i5 2500 & GTX 670
Just wanted to see if I could beat the i7's 😁

So that's how Sandy Bridge with XP performs. 😮

Completely off topic, but do you guys know if there are any i830 based desktop boards out there? I think the 830 would be a great chipset to build a killer P3 system around. Native Tualatin support, AGP 4x, up to 1GB of memory, and of course the speed and reliability of an Intel chipset.

I once had a ThinkPad with that chipset and a 1.26GHz PIII-M. That thing FLEW.

Well, here we go:

i7 3930K, X79, 32GB Quadchannel, GTX570

Results for S3 Trio3D are shown in my youtube channel.

elfuego wrote:

sgt76 wrote:

I was using sdram @ 152mhz. ddr apparently won't make much difference as the P3's bus is too slow for ddr bandwidth to be effectively utilized.

I heard about this rumor, but I find it still hard to believe. I remember the difference changing from KT133a to KT266a on athlon XP 1600+, the frame rate in Morrowind seemed to double. Thats why I hoped it would be similar on tualatin...

...and I was right. DDR bandwidth does make a difference and according to this:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/715/18
It's at least 25%. If not much, much more. So... Anyone wanna do some 3dmark testing on DDR tualatin rig? 😀

Here's the system I was using in 2003.

Athlon XP 1800+
512MB DDR
Either an ECS K7S5A or an Asus A7V-333 (can't remember which one it was at the time this screenshot was taken)
GF4 Ti4200 128MB
Win 2000

So I was playing around with 3dmark2001 today because apparently a P4 1.6 + Radeon 7000 gets unplayable settings for a multiplayer game of Rise of Nations whereas a P3 866 + GF4MX 440SE SDR is playable

Intel P4 1.6ghz
ATI Radeon 7000 64MB AGP
512MB SDRAM
XP Pro SP3

Intel PIII 866mhz
nVidia TNT2 Ultra 32MB AGP
512MB SDRAM
XP Pro SP3

Intel PIII 866mhz
nVidia GF2MX 200 64MB AGP
512MB SDRAM
XP Pro SP3

Intel PIII 866mhz
nVidia GF4MX 440-SE 64MB SDR AGP
512MB SDRAM
XP Pro SP3
[/img]

awergh wrote:

So I was playing around with 3dmark2001 today because apparently a P4 1.6 + Radeon 7000 gets unplayable settings for a multiplay […]
Show full quote

So I was playing around with 3dmark2001 today because apparently a P4 1.6 + Radeon 7000 gets unplayable settings for a multiplayer game of Rise of Nations whereas a P3 866 + GF4MX 440SE SDR is playable

Intel P4 1.6ghz
ATI Radeon 7000 64MB AGP
512MB SDRAM
XP Pro SP3

Intel PIII 866mhz
nVidia TNT2 Ultra 32MB AGP
512MB SDRAM
XP Pro SP3

Intel PIII 866mhz
nVidia GF2MX 200 64MB AGP
512MB SDRAM
XP Pro SP3

Intel PIII 866mhz
nVidia GF4MX 440-SE 64MB SDR AGP
512MB SDRAM
XP Pro SP3
[/img]

Well, just looking at the specs on paper

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=127&card2=63

It's not surprising at all that the GF4MX outperforms the Radeon 7000.

Guess it doe make sense I just expected playable performance. Pity there is no 800x600 options for rise of nations (theres a patch but for a different version)

You would have to upgrade to a Radeon 9000 Pro if you wanted a card made by ATI that consistently outperforms a GF4MX across nearly all tests.

Xeon Prime:
ASUS XG-DLS
Dual P3 Xeon 700/1MB SL49P
2GB PC133 ECC
WinFast A350
Windows 2000 Pro SP4

Swapped the GeForce4 Ti4600 for a WinFast A350 (FX5900 Ultra).

Should be interesting to see how much of a boost I get when I find my self a pair of 900/2MBs... and then overclock them to 1Ghz.

Stock

OC'd @ 784Mhz

m1919 wrote:

Xeon Prime: ASUS XG-DLS Dual P3 Xeon 700/1MB SL49P 2GB PC133 ECC WinFast A350 Windows 2000 Pro SP4 […]
Show full quote

Xeon Prime:
ASUS XG-DLS
Dual P3 Xeon 700/1MB SL49P
2GB PC133 ECC
WinFast A350
Windows 2000 Pro SP4

Swapped the GeForce4 Ti4600 for a WinFast A350 (FX5900 Ultra).

Should be interesting to see how much of a boost I get when I find my self a pair of 900/2MBs... and then overclock them to 1Ghz.

Stock

OC'd @ 784Mhz

Sorry for off-topic, but what beautiful desktop wallpaper! 😉

Tetrium wrote:

Sorry for off-topic, but what beautiful desktop wallpaper! 😉

Isnt that the standard autumn background that comes with Win2k/XP?

