[Spencer2004]

hi, i just got my new computer with an e8400 and a 9800gt (basically an 8800gt with a different name) and ive just run 3dmark 06 and the scores dont exactly match up with other benchmarks from simular systems. my cpu is overclocked to 4.0ghz (470 x 8.5) but i only saw about 800 extra 3dmarks from the stock clock of 3.0ghz. other benchmarks from identical systems get around 20,000 3dmarks but i only get around 11,000, is there something wrong with my system?? it deffenitly isnt overheating because my cpu is about 45 degrees under load and 31 degrees idle.

i think that my graphics driver version is 178.24

my other system specs are below if they are of any relivance.

[Carbon]

Don't worry about it. Synthetic benchmarks mean nothing. You could have 3dmark on higher settings than normal - make sure to test at the default settnigs.

[thingie2]

Yea, benchmarks like that don't mean much, but make sure you have all the latest drivers for everything, that will make a difference.

[katana]

dont feel to bad our laptop did terribly.
story time:
dad finds 3Dmark05 on our laptop and runs it, first 10 seconds were fine, then it got jumpier and jumpier until after about 2 minutes the laptop decides it overloaded and up comes the infamous bsod, but with no text. i estimate our laptop would have got about a 3.

[Spencer2004]

3dmarks settings are default, latest drivers, all nividia hotfixes, not overheating. well its deffentialy the gpu because the cpu score is allright. not bothered too much because im upgrading to a 4870 at christmas anyway, thanks 4 the help guys.

[Carbon]

Eh, at 22" you're not going to see too much of an increase. I'd recommend the GTX 260, pretty much perfect for 22", lots of VRAM stock which is becoming the norm pretty quickly.

[Spencer2004]

ok then, ive just checked out some benchmarks and there is a quite a difference between the 2 cards. do you think its worth getting the core 216 over the regular gtx 260 for an extra £15? also while were r on the subject do you think a 19" or 22" monitor is best if they both have the same res (720p)

[Carbon]

I don't see much of a reason to go for a 22" monitor if you're running 1440x900 or anything equivalent to 720p in pixel count. At that point you're just getting larger pixels and a harder-to-see screen. I already have issue with 22" monitors @ 1650x1050 regarding their inability to render 1080p video natively, and usually recommend 24" or bust.

And yes, it is worth it, regardless of resolution.

e: I thought you were running a 4850 and a 22" monitor already because I was reading someone's else's sig, apologies. With a 9800GT, it's going to be more powerful, yes, but really a 4850 or 9800GT is stretching it as far as usefulness at low res goes. I only recommend GTX 260 or below for anything below 1650x1050, anything more is a waste tbqh.

[Spencer2004]

lol i just changed my sig because i thought i was getting a 4850 but scan ran out of stock... and i ran out of cash :). also i havent got the monitor yet, im just running a crappy crt at the moment.

brilliant so 19" monitor and gtx 260 it is, thanks 4 the advice!!

[Carbon]

Do though consider upgrading from that monitor in the near future or getting another, larger one to pair with it. Having 1920x1200 and the graphics card to run it is amazing, and you'll have half that when you get the GTX 260.