Posted by satchmo on Sat Feb 26th at 4:28am 2005
satchmo
member
2077 posts
396 snarkmarks
Registered: Nov 24th 2004
Location: Los Angeles, U.S.

Occupation: pediatrician
Posted by Nickelplate on Sat Feb 26th at 4:42am 2005
Nickelplate
member
2770 posts
327 snarkmarks
Registered: Nov 23rd 2004
Location: US

Occupation: Prince of Pleasure
Posted by $loth on Sat Feb 26th at 8:57am 2005

# Intel Celeron D Processor 330
# Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition operating system
# 256MB RAM to power creative applications and games
# 40GB hard drive for storing your digital masterpieces
# DVD/CD-RW combo drive plays CDs and DVDs and can record CDs
# ATI's Radeon 9100 PRO IGP graphics for eye-popping 3-D games
# Internal modem for dial-up Internet access
# Integrated Fast Ethernet port for networking or broadband service
# USB 2.0, microphone, headphones and other common connections
# Compact form factor fits in small spaces
# Unique cable-management system hides cords from small fingers
[addsig]
$loth
member
2256 posts
286 snarkmarks
Registered: Feb 27th 2004
Location: South England

Occupation: Student
Posted by wil5on on Sat Feb 26th at 11:10am 2005
wil5on
member
1733 posts
323 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 12th 2003
Location: Adelaide

Occupation: Mapper
Posted by Orpheus on Sat Feb 26th at 11:19am 2005
you know, i would truly like to see the numbers involved at a computer manufacturing facility.
how much money do they think they save putting all those crappy parts into one cabinet. :/
i remember back in the SX/DX days, they actually spent money to dummy down a DX motherboard, only to sell it for less.
[addsig]Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
Posted by Crono on Sat Feb 26th at 9:06pm 2005
how much money do they think they save putting all those crappy parts into one cabinet. :/
i remember back in the SX/DX days, they actually spent money to dummy down a DX motherboard, only to sell it for less.
Oh they save a lot of money. It's just like Dell or Gateway. They use just as crappy parts. They focus on the processor because they know most people think that's the determinate factor. (that becomes their marketing ploy) then they sell it for about the same price it would cost to build one, making a crap load of money in the process. Not to mention, they have contracts with all these manufacturers so they get the parts far cheaper then a retail price.
Everyone does it though. Don't be surprised. [addsig]
Posted by Orpheus on Sat Feb 26th at 9:45pm 2005
Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
Posted by SuperCobra on Sat Feb 26th at 9:47pm 2005
[addsig]
Posted by Crono on Sat Feb 26th at 9:48pm 2005
When will you learn?
Posted by Orpheus on Sat Feb 26th at 9:55pm 2005
Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
Posted by $loth on Sat Feb 26th at 10:25pm 2005
3D Mark 2001: 10000-11000(if 9600 pro OC'ed)
[addsig]
$loth
member
2256 posts
286 snarkmarks
Registered: Feb 27th 2004
Location: South England

Occupation: Student
Posted by Crono on Sat Feb 26th at 11:35pm 2005
2001: Max Settings: 2128
I can't run '05, because I don't have "Pixel Shader 2.0". Oh well. My machine tends to perform better overall in games.
HL2 at pretty high settings runs fine on my machine, for example. [addsig]
Posted by Orpheus on Sat Feb 26th at 11:38pm 2005
2001: Max Settings: 2128
I can't run '05, because I don't have "Pixel Shader 2.0". Oh well. My machine tends to perform better overall in games.
HL2 at pretty high settings runs fine on my machine, for example.
i assume your 2128 score was for the 03 test.
the 05 test?? i consider my machine quite powerful. it stutters massively on the 05 test. in fact one of them only runs at 1 fps
makes me wonder if a machine exists that can run it smoothly.
[addsig]Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
Posted by Crono on Sun Feb 27th at 2:29am 2005
? quoting Crono
2001: Default Settings: 9450
2001: Max Settings: 2128
I can't run '05, because I don't have "Pixel Shader 2.0". Oh well. My machine tends to perform better overall in games.
HL2 at pretty high settings runs fine on my machine, for example.
i assume your 2128 score was for the 03 test.
the 05 test?? i consider my machine quite powerful. it stutters massively on the 05 test. in fact one of them only runs at 1 fps
makes me wonder if a machine exists that can run it smoothly.
It says "2001" doesn't it?
Without changing the default settings the score was 9450. Just to clairify.
Yes there are many machines that can run it just fine, they have video cards that cost thousands of dollars.
I think this is an okay benchmark, it doesn't test it with specific titles or anything like that (which may be optimized to run faster and look better on slower machines *cough*most games*cough*). So, it's a little pointless really, because there's no comparison so you can put it into perspective. The number that 3d mark gives really means nothing.
Although, if there were something made that ran all effects and tests in all sorts of settings with the same algorithms that are commonly used. Giving a number from that would be pretty usful. Then game developers could give a range of two numbers for the system requirements. Because, honestly right now, system requirements on games basically say you need a pentium four, AMD XP, or an AMD 64 chip, which obviously isn't true, since you could have a Xeon or something as such (if you were rich) and it would run very well.
Although, I heard years and years ago they tried to make a standard like this and it was just impossible. Since you have to take everything into consideration. [addsig]
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Feb 27th at 2:34am 2005
It says "2001" doesn't it?
well then smarty pants, what did you get in the 03 test? you cannot cop out cause it doesn't require special cards
and thousands i can believe. the test is definitely hardware intensive.
[addsig]Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
Posted by Cassius on Sun Feb 27th at 2:35am 2005
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Feb 27th at 2:48am 2005
/me goes and finds really evil "flame warrior" for cass.
/me starts with the "sissy" ones first.
/runs
i think i will waste my #7,000 on it too.
[addsig]Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
Posted by $loth on Sun Feb 27th at 8:52am 2005
makes me wonder if a machine exists that can run it smoothly.
SLI Orph (scalable link interface I think it stands for).
*imagines having 2 6800 ultras*
[addsig]
$loth
member
2256 posts
286 snarkmarks
Registered: Feb 27th 2004
Location: South England

Occupation: Student
Posted by SuperCobra on Sun Feb 27th at 9:20am 2005
[addsig]
Posted by Dred_furst on Sun Feb 27th at 4:39pm 2005
This mobo
This memory
This processory
This case
These green cathode lights
[addsig]
Snarkpit v6.1.0 created this page in 0.1598 seconds.