My K6-2+ 600 MHz on Asus P5A with Voodoo2 SLI:

and Quadro2 Pro:

Please note that the V2 SLI is benched at 16 bit color depth and software TnL.

I found an old benchmark result from my 1.4Ghz Tully rig.
Hardware used:
P3S-1400Mhz
GF3 Ti200-something
Windows ME
256MB SDRAM cl3

Score was: 5853

Was with 3DMark2001SE

Tetrium wrote:

I found an old benchmark result from my 1.4Ghz Tully rig. Hardware used: P3S-1400Mhz GF3 Ti200-something Windows ME 256MB SDRAM […]
Show full quote

I found an old benchmark result from my 1.4Ghz Tully rig.
Hardware used:
P3S-1400Mhz
GF3 Ti200-something
Windows ME
256MB SDRAM cl3

Score was: 5853

Was with 3DMark2001SE

Please tell me this is a typo? Not even 6k with such a card? 😖 😢 I had about 8k+ with an overclocked GF4 mx 440...

elfuego wrote:

Tetrium wrote:

I found an old benchmark result from my 1.4Ghz Tully rig. Hardware used: P3S-1400Mhz GF3 Ti200-something Windows ME 256MB SDRAM […]
Show full quote

I found an old benchmark result from my 1.4Ghz Tully rig.
Hardware used:
P3S-1400Mhz
GF3 Ti200-something
Windows ME
256MB SDRAM cl3

Score was: 5853

Was with 3DMark2001SE

Please tell me this is a typo? Not even 6k with such a card? 😖 😢 I had about 8k+ with an overclocked GF4 mx 440...

I was reading the entire thread and was wondering the same. I have no idea.
I did that run many months ago and haven't had the time to do a rerun.

But I'm curious now anyhow. Afair I did everything on default settings.

Maybe it's the OS and XP is faster?
Maybe it's the card and it's some kind of underclocked OEM card?

I'll do a rerun tomorrow when I have the time 😀

Edit:Maybe it's the version of DirectX? Iirc it's DX8. I'll check the rig tomorrow 🤣 and figure out whats wrong with it 😜

Tetrium wrote:

I was reading the entire thread and was wondering the same. I have no idea. I did that run many months ago and haven't had the t […]
Show full quote

elfuego wrote:

Tetrium wrote:

I found an old benchmark result from my 1.4Ghz Tully rig. Hardware used: P3S-1400Mhz GF3 Ti200-something Windows ME 256MB SDRAM […]
Show full quote

I found an old benchmark result from my 1.4Ghz Tully rig.
Hardware used:
P3S-1400Mhz
GF3 Ti200-something
Windows ME
256MB SDRAM cl3

Score was: 5853

Was with 3DMark2001SE

Please tell me this is a typo? Not even 6k with such a card? 😖 😢 I had about 8k+ with an overclocked GF4 mx 440...

I was reading the entire thread and was wondering the same. I have no idea.
I did that run many months ago and haven't had the time to do a rerun.

But I'm curious now anyhow. Afair I did everything on default settings.

Maybe it's the OS and XP is faster?
Maybe it's the card and it's some kind of underclocked OEM card?

I'll do a rerun tomorrow when I have the time 😀

Edit:Maybe it's the version of DirectX? Iirc it's DX8. I'll check the rig tomorrow 🤣 and figure out whats wrong with it 😜

I have a video from 2002 with a friend of mine who is overclocking his P3 800 to 920 mhz, Geforce 3 Ti200 with CL3 ram at 153mhz. He got the same amount of points. The P3S at 1400mhz is a bit faster, so there should be some more points be had. I've included two snapshots from the video:

I can add that later he switched to CAS2 and increased his score to 6084.

Just got my Geforce 5950 Ultra in the mail. I fired up 3Dmark 2001SE on my P3 BX440 rig with the following specs:

Asus P3B-F v1.03 (440BX)
PIII-S 1400mhz
1024MB SDRAM PC133 CAS2
Geforce FX5950 Ultra (standard clock)
Windows 98SE

Score: 8498

vetz wrote:

Just got my Geforce 5950 Ultra in the mail. I fired up 3Dmark 2001SE on my P3 BX440 rig with the following specs: […]
Show full quote

Just got my Geforce 5950 Ultra in the mail. I fired up 3Dmark 2001SE on my P3 BX440 rig with the following specs:

Asus P3B-F v1.03 (440BX)
PIII-S 1400mhz
1024MB SDRAM PC133 CAS2
Geforce FX5950 Ultra (standard clock)
Windows 98SE

Score: 8498

That's quite a system! Though I'm a little surprised it scored so low--the BX is supposed to be the fastest P3 chipset at 133MHz. I was able to hit 11460 with a P3-1575 and 9800Pro on an 815 board. I wonder if Win98 is holding your machine back.