What is your 3D mark score with factory clock speed (8600GT)

What is your 3D mark score with factory clock speed

Score: 3650

Memory Type: DDR2 256mb

Driver: 175.80

Resolution: 1280 x 800

OS: Windows Media
----------------------


Score:

Memory Type:

Driver:

Resolution:

OS:

 

best score stock 8600m gt

score 3654

driver 175.19( thanks forerunner for .inf file!)

resolution:1280X800

 

btw with my native resolution is there any way to use 3dmark vantage?
aside from an external monitor>? it asks for at least 1280X1024


any suggestions?

 

score 3775

driver 174.74

resolution:1280X800

[Windows XP]

 

You can always change the resolution if you wish, just click on the button that says "change..." in the column where it states the resolution.

score: 4062

Driver: 175.19

Res: 1280X1024

 

Score:~4000
Driver: Probably 169.09
Res: 1280x1024 (the only proper resolution BTW)

 

Score: 3900
Driver: 175.19
Res: 1280*1024 (have to use external monitor as my screen only supports max 1440*900)

 

Score: 3900 (ish)
Driver: 175.19
Res: 1440*900

 

Score: A little over 4700 points

Driver: 174.31 driver

Resolution: 1280 x 1024 (default => I only use the demo)


Haven't tried it with the 175.19; I'm only interested in the OC results

 

desktop 8600GT with 177.35 driver = 5188 points

 

8600M GT 512M ddr2
Windows XP 32

score: 3835
driver: 177.41
resolution: 1280X800

 

8600GT 256MB DDR3 > 4300pts @ 1400x900 no OC

 

Wow, I'm not getting anything close to you guys...guess I should update my drivers.

8600M GT 512M ddr2
Windows Vista Ultimate 32

score: 3414
driver: 156.10
resolution: 1280X800

 

Assuming you're not OC'ing, then that's pretty normal for a ddr2 8600GT (512mb is useless by the way)

 

Why is 512MB useless? Surely your not refering to the bus width being 128bit. This will have no impact on the amount of useable memory as all of it will be addressable to the card it will just take longer to process all of it than if it was a wider (256bit) bus.

 

~3300
174.16
1440x900

 

LOL, why's everyone running on 1280x800 resolution? Anyway, here's mine...

Dell Inspiron 1720
8600M GT DDR2
169.09 drivers, (Sometimes 175.80 for newer DX10 games) laptopvideo2go.com

3DMark06 Stocks:
1280x1024 = 3303 3DMarks

3DMark06 Overclocked:
1280x1024 = 4342 3DMarks

 

I can barely break 4000k, what processor and OC are you using?

 

Here's a screenshot:

Click to enlarge:

650 core/1300 shader/525 memory - Stress tested for exactly 48 hours non-stop, no artifecting.

It's pretty much experimental to use 8700M GT drivers for my machine, I had struttering issues while playing CounterStrike, but when I started using 8700M GT as my hardware, the struttering is gone. I don't know the driver engineering explanation, but it just works. When I reverted back to 8600M GT on the same 175.80 drivers that's where the struttering starts.

BTW, your score is still good man... Especially on 1440*900 resolution.

 

What do you mean by "use 8700M GT drivers"? It sounds very interesting.

 

How come there is such wide variation of scores from about 3300 to 4700? I know that the ddr3 should score more, but even some of the ddr2 cards seems to be scoring ~3800 Marks. I think such threads only have credibility of the posters actually link to their results on the ORB. Otherwise, anyone could post their result to be anything they want!

 

You only have a 1.5MHz processor? Can that compete with an abacus?

 

You have a mere 166MHz more. Your's must be an abacus on steroids
I've overclocked it to about 1.9GHz, so yeah it can.
Edit: Your the first person to point it out.

 

Of course, my vast intellectual genius makes me the perfect person to bring you out of the Middle Ages.

 

With the laptop in my signature, I was able to score a 9,257 with all stock clock speeds. Never tried OC'ing before.

 

LOL, didn't you see the screenshot? Sorry my English is not very..... "Default", I meant the drivers are the same 175.80, but what I meant is the hardware selection, I chose 8700M GT instead of 8600M GT. Hope you get what I meant. My struttering issues were gone after that.

