Post Ur Aquamark Results

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adamp2p+1 March 2004 - 16:25--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (adamp2p &#064; 1 March 2004 - 16:25)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-DarthInsinuate@1 March 2004 - 09:17
i agree with 4th gen, there&#39;s something wrong with your score - do you happen to have Anti-aliasing and Antisotropic filtering turned on from the ATI control panel?

---

That might be the issue. One thing that I noticed about MicrosoulV3&#39;s system (3.3 GHz) is the fact that he does not have the right AGP arpeture set.

You should go into BIOS and increase the AGP arperature to 128 MB. [/b][/quote]
so should i bump that up then? i heard that is always sposed to be set at 64 (but what the hell do i know) :D just tell me what i should do, and ill try it :)

lol i just tried out that aquamark program and after trying to figure out what you click to start a test i finally figured it out (well only took like 2 minutes but whatever) and i had like 21fps at teh start :) then went down to like 5 lol. ended up with like 4,500 i think at the end but i was so mad i just exited so fast and uninstalled it.

now im downloading 3dmark 2001, 2003 i only got 156. because of the vid card i couldnt do the second two tests. gotta get a new card, and mobo, and ram, and cpu, and case, and hard drive :blink: to many things to buy, so little money to spend :(

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adamp2p@1 March 2004 - 18:25
That might be the issue. One thing that I noticed about MicrosoulV3&#39;s system (3.3 GHz) is the fact that he does not have the right AGP arpeture set.

You should go into BIOS and increase the AGP arperature to 128 MB.

---

Hmm my AGP aperature is only set at 64 too I believe, it would improve my score if i bump it up to 128??

i tried bumping it up to 128, and my score got considerably worse (21000)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mïcrösöül°V³@1 March 2004 - 23:55
i tried bumping it up to 128, and my score got considerably worse (21000)

---

odd, so you think it&#39;s best to be left where it is?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kaiweiler+1 March 2004 - 23:18--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (kaiweiler @ 1 March 2004 - 23:18)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Mïcrösöül°V³@1 March 2004 - 23:55
i tried bumping it up to 128, and my score got considerably worse (21000)

---

odd, so you think it&#39;s best to be left where it is? [/b][/quote]
try both and see which is better for you.

i tried out 3dmark 2001se and i got 5848 :lol: gotta get a new computer badly&#33;

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mïcrösöül°V³@1 March 2004 - 19:55
i tried bumping it up to 128, and my score got considerably worse (21000)

---

MicrosoulV3:

First let me tell you that I really like your website (the music that plays is great).

Then let me tell you that you should really run at least three benchmarks and either take the average of those three scores or report the highest.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adamp2p+1 March 2004 - 23:21--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (adamp2p @ 1 March 2004 - 23:21)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Mïcrösöül°V³@1 March 2004 - 19:55
i tried bumping it up to 128, and my score got considerably worse (21000)

---

MicrosoulV3:

First let me tell you that I really like your website (the music that plays is great).

Then let me tell you that you should really run at least three benchmarks and either take the average of those three scores or report the highest. [/b][/quote]
well thank you adam. :D and i found that if i leave the agp aperature size to 64, that seems to works the best for me.

are my core speeds right? they are lower than others with the same vid card.

score here

Those settings seem stock from what I remember of my card.