference between the Geforce FX5800 in my XP3000+ rig, that cpu does have 256kb more L2 Cache and is running slightly faster... but there really doesn't seem to be a huge performance difference between the two in this game.

Still would consider anything Pre Core period correct for the CPU.
Would not go by release dates, people played it, and it was used for benchmarks after it was released.
Reason to upgrade, thats something you have to consider.

Also the Nforce 4 chipset was released in 2004, just because its 3 months after your set date just so you can have INTEL with PCI-E and not AMD.
Oh I'm guess I'm wrong, you could have one AMD operton with the AMD-8xxx chipsets compete.
Server class, so I had to google it.
Via's PCI-E chipsets also fall outside your date for amd.
Seems unfair.

AlphaWing wrote:

Still would consider anything Pre Core period correct for the CPU.
Would not go by release dates, people played and it was used for benchmarks after it was released.

Well as I wrote, that is what the less strict somewhat period correct list is for.
Nothing hinders people comparing results from the different lists. 😀

And yes Nforce 4 was released later 2004.
We can allow Nforce4 with single core 0.13 micron Athlon 64 with GF 6x00 or Ati Radeon X8X0 in the period correct list just so the Athlon 64 platforms also gets easy access to PCI-E.
The thing is most people are running 0.09 micron Athlon 64 and those are from early 2005 and then we must allow Prescott 6X0 and even Cedar Mills... where does it stop 😀

Tualatin and 6800GT.
PIII-S 1400@1585, 151MHz FSB, 1.5GB SDRAM 2-2-2, EVGA 6800GT AGP (81.98), WinXP Pro SP3, VIA 694T, X-Fi Extreme Music

640x480 Medium: 42.6 fps
1024x768 Ultra: 41.5 fps
1280x1024 Ultra: 40.7 fps

Here are some more timedemo results:

Pentium 4 2.4GHz Northwood, Soyo P4I-845PE (Socket 478), 512mb DDR-333, NVIDIA GeForce 3 Ti 200 64mb AGP (30.82 Win9x drivers), Turtle Beach Santa Cruz, DirectX 8.1b, Windows 98SE.

Medium Quality:
640x480=16.0
1024x768=10.3

High Quality:
640x480=12.3
1024x768=7.0

Ultra Quality:
640x480=10.7
1024x768=5.7

I didn't bother with 800x600, 640x480 was bad enough (and 1024x768 was insufferable 😵 ). Needless to say, the GF3 does not qualify either.

As for anything goes:

Core i5-3350p 3.1GHz, MSI Z77A-G43 (LGA1155), 8gb DDR3-800, NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 2gb PCIe (310.90 WHQL drivers), ASUS Xonar DG, DirectX 11, Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64-bit (Only 1024x768 was tested).

Medium=204.1
High=201.6
Ultra=198.9

Now to see what results I can get with the FX5500 in the Pentium 4.

Just booted my DELL Dimension 4600i which seems suited to the job 😀

Pentium 4 3.0Ghz Prescott, Intel i865P (DELL MB) Socket 478, 1Gb DDR400 Ram (Running Dual Channel @ 400mhz, 1:1), 256mb ASUS Geforce FX 5950 Ultra AGP 8x Graphics Card (Stock), Creative Audigy SB0090 Sound Card, Windows XP SP3

1024x768 - 40.3fps
640x480 - 61.5fps

PIII-Socket-370-1200mhz Celeron Tualatin- DFI CA64-TC- Via Apollo Pro 133Z - 512mb SDRAM PC133 - 2-2-2 - Nvidia Reference Geforce FX 5700 Ultra AGP 4x (Nvidia branded not 3rd party)- 56.64 Forceware - SoundBlaster 16 CT1740 ISA - Windows 98 SE

Low Quality
640x480=20.1
1024x768=17.4

Medium Quality
640x480=20.1
1024x768=17.4

High Quality
640x480=19.9
1024x768=17.2

Ultra Quality
640x480=19.8
800x600=19.6
1024x768=17.1

5700 Ultra is Completely bottlenecked by the cpu, and if your having trouble getting Doom3 to work under 98, install kernel ex.

