3.10 slower than 3.9

Word.
Stability and looks is IMHO more interesting than some xtra FPS. 3.10
works
great here. No probs at all.
9800PRO
P-4 2,6
1GB RAM
2X 120GB 7200 WD, 8MB
17" TFT
SB AUDIGY

3.10 has sorted out any problems I have previously.
9800Pro, XP2600, 512Mb Ram

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:07:30 GMT, "KCB"
wrote:


"Strontium" wrote in message
...
You are referring to ~100 points difference. From what I've seen, that is
the margin of error/variaton, for those progs. +/- 100 points, in either,
is negligable.


The margin may be small, but the fact is they are still slower, and the
results are repeatable. I've seen a post here where somebody said he gained
600 points by changing to the 3.10's. I'm merely making the point that *did
not* occur here.

Who knows...? How many other programs do you have installed on your
PC? IM, scanner update, a M$ patch...

Don't worry about... but I guess you will.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

"Darthy" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:07:30 GMT, "KCB"
wrote:


"Strontium" wrote in message
...
You are referring to ~100 points difference. From what I've seen, that
is
the margin of error/variaton, for those progs. +/- 100 points, in
either,
is negligable.


The margin may be small, but the fact is they are still slower, and the
results are repeatable. I've seen a post here where somebody said he
gained
600 points by changing to the 3.10's. I'm merely making the point that
*did
not* occur here.

Who knows...? How many other programs do you have installed on your
PC? IM, scanner update, a M$ patch...

Don't worry about... but I guess you will.


All you guys who took a big fit and got all defensive about this post still
seem to not understand that I was merely making the point that not everybody
is going to gain 600 points on their 3d mark scores by changing to the 3.10
drivers. Maybe I chose the wrong subject line or presented the subject
matter poorly. Or maybe, according to K, I'm just too lazy and ignorant!
All I meant by this was to counter the poster which stated that he made a
big jump in his score and everybody should switch to the 3.10 drivers. My
results indicated otherwise. I don't live or die based on 3dmark scores;
this is what the other post used for scoring so I stayed with the same.
Please forgive me for being so stupid and I'll re-consider any impulses I
have about posting here in the future.

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:32:29 GMT, "KCB"
wrote:


"Darthy" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:07:30 GMT, "KCB"
wrote:


"Strontium" wrote in message
...
You are referring to ~100 points difference. From what I've seen, that
is
the margin of error/variaton, for those progs. +/- 100 points, in
either,
is negligable.


The margin may be small, but the fact is they are still slower, and the
results are repeatable. I've seen a post here where somebody said he
gained
600 points by changing to the 3.10's. I'm merely making the point that
*did
not* occur here.

Who knows...? How many other programs do you have installed on your
PC? IM, scanner update, a M$ patch...

Don't worry about... but I guess you will.


All you guys who took a big fit and got all defensive about this post still
seem to not understand that I was merely making the point that not everybody
is going to gain 600 points on their 3d mark scores by changing to the 3.10
drivers. Maybe I chose the wrong subject line or presented the subject
matter poorly. Or maybe, according to K, I'm just too lazy and ignorant!
All I meant by this was to counter the poster which stated that he made a
big jump in his score and everybody should switch to the 3.10 drivers. My
results indicated otherwise. I don't live or die based on 3dmark scores;
this is what the other post used for scoring so I stayed with the same.
Please forgive me for being so stupid and I'll re-consider any impulses I
have about posting here in the future.

Dude... I was just saying... other factors can effect your score...
different video cards may work better than others... But perhaps the
poster had issues with his 3.9 that were fixed, while yours was fine
to begin with.

Going to 3.10 drivers... I'm about the same, but its tricky as I went
from Win98se/3.9 WinXP/3.10



--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

Dont let a few numb nuts keep you away. The whole point of these groups is
to get a wider perspective and that eveyone can post thier view. Some
posters dont have very good people skills and go a bit overboard when they
don't agree.





"KCB" wrote in message
news:xl2Fb.165265$_M.750566@attbi_s54...

