3D Mark 05 scores?

2700 score
P4 at 3.3ghz / i875
9800pro at 432 / 716, cat 4.9

On 9/30/2004 5:46 AM fish brightened our day with:

>2700 score
>P4 at 3.3ghz / i875
>9800pro at 432 / 716, cat 4.9
>
>
>
>
>
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=26479

--
"...forged but accurate."

Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
www.inglostadt.com

"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
news:TKV6d.3240$ m...
> On 9/30/2004 5:46 AM fish brightened our day with:
>
>>2700 score
>>P4 at 3.3ghz / i875
>>9800pro at 432 / 716, cat 4.9
>>
>>
>>
>>
> http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=26479
>
> --
> "...forged but accurate."
>
> Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
> www.inglostadt.com

Our scores are fairly similar.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=21438

JT

On 9/30/2004 11:17 AM JT brightened our day with:

>"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
>news:TKV6d.3240$ om...
>
>
>>On 9/30/2004 5:46 AM fish brightened our day with:
>>
>>
>>
>>>2700 score
>>>P4 at 3.3ghz / i875
>>>9800pro at 432 / 716, cat 4.9
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=26479
>>
>>--
>>"...forged but accurate."
>>
>>Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
>>www.inglostadt.com
>>
>>
>
>Our scores are fairly similar.
>
>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=21438
>
>JT
>
>
>
>
I wonder how meaningful those CPU scores are. You were .4 fps faster in
the first test, which is a whopping 23% better than me, whereas I was .4
fps faster in the second CPU test, which in that case is only a 13%
advantage, still a "tremendous" difference but not quite so much as the
first. It evens out that you end up with the better CPU Score, but what
the hell does that mean?
LOL

--
"...forged but accurate."

Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
www.inglostadt.com

"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
news:WpY6d.3344$ ...
> On 9/30/2004 11:17 AM JT brightened our day with:
>
>>"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
>>news:TKV6d.3240$. com...
>>
>>>On 9/30/2004 5:46 AM fish brightened our day with:
>>>
>>>
>>>>2700 score
>>>>P4 at 3.3ghz / i875
>>>>9800pro at 432 / 716, cat 4.9
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=26479
>>>
>>>--
>>>"...forged but accurate."
>>>
>>>Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
>>>www.inglostadt.com
>>>
>>
>>Our scores are fairly similar.
>>
>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=21438
>>
>>JT
>>
>>
> I wonder how meaningful those CPU scores are. You were .4 fps faster in
> the first test, which is a whopping 23% better than me, whereas I was .4
> fps faster in the second CPU test, which in that case is only a 13%
> advantage, still a "tremendous" difference but not quite so much as the
> first. It evens out that you end up with the better CPU Score, but what
> the hell does that mean?
> LOL
>
> --
> "...forged but accurate."
>
> Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
> www.inglostadt.com

It means we both watched an annoyingly long slideshow!

"JT" <> wrote in message
news:H4SdnbanlbSkwMHcRVn-...
>
> "Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
> news:WpY6d.3344$ ...
>> On 9/30/2004 11:17 AM JT brightened our day with:
>>
>>>"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
>>>news:TKV6d.3240$ .com...
>>>
>>>>On 9/30/2004 5:46 AM fish brightened our day with:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>2700 score
>>>>>P4 at 3.3ghz / i875
>>>>>9800pro at 432 / 716, cat 4.9
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=26479
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>"...forged but accurate."
>>>>
>>>>Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
>>>>www.inglostadt.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>Our scores are fairly similar.
>>>
>>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=21438
>>>
>>>JT
>>>
>>>
>> I wonder how meaningful those CPU scores are. You were .4 fps faster in
>> the first test, which is a whopping 23% better than me, whereas I was .4
>> fps faster in the second CPU test, which in that case is only a 13%
>> advantage, still a "tremendous" difference but not quite so much as the
>> first. It evens out that you end up with the better CPU Score, but what
>> the hell does that mean?
>> LOL
>>
>> --
>> "...forged but accurate."
>>
>> Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
>> www.inglostadt.com
>
> It means we both watched an annoyingly long slideshow!
>
>



So did I!!!!!!!!!!!


ROTFLMAO!!!!!


Thanks for the laugh...........I needed one today.



--
callsignviper


The truth is out there. You just have to look in the right places and ask
the right questions.

you guys saved me a big d/l
it not even worth getting to try on my ageing 9700pro amd 5200+ 1 gig ddr
3200.
what were they thinking? i guess it time to run out and spend 3 grand to
build a top of the line sys so i can watch a bench mark lol not in this life
time.
i think ill stick gameing and pas on 3dmark 05.

