1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

How do you tell the difference between 9800pro and 9800pro se

Discussion in 'ATI' started by Jason, Oct 8, 2003.

  1. Jason

    Jason Guest

    I just bought a gigabyte 9800pro and my 3dmark scores seem low, properties
    say 9800pro(also says i have a secondary pci display????)
    3dmark2003 5341
    aquamark 35,341

    System is
    xp2400 (bus o/c from 133 to 166 multiplied up 2005)
    512ddr Twinmos 333
    MSI KT4V onboard sound
    120gig 8m cache maxtor
    Winxp sp1
    Latest drivers off ati site

    hope someone can help
    Jason, Oct 8, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jason

    John Hall Guest

    Looks ok to me, especially the aquamark score. That's about what I get with
    my 9800 non pro - flashed and running at pro speeds - on an Athlon 2800 with
    1 gig of pc3200 ddr ram.

    John Hall, Oct 9, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jason

    Strontium Guest

    Actually, I think that AM3 score looks very low. I get 34,900...I'm running
    a 9700np !!! That person (and you!) should be getting somewhere in the area
    of about 40,000+!

    Especially, considering that the CPU and memory are decent.

    People with 9800pro's (and decent processor/memory) have been, easily,
    getting 42,000 aquamarks with that bench...

    John Hall stood up at show-n-tell, in
    f62hb.262553$, and said:
    Strontium, Oct 9, 2003
  4. Jason

    John Hall Guest

    If I recall correctly, I'm getting around 38000 with 4xaa and 8xaf on. The
    only place where it slows down is the big explosion.

    John Hall, Oct 9, 2003
  5. Jason

    Strontium Guest

    Ok. I, generally, run all benchmarks with driver settings down to bare
    minimum. I can crack 26,000, with all turned up to full in D3D. Point is,
    we need a baseline. Having various settings turned up, only confuses
    things. What do you get, when you run with all D3D settings for 'fastest'?
    I'm thinking you'll whip my ass, if you do it that way. It's a
    baseline...it means nothing when we start adding AF and AA settings.

    John Hall stood up at show-n-tell, in
    pR6hb.57859$ko%, and said:
    Strontium, Oct 9, 2003
  6. Jason

    John Hall Guest

    Yeah, I was running it at my preferred settings because I wanted to see how
    my performance was with eye candy turned on. I must say that I wasn't
    disappointed. I'll run it with settings at fastest and let you know.

    John Hall, Oct 9, 2003
  7. Jason

    John Hall Guest

    Ok, I ran the test and I'm getting 38565 with all setting turned down in
    D3D. Interesting, it's not much different than with settings turned up.
    Think I'll run it again with the settings turned up to see if there is a

    John Hall, Oct 10, 2003
  8. Jason

    John Hall Guest

    34252 with eye candy turned on, 4xaa and 8xaf. Everything is very smooth.
    By the way, I downloaded the Call of Duty demo which requires a DirectX 9a
    compatible video card and cannot get over how good the demo looks and how
    smooth it runs on my 9800 flashed pro. Direct X9 sure raises the bar when
    it comes to looks and performance, and the radeons are the way it should be
    played right now.

    John Hall, Oct 10, 2003
  9. Jason

    Strontium Guest

    I guess that doesn't seem too off-keel. You pull about 4,000 more, than I
    do, eye-candy or not.
    John Hall stood up at show-n-tell, in
    2hphb.63205$ko%, and said:
    Strontium, Oct 10, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.