If people are wondering why some entries description gets butchered its just cosmetics making the ting look more like a list on high res screens, in low res it will look like a mess anyhow.
I try to not remove information. Your full descrption is here in the thread anyway.

And now, something for the "anything goes" category: my Fujitsu T901's results, mostly as a test to see how far integrated graphics have come with the Sandy Bridge generation.

-Core i5-2520M
-6 GB (2 GB + 4 GB) DDR3-1333 (Yes, it runs dual-channel somehow.)
-Intel HD 3000
-Windows 7 SP1 64-bit

Low:

640x480 - 39.7 FPS
1024x768 - 36.4 FPS

Medium:

1024x768 - 34.5 FPS

High:

800x600 - 38.4 FPS
1024x768 - 35.7 FPS

High (advanced settings off)

1024x768 - 44.6 FPS

...Intel, you fail at graphics processing forever. There are some moments in the timedemo where the game runs really fast, and other moments where the framerate just tanks, and I mean tanks harder than my period-correct system up there.

So it's clear that even a modern Sandy Bridge CPU, exponentially faster than that old NetBurst architecture, gets gimped pretty hard by the on-die integrated graphics if you don't have anything better. I thought we'd have something that could beat a 6800 Ultra in a typical notebook by now; guess not.

The question I can't help but ask is "Why?" What's the bottleneck in the graphics architecture that causes such poor performance? Terrible OpenGL drivers, perhaps? Not enough fill rate or memory bandwidth? Not enough shader performance? TDP-limited design constantly throttling both the CPU and IGP as it struggles to find the right balance for running Doom 3 under a 35W TDP?

Again, changing resolution doesn't have a particularly pronounced effect on performance, neither does the Low/Medium/High quality setting, and while I can go in under the Advanced Options and disable everything there for a noticeable performance boost, it's still not as dramatic of a boost as I hoped.

http://mattgadient.com/2012/05/20/intels-hd-3 … ou-might-think/

Seems to be processing power first,TDP and memory bandwidth. Considering the size of the Intel gpu compared to an Nvidia one it's not too bad. heh.

Would be interesting if in a dual socket mobo if you could designate the second CPU as dedicated entirely to the GPU. Wonder what the performance would be like then but I guess in that case it would be cheaper just to buy a video card.

http://wccftech.com/intel-broadwell-k-lga-65w … iris-pro-edram/

My AGP 939 system:

Athlon 64 3700 (2.2GHz), EVGA 6800GT AGP (307.83), 2GB DDR400, Gigabyte K8NSC-939 (NF3 250gb), Onboard audio, XP Pro SP3:

640x480 Medium: 115.0 fps
1024x768 Ultra: 98.5 fps
1280x1024 Ultra: 79.1 fps

Socket 939 Amd Athlon 64 X2 3800+ @ 240FSB 2.4ghz : Abit - KN8 ULTRA - Nforce 4 - 4gb DDR400 - 3-2-2-1T-DC - Geforce GTX 550TI 1GB GDDR5 - PCI-Ex16 - 337.88 - SB Audigy PCI - XP-SP3

Low Quality
640x480=104.9
1024x768=104.9

Medium Quality
640x480=104.7
1024x768=104.8

High Quality
640x480=105.0
800x600=104.9
1024x768=104.2
1280x1024=104.1
1600x1200=103.9

Ultra Quality
640x480=104.8
800x600=104.9
1024x768=104.5
1280x1024=103.5
1600x1200=103.2

Those are a wall of boring results. Nearly no variance at all 🤣 so much so all the results are within test variance levels of each other.
Safe to say the 550 is completely cpu bound here.
Why do I have such a modern GPU in a machine like this??? Steam OS beta is installed on this machine too 😈. It needs a more modern gpu to run well.