Can anybody with the 7950 SLI beat my 11056 3DMark2006 Score?

Can anybody with the 7950 SLI beat my 11056 3DMark2006 Score?

Everybody says that the 7950 is a better score...

I would like to see a score to prove it...

Joe

 

Well, my desktop with 8800GTX SLI got 14147 after some tweaking, but you are talking about notebook, right? =D

 

yeah an overclocked 7950 sli setup would beat it hands down

 

Yep... Notebooks only....

And I would like to compare the 7950 card to the 8700....

Nice try though...hehehe

Nice score also....

Joe

 

Thats speculation....

Lets see it...

Post if you have a score.... not if you have an opinion.

Joe

 

I don`t think it can. The 8700GT has better OCing potential than the 7950GTX.
Also,just 14400 with SLI dekstop 8800GTX? there are people out there with 30k 3dmark06 scores...

 

When you buy out NBR or become a mod, feel free to enforce that. Otherwise I'd ask nicely not demand.

It's been shown time and time again that the 8700 loses to the 7950 at higher resolutions. Run 3dMark06 at 1920x1200 and post your score. 7950 owners will beat it hands down. At higher resolution 8700 owners lose, plain and simple. Whats the use of having a 1920x1200 screen if you can play games at that resolution? I play COD4 at 1920x1200 with 2x AA.

 

Prove it and post a score.....

Until then I don't believe it...

Im not demanding, I am just calling it bs until someone posts a score to back it...


Joe

 

Reading comprehension isn't one of your strong points is it?

First off, I don't have a Q6700, you will get more points in 3DMark06 for it vs my X6800. Second at lower resolutions i.e. 1280x1024 (stock 3dmark06) then the scores would be fairly close. Move the resolution up to 1920x1200 and run it. I'll do the same and post that, you'll see a difference then.

 

/Fixed.
I think that's what WJ meant...and he does have a point .

the 8700s are great cards....on WXGA resos hehe.

 

Thanks for the insult...

I still don't see a score...

Post a score and I will run the test at the higher resolution.

Also post your scores on the later...

Make sure you give full detail.. So that we can see everything...

Joe

 

my gosh, those 3DMark scores really get into people, huh?

reminds me of... oh yes the Windows Experience Index ratings...

 

I agree with WU.

My Single 7900 Beat 2x 8700's in the Dell m1730 in Crysis Benchmarks.
@ 1600x1050. medium shadows/shaders all other settings to HIGH.

I always say this.

8700's crater at high res.

Run 3dmark @1900x1200. I agree.

or Post some Fraps Benchmarks @1900x1200 medium shadows and shaders all other settings to HIGH.



then benchmark eachother against that.

the single 7950 will Take 2x8700s @1900x1200 Crysis with those settings. Hands Down.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=175029&page=2 my 7900gtx against 2x dells. I know the dells are only 2x 256. I don't know about the Clevo

 

run Crysis

medium shaders medium shadows. all other settings @ high

1900x1200 Fraps for 60 seconds.

I will go my m1710 oc'd 7900gtx @650/750 1.32v vid7 mod against your Clevo. I already beat the sli 8700 in the m1730.

who said other notebooks can't street race against eachother

 

why does any of this matter steponz? In 2 months your system will seem like poo compared to an 8800 gtx sli setup in synthetic tests....

I read an article not long ago about how synthetic tests can be manipulated and way inaccurate. I agree with dexgo show some fraps, or shut the frap up already......

 

Crazy habib... ki$$ my arse...

Go buy an 8800 that doesnt exist yet... And we also don't know what is going on with the SLI setup..

So there is nothing wrong with benchmarking to current setups...

What are you guys using to log the fraps?

With the newest .21 driver I can run no problem in the higher resolution.

Joe

 

1900x1200 medium shadows shaders all other Settings to HIGH.
2007-12-15 10:44:08 - Crysis
Frames: 1571 - Time: 58734ms - Avg: 30.479 - Min: 19 - Max: 48

2007-12-15 10:44:27 - Crysis
Frames: 892 - Time: 32027ms - Avg: 27.852 - Min: 17 - Max: 46

2007-12-15 10:45:05 - Crysis
Frames: 1166 - Time: 39454ms - Avg: 29.553 - Min: 20 - Max: 43

675/800 wicked OC>95 degrees centigrade.

1600x1050 Medium Shadows Medium Shaders all other settings to HIGH.



2007-12-15 10:39:53 - Crysis
Frames: 1701 - Time: 39716ms - Avg: 42.829 - Min: 21 - Max: 68

2007-12-15 10:40:35 - Crysis
Frames: 1395 - Time: 35632ms - Avg: 39.150 - Min: 24 - Max: 72

SSSSSSSSMOoooKIN!

these are real benchmarks.

I have benched against 3 m1730 2 on the net (recorded on forums) and 1 IRL (my friends)


my RIG beat all of them. 8700 are only 128 bit.

i am not kidding buddy. the 8700's you have at best will be PAR with me. no crap.

at high resolutions they can only do soo good. (drivers are not) the bus physically restricts it. (like the law of Phsyics)

and plus I have benched 3 allready. I know that you don't have a m1730. but the 8700's are what they are.

so if you pull out way ahead of me, I know it will be B.S.

