10,008 3DMarks in 3DMark 2003

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vehementi

Vehementi

Posts: 2,644   +2
Whoa, just found this over at Futuremark.

A guy with a 4.3GHz P4EE ES & a 9800XT just got over 10,000 3DMarks in 3DMark03. That is sick. Not even a guy with a 3GHz Athlon64 FX-51 was able to beat him - fell short by about 200 Marks.

Click here for the 10,000+ dude

And here is the FX-51 dude (2nd place is just the first loser ;))

Ha! Eat that, AMD lovers :D
just kidding of course, i love AMD
 
Originally posted by Vehementi
Ha! Eat that, AMD lovers :D
just kidding of course, i love AMD
Click to expand...

Let's see.....you're saying that there's something wrong with being an AMD lover and not having to pay out the keister for equivalent (or better) computing power?

I guess I just don't have that much money to throw away. :p
 
Re: Re: 10,008 3DMarks in 3DMark 2003

Originally posted by Masque
Let's see.....you're saying that there's something wrong with being an AMD lover and not having to pay out the keister for equivalent (or better) computing power?

I guess I just don't have that much money to throw away. :p
Click to expand...

No, I said that because the top performer in an well-known benchmark was based on an Intel system. Nothing about money.

You did read the 2nd line in your quote, right? ;)

The only real reason that the P4 performed better was because it overclocked higher. Both systems were obviously overclocked to the limit, and I applaud AMD for making such a quality processor that it's able to compete with a processor that's over a 1.5GHz faster than it. That's outstanding. But, AMD's limiting factor is their clock speed, and Intel's limiting factor is their work per clock cycle. That's it. That's the solution to hundreds of Intel vs. AMD flamewars. Neither is better. After reading a bunch of them though, I don't think it's really about the processors anyway :rolleyes:

But, the point of this thread was that a milestone of performance had been reached. That's all.
 
that is one sick system, id like to get the figures on how much money went into that computer. id bet that most of the price would consist of that cooling... -81c!!!!!!!!!!!!!! masque, why are you getting so upset about a comment about an AMD vs Intel? i dont uderstand those of you who choose to get so wrapped up in what name is printed on your silicon... all i care about is performance. but thats just me, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
 
Originally posted by KA3
that is one sick system, id like to get the figures on how much money went into that computer. id bet that most of the price would consist of that cooling... -81c!!!!!!!!!!!!!! masque, why are you getting so upset about a comment about an AMD vs Intel? i dont uderstand those of you who choose to get so wrapped up in what name is printed on your silicon... all i care about is performance. but thats just me, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Click to expand...

Hehe....I don't. I just love throwing a little bait now and then. I like AMD yes.....it's been good to me. Intel's good as well.....just a little to much for me pricewise overall.

Besides that, these guys need to get their blood circulating once in awhile so they don't get stagnant. :p
 
id be careful, not all of us computer geeks are in the *best* of physical condition, someone could get hurt if their heart starts goin too fast.....
 
According to the website the dual-cascade cooling came free.....they gutted 2 freezers which were apartently broken and fixed them up....
350 fps in wings of fury is fairly fast.....nothing compaired to my 2500+ when i finally overclock it....yeh right.....

i wonder what cascade cooling will make of the 939 Athlons and the next gen graphics cards.....20k soon? maybe not.....

Steg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back