3870xt 512mb 3D06 Score- expected a bit more

Sparky · 30 Mar 2008 at 02:11

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6003442

10544 with e2140 at a shade under 3GHZ. 2GB Crucial Ballistix pc8500 RAM

Does it seem low to anyone else?

toucam · 30 Mar 2008 at 02:23

Nope, a 8800GTX at default clocks is around 13000, so your score is spot on for a 3870XT!

Sparky · 30 Mar 2008 at 02:26

Would Vista slow it down some?

skunksta · 30 Mar 2008 at 02:35

Not a lot i get better scores in xp but only with 8.2 .For some strange reason 8.3 takes a third of my score.Yet vista i get better scores with 8.3 (btw with hotfix and tryed without to)

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5978732

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5881709

Sorry about the clocks being dif on them.Only just got a new case to be able to push it to 3.2 hope it helps and the score dont seem to bad for what hardware you have check the 3dmark thread page2 see if you can see a system close to yours

-iceblade^ · 30 Mar 2008 at 02:45

10337 - -iceblade^ - E2160 @ 3.0ghz 3870 @ 877 Core 1179 Mem - Vista

that's my 3dmark06 score with the rig in my sig, as i submitted on another forum... your score is correct.

Sparky · 30 Mar 2008 at 10:14

So 10544 is not to bad then. Think its time i moved to Quad Core and 4GB Ram.

gurusan · 30 Mar 2008 at 10:19

4gb ram isn't going to help your score if that's what you're thinking.

Quadcore will of course.

Richdog · 30 Mar 2008 at 10:24

Yeah, a quad clocked to 3.5k or so would add a couple of K onto there most likely. Do you really NEED a higher 3DMARK2006 score though, or do your games not run well enough?

gurusan · 30 Mar 2008 at 10:30

epeen not long enough

Ham · 30 Mar 2008 at 12:15

Getting a Quad because your 3D06 score isn't as high as you would like seems a little silly.

Anyway, your score seems about right - When i had 1 x 3870 i was getting just under 11k with an e2180 @ 3.2

Sparky · 30 Mar 2008 at 13:11

Getting a Quad because i do a lot of multi apps. Also i play 1080P files through the pc and the 2140 has struggled lately.

Plus i have had this CPU since release day and dont change CPU/GPU just because there is a new one (unlike some ppl) Easy shuffle "Cough"
So why not buy a 2nd hand Quad for £70-90?

gurusan · 30 Mar 2008 at 14:19

Your 3870 should handle all the HD stuff....if its going to the CPU then something is wrong.

jambus · 30 Mar 2008 at 14:47

CS||nuTs said:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6003442

10544 with e2140 at a shade under 3GHZ. 2GB Crucial Ballistix pc8500 RAM

Does it seem low to anyone else?

Not a bad score, you'll probably be bottlenecked by that CPU, not so much the ram, although if you're running Vista, 4Gb wouldn't hurt.

Richdog · 30 Mar 2008 at 15:18

CS||nuTs said:
Getting a Quad because i do a lot of multi apps. Also i play 1080P files through the pc and the 2140 has struggled lately.

Plus i have had this CPU since release day and dont change CPU/GPU just because there is a new one (unlike some ppl) Easy shuffle "Cough"
So why not buy a 2nd hand Quad for £70-90?

I think £70-£90 may be a tad optimistic mate, they're still fetching £120+ on MM aren't they?

gurusan · 30 Mar 2008 at 15:24

I think you can maybe pick up a B3 for 90ish. The g0 quads are still pricey though.

silversurfer · 30 Mar 2008 at 15:31

3ghz is good enough, its not holding you back imo and this score is about what I would expect without something extreme like watercooling for the gpu, etc

Try disregarding the cpu score part of 06 and just compare the other two scores. Now when you lower the cpu clock does it effect the normal scores much?

The Asgard · 30 Mar 2008 at 16:01

CS||nuTs said:
Also i play 1080P files through the pc and the 2140 has struggled lately.

That should be handled by the GPU.

Sparky · 30 Mar 2008 at 18:06

So what in your opinions should i do? Im swayed towards another 2GB of pc8500 and a Q6600 or another 2GB and a high end dual core? Maybe its the paltry cache on the e2140 that holds it back a bit?

The Asgard · 30 Mar 2008 at 19:57

CS||nuTs said:
So what in your opinions should i do? Im swayed towards another 2GB of pc8500 and a Q6600 or another 2GB and a high end dual core? Maybe its the paltry cache on the e2140 that holds it back a bit?

I have gone down from a Q6600 at 3+Ghz to a E2180 at 3.4Ghz and I can't tell any difference in the OS. Unless you have a really high end gpu like the GX2 and using it without AA you won't need anything above 3Ghz. You won't be CPU bound with your current setup. With the CPU its the law of diminishing returns unless you really utilise the power.

If you want to see decent gains in the OS one of the biggest bottlenecks is the hard disk. I went from a 500GB AAKS to a Raptor 150 and the system felt a lot more responsive.

Upgrading the memory from 2GB to 4GB in XP will see very little gains and you won't see the full 4GB unless you go 64 bit which can be a pain. Vista will see a better improvement but again you wont see the full 4GB unless you go 64 Bit.

To me your GPU is a good match for your CPU.

Might be worth looking at any junk that maybe installed on your OS if you feel its slow.

-iceblade^ · 30 Mar 2008 at 20:32

i wonder what could be up with your system, cos this hardly, if ever, gives me any slowdowns, and the only issue i have is crysis constantly crashing... antivirus check maybe?