 

I believe that this thread is interesting if discussed with some intellectual standards really (just plain curiosity). We have been believing that the 7950 GTX is the king of cards absolute. Come the 8700M SLi people start doing some benchmarks and get the best scores ever at 1280x1200 (even with no Quads).

So, do post you scores at 1900x1200 and some fraps on crysis. Let's see.

I'm more interested really on res of 1600x1050 that actuallly most people with the 7950 GTX play. This due to the fact that at 1900x1200 performance of some games is good but not so good. Actually with the 8700M GT I play with 1600x1050 very well indeed.

Stay cool,

Trance
PS: Steponz, I think you should have just been happy to be the king of 1280x1024 resolution. At 1600x1050 and 1900x1200 the 7950 GTX with that bus is headed to damage your excitement.

 

*cough* flame war *cough*
"my D*ck(aka gpu) is bigger than yours?*

 

tooo funny.....


Guys what are you using to record the the frames?

Where in the game are you recording the frames also?



Joe

 

They are using fraps to measure framerate. There are some demos you can download and run for comparison.

 

Ok I didn't really try to beat the 11K but here is the 1920x1200 everyone wanted to see.

 

my CPU score is only 2000

yours is probably double or more that.

that's the thing with 3dmark. it should only count for the GPU not the CPU.

 

Maybe you buy a real laptop then you can compete.

 

in gaming you only need like 1/2 of what you got. I won't be fooled into buying a QUAD core for gaming.

lmfao......

 

videocard make the big difference... now the processor is at the same level as the ram/hard drive...

and its better this way... on desktop you just have to change the videocard... my brother play crysis with no big problem with a 8800gt and he just have a slow pentium4

 

Great now open 4 virtual OS's and setup a virtual network whiles debugging it sitting in BFE. Then at the end of the day go back to your tent and play games.

As I have stated before if all you use your computer for is gaming you don't need the quad core, you really don't even need a dual core, but if you use it for things like actual work it makes a difference.

 

the d901 is for gamers.

if you buy it for work thats your choice.

99% of the other people get it for Gaming

I have 6 linux servers running in my basement at work. they have no screens are have more power than 3 of your quad cores put together.

My notebook is for gaming. my servers are for servers.

and yes at work I could do all those things you said.

on my Notebook all I want to do is play games and get better FPS than people with 8700's x 2 in Crysis. so my lowly m1710 has no probelm doing this, she has many notches on her belt.

until a 8800's come out. She will stay where she is.

 

Great, bring your laptop and your basement and I might help you find a job. I can do all of that from my laptop. As for 99% buy the 901C just for gaming you might want to look around here. A large majority use it for work and for gaming. As for the argument of multi core more not being useful you might want to do something other than game. More programs (games) will start doing it because they are already maxing out the single threaded processing. You can only push the frequencies so far. More cores mean more processing power, more processing power means you can do more with one machine. You can even do more at the same time if you realize that the main reason for multi-threaded operating systems (one of the main reasons for windows) is so you can do more than one task at the same time. Linux has always had this ability and is finally catching up in the ease of use categories. One of the reasons it is being used more and more.

 

you find me a job?

my job is where those servers are... as I said.

All of what you said is true. and I agree with it. But the d901c IS geared 100% towards gamers.

Yes it can be used however for work or whatever people choose.

but it is geared for Gamers.

that's all I said.

cheers

 

If you only have 6 servers that that like my room. I have more like 90 servers. As for gaming it might be marketed that way but it certainly is not its only purpose. It is geared more towards a mobile workstation. Just look at the specs. If I just wanted a pure gaming machine I could build a lot better desktop. But then I would have the same problem no real portability.

 

it's for gamers.

yes you can use it for a mobile workstation if you like.

 

I use my 9261 for work mostly but do game when i can. they call it a gaming machine but u don't need 2.6 quads or 4 gigs ram or any of that for gaming i did it for work.



joe,

how come no one is posting there 7950 scores.
a lot of peeps say that there 7950's will "SMOKE" the 8700's
we are on the 4th page and i don't see "1"

 

for sure , If I were using it for encoding and work related muti-tasking. I would most certainly love to have the QUADS.

but for gaming. the lowest processor avail would be more than enough.

 

I posted a Ton of Crysis Benches. for 1 single 7900 that is volt moded like a 7950 and is OC"d way higher than one as well.

i have been smoking the 8700's in the m1730 in Crysis @1900x1200 & 1680x1050.

they can smoke me @ lower resolutions though. its thanks to that 128 bit extra pipe that I can smoke with ";D

 

This thread has veered somewhat Off Topic.

So umm has the OP posted his benchies??? I recall he was totally vociferous posting multiple times for someone to challenge his epeen. Now I see that someone has stepped up to the plate and answered his challenge ( nice scores btw ) he is nowhere to be found? What gives??

 

This is getting funny.

My D901C with SLI 8700m's stock with the 3 Gig core 2 gets 8499 3d Marks , Everything stock. After fixing the bios flash problem i had from the bulid.

