Benchmark: Z70V/ w3v (x600) 3d Mark 03

Just wondering what owners of the z70v or w3v got on 3dmark 03
I got 3195 with no overclocking of the gpu.

 

2998 - W3V X600 64mb ded. 1.5GB DDR2

 

W3V 1.86, 2 GB DDR2, 60 GB 7200rpm, x600 64 dedicated, Omega drivers with tweaks.. no overclocking... 3652 3dmark03

 

Can you please tell me exactly what these tweaks are? thanks

 

I got 1152 on 3dmark05 without the new drivers, is this good or bad?

btw: W3v, 1 gig ram, x600 with 64mb ded ram

 

I run everything at a performance level.. texture preference, mipmap detail level, etc. I changed a few other things, but it was a while ago and I don't remember what they were exactly as I don't know the defaults. Just try a few things, run some benchmarks, and determine if it helps or hurts your computer's performance.

Also I reformatted the hard drive. I got rid of all the programs I will never use and try to avoid running unnecessary background processes.

 

Yeah. I didnt really wanna mess with the advanced tweaks in the tool tray and just left AA disabled (i think that helps performance rite?) So far with a bit of OCing/junk programming removal, I got my dad's A290 up to 3450's in 3dmark 03. Hopefully, I can do the same once my s360 arrives.

HEY RAYMOND!

 

just out of curiosity what level of hyper memory are all of you showing? I wonder if that may make any dif... also I had tried the omega drivers for the 5.7 catalyst... they seemed to make fps on counter strike go down severely... maybe i had tweeked it wrong.. dunno...

ray what was your 3d mark03? it would be a better score for comparision...

 

wow, 3600? I barely broke 3000 with everything running on performance; though I did not kill all the background processes. I somehow doubt they can be worth 600 3dmarks

I'm getting around 3070 after re runing 3dmark03: X600, Cat 5.7, 1.86GHz undervolted, 1.5GB ram

 

That's probably because he swapped the stock hdd for a 7200rpm one and the 512 extra mb of ram. If you undervolt your cpu, you can oc your graphics card more, which might help even more (at least that's what i've been told). Also, I'm beginning to think that although the omega drivers improve 3dmarks, it shortens actual fps and gameplay a lot. Anyone else with similar experiences?

 

yeah... although i hadnt put the omegas on again for benchmarks i had put them on at one point and tried to run cz and it gave me about 20 -30 fps in stead of teh usual around 70 or more ish with stock... so even if 3dmark03 may be higher with omega I guess practically stock or ati's may be better... though im not sure... any others with similar experiances?

 

Now that I look at it. My 3600 score came from using the cat 5.6 omegas. I have since upgraded to the 5.7 and will run another test at some point today. I will use the same settings as the last test I ran with the 5.6 and will let you know how the score turns out.

 

any other benchmarks? what are ppl getting overclocked?

 

sorry... can't help w/ the OCing but on stock Asus/Ati drivers I got 3209 3DMark03 marks and 1158 3DMark05 marks.... hope that helps for some basis of comparison. My specs:

Z70V
PM 740 1.76 GHz
1 GB DDR2 Dual channel (533 MHz)
Stock Asus Drivers (apparerntly version 6.14.10.6525 published 22/3/2005... according to Windows Device Manager).

 

I just hit 1494 on 3dMark05, that's with Omega at 515/300. Any higher than 300 on the memory and I was having problems. Heat at normal load is about 60, breaking the 70s under high load. My HL2 score went from 47 to 72. That's at 1024x768, highest quality settings, 4x AA 4x AF. At 1680x1050, I can average around 30fps with highest quality settings, and 2x AA and 2x AF.

Z70V
Pentium M 1.73
1gb RAM

 

DownByFive-- That's pretty steep settings. I'm going to try that out too. Are you also undervolting? And if so, what are your settings on that?

 

Yeah, I thought so too, but those are lower than G2P's tested settings, so I figure it should work. I'm still kind of experimenting with undervolting, but not at the same time as I'm playing games. Right now I'm trying .812 volts on a multiplier of 6. Maybe that's a stupid setting, but I'm still experimenting with this.

 

Undervolting has worked wonders for me. I've got 6x down to .716 so your .8 setting is fine... you could still go much lower... some even have got 6x to .7 I still havent run a 24hr test for full stability testing (no time...) but things seem to run fine. I woulnt worry about undervolting in games either as you are not loosing any processing power and if it is stable then there is no real disadvantage as far as I can see, though I am no expert and have only been undervolting for bout a month and a half.

On overclocking the gpu though I am very much a noob... i tried to do it with 470 on core and 300 on mem. Does that translate into 470 /300? So would 513 be core and 300 mem? After ocing it though my stock dropped drastically to 2900 on 3dmark03... (300 lower than in was before-3200). The card also froze up and I had to reboot twice at around those settings. I had heard that infact memory should be clocked higher than core... that you should clock up mem first and then change core till it stops functioning / artifacts appear...

Are there any major drawbacks to ocing on a constant basis? Any help would be great... i dont want to screw up my card ... downbyfive is that on the w3v or z70v and would it make a dif? Same card right... also what are you using to oc? atitool?

 

I understand undervolting is great, but when you're overclocking anything, shouldn't you need more juice to perform it? just out of curiosity.

 

I usually underclock my card to get battery life up and even when I'm on ac power, I still underclock the gpu to get temperatures down. I've read so many stories about Sonys breaking down after 2 years of use due to overheat that I undervolt and underclock whenever possible. Try to not oc until you actually play games or need the extra boost. That's what most pple do,

 

WIth undervolting as far as i understand you are still getting the same processing power regardless of voltage. If it is stable at that voltage setting at the highest multipler then there is no need for more voltage. It is the same concept with overclocking. You can get your cpu to go faster but the company limits it so that all of them produce to the same levels. Voltage works the same way in that your chip can produce at the same level with lower voltage but maybe not all the chips so the put the voltage to stock values where all the chips will function. So lowering the voltage, as far as I have understood, will not, if stable produce and harmful effects and you shouldnt need more juice to perform as ur cpu is still operating at the same speed. I may be wrong as like I said I am no expert and do not work in some intel plant or as an engeneer for them but from reading many posts in dif forums that is my understanding. Hope that helps.

Any advice on ocing my gpu though? ... atitool or omega or ravitool? ...