AquaMark3 - Post Your Score & Comment
AquaMark3 is available to everyone now! Get it , install, test your system, then post your results.
This is the first test, AquaMark3 "Score Measurement" on my system No. 1. Video card set at 320MHz core/310 memory.
(After you run the test, AquaMark3 will dump three data files in My Computer/My Documents. Some of you guys will have hours of fun deciphering all the details.)
This is the first test, AquaMark3 "Score Measurement" on my system No. 1. Video card set at 320MHz core/310 memory.
(After you run the test, AquaMark3 will dump three data files in My Computer/My Documents. Some of you guys will have hours of fun deciphering all the details.)
0
Comments
1) New, interesting benchmark designed specifically to test a system's readiness for new games.
2) Great gamers' benchmarking program.
3) It's fun to run.
4) FutureMark Corp. (previously Mad Onion) could use some competition. That are not the only game in town - pardon the pun.
Let's see how the different cards stack up against each other. This is not for bragging rights, but for knowledge. Supposedly, AquaMark3 primarily tests the video card, with the the influence of the variables of system memory and CPU greatly reduced.
ATI 9700 Pro 330/330
I like the fact that this benchmark does not take forever to run like 3DMark2001 does.
Apparently pretty damn good for a Ti4600. Going by the compare results, (approximate CPU speed, any GPU/mem speed) I've got the 6th highest score. The reason for this may be because they are using vid drivers much more recent than mine.
P4 2.4C w/ HT Enabled
Asus P4C800-E
512 MB XMS3700 3-4-4-7
Sapphire Atlantis 9800, BIOS-modded to 9800 Pro (380/340).
200 FSB / 400 Mem / 66 AGP / 33 PCI
Windows XP Pro SP1
ATI Catalyst 3.7
I'm very surprised Spinner didn't push 40,000 as he's got a 9800 Pro as well on a much faster CPU than mine (AXP 3200+).
I'll try a little later with the Catalyst 3.8's and see how that goes.
33,000ish
With kazaa running and a firewall and a well, everything running.
p4 2.4
512mb rdram 1066
radeon 9700pro
asus p4t-533c
Ill post a screen shot when I do a reboot and shut down everything.
Much faster program then 3dmark
specs are
2.8c
abit is7
512 corsair pc3500 @ 200, 2-2-6-2 F1
9700 pro @ 330/330
ATI 8500 (64 MB)
AMD Athlon 1800+ (no OC)
1 GB Ram
512mb RAM
Ti 4200
Need a 9800 Pro and a new CPU
System Specs
Iwill Mpx2
2 x MP2000
1 gig ecc
Gf4 Ti4600
Il download this later and see what I get (not sure I really want to know but..)
Spinner & Simguy
It is good to see a different benchmark utility to 3dmark. It's become such a staple but the differences in scores here are calculated alot wider than 3dmark. Makes it quite fun
Win2k SP3
Old Dets (something in the 45.x series).
Seems to perform about where expected for the GFX (a little under the ti4200 above) but my CPU score kicks some ass considering the clock speed. Somehow it beats out a Barton @ 2.2 Ghz. Maybe its the cache (1 MB) or something causing really high scores because that's pretty wierd. On Folding a such it performs near an XP 2100+ @ stock.
Actually, I'm running the Omega 2.4.74a drivers. Come to think of it, I've read somewhere that the Omegas supposedly render better quality, but that benchmarking scores fall. As far as the soft mod goes, Windows and 3DMark03 indicate the card to be a "9700 Pro". Hmm.
My graphics drivers are the 4403's
In the last test, with that explosion, it was as slow as 0.5 fps!!
Also, it seems to be highly weighted toward DX9... the DX8 hardware is scoring MUCH lower.
8544
That's an AthXP overclocked to 1700mhz and a Sapphire Radeon 9000
Why why why?
Prime, I highly suspect that something is seriously skewed in AquaMark's rating of processors here... :banghead:
Maybe they received a little $$$bribey$$$ from Intel? :mad2:
I think you may be right.
/me thinks that it should become an invalid benchmarking program since it is biased towards Intel.
Not too bad - There are similar systems to mine getting far beyand that score with some serious overclocking.