4.51 vs PD5 benchmark?

[Colin Morey]

Well, you can download the drivers, <A HREF=http://www.3dmark.com> Here, at www.3dmark.com</a>

First go with html tags on the board, so forgive me if I've made a mistake, I havn't had a chance to benchmark yet. (is prepping to install NT)

[CChuck]

I will get 3DMark, but for the time being, the Final Reality score for PD5 is 6% lower overall than 4.51. Very disappointed so far.

[This message has been edited by CChuck (edited 07-01-99).]

[redneterp]

psmcginnis,

compared to your FR benchmarks, my K6-II somehow discouraged me.
(K6-II-350, P5A, 64MB PC100, Mys 8MB)

PD5:
2D: 2.96
3D: 3.27
Bus transfer Rate: 1.09
Total: 2.85

4.51:
2D: 1.09
3D: 3.04
Bus transfer Rate: 3.04
Total: 2.45

4.33:
2D: 2.94
3D: 2.85
Bus transfer Rate: 3.43
Total: 2.97

I'm still confused about the low performance of my PD5's Bus Transfer Rate.

Regards,

Robin

[CChuck]

I got 3D Mark Max but Final Reality allows me to compare results with the old drivers:

4.50 drivers: 4.89 (FR overall score)
4.51 drivers: 4.78 (bios 2.2)
5.13 drivers: 4.74 (manual uninstall / install)
5.13 drivers: 4.66 (automatic install, bios 2.3)

As you can see, everytime I upgraded the bios or drivers since 4.50, my Final Reality score has fallen. The current drivers represent a 5% decrease since 4.50 final. The only thing that has improved is my AGP scores. I'm not a Quake2 fanatic, so I'm terribly disappointed with these drivers so far. I just cannot understand why these latest drivers are less powerful in all but AGP and OpenGL.

------------------
PII 350@392; Asus P2B; 128MB; Mill G200 (8 meg); Seagate 9.1GB; Win95 OSR 2.5