--


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIGHT BACK AGAINST SPAM!
Download Spam Inspector, the Award Winning Anti-Spam Filter
http://mail.giantcompany.com


"JT" <> wrote in message
news:H4SdnbanlbSkwMHcRVn-...
>
> "Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
> news:WpY6d.3344$ ...
>> On 9/30/2004 11:17 AM JT brightened our day with:
>>
>>>"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
>>>news:TKV6d.3240$ .com...
>>>
>>>>On 9/30/2004 5:46 AM fish brightened our day with:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>2700 score
>>>>>P4 at 3.3ghz / i875
>>>>>9800pro at 432 / 716, cat 4.9
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=26479
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>"...forged but accurate."
>>>>
>>>>Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
>>>>www.inglostadt.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>Our scores are fairly similar.
>>>
>>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=21438
>>>
>>>JT
>>>
>>>
>> I wonder how meaningful those CPU scores are. You were .4 fps faster in
>> the first test, which is a whopping 23% better than me, whereas I was .4
>> fps faster in the second CPU test, which in that case is only a 13%
>> advantage, still a "tremendous" difference but not quite so much as the
>> first. It evens out that you end up with the better CPU Score, but what
>> the hell does that mean?
>> LOL
>>
>> --
>> "...forged but accurate."
>>
>> Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
>> www.inglostadt.com
>
> It means we both watched an annoyingly long slideshow!
>
>

ops i miss typed 2500+ cpu. sorry

--


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIGHT BACK AGAINST SPAM!
Download Spam Inspector, the Award Winning Anti-Spam Filter
http://mail.giantcompany.com


"Mangyrat" <> wrote in message
news:cjj10c$4f53$...
> you guys saved me a big d/l
> it not even worth getting to try on my ageing 9700pro amd 5200+ 1 gig ddr
> 3200.
> what were they thinking? i guess it time to run out and spend 3 grand to
> build a top of the line sys so i can watch a bench mark lol not in this
> life time.
> i think ill stick gameing and pas on 3dmark 05.
>
> --
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> FIGHT BACK AGAINST SPAM!
> Download Spam Inspector, the Award Winning Anti-Spam Filter
> http://mail.giantcompany.com
>
>
> "JT" <> wrote in message
> news:H4SdnbanlbSkwMHcRVn-...
>>
>> "Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
>> news:WpY6d.3344$ ...
>>> On 9/30/2004 11:17 AM JT brightened our day with:
>>>
>>>>"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
>>>>news:TKV6d.3240$ y.com...
>>>>
>>>>>On 9/30/2004 5:46 AM fish brightened our day with:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>2700 score
>>>>>>P4 at 3.3ghz / i875
>>>>>>9800pro at 432 / 716, cat 4.9
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=26479
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>"...forged but accurate."
>>>>>
>>>>>Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
>>>>>www.inglostadt.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Our scores are fairly similar.
>>>>
>>>>http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=21438
>>>>
>>>>JT
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I wonder how meaningful those CPU scores are. You were .4 fps faster in
>>> the first test, which is a whopping 23% better than me, whereas I was .4
>>> fps faster in the second CPU test, which in that case is only a 13%
>>> advantage, still a "tremendous" difference but not quite so much as the
>>> first. It evens out that you end up with the better CPU Score, but what
>>> the hell does that mean?
>>> LOL
>>>
>>> --
>>> "...forged but accurate."
>>>
>>> Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
>>> www.inglostadt.com
>>
>> It means we both watched an annoyingly long slideshow!
>>
>>
>
>

You mistyped a lot more than that, moron. Thanks for the useless post.

"Mangyrat" <> wrote in message
news:cjj1jh$4bnh$...
> ops i miss typed 2500+ cpu. sorry
>

> "Mangyrat" <> wrote in message
> news:cjj10c$4f53$...
>> you guys saved me a big d/l
>> it not even worth getting to try on my ageing 9700pro amd 5200+ 1 gig ddr
>> 3200.
>> what were they thinking? i guess it time to run out and spend 3 grand to
>> build a top of the line sys so i can watch a bench mark lol not in this
>> life time.
>> i think ill stick gameing and pas on 3dmark 05.
>>

hey kill bill go back to ****ing your sister.

--


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIGHT BACK AGAINST SPAM!
Download Spam Inspector, the Award Winning Anti-Spam Filter
http://mail.giantcompany.com


"Kill Bill" <> wrote in message
news_87d.1105$...
> You mistyped a lot more than that, moron. Thanks for the useless post.
>
> "Mangyrat" <> wrote in message
> news:cjj1jh$4bnh$...
>> ops i miss typed 2500+ cpu. sorry
>>
>
>> "Mangyrat" <> wrote in message
>> news:cjj10c$4f53$...
>>> you guys saved me a big d/l
>>> it not even worth getting to try on my ageing 9700pro amd 5200+ 1 gig
>>> ddr 3200.
>>> what were they thinking? i guess it time to run out and spend 3 grand to
>>> build a top of the line sys so i can watch a bench mark lol not in this
>>> life time.
>>> i think ill stick gameing and pas on 3dmark 05.
>>>
>
>