Plays every game i have loaded so far.
I have fun, that was the point of buying this rig.....
Not to post the best 3d mark record.

I Only have one FTP Server, And one WiFi Repeater with a 60 foot tower at my house.

I Suck......LOL

Guys, Most of us posting here are Tech savy, A bit of respect goes a long ways.

If you get my drift.....

 

I do get what you are saying but so far I am the only to actually post the scores as requested.

Anyone else care to post theirs??

 

Sorry it took me so long. I'm currently at work. I work on a ship if I can get a 5.0kb/s download I'm lucky It took me a while to download the 580mb file for 3dmark06. I benched my system back in July when I got it. I deleted it after that.

Regular 1280x1024 no AA

Linky

1920x1200 no AA

Linky

1920x1200 (forced 4xAA in control panel)

Linky

I don't really know if forcing AA in control panel worked because my scores from 1920x1200 no AA to 1920x1200 4xAA are so similar.

What we really need is a Q6700 user with 7950's to post. Those quads kick the scores up quite a bit. Btw: I'm using 169.09 drivers.

 

and those Fraps benchmarks @ 1600x1050 & 1900x1200?

 

I'll try to download it and post it. It just takes me a while to get it done. I'm getting off on Wednesday though. Once I'm home I can do it easily....unless I'm putting together my sons swingset for Christmas!

 

Wu Jen, don't worry about how long it is just nice to see the scores. It takes me awhile some days as well. I love it when when I get to civilization and get to use real internet. It only happens twice a year for me though. I can't wait until May to use it again. I average about 6.5 on mine. I can hardly keep up with email let alone posts here.

I would say from this that the winner is 7950 (no big surprise)

8700
SM 2.0 Score 3362
HDR/SM3.0 Score 2844

7950
SM2.0 Score 3688
HDR/SM3.0 Score 3286

But not by a lot though. Maybe the OP can get the 11k OC to run the 1920x1200 to see how it does. I might spend a couple more hours if I get a chance to see how it does.

Dexgo,

Are you using a demo or just running through a portion of the game freelance?

 

I just wish that 3DMark06 was capable of doing the HDR/SM3.0 at 4xAA.

If you add AA on top of 1920x1200 the 8700 gets crippled quickly.

We had this discussion when the 8700M GT's 1st appeared. They looked faster than the 7950GTX's at 1st then after some higher resolution testing they showed they could not hang, especially once AA was applied.

Crysis is one of the few games I can't play at 1920x1200. I run COD4 at it with no problems and AA. (Heck I've even been OCing and then turning on Vsync because I hate tearing )

Neverwinter nights 2, Supreme Commander and Crysis are games I have and that I've played with everything turned to high and my system starts to chug. Not playable with all the eye candy turned on and running 4xAA @ 1920x1200 on those games.

 

And yeah, I just looked your CPU score is 1100 over mine That bumps the score up quite a bit. Too bad we don't have anyone with a Q6700 and SLI 7950GTX's that will post.

 

It would be nice for comparison I agree. I still don't think the price/performance of the 8700 is all that bad. It does a really good job on everything I have tried. If Supreme Commander gives the system a work out at all like World in Conflict I think it will wear anything but the actual best down. I haven't tried Crysis yet I think I have a copy coming this way in the next few days (I hope). So far the only game I dropped down in resolution was bioshock and I didn't have to do that (I should have just oc'd a bit). But there is one area that it made a difference to me. I am hoping things slow down here in the next few weeks so I can get back to playing some games.

 

I am running the First part of the Chapter Recovery.

the Full Game. My card is totally maxed out as far as I can go.

I've just added a 50mhz Delta to my Geometric Shader clock. and along with the Voltage @ 1.32. it's screaming right now.


not long before it dies I'm afraid. peaks @ 95 degrees with a 100 degree fan boost. (their allready forced to FULL) and 102 degree shut off.

I removed the Throttles and all other Voltage steps are 1.32 vid7 1.32 vid2 1.32 vid0. in the BIOS. the perf tables have been edited too.

Just glad I can get so much out of it.

 

Any other game we want to bench mark?? I am still waiting for my copy to show up.

 

do some Bioshock Fraps @1900x1200 & 1680x900 1680x1050 all settings maxed except for Vsync.

I will Do the same. after work of course.

 

10:44:08I will give it a shock, I mean a try.

 

1680x1050 all settings maximum except no Vsync

2007-12-18 22:17:22 - Bioshock
Frames: 1479 - Time: 43640ms - Avg: 33.891 - Min: 22 - Max: 55

2007-12-18 22:18:08 - Bioshock
Frames: 1250 - Time: 37971ms - Avg: 32.920 - Min: 22 - Max: 45

2007-12-18 22:18:49 - Bioshock
Frames: 1020 - Time: 31719ms - Avg: 32.157 - Min: 19 - Max: 49

Single 7900gtx 512 625/750 25mhz Geometric Delta Shader Clock 1.32v stepdown vid0,2,7 Fans Max Throttling Disabled 97 degrees Centegrade. 102 degree Shutdown