AquaMark3 scores

[wayout44]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

But then why restrict yourself now when s939 becomes deduntant within 6months and the FX60 will be the fastest CPU that you'll be able to upgrade to (there will not be anymore speed steps for s939).

He's lasted this long with what he's got so why not wait a little bit longer?

[casecutter]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

How much faster of a CPU could any of us need than a FX-60? There is no software or game available now that could stress that much power. Even for the next few years a FX-60 would be still hardly used and still be an outrageous CPU. A good budget system based on the Venice CPU would be powerful enough for years to come. There is not even the need to get a dual core CPU now as they are really only beneficial for a few tasks. Anything faster than either a 3800+ Venice or 3700+ San Diego is wasted speed now. ANd FX chips are really only suited for overclocking as the regular user would never get the benefits of unlocked multi's. Socket 939 may not have any newer CPUs coming after the FX-60, but this person does not need/want that much power. I still do not understand why AMD is bringing a new socket to the table except for the fact they want to integrate DDR2 into their lineup. And DDR2 does not have the speed that the AMD CPUs need now. I think that it will be at least a year or more before the ram could be made fast enough to see benefits. Besides, he may wait and this new CPU could fall on its face in the meantime and then the price if S939 CPUs goes back up. Everyone thought the P4 Hyperthreading CPU was the wave of the future and look how badly it is performing compared to the simpler AMD64. Intel is going back to a form of architecture like the P3 as their current architecture is just plain bad. There has not been any info stating that the new AMD CPU is going to be that much better or faster. Besides, the cost of new technology almost always outweighs the benefits for the first year of production.

[Yawgm0th]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

There is no software or game available now that could stress that much power. Even for the next few years a FX-60 would be still hardly used and still be an outrageous CPU. A good budget system based on the Venice CPU would be powerful enough for years to come. There is not even the need to get a dual core CPU now as they are really only beneficial for a few tasks.

Wrong; VERY wrong; unbelievably wrong; somewhat wrong/exaggerated; respectively. F.E.A.R. with SLId cards can easily use that much power, as can tons of multimedia applications. You can never have too much power for 3D rendering or video encoding. No processor is ever "outrageous" or "hardly used" even one year after it comes out. An FX-60 equivelent might still be mid-range two years from now. A Venice CPU is singe-core and will be on the low-end years from now. Really, your first two statements might have some validity if you had simply said year instead of years. Dual-core CPUs are useful in plenty of specified applications, as well any sort of multitasking. I will submit that the average user won't get much out of one until at least after Vista.

ANd FX chips are really only suited for overclocking as the regular user would never get the benefits of unlocked multi's. I still do not understand why AMD is bringing a new socket to the table except for the fact they want to integrate DDR2 into their lineup. And DDR2 does not have the speed that the AMD CPUs need now. I think that it will be at least a year or more before the ram could be made fast enough to see benefits.

Agreed; amen to that; actually it's the inverse (AMD CPUs do not need the speed that DDR2 has right now); agree to the inverse. Benchmark the difference between PC4000 and PC2100 on an Athlon 64 now and you'll find it's relatively minor in most applications. You can get away with using slow RAM on K8 systems. Socket 478 and LGA775 systems, on the other hand, see huge losses from not running fast dual-channel RAM.

Everyone thought the P4 Hyperthreading CPU was the wave of the future

Who thought that? They must have been high... But I really can't say I knew anyone who thought that.

There has not been any info stating that the new AMD CPU is going to be that much better or faster. Besides, the cost of new technology almost always outweighs the benefits for the first year of production.

Yes there has. In April X2s will get bumped up to 2.667GHz at both 1MB (dual 512KB) and 2MB (dual 1MB) cache sizes. Semprons (the budget) will be getting major speedbumps and K8 systems will now be more accessable for the low-end as a result.

Honestly, I'm going to have to go with Wayout. You just wait a few months and then you can get motherboard and RAM that will last for two to three years, in theory.

[wayout44]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

Sorry casecutter, but your argument really doesn't hold that much water as by this time next year the FX-60 is likely to be very "mid-range" and there will be faster CPU's no matter what you think as people will always want something faster (re: Murphy's Law) so the manufacturers will provide those people plus if you look at some of the FX-60/ reviews you will find that even some game benchmarks out now are still pretty much CPU bound (what is it going to be like next year when more games make more use of multi-core CPU's? But then again we may all have physic engine cards by then as well, or at least want one, to help not only the CPU but the v/c as well).

[casecutter]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

Well, if a FX-60 becomes a mid level CPU next year, then the budget for mid level PC's is gonna be outrageous. All I am saying is that taking a cheaper CPU like a Venice and overclocking it say 35-40% will give someone an excellent fast system that will last a couple of years. Buying the first production run of a new technology can be risky if there are flaws that are not caught before production. I stand by my decision to buy current hardware at a better price but respect you opinions.

[wayout44]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

Well if you want to stick with older technology then why not just wait for the newer to come out as the older will be that much cheaper again?

[iviuz]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

My score was gfx 10,800 cpu 8,677 and triscore 67,893 with only 512mb ram.

[eyeblazin]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

I have the following specs:

ASUS A8N-SLI DELUXE
AMD64 4000+ SAN DIEGO - stock hs/fan
POWERCOLOR X800GTO 256mbddr3
2GB PC3200 RAM
AUDIGY 4
250gb SATA HDD
550W ps

Problem is Aquamark will run several tests then crash to desktop.
Nothing is OC or hot CPU runs at around 44C loaded.
Is there a program that will tell me the video card temp?

[Darthtanion]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

The latest versions of the Catalyst drivers have a monitoring tool that works with the internal rheostat built into modern ATI cards.

[sgardnerdell]

Re: AquaMark3 scores

Problem is Aquamark will run several tests then crash to desktop.
Nothing is OC or hot CPU runs at around 44C loaded.

You need the hotfix, try searching for direcpll-153.zip on google. Copy the DLL from the zip file into the folder where AquaMark is installed.

Finally found a download for the DLL (sorry I've already lost the link) and have benchmarked my new machine:

Intel Core Duo E6600 (2.4Ghz - 4Mb L2 Cache)
2GB DDR2-800 CL4-4-4-12 RAM
MSI 965 NEO MOBO
74GB WD-Raptor (16MB Cache)
ATI Radeon X1800XT 256MB

Scores:
106,198 in AquaMark3
4601 in 3DMark06
9220 in 3DMark03