Tuesday, May 22nd 2007

100 000 in 3DMark 03 broken

The 100 000 point barrier in 3DMark 03 goes down thanks to Kingpin! A Core 2 Extreme CPU clocked at 5.2GHz and two GeForce 8800 Ultra cards (with frequencies for core and memory 985/1243 respectively) were used to achieve this feat.

Congratulations!Source: XtremeSystems Forums
Add your own comment

25 Comments on 100 000 in 3DMark 03 broken

#3
jocksteeluk
lol my crappy pentium d 820 at stock speed takes almost 3x the core voltage, what shite processors these truly were:shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#4
HookeyStreet
Eat, sleep, game!
Thats crazy!! But TBH we could all probably do it if we had the cash/backing that Kingpin has ;)
Posted on Reply
#5
jydie
Hmmm. I stopped using 3DMARK03 when benching new video cards well over a year ago. Breaking the 100,000 mark is simply done for fun, since 3DMARK03 was designed for video cards produced in 2003-2004. New video cards need to be benchmarked with 3DMARK06 to get a "complete synthetic" test.
Posted on Reply
#6
GJSNeptune
by: jydie
Breaking the 100,000 mark is simply done for fun.
We know. ;)
Posted on Reply
#7
ktr
kingpin and his frosty Nitro does it again!
Posted on Reply
#8
Solaris17
Creator Solaris Utility DVD
is he the guy at cbeit that couldnt get his rig to work because they didnt have the euro american outlet converter for his cascade? he had an abit board if that helps.
Posted on Reply
#9
OnBoard
I haven't even broken 20k yet (500 missing) and now I've lowerd OCs, 'cause it's getting warmer. 5x my power, quite nice.
Posted on Reply
#10
jydie
I dug up some of my last 3DMARK03 scores and wanted to comment further. Breaking 100,000 might be just for fun, but that really is a remarkable score. The best I scored a year or so ago was 12,000 with an AMD 3500+ and Radeon X850XT. One reason I stopped using 3DMARK03 was because it did not show any benefit when using dual core CPUs. In fact, my single core AMD 3500+ beat my AMD X2 3800+ by about 800 points under 3DMARK03. The opposite occured under 3DMARK06. Maybe a new patch has fixed this issue with 3DMARK03. Although... if using dual core CPUs under 3DMARK03 still offers no benefit over single core CPUs, then breaking 100,000 is that much more amazing because the video card is responsible for most of the increase. :toast:
Posted on Reply
#11
spectre440
i've said this many times before, and i'll say it again.

some people just have waaaaaaay too much time on their hands.
Posted on Reply
#12
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Still a remarkable feat. I dont know where I currently even rank on 3dmark03
Posted on Reply
#14
FAXA
I got just under a third of that, at 27982 :D
Posted on Reply
#16
JUDAS3
100k - jesus just done mine and got 33,039
Posted on Reply
#17
breakfromyou
by: OnBoard
I haven't even broken 20k yet (500 missing) and now I've lowerd OCs, 'cause it's getting warmer. 5x my power, quite nice.
You have a pretty nice system, and you can't break 20k in 3Dmark03...? There is definitely something wrong with your setup. I can break 20k easily with a crappy clocking X2 4400+ and a crappy clocking 7900gt.

get a new power supply. it would help.
Posted on Reply
#18
Darkrealms
by: jydie
I dug up some of my last 3DMARK03 scores and wanted to comment further. Breaking 100,000 might be just for fun, but that really is a remarkable score. The best I scored a year or so ago was 12,000 with an AMD 3500+ and Radeon X850XT. One reason I stopped using 3DMARK03 was because it did not show any benefit when using dual core CPUs. In fact, my single core AMD 3500+ beat my AMD X2 3800+ by about 800 points under 3DMARK03. The opposite occured under 3DMARK06. Maybe a new patch has fixed this issue with 3DMARK03. Although... if using dual core CPUs under 3DMARK03 still offers no benefit over single core CPUs, then breaking 100,000 is that much more amazing because the video card is responsible for most of the increase. :toast:
I just checked, it sayed my first core got 104 and my second core got 14 so it obviously hasn't fixed any multi core issues.
Posted on Reply
#19
DaMulta
My stars went supernova
holy shit that's fast
Posted on Reply
#20
0V3CHKiN
Gimme ten years and I'll break that.
Posted on Reply
#21
XooM
by: jocksteeluk
lol my crappy pentium d 820 at stock speed takes almost 3x the core voltage, what shite processors these truly were:shadedshu
your PD does 3.6v stock?! OMG!



:p
Posted on Reply
#22
mariano
Get a girlfriend, score with her.
Posted on Reply
#23
OrbitzXT
by: jydie
Hmmm. I stopped using 3DMARK03 when benching new video cards well over a year ago. Breaking the 100,000 mark is simply done for fun, since 3DMARK03 was designed for video cards produced in 2003-2004. New video cards need to be benchmarked with 3DMARK06 to get a "complete synthetic" test.
3dMark03 seems like a more accurate test to me. My 8800GTX scored the same at stock settings 575/1800 and overclocked to 625/2000 on 3dMark06 mainly because of the CPU, but 3dMark03 the difference in scores between stock and overclocked settings is very obvious. Its still a useful bench, not just for fun.
Posted on Reply
#24
DrunkenMafia
fuck yeah, that is pretty good. Must have a bs psu in that system..

What sort of cooling does he have on that cpu???
Posted on Reply
#25
Xaser04
Very nice.

Although I do wish that some of these systems also get tested in proper games (really just to see what difference the high clocks make over say everything at stock).
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment