Tommaso wrote:

Just a quick question, I did the time demo and had a score of 52 frames per second and it was with 756 megs of DDR 400. I then didn't change anything ther than adding different ram to get 1 gig, but I changed all the sticks, and it happened to be DDR 333. Then I ran the test again and lost 10 frames per second. Does ram speed effect frames per second this much, even when it is 256 megs more? Thanks in advance!

Doom is very sensitive to memory speed and latency. I went from 41.5 fps on a P3-1575/SDRAM platfrom to 49.3 fps on a P3-1575/DDR platform...and DDR isn't even supposed to matter much with a PIII!

27.1 FPS, SPBHM, Pentium 4 2.4B @ 3GHz, Asus P4PE 845PE, 768MB DDR-333 CL2.5, Radeon 9500PRO 128MB @ 330/610 Cat 10.2, onboard AD1980, XP-SP2.

36.5 FPS, SPBHM, Pentium 4 2.4B @ 3GHz, Asus P4PE 845PE, 768MB DDR-333 CL2.5, Geforce 8400GS G98 512MB PCI Forceware 257, onboard AD1980, XP-SP2.

D3 is basically the only game I tested with both and got a better experience with the 8400GS, the others (Dx9) might run with higher framerate here and there but were very inconsistent on the 8400 due to the PCI bus,
with the 9500 setting agp aperture size to 256MB eliminated some quick freezes it had during the timedemo (compared to 128mb aperture size), but the overall framerate difference is probably under 1FPS on the timedemo...

I used v1.31 on both...
edit: settings are 1024x768 ultra, on advanced I have everything turned on apart from vsync and anti aliasing, the drivers are always on the default quality settings.

I finally have Doom 3 v1.0 retail, so let's dust off the ol' Gallant Gallatin box and see if I can actually get some proper framerates.

P4 EE Gallatin 3.2 GHz, 2GB DDR400 2.5-3-3-6, GF 6800Ultra 440 MHz/1.15 GHz 77.77, Auzentech X-Fi Prelude, XP Pro SP3

Ultra Quality, no AA:

800x600 - 89.7 FPS
1024x768 - 88.7 FPS
1152x864 - 87.2 FPS
1280x1024 - 81.0 FPS

Ultra Quality, 2xAA:

800x600 - 89.5 FPS
1024x768 - 85.0 FPS
1152x864 - 79.8 FPS
1280x1024 - 72.0 FPS

Ultra Quality, 4xAA:

800x600 - 86.0 FPS
1024x768 - 73.8 FPS
1152x864 - 65.8 FPS
1280x1024 - 56.1 FPS

I went through the trouble of including AA settings for the sake of completeness, even though all the detail presets default to AA off.

I gotta say, version 1.0 does make a big difference when it comes to framerates! Everything's now more in line with what I expect out of the hardware, though maybe I should update the graphics drivers to 92.91 like everyone else, just to level out the field a bit.

I could level it out even more if I had any sort of CPU multiplier control in the BIOS to bump it up to 3.4 GHz, but I don't.

Period correct (CPU + GPU + MB), December 2003 (OC'ed) :

56.4 FPS, agent_x007, Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3,2GHz @ 3,528GHz, Gigabyte GA-8PENXP (865PE), 4GB DDR-440 CL2.5.3.3.8, Radeon 9800 XT 256MB @ 425/770 + Catalyst 9.1, Creative Audigy 2 ZS, XP Pro SP3.

Doom3 v1.0

NamelessPlayer wrote:

I finally have Doom 3 v1.0 retail, so let's dust off the ol' Gallant Gallatin box and see if I can actually get some proper fram […]
Show full quote

I finally have Doom 3 v1.0 retail, so let's dust off the ol' Gallant Gallatin box and see if I can actually get some proper framerates.

P4 EE Gallatin 3.2 GHz, 2GB DDR400 2.5-3-3-6, GF 6800Ultra 440 MHz/1.15 GHz 77.77, Auzentech X-Fi Prelude, XP Pro SP3

Ultra Quality, no AA:

1024x768 - 88.7 FPS

I went through the trouble of including AA settings for the sake of completeness, even though all the detail presets default to AA off.

I gotta say, version 1.0 does make a big difference when it comes to framerates! Everything's now more in line with what I expect out of the hardware, though maybe I should update the graphics drivers to 92.91 like everyone else, just to level out the field a bit.

I could level it out even more if I had any sort of CPU multiplier control in the BIOS to bump it up to 3.4 GHz, but I don't.

I replaced your old score in the non overclocked list as your new score is bottlenecked by something else than the video card.

I called your video card "GF 6800 Ultra Extreme". Nvidia diddnt really have an official spec for that card, it should be 450+ MHz core though so I suggest we try to keep the GF6800 in the non overclocked list at 400/1100 unless someone has a card that can hit 450 MHz (or an actual "Ultra Extreme").

