[N1K]

2.0 at mine IBM R52 laptop..

[X-Ecutioner]

This is my rating...Planning on OCing cpu and memory.

Attached File(s)

•  performance.JPG (24.5K)
  Number of downloads: 39

[linv5800]

cpu - 5.2
ram - 4.2
graphics - 4.7
drive - 4.5
gaming - 4.2

[X-Ecutioner]

Yeup, I over clocked my memory, video card, and yes...even double the voltage runnin to my harddrive... check out my score.

 performance.JPG (23.8K)
Number of downloads: 47

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On a serious note....I take it scores don't go past 5.9? cause I noticed some lower-end vid cards are matched to mine...which stupifies me...

Ah well...Gotta love MS Paint.

This post has been edited by X-Ecutioner: 21 November 2006 - 02:00 PM

[kartel]

[X-Ecutioner]

Think your a big man eh kartel???

Just u wait till I duct-tape a bunch of my dual core cpu's together...then we'll see who's boss....

[ripken204]

i gained .1

Attached File(s)

•  ripken204.jpg (69.57K)
  Number of downloads: 76

[DigeratiPrime]

kartel, on Nov 21 2006, 04:46 PM, said:

[Menion]

Processor: 4.2
Memory: 4.5
Graphics: 5.9
Gaming graphics: 5.5
Primary hard disk: 5.2

Pretty good for something that cost me less than $600

Next upgrade is CPU and Memory... The rest will hold out for a while.

Cheers!

This post has been edited by Menion: 22 November 2006 - 06:12 AM

[kartel]

ATI tool rules!

[kartel]

I figured out what SE means: sucky edition-64bit

This post has been edited by kartel: 26 November 2006 - 11:46 AM

[dAbReAkA]

kartel, i noticed that on one of the screens it says radeon 9600 pro..
and the last one says radeon 9600..
ah, btw your signature says radeon 9600 SE
which one do u have after all?

mine is nothing special.. i've always got 3.4, even before adding 1gig of ram.. no readyboost devices, no nothing..
a friend of mine with a radeon 9600 pro scores 3.8 or something like that.. so it's normal for a 9600 non-pro to score around 3.5.. something may be wrong on your end..

[kartel]

Well the box says sapphire radeon 9600 atlantis but I guess its a 9600se.

I manually picked the pro driver to see if would make a difference but there was none.

[dAbReAkA]

btw, what are the default for your video card? core/memory?

[jaws75]

jaws75, on Nov 19 2006, 05:53 PM, said:

Just installed Vista today for the first time.
I had to use the XP promise drivers for my raid controller but they work fine.
For being a first time user I have to say I like it so far.

Because of the lack of Vista drivers for my Promise controller I switched from a raid0 back to IDE. My primary hard disk score went from the 5.4 to 4.3. Who ever said raid0 had no benefit?

Details:
in Vista 32bit
two IDE WD 40Gb in raid0 partitioned to 60gb = 5.4 (using XP 32bit drivers)
in Vista 64bit
one of the same 40Gb drives no raid =4.3
I think I'll have to try my XP 64bit drivers next

[kartel]

dAbReAkA, on Nov 27 2006, 01:50 AM, said:

btw, what are the default for your video card? core/memory?

The default is 325\196

[dAbReAkA]

ffs,
mine says 324\181.25 as default..

[kartel]

Whats the ram size in yours?

Mine has a crappy 64bit memory bus.

I get 32fps on the ati tool at 420-216

A x850xt pe gets 500fps+

Gforce5200 gets 16....lol

[dAbReAkA]

i'm running on vista now so i'm not sure if my results would be so accurate..

no clock - 324-181 - 44 fps AVG

clocked at 420-216 - 50 fps AVG

it has 256mb of memory, so i guess my memory is slower than the "usual" radeon 9600

[usasma]

5.3 overall

5.3 - CPU (Core 2 Duo E6600) and the RAM (4 gB of Corsair)
5.5 - gaming graphics (eVGA GEForce 7600 GT)
5.9 - graphics (same card as above)
5.9 - hard drive (W-D 10,000 rpm SATA)