2 2600xt ddr4 version in crossfire results

gareth170 · 5 Aug 2007 at 21:18

Jihad said:
Then howcome with Fraps on and off I get the same performance in CSS stress test?

Does Fraps have a performance impact on the game?

There is a small overhead associated with drawing the framerate on screen. This may vary depending on your system configuration, but should remain relatively minimal. The best way to measure it on your own system is to find a game that allows you to benchmark it and compare the results obtained with and without Fraps loaded.

When you are benchmarking the overlay is automatically disabled to provide the most accurate results.

gareth170 · 5 Aug 2007 at 21:27

hl2 2007-08-05 21-23-35-95
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
2676, 61917, 5, 45, 43.219

see...

without fraps , it goes to 173fps

gareth170 · 5 Aug 2007 at 21:51

its ok now... i forgot to reboot..

but it didn't ask to be rebooted so that why i just ran it.

anyway my fault..

im sorry..

gareth170 · 5 Aug 2007 at 22:06

anyway i rebenchmarked quake 4 and the results are the same as the first benchmarks for quake 4. so is the result good or bad for quake 4?

gareth170 · 6 Aug 2007 at 12:13

phil14 said:
yeah i do game a bit, But, Iv been running a X1600PRO for ages and i thought the graphics were ok.. i play bf2, bf2142, css,half life, and a few others.. I will be running it on a 19inch wide screen.. Do you see much difference between the X1950 and the 2600XT?

i went from a 1600xt + x1650pro in crossfire to 1 2600xt and there was a big difference.

anyway do u mean u are considering getting 2 2600xt's or 1? if 1 then the 1950 would be faster but if 2 then the 2600xt would be faster..

the 2600 is great for media also..

gareth170 · 6 Aug 2007 at 13:56

phil14 said:
X1950PRO it is then!

X1950PRO is faster

but btw don't believe to much what benchmark sites and reviews say

gareth170 · 7 Aug 2007 at 11:22

half life 2, max settings, 1680 x 1050, with 4x AA and 16x AF

Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg
31934 180000 .....102 271 177.411

good result?

gareth170 · 7 Aug 2007 at 11:31

jrodga2k5 said:
Thats much better, what did you change? I mean you were sitting at 79fps previously

u mean on CCS?

gareth170 · 7 Aug 2007 at 11:35

jrodga2k5 said:
ah this is a separate test on half life 2 my bad

yep..

but on CCS i get 120fps now in vista at max settings, 1680 x 1050, with 4x AA and 16x AF

.. in xp its 70fps on the same settings

gareth170 · 7 Aug 2007 at 15:11

Mul said:
Looks quite interesting. I reckon those crossfired 3dmark06 scores will fly upwards with an overclock on the CPU.

the score would but im not prepared to overclock my cpu

gareth170 · 8 Aug 2007 at 11:08

jrodga2k5 said:
do it....its fun

maybe its fun but if it damages the cpu and memory, i don't have the money to replace them at the moment..

but in 2 weeks im buying the amd x2 6000+ cpu

gareth170 · 8 Aug 2007 at 11:36

Scougar said:
If I had the money I would by an 2600xt for a laugh, and experiment, but I'm not that flush, or mad

Still interested in what happens to 2600xt's when clocked.

Matthew

well i clocked the core to 880mhz without any problems.

honesty the 2600xt is a good card.. if u had a 2600xt u see it isn't as bad as review say it is.

gareth170 · 8 Aug 2007 at 22:53

ive just overclocked my cpu 10%. i did a test on 3DMark06, see below:

before:
3DMark Score 7389 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 3173 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 3794 Marks
CPU Score 1590 Marks

Detailed Test Results

Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 25.303 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 27.587 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 0.498 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 0.812 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 35.966 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 39.92 FPS

after:
Main Test Results
3DMark Score 7783 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 3241 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 3961 Marks
CPU Score 1762 Marks