I also added agent_x007's latest score and SPBHM's scores.

My summer break from computers will soon be over! 😀

AGP's end :
129.2 FPS, agent_x007, Core 2 Extreme QX9770 3,2GHz @ 3,84GHz, 4CoreDual-SATA2 R2.0, 4GB DDR2-682 CL5.5.4.12, GeForce 6800 Ultra 256MB @ 440/1150 + ForceWare 93.71, Creative Audigy 2 ZS, XP Pro SP3.

You can't go much faster than this using Intel platfrom and GF 6800 Ultra with AGP slot 😉

EDIT :
238.4 FPS, agent_x007, Core 2 Extreme QX9770 3,2GHz @ 3,84GHz, 4CoreDual-SATA2 R2.0, 4GB DDR2-682 CL5.5.4.12, Radeon HD 3850 AGP @ 715/1818 + Catalyst 10.2, Creative Audigy 2 ZS, XP Pro SP3.

One of fastest AGP PC's that can be build (without LN2's help 😉).

How a 4CoreDual-SATA2 maxed out looks like ?
Something like this :
304.8 FPS, agent_x007, Core 2 Extreme QX9770 3,2GHz @ 3,84GHz, 4CoreDual-SATA2 R2.0, 4GB DDR2-682 CL5.5.4.12, GeForce GTX 580 @ 850/4400 + ForceWare 368.81, Creative Audigy 2 ZS, XP Pro SP3

Skyscraper, dunno how picky you are on the period list, but the A8N32-SLI Deluxe Nforce4 boards is a revised revision of the Nforce 4 chipset released in 2005. The main difference being that it supported 16x on both PCI-E lanes and other general fixes.

Aaaand I'm back!

While it's still not very cold outside, I'm still swamped with work and other hobbies are taking up most of the little spare time I do have I think it's time to waste some of it on computers again.

vetz wrote:

Skyscraper, dunno how picky you are on the period list, but the A8N32-SLI Deluxe Nforce4 boards is a revised revision of the Nforce 4 chipset released in 2005. The main difference being that it supported 16x on both PCI-E lanes and other general fixes.

As we do not differentiate between the 2004 and 2005 core revisions of the AMD64 as long as the CPU model exist with a 2004 core revison it makes sense to not differentiate between Nforce4 revisions. We are not allowing SLI in the period correct list and the same result can be achieved with earlier Nforce4 revision motherboards so it dosn't matter much.

It would make more sense to ban the San Diego core A64 from the period correct list but if someone wants to join the fun and buys a rather expensive A64 FX55 and we then tell that member that his/her CPU has the wrong core revsion and the score therefore dosn't qualify for the list that member might get a bit upset. It dosnt matter much to me though as I have plenty of good Nforce4 boards and pretty much every Clawhammer and San Diego CPU ever released including both versions of the FX55. 😁

We are making a difference between Prescott 1M and 2M not only becasue of the CPU model names beeing different but also because the later as the name indicates has twice the amount of cache. The performance is pretty much the same when comparing Prescott 1M to 2M so this is however up for debate. EDIT The P4 Extreme Edition 3.46 (Prescott 2M) is fine in any case as it was released late 2004. Ignore this, I was tired when I wrote this as there are no P4 EE Prescott 2M 3.46! /EDIT

As the rules in the first post indicate the "CPU model cut-off" is 31 dec 2004 and the chipset and GPU needs to be released in 2004 in some form but other than that the rules are not very strict and also up for debate.

I added two of agent_x007s scores with the QX9770 so the list is pretty much up to date.

Getting a 7700k and some fast RAM (3000 MHz!) soon to complement my GTX 1080. I'll be sure to run this when I get it.

Skyscraper wrote:

We are making a difference between Prescott 1M and 2M not only becasue of the CPU model names beeing different but also because the later as the name indicates has twice the amount of cache. The performance is pretty much the same when comparing Prescott 1M to 2M so this is however up for debate. The P4 Extreme Edition 3.46 (Prescott 2M) is fine in any case as it was released late 2004.

I think you meant Gallatin core (130nm).
Prescott-2M was released in Q1 2005 (with Pentium 4 6xx series and P4EE 3,73GHz) : LINK

@up Good luck

agent_x007 wrote:

I think you meant Gallatin core (130nm). Prescott-2M was released in Q1 2005 (with Pentium 4 6xx series and P4EE 3,73GHz) : LINK […]
Show full quote

Skyscraper wrote:

We are making a difference between Prescott 1M and 2M not only becasue of the CPU model names beeing different but also because the later as the name indicates has twice the amount of cache. The performance is pretty much the same when comparing Prescott 1M to 2M so this is however up for debate. The P4 Extreme Edition 3.46 (Prescott 2M) is fine in any case as it was released late 2004.