"Darthy" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:07:30 GMT, "KCB"
wrote:


"Strontium" wrote in message
...
You are referring to ~100 points difference. From what I've seen,
that
is
the margin of error/variaton, for those progs. +/- 100 points, in
either,
is negligable.


The margin may be small, but the fact is they are still slower, and the
results are repeatable. I've seen a post here where somebody said he
gained
600 points by changing to the 3.10's. I'm merely making the point that
*did
not* occur here.

Who knows...? How many other programs do you have installed on your
PC? IM, scanner update, a M$ patch...

Don't worry about... but I guess you will.


All you guys who took a big fit and got all defensive about this post
still
seem to not understand that I was merely making the point that not
everybody
is going to gain 600 points on their 3d mark scores by changing to the
3.10
drivers. Maybe I chose the wrong subject line or presented the subject
matter poorly. Or maybe, according to K, I'm just too lazy and ignorant!
All I meant by this was to counter the poster which stated that he made a
big jump in his score and everybody should switch to the 3.10 drivers. My
results indicated otherwise. I don't live or die based on 3dmark scores;
this is what the other post used for scoring so I stayed with the same.
Please forgive me for being so stupid and I'll re-consider any impulses I
have about posting here in the future.

Well, if OP can't handle having a heated (or not) discussion, OP shouldn't
be posting to a public forum. And, if other people not sharing a view or
debating is being 'numb-nutted', I think you've got some problems with
people skills, yourself.

-
Jim stood up at show-n-tell, in OHoFb.615736$Tr4.1598401@attbi_s03, and
said:

Dont let a few numb nuts keep you away. The whole point of these
groups is to get a wider perspective and that eveyone can post thier
view. Some posters dont have very good people skills and go a bit
overboard when they don't agree.





snip
--
Strontium

"It's no surprise, to me. I am my own worst enemy. `Cause every
now, and then, I kick the livin' **** `outta me." - Lit

You need to join an anger management support group. and then get some booty.
You'll get those "people skills" back in no time.

--
Tony DiMarzio


"Strontium" wrote in message
...
Well, if OP can't handle having a heated (or not) discussion, OP shouldn't
be posting to a public forum. And, if other people not sharing a view or
debating is being 'numb-nutted', I think you've got some problems with
people skills, yourself.

-
Jim stood up at show-n-tell, in OHoFb.615736$Tr4.1598401@attbi_s03, and
said:

Dont let a few numb nuts keep you away. The whole point of these
groups is to get a wider perspective and that eveyone can post thier
view. Some posters dont have very good people skills and go a bit
overboard when they don't agree.





snip
--
Strontium

"It's no surprise, to me. I am my own worst enemy. `Cause every
now, and then, I kick the livin' **** `outta me." - Lit

" Well, if OP can't handle having a heated (or not) discussion, OP
shouldn't
be posting to a public forum.

A discussion would imply a two way dialog on the topic of the post. The
comments that I made were not concering any discusions posted hear but
rather personal attacks that were uncalled for.


And, if other people not sharing a view or
debating is being 'numb-nutted', I think you've got some problems with
people skills, yourself.

Where did you get this from what I wrote ?




Dont let a few numb nuts keep you away. The whole point of these
groups is to get a wider perspective and that eveyone can post thier
view. Some posters dont have very good people skills and go a bit
overboard when they don't agree.





snip
--
Strontium

"It's no surprise, to me. I am my own worst enemy. `Cause every
now, and then, I kick the livin' **** `outta me." - Lit

This whole thread was just too funny!

Thank's
Dan

--end

Indeed.

It would have been simpler and more mature if the guy stated: "Various
Benchmarks, like 3dmark####, do not dictate real ingame framerates." Or
something to that nature?

I myself have never used a benchmark other than real games.

Quake3 for my opengl benchmark, UT2003 for my D3D benchmark. I only take
note of Minimum Framerates, and over all Game smoothness of play, and of
course keep a sharp eye to detail - make sure they didn't comprimise visual
quality for my framerates and artifacting etc.

Been awhile for any new OGL games, maybe just Doom3, haven't played the War
FPSes.

"Danny Greaves" wrote in message
...
This whole thread was just too funny!

Thank's
Dan

--end