ITT: post your 3dmark2001 result I'll start >50991 i7-4930K,

download link:
https://www.futuremark.com/benchmarks/legacy

File: ss (2017-05-15 at 06.18.28).png (73KB, 816x336px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 816x336px

Ive only upped the res to 1080p
>i5-6600
>Intel 530 graphics
>8gb ram

>>60409000
KEK, I'll give it a go

Holy shit I remember this. They showed it to my mom and I when they delivered the PC.

3dmark 01 best 3dmark.
It is the only 3dmark in which software tweaking makes the difference, everything we had past that is just raw power bullshit used to showcase cherrypicked components by manufactures.

99553, 4770k at 4.4ghz and a gtx 1080
not bad

File: Capture.png (355KB, 891x598px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 891x598px

Did i do gud?

File: Untitled.jpg (124KB, 591x557px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 591x557px

i5 4670, gtx 960

File: error message.jpg (22KB, 458x172px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 458x172px

Xeon E3 1231 v3
RX 480

I can't even run the fucking thing.

>>60410649
got the same message, but it still started when I clicked OK.

File: kek.png (169KB, 845x883px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 845x883px

60317
i3 4170, GTX 660 Ti

>>60409000
>i7-4930K,
>50991
What the fuck? Did you change default settings?

>>60410733
yeah I'm starting to think I messed up somewhere. default settings though.

>>60410649
Ramlets everyone...

>>60410470
What are you OC'd to? 63k here at 3.9GHz with a GTX 970. We seem to be CPU limited.

File: 2001se.jpg (76KB, 581x539px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 581x539px

What do I win?

>>60410941
*ran it again with power plan set to 100%. 72332k.
Neat to finally see this thing like it's supposed to be viewed. It raped my TNT.
>150/300Mtexels/s to 27000/56000

>>60409000
>34139
Fx-8150, GTX 650ti, 12GB

>>60411276
used standard setting, no oc and shit

it crashed with 8xAA in 1920x1200 on the second high poly test for me.

File: win.png (229KB, 1347x649px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1347x649px

How good did I do?

Bah, I can't even get it to start on win10.

File: 3dmark01.png (15KB, 504x416px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 504x416px

>>60410733
trying different settings here but it's not helping.
>post details

>>60411621
winrar/10

>>60409239
You don't fucking up the res to 1080p. You keep it at default for the benchmark to be meaningful.

>>60411621
You're not much better than 2001.

>I just ran 3DMark2001 on my PC (PIII 600, 196Meg o' RAM, and a Hercules Prophet II MX 64Meg card,unclocked) with the settings all at minimum, and got 2194......
>At 1024*768/32-bit colour, I score 1500-ish.......

>>60411827
We should probably normalize this to 1080p and maybe 4xAA. No reason to put up with jaggies on a somewhat lengthy test.

>>60411712
Whoa, it looks like the 780 gets to use quad multitexturing in this.

Try changing your power plan.