I think you meant Gallatin core (130nm).
Prescott-2M was released in Q1 2005 (with Pentium 4 6xx series and P4EE 3,73GHz) : LINK

@up Good luck

You are correct, my tired mind got the s775 P4 EEs mixed up with the dual core Presler EEs as there were both 3.46 and 3.73 GHz versions of those. I should know this as I own the s775 Gallatin 3.46! 😁

The Gallatin is much faster than the Prescott 2M anyhow so it's no loss.

25.1 FPS
P4 Northwood 2.4 GHz, Radeon 9800 XXL (shows up as XT), 512MB DDR-266 2.5-3-3-7, Intel D845GERG2 (i845GE), Onboard AD1981B, XP-SP3

Everything else:

89.1fps, A10-7860k @ 3.6GHz, ASRock FM2A78M-ITX+, 2x8GB DDR3-2400 @ 10-12-12-31, integrated GPU, integrated audio, Server 2012 R2.

Seems to be the first APU benchmark! 🤣

Kinda disappointing (probably because I'm on the latest version) but what evs!

292.4 FPS, i7 7700k @ 4.5 GHz, Asus ROG Maximus IX, 2x8GB DDR4 Corsair Dominator @ 3000 MHz, GTX 1080.

MrEWhite wrote:

Kinda disappointing (probably because I'm on the latest version) but what evs!

292.4 FPS, i7 7700k @ 4.5 GHz, Asus ROG Maximus IX, 2x8GB DDR4 Corsair Dominator @ 3000 MHz, GTX 1080.

Looks like the perfect build for the "can it run Crysis" thread

@candle_86 Would you like to go for round three ?
I got myself a new motherboard and a proper soundcard this time 😀

214.5 FPS, agent_x007, Pentium Extreme Edition 965 @ 5,10GHz, Rampage Extreme, 16GB DDR3-1133 CL5.6.5.15 CR1T, GeForce 7900 GTX GX2 @ 600/1400 + ForceWare 92.91, Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty XtremeGamer, XP Pro SP3

agent_x007 wrote:

@candle_86 Would you like to go for round three ?
I got myself a new motherboard and a proper soundcard this time 😀

214.5 FPS, agent_x007, Pentium Extreme Edition 965 @ 5,10GHz, Rampage Extreme, 16GB DDR3-1133 CL5.6.5.15 CR1T, GeForce 7900 GTX GX2 @ 600/1400 + ForceWare 92.91, Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty XtremeGamer, XP Pro SP3

Great score!

I just wanted to log a new score for my 2003 P4 system with an upgraded graphics card and ask a quick question. First my system specifications are:

Windows XP SP2,512 megs DDR 400 RAM,ASUS P4P800 LE Motherboard, Pentium4 3.06 Ghz. Northwood, 533 FSB, 128 Meg GeForce 6800 Model 400 from LeadTech, SoundBlaster Live Value, Doom 3 Ver. 1.0, 1028 X 756 Ultra detail with everything set to full except AA and VSync, Score 72.9

I had the Geforce FX 5800 Ultra with the same system and scored 52, so I think it is a nice improvement and pretty sure it is the best I can get out of this system considering the processor it has.

The question I would like to ask is, when I was setting the CMOS, there is an option for Hard Drive with the selections SATA or SATA_PATA. I first chose SATA+PATA because O have both type Hard Drives installed in the system. With this setting when running the DOOM bench my system scored very low, around 38 frames per second. I also noticed when the bench was running when it would freeze temporarily the Hard Drive was chugging like crazy. I set the CMOS back to just SATA setting and there was no hard drive chugging and no freezes and the score was 72.0. So, does hard drive speed have anything to do with bench mark? It seemed to freezes were from access to the hard drive.

I hope this makes sense, I just got in from a small operation and am stilll drowsy. Thanks in advance!

Tommaso

agent_x007 wrote:

@candle_86 Would you like to go for round three ? I got myself a new motherboard and a proper soundcard this time :) […]
Show full quote

@candle_86 Would you like to go for round three ?
I got myself a new motherboard and a proper soundcard this time 😀

214.5 FPS, agent_x007, Pentium Extreme Edition 965 @ 5,10GHz, Rampage Extreme, 16GB DDR3-1133 CL5.6.5.15 CR1T, GeForce 7900 GTX GX2 @ 600/1400 + ForceWare 92.91, Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty XtremeGamer, XP Pro SP3

Doom 3 XP 5,1GHz Rampage GPU OC.PNG

I would if I hadn't sold my X2 6000 to my brother with an 8800GTS 512 in it so he would have a computer, but I'll see what I can scrouge up, I've still got the cards

I'll be back this summer with a nice OC AM2/AM2+ board, an X2 6400 and my SlI 7900GTX, and some DDR2 1066 and see how far I can really push it or I'm now thinking a Nice Pentium D 960 with a 780i board for SLI 7900GTX 🤣