|
Post by Bones on Apr 27, 2017 23:07:28 GMT -5
Ran this on a card I got from one of the IT guys at work, it came from a slot machine at a casino he used to work for. This result is really good BUT since it's so good compared to others running the same card I'm not sure if it's a legit or bugged run. The card itself cranks as you can see from the speeds it was going at and yes, it can run higher than this if I want it to. Already know my GPU-Z and CPU-Z versions are older ones, was just testing the card to see what it could do. hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark2001_se/rankings?hardwareTypeId=videocard_283&cores=1#start=0#interval=20Comments please and thanks!
|
|
|
Post by ozz on Apr 27, 2017 23:15:43 GMT -5
nice rods but are ya gunna keep on yappin about this, that and everything else or gunna get on and bench it , cmon man get into it
|
|
|
Post by Macsbeach98 on Apr 27, 2017 23:27:41 GMT -5
I just looked at the top sub there and the device ID and everything on yours looks Ok. One thing I notice his card is running at PCIe 4x yours is running at 16x Could explain why your card has got better fillrate and bandwidth. The individual scores in your run dont looked bugged and you are showing a 30% increase in bandwidth probably from the 16x.
|
|
|
Post by ShrimpBrime on Apr 27, 2017 23:44:34 GMT -5
Looks like a good test run to me. I would imagine you can get this score close to 20,000.
|
|
|
Post by Bones on Apr 28, 2017 4:45:36 GMT -5
Thanks guys - I'll need to run the correct CPU-Z and GPU-Z versions and get a valid run done.
|
|
|
Post by Macsbeach98 on Apr 28, 2017 7:47:08 GMT -5
That is valid just the way it is. You only need the latest CPUz for CPUz validations otherwise CPUID wont accept it (HWBot will) or the latest CPU's where an older version wont read correctly. The same for GPUz actually for older cards like that I always use 0.8.2 the latest GPUz will send the screen blank with some old cards. HWBot will accept that without a problem.
|
|
|
Post by Aleslammer on Apr 28, 2017 11:09:36 GMT -5
Card has a 128 Bit Bus Width, you have linked to the SE version (64 Bit). Score is in line with the Radeon X300.
|
|
|
Post by Macsbeach98 on Apr 28, 2017 18:01:02 GMT -5
Ah I missed that bit. Good spotting Brad.
|
|
|
Post by Bones on Apr 28, 2017 18:41:27 GMT -5
Yeah, it's a EAX300LE 128 card. I believe they've lumped these together into one category like some others were done recently and the link does show to be for the 128 card.
It did work with the newest GPU-Z and I solved the CPU-Z issue, now to really turn it up and see what I get once temps cool down here.
|
|
|
Post by Macsbeach98 on Apr 28, 2017 19:17:19 GMT -5
No Brad is right they are different cards the X300 has a 128bit bus width and the X300SE has a 64bit bus width. There are 2 separate sections in the database for them. The link you posted is for the 64bit X300SE the 128Mb of memory on the card has nothing to do with it. This is a snip from GPUz in your screenshot I have circled the bus width. Here is where you should post it not in the SE.
|
|
|
Post by Bones on Apr 29, 2017 1:48:54 GMT -5
Glad I did check before trying to sub it! I see what I can do and how it stacks up in the end. Thanks guys!
|
|