Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
JAKUS said:Why, Most everybody else has drivers for Vista
Yeah for Vista, not Dx10.
Last edited:
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
JAKUS said:Why, Most everybody else has drivers for Vista
kibble said:I find this fascinating and you are clearly a strong candidate for medical research when you take into consideration the fact that anything over 72fps is undetectable to the human eye. Fact.
It's not a pathetic excuse for an argument, firstly because I'm not even making an argument of it! He said he needs a "stupidly high frame rate" to enjoy games properly. He doesn't. He needs a maximum of 72, and a minimum of let's say 60 to be comfortable. I was addressing his specific statement you doofus, which I thought quoting him would clearly suggest. Evidently not. I'm well aware that the minimum frame rate is what counts.easyrider said:I was wondering when this pathetic excuse for an arguement would rear its ugly little head.
Grasping at straws springs to mind.
If you knew what you were talking about its the miniumum framerate that counts.
TheGunslinger said:...**shudder** I just said the words 'PC' and 'world' in the same sentance (spits on floor and turns round three times to eleviate the curse of that god forsaken shop)
kibble said:It's not a pathetic excuse for an argument, firstly because I'm not even making an argument of it! He said he needs a "stupidly high frame rate" to enjoy games properly. He doesn't. He needs a maximum of 72, and a minimum of let's say 60 to be comfortable. I was addressing his specific statement you doofus, which I thought quoting him would clearly suggest. Evidently not. I'm well aware that the minimum frame rate is what counts.
Jeez, this has been blown WAY out of proportion! I was simply making a point that the human eye cannot detect more than 72fps, yet he was implying that he needed a lot more than that to be happy. That's it. Stop confusing yourselves by thinking I was saying anything more than that!LEUVEN said:How do you know he needs a maximum FPS of 72?
What if he's running at 85Hz with v-sync on, will he still need 72 FPS?
![]()
LoadsaMoney said:Yeah for Vista, not Dx10.
fornowagain said:
Mkay, what where the scores individually? The SM2, HDR/SM3 and CPU elements are not calculated for a total linearly.Rroff said:I just noticed that coz I'm using a widescreen display its using a lower resolution for benchmarking (1280x800) so results aren't directly comparable I guess to the default 1280x1024 - unfortunatly I can't change that with the free edition.
As my scores are approx 25% higher than expected and 1280x1024 is about 22% higher screen estate I'm also guessing 3D Marks 06 doesn't adjust for the resolution difference :| gay.
The highest GX2 score on the orb is 12809, that's with clocks 775/1640. A C2D at 4698 Mhz. Plenty more around, I've yet to see any higher without sub zero water, phase, DI or LN2.Rroff said:On my current settings, with the CPU at stock I'm getting 4961 for SM3 and 5034 for SM2 and 2094 for the CPU.
Thing is I would consider those scores low (from the links) for a 7950GX2 at those clock settings... theres been people posting 13-14K in 06 in some of the forums I frequent without going to those lengths to cool the boards and generally without breaking much above 700MHz...
possibly the boards don't like running at silly low temps... maybe if they brought the temps back up towards 40C then they'd see much higher scores.
My GX2 setup was pretty quick, 10.25K 06 was at 600/1600 and a 3.6GHz. 650 gets maybe 11K. Default res of course. I would point out on the same system my GTX scores 12.5K in 06Rroff said:That was with a 650 core, getting purple patterns in windows atm at 700 or above, which I wasn't getting before, hope I'm not killing the board.
ORB top 11 said:11. 12809 *Overklokk* Sub Zero Norway WR with 7950 GX2
Why don't you just get/show a score that's actually relevant with what you have? Run it at the correct res and then see how confident you areRroff said:I'm 100% confident that with volt mod + water this board could do more than 16357...
The default vcore is 1.25 (not 1.3 as I believe most are)
kibble said:I find this fascinating and you are clearly a strong candidate for medical research when you take into consideration the fact that anything over 72fps is undetectable to the human eye. Fact.
kibble said:Jeez, this has been blown WAY out of proportion! .
kibble said:I find this fascinating and you are clearly a strong candidate for medical research when you take into consideration the fact that anything over 72fps is undetectable to the human eye. Fact.