Ok thanks, yeah im using a random Compaq motherboard, who knows how its affecting the scores.

Finally got around to setting up the 12900k.

Shagittarius wrote on 2022-03-02, 06:27:

Finally got around to setting up the 12900k.

i12900k_rtx3090.jpg

Is 3DMark2001 even multithreaded? Also, have you tested P covers vs P+E cores vs E cores for this?

appiah4 wrote on 2022-03-02, 06:44:

Shagittarius wrote on 2022-03-02, 06:27:

Finally got around to setting up the 12900k.

i12900k_rtx3090.jpg

Is 3DMark2001 even multithreaded? Also, have you tested P covers vs P+E cores vs E cores for this?

I have not, I don't know that I will, It doesn't seem to run by default on the E cores.

appiah4 wrote on 2022-03-02, 06:44:

Shagittarius wrote on 2022-03-02, 06:27:

Finally got around to setting up the 12900k.

i12900k_rtx3090.jpg

Is 3DMark2001 even multithreaded? Also, have you tested P covers vs P+E cores vs E cores for this?

3dmark 2001 is not really going to benefit from more cores, but... the 12900k is a single core performance beast, and windows should be clever enough to only use P cores and boost as high as possible for 3dmark 2001se...

is just that... newer windows are kind of slow on 3dmark 2001se compared to XP afaik, and newer graphics cards and drivers also probably don't care that much about it and dx7 performance.

SPBHM wrote on 2022-04-06, 18:00:

appiah4 wrote on 2022-03-02, 06:44:

Shagittarius wrote on 2022-03-02, 06:27:

Finally got around to setting up the 12900k.

i12900k_rtx3090.jpg

Is 3DMark2001 even multithreaded? Also, have you tested P covers vs P+E cores vs E cores for this?

is just that... newer windows are kind of slow on 3dmark 2001se compared to XP afaik, and newer graphics cards and drivers also probably don't care that much about it and dx7 performance.

All of that is true, I just do it for fun.

SPBHM wrote on 2022-04-06, 18:00:

is just that... newer windows are kind of slow on 3dmark 2001se compared to XP afaik, and newer graphics cards and drivers also probably don't care that much about it and dx7 performance.

You know, I've been casually tracking Win10 3DMark2001 performance on my HTPC over the years, and there was a definite uptick starting with build 1909. And now at 21H2, Win10 is basically as fast as Win7 - yay. 😜 It's nowhere near XP of course, but it's nice to see DX7-DX8 graphics performance slowly creep back up again.

HTPC specs: Core i7-4790K @ 4.7GHz, Asus Z97-A, GTX 1650 Super (except on XP), 16GB DDR3-2133

WinXP (GTX 680): 125,280
Win7 (GTX 1650 Super): 96,832
Win8 - skipped
Win10 v1511: 92,255
Win10 v1607: 92,306
Win10 v1709: 92,262
Win10 v1809: 92,640
Win10 v1909: 95,439
Win10 v20H2: 96,011
Win10 v21H2: 96,381

Each version of Windows was tested with a different display driver, so it's a definite possibility that Windows itself isn't getting any faster, but nVidia drivers are. Who knows, right?

I'll likely be upgrading the HTPC to Win11 this November. It'll be interesting to see how that affects my annual 3DMark01 run. 😀

Ryzen 5 3600 & original GTX 1650 (GDDR5 memory)

I'm surprised that it runs 🤣

SIS760 Based Socket 754 motherboard that overclocks way better than it should.
PhilsComputerLab did a video a few years back https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OFaWs136eY
Sempron 2800+ @ 1913mhz
Medion Radeon 9800XXL (R360) @ 412-358
2GB ddr400 single channel @ 382.6 2.2.2.5

Hello

Win98se
Tualatin Celeron 1200 @ 1600 (133x12)
Asus TUSL2-c, 1.04
512MB PC133 @ 2t
Asus 9280 Ti4200 64mb @ 290/590 - Driver 45.23

Score:
8892 3DMarks

stereotyp wrote on 2022-10-26, 06:27:

Hello […]
Show full quote

Hello

Win98se
Tualatin Celeron 1200 @ 1600 (133x12)
Asus TUSL2-c, 1.04
512MB PC133 @ 2t
Asus 9280 Ti4200 64mb @ 290/590 - Driver 45.23

Score:
8892 3DMarks

What's your SL spec on this tualatin based celeron 1200 overclocked to 1600?

Cheers,

SL656

I have two of 656's, one is working at 133 @ 1.6v, other one is refusing to go as much as 110fsb...
As i red online, for 1200mhz Tualerons, it's 50/50 to pick good one.. I guess i was lucky.

pentiumspeed wrote on 2022-10-26, 23:17:

What's your SL spec on this tualatin based celeron 1200 overclocked to 1600?

Cheers,

stereotyp wrote on 2022-10-31, 08:01:

SL656 […]
Show full quote

SL656

I have two of 656's, one is working at 133 @ 1.6v, other one is refusing to go as much as 110fsb...
As i red online, for 1200mhz Tualerons, it's 50/50 to pick good one.. I guess i was lucky.

pentiumspeed wrote on 2022-10-26, 23:17:

What's your SL spec on this tualatin based celeron 1200 overclocked to 1600?

Cheers,

Thank you, this also benefits us on here too,

Cheers,

Quick question, i tested a Pentium D 805 @ 2.6GHz, 1GB DDR one ram (single channel), WIndows XP SP3, Radeon 9550 256mb 128bit AGP8x.
I got 6680 score on 3DMark2001, and browing the net it seems thats pretty low.
Any ideas?
All drivers are installed.

I would think you have some pretty low clocks on that 9550
but it should be capable of some OC.

The 9550 has half of the vertex shaders comparing to a 9500 (Pro). But I don't know if that's a really bad thing, depends on the game I guess. For 3DMark2001...don't know.

Thanks. Maybe its the CPU and RAM holding it back as well.. Maybe 3dmark doesnt like penitum dual cores.

Not some super results, but they are obtained with pci to pcie bridges card
-pex8112 (8111 gave worst results)
The rest of the system is:
2x tually 1400 and LinLin
Supermicro S370DLE
2gb PC133 ecc reg

HD5450 8970
GT610 7499
GT 730 (pcie x1, Kepler) 9551
GTS 450 9666

Then with 2X tually 1266 (had to temporary swap CPUs):
HD5570 10157

Am I at level of AGP considering the platform?

Might have just set the Win98SE 3DMark01 world record.
Setup:
VM in QEMU with:
1 core from a Ryzen 5 5600x @ 4.8GHz
16GB of RAM (2GB of which is usable even with patchmem... yay)
NVIDIA 7900 GTX PCIe @ 695/875MHz (core/mem)

what I've learned from this is that 3DMark 01 is insanely CPU bottlenecked.