Hmm all of them seem to be testing under 1280x800 resolutions, I don't know why, probabaly an "illusion" to believing its their default score. haha. Anyway I always use the default 1280x1024 resolution to test.

 

Seriously? With a 8600 GS? Non-overclocked? Seriously, that seems too low though......with the following system:

Commodore 64

8-bit 6510 microprocessor
64 KB RAM
VIC-II GPU w/16 colour capability
Commodore 1541 FDD (no HDD)

I scored 20,000 in 3DMark06.

 

No, that has nothing to do with it. A lot of laptops support a max resolution of 1280 x 800, including mine. So we can't test at higher resolutions.

 

Hmm I suppose so...

 

New Score (v175.19)

 

Oh yes it does. There are people who are sick enough to do that even their machines support higher resolutions than that. Just like how you sarcastically aimed at WSFrazier and his 9000+ plus score.

 

or maybe its the highest resolution we can get,,

na it cant be that, just an ego boost because having a high 3Dmark06 score is the only thing that can give me a good nights sleep

 

Maybe. But IMO, most run it at the highest default resolution selected by the 3DMark06 program (I know at least I do). That's why I was saying that people need to post links. Even pictures don't prove anything-they can be easily photoshopped.

Not sarcastic.....it's all in good fun.

 

Lol, I'm not good at internet sarcasm, but I guess my score isn't believable? Lemme try running it again to make sure I am not blind.

 

Interesting... I understand people lying about their score, but photo editing the score is a bit too extreme... LOL

 

Let me give you an example.....the following took me no more than 3 minutes:



(And no, that's not my real score at all, it's just photoshopped )

 

But, why would you waste your 3 minutes?

 

To blow my horn?

 

Fair Enough

 

Score: 4699

Memory Type: 3GB DDR2

Driver: idono.... oem? lol where can i find this?

Resolution: 1280 x 800

OS: Vista premium



The break down;
My system: 4699
sm 2.0 1886
sm 3.0 1790
cpu 2159

system is as follows;
Core 2 duo T8300
2.4GHz/800MHzFSB 3m L2 cache
3GB DDR2 667MHZ
256MB Nvidia 8600m GT
160GB 7200RPM SATA

 

dustthis mate you could find it 3dmark system infor page or Nvidia COntrol Panel

 

4403 marks. I got a G1S-A1 with Intel T7500, 5400 rpm HD and 4 Gb Ram. Results with the default options (3dmark 2006 free). I am using the 177.35 driver.

 

why do you think your test is in 1280x1024 ??

your sig clearly says

 

Unless using an external monitor.
These benchmarks need to be performed at a uniform setting of what ever we come up with as a "standard" that will allow everyone to test using their notebooks display. Other wise we might as well allow people to post results from the 8800M GT's.

 

Does this look right?

Driver 7.15.11.7431

 

my monitor is a 1440x900, but that is the panel native resolution

but i can go upto 1440x1024 and can do 1280x1024 without a problem

as an example if you do a test at 1024x768 is it only valid on panels with are native resolution 1024x768 of coarse not, the panel just interpolates down.

my panel interpolates up to 1440x1024 it might be a bit blurry but the results are still valid.

 

might be working, but how do you force the resolution ? do you have to add higher resolutions in the driver.inf ?

when i look at the result of 4700 points of the poster i quoted it seems a little bit off the range for a 8600m with 1280x1024. it suggests that he neither used an external monitor , nor forced a higher resolution.

so all this comparing of those benchmarks does not mean a lot if the people do not use the same resolution. the results would need to be compared only with results achieved under the same test setups ( resolution, standard clocks - oced core/ram/shader)

 

It might just be easier for EVERYONE to run it @ 1280x800
It sucks because we cannot really compare to the "default" 3dmark res. But at least all of us can compare to each other. Not everyone has a external monitor that they can access. Or like me, I am just lazy and don't feel like plugging it in

@ 1280x800 I get 4895
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=7211804

 

I don't have to force a resolution , they are their in the Nvidia control panel

Also the results, i get are normal for an desktop 8600GT at 1280x1024, as i said my panel is a native 1440x900.

 

512mb of ddr2 ram is poor....256mb ddr3 is faster.

Of course the 128bit bus makes a difference....in fact you've pretty much said it yourself in your own post

but I was moreso referring to the fact it's ddr2 in combination with the 128-bit bus