Endless Paradigm

feinicks Wrote:funny... PCMark runs, but doesn't give a marking, saying that System Suite needs to be selected. I did notice that Web page rendering test failed. Maybe that is why its not giving a score?

Did you ever uninstall IE or something?

You need IE for that.

Assassinator Wrote:

feinicks Wrote:funny... PCMark runs, but doesn't give a marking, saying that System Suite needs to be selected. I did notice that Web page rendering test failed. Maybe that is why its not giving a score?

Did you ever uninstall IE or something?

You need IE for that.

nah.. figured it out. IE stopped at that "do you want IE to be your bitch" dialog box. I didn't notice it earlier.



will post 3dmarks later...

It'd be awesome if they release that game, Proxycon..

feinicks Wrote:

will post 3dmarks later...

It'd be awesome if they release that game, Proxycon..

Comparing my score and this shows how much having no GPU is bringing down my scores...

CPU has similar clock speed to yours, twice as many cores. (And the Phenom should be at least equal to the Athlon, if not superior, on a clock to clock basis).

Should compare individual components, ie CPU score etc - probably works better.

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:Should compare individual components, ie CPU score etc - probably works better.

I don't have that version which tells me separate scores.

That's the pay (non-freeware) version or something.

Assassinator Wrote:

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:Should compare individual components, ie CPU score etc - probably works better.

I don't have that version which tells me separate scores.

That's the pay (non-freeware) version or something.

Doesn't it at least show the results from each component?
The non-free thing, you just need to enter in a serial.  Could always use another benchmarking tool - there's plenty out there >_>

Assassinator Wrote:

feinicks Wrote:...

Comparing my score and this shows how much having no GPU is bringing down my scores...

CPU has similar clock speed to yours, twice as many cores. (And the Phenom should be at least equal to the Athlon, if not superior, on a clock to clock basis).

you have about 512MB extra RAM, two times as many Processors, which are based on the 65nm process(?) and a ultra OS... I'd say that score is a little less than what I would expect. For IGP i mean. A good GPU should give you something about 7000-8000.
Actually I was expecting more for my built, but my GPU has been acting weird of late. playable Frame rate is no where, where it used to be... turning on AA kills any game. even at 1280*768 px.

Assassinator Wrote:

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:Should compare individual components, ie CPU score etc - probably works better.

I don't have that version which tells me separate scores.

That's the pay (non-freeware) version or something.

lol... guilty !

Hmm, just noticed Assassinator only has ~3.5GB of RAM.  You running 32-bit Server 2003??

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:Hmm, just noticed Assassinator only has ~3.5GB of RAM.  You running 32-bit Server 2003??

Nah, it's Windows XP x64 version. It's actually 64bit. Don't know why it shows 3.5GB RAM here. I think (I remember) task manager actually showing the full amount. Can't check now since I gave the power supply back to my brother.

Or it could be integrated GPU leeching my RAM, which I would not care about, since I got way more than I need anyway.

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:you have about 512MB extra RAM, two times as many Processors, which are based on the 65nm process(?) and a ultra OS... I'd say that score is a little less than what I would expect. For IGP i mean. A good GPU should give you something about 7000-8000.

The extra RAM shouldn't make any difference, since I seriously doubt anything in that test will actually use up more RAM than you have.

And the Windows XP x64 version (which shows up as server 2003) also wouldn't make too much difference, since PCMark05 itself is 32bit (and so can't take advantage of the 64bit-ness).

feinicks Wrote:

Assassinator Wrote:

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:Should compare individual components, ie CPU score etc - probably works better.

I don't have that version which tells me separate scores.

That's the pay (non-freeware) version or something.

lol... guilty !

Shouldn't be hard to download...

But the thing is, I can't really be bothered taking off the power supply from my bros comp, sticking it on mine, taking it off, and sticking it back into his again, just to do that test.

Assassinator Wrote:

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:Hmm, just noticed Assassinator only has ~3.5GB of RAM.  You running 32-bit Server 2003??

Nah, it's Windows XP x64 version. It's actually 64bit. Don't know why it shows 3.5GB RAM here. I think (I remember) task manager actually showing the full amount. Can't check now since I gave the power supply back to my brother.

Or it could be integrated GPU leeching my RAM, which I would not care about, since I got way more than I need anyway.

feinicks Wrote:you have about 512MB extra RAM, two times as many Processors, which are based on the 65nm process(?) and a ultra OS... I'd say that score is a little less than what I would expect. For IGP i mean. A good GPU should give you something about 7000-8000.

The extra RAM shouldn't make any difference, since I seriously doubt anything in that test will actually use up more RAM than you have.

And the Windows XP x64 version (which shows up as server 2003) also wouldn't make too much difference, since PCMark05 itself is 32bit (and so can't take advantage of the 64bit-ness).

GPU shouldn't take up that much RAM.
Extra RAM will make a difference, though not in XP. Talk Vista, talk RAM. OS will make a difference till a certain extent.