3dmark05

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Freyqq, Jun 6, 2007.

  1. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
  2. wallaby macrumors 6502

    wallaby

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    Location:
    Iowa
    #2
    good lord. My AMD machine gets a paltry 3xxx. Can anyone run 3Dmark05 on the higher-end MBP?
     
  3. chex macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 17, 2007
    #3
    where did you get 7194 from?

    wallaby - the mbps all have the same gpu so it won't really make a difference
     
  4. Zadillo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    #4
    The higher end MBP has 256MB of VRAM though, which could make a bit of difference in 3DMark.
     
  5. alexjs77 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
  6. aliquis- macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    #6
    This is 1280x1024? Not 1440x900 I guess?
    Why not 3dmark06?

    XFX 8600 GT gives 11246 @ 1280.
    That card runs 620 MHz core instead of 540.
    1355 MHz shader instead of 1180.
    And 800 MHz memory instead of 700.

    Damn 8600 GT cards are cheap btw.
     
  7. Zadillo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    #7
    The desktop 8600 GT isn't directly comparable to the 8600M GT. The 8600M GT 256MB version gets around 7700 in 3DMark05, and the one in the Asus G1S got just above 3800 in 3DMark06 (someone with a Zepto managed to overclock the 8600M GT a bit to get above 4000 in 3DMark06 though).

    -Zadillo
     
  8. Camburano macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
  9. Zadillo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    #9
    What are you confused about exactly? Are you confused that the ATI X1600 gets over 3000 points less in 3DMark05 than the new 8600M GT?

    -Zadillo
     
  10. Zadillo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    #10
  11. aliquis- macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    #11
    I know it's not, I just wanted to know how much slower mobility version would be over desktop version.

    But if the core on this one runs 100mhz slower and 400mhz slower ram why would there only be 500 points in difference with the asus? Shouldn't it be a little more? Anyway I hope someone figures this out for sure real-soon-now, if it's underclocked that sucks but atleast people might be able to get some more performance out of it instead... Hopefully not only in Windows ;/

    Stupid Apple ;/, just give us the number on your spec pages, even when you suck.
     
  12. Zadillo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    #12
    Well, I don't know what the clocks are of the 8600M GT in the Asus G1S; it's possible it isn't running at the full clock speeds either. Or just that the difference in clockspeed doesn't make as much difference in real-world performance.

    But looking at the early results, 3DMark05 and 06 scores, etc. it looks like the 8600M GT in the MBP is performing very well indeed.
     
  13. MGLXP macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    #13
    From this site, it looks like the core of the G1S is slightly overclocked from 475 to 513MHz and the Memory is at reference level at 700MHz (1400MHz effective).
     
  14. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #14
    I know it has nothing to do with this thread but that is one ugly laptop.
     
  15. Zadillo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    #15
    Well, depends on tastes. The G1S is designed as a "gaming" laptop, so it's supposed to appeal to hardcore gamers, hence the green lights, carbon fibre patterns, etc.
     
  16. Zadillo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    #16
    Do you know where in the thread that was shown? I know that when GentechPC has been doing those benchmarks he's been doing various overclocks to see how far it could be pushed.
     
  17. mavere macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    #17
    Well I guess hardcore gamers have bad tastes then :p

    I'm a gamer and I wish gaming oriented laptop companies understand the need for more "universal" good design. e.g. Apple and Sony. While some may call both the G1S and the MPB beautiful, it's much harder to call the MPB ugly than the G1S.

    Anyway, there's something fishy about the 3dmark score vs the reported gpu clocks. I'm guessing that the reported clocks are somehow off considering how a couple programs crash when trying to look at GPU info.
     
  18. deadpixels macrumors 6502a

    deadpixels

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    #18
    i'm with you on that, i had to look at the link and now it's gonna haunt me at nights for a week :eek:
     
  19. MGLXP macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    #19
    It's the first post...in the picture below where it says G1S 3DMark06 at 1024X768 Score no overclock:4746, then look at the first graph.
     
  20. Camburano macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    #20
    No, i´m not confused :)
     
  21. hwieniawski macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    #21
    I got 2438 with my oc-ed x1600 on my MBP, and I really wish I hadn't bought my MPB 6 months ago!! I want the 8600M GT :(
     
  22. ActionJaxon macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    #22
    3DMark 05 Score

    I got a 3DMark 05 score of 9714 on XP Pro. And I'm trying to get higher as we speak. I overclocked my 8600M GT 256mb to 568MHz core and 880MHz memory clock using RivaTuner.

    USING THE FOLLOWING:
    MacBook Pro 15"
    Intel Core 2 Duo, 2.4GHz
    4096MB DDR2 667MHz
    nVidia 8600M GT 256MB (O/C)
    160GB 7200rpm HDD
    Mac OS X 10.5.1 Leopard
    Windows XP Professional SP2
     

Share This Page