Detailed Test Results

Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 25.387 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 28.624 FPS
CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 0.553 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 0.898 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 36.075 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 43.137 FPS
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2684983

why world the SM 2.0 and SM 3.0 go higher also? the graphic card is at stock so i thought only the CPU Score will go higher...

gareth170 · 9 Aug 2007 at 10:34

ok. at 10% the vcore was 1.28v and core temp 35c is that ok? im using a Akasa EVO Blue Heatpipe Copper cooler

i thought adding more volts would damage it. can't i up the fsb without highering the voltage?

also is it better to put my memory on 667?

is there a program to be able to see the whole cpu temp?

gareth170 · 9 Aug 2007 at 10:49

jaykay said:
It wont damage it if you add more volts. what kills a cpu is heat. Do you know what your load temp is?

no. is there a program that records the cpu temps while im gaming?

gareth170 · 9 Aug 2007 at 11:25

Mul said:
Coretemp writes a temperature log to a notepad file. A very nifty and accurate program for AMD64's and Core 2's

ive just tryed it , doesn't work on vista64

gareth170 · 9 Aug 2007 at 12:07

ive overclocked to 20%...

3DMark Score 8105 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 3317 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 4090 Marks
CPU Score 1900 Marks

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2688863

i tryed overclocking to 30% but it was unstable not sure why because i droped down the memory to 667 and the core temps was only 37c and the voltage was only 1.33v

gareth170 · 9 Aug 2007 at 13:08

well ill be buying a 6000+ on the 21st so that should help a lot..

so as u see theses cards isn't as bad as reviews say...

gareth170 · 9 Aug 2007 at 14:37

J.D said:
It could be a memory stepping you may have to change or it may have just needed a little more juice on the voltage. I can go to about 2.63Ghz (2630Mhz) before I need to start raising my voltages from 1.35v.

I wonder how much more power is in these cards????. Great jump from what you have pushed it so far.

Your temps are fine btw . As long as you keep your eyes on the temps then you will be ok so don't worry when you get the CPU going a little bit faster and things start to heat up. As long as the CPU stays under the 70'C in CoreTemp then it will pass dual Prime / Orthos or whatever stability program you decide to use.

When you hit a wall, increase the voltage by just one increment and then reboot and see if it helps. If that doesn't then try one more increment of voltage and if that doesn't sort it then it's probably going to be the memory. Some motherboards "Auto" settings have put my memory to a timing that was causing it to crash in BIOS just after POST screen. If working on the RAM settings works for you as it did for me then just put the voltage back two increments and keep pushing faster. When you hit a wall it's more likely going to be voltage before RAM so when instability hits the further you push you can eradicate that problem more quickly.

As for RAM as you see my DDR400 2-3-3-6 1T is running at DDR466 2.5-3-3-7. I was having boot problems after I raised the speed and after playing around with all my settings only raising my latency from 2 to 2.5 got it started. I thought this was it but a few times my PC crashed so I ran memtest and errors should quite quickly with 8 passes Test 5 and Test 8 (Detects them best). I had another mess around with my ram timings and changing the last timing (TRAS) from 6 over to 7 and it's been fine ever since. I can get to just under DDR 500 with the same timings also but I only do that for benching.

This is just a quick guide to get you in the swing of things. Not to follow word by word as I'm I've had a herbal cigarette or two today. Oh and for Air I'd recommend 1.55v for the CPU to be your maximum to go to. Only increase the voltage on the CPU when you need to and only up until 1.55v then that's the max I'd go for air personally.

thank u mate.

on my bios it as overclock profiles. they work up to 20%.. i will try what u said...

gareth170 · 16 Aug 2007 at 17:08

i just got my amd 6000+ cpu today. it seems much better... ive benchmark bf2.

2007-08-16 16:54:51 - BF2
Frames: 11050 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 92.083 - Min: 65 - Max: 101

i will do more benchmarks with other games...