Benchmark Thread - How do you rank against other GS users?

#1201 Edited by Horgen (110151 posts) -

@Postmortem123 said:

@horgen said:

To be expected I guess. Going to change the cooler on them?

Nope I'm okay with them, they actually aren't as loud as people say. Not much louder than the 780 Ti.

That's good.

@superclocked said:

@horgen said:

@superclocked said:

@horgen: Yeah, the physics score and combined score factor into it, too. But, my graphics score is still over 9000, which is pretty good considering the price of my system...

You beat mine =/

Not by much.. Are you waiting for 20nm before you upgrade?

I think I have a slightly better score actually... Well than the one you linked to. Still a little below 8800.

#1202 Edited by Amster_G (4290 posts) -

Stock speeds.

#1203 Edited by jun_aka_pekto (16406 posts) -

I finally replaced the GTX 560 Ti with a 4Gb GTX 770. So, I did a retest. Some changes from previous...... Forget the top. But, that should keep me from the basement for a while. He He.

I reset my FX-8350's clock speed back to 4.0 Ghz.

#1204 Edited by BPoole96 (22803 posts) -

I got an R9 290 a few months ago and figured I'd update my score here

Firestrike: 9448 - BPoole - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3327039 i5 2500k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 1070/1370 | 8GB RAM 2133Mhz

Cloud Gate: 19932 - BPoole - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3223832 - i5 2500k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 1050/1350 | 8GB RAM 2133Mhz

#1205 Posted by Postmortem123 (7711 posts) -

@BPoole96 said:

I got an R9 290 a few months ago and figured I'd update my score here

Firestrike: 9253 - BPoole - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3223832 i5 2500k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 1050/1350 | 8GB RAM 2133Mhz

Cloud Gate: 19932 - BPoole - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3223832 - i5 2500k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 1050/1350 | 8GB RAM 2133Mhz

Which one you get?

#1206 Posted by BPoole96 (22803 posts) -

@Postmortem123: the MSI R9 290 Gaming 4G

#1207 Edited by kitty (114805 posts) -
@jun_aka_pekto said:

I finally replaced the GTX 560 Ti with a 4Gb GTX 770. So, I did a retest. Some changes from previous...... Forget the top. But, that should keep me from the basement for a while. He He.

I reset my FX-8350's clock speed back to 4.0 Ghz.

Nice, what do you think of the card? I bet you like the boost up from the 560 :P

#1208 Edited by jun_aka_pekto (16406 posts) -

@kitty said:
@jun_aka_pekto said:

I finally replaced the GTX 560 Ti with a 4Gb GTX 770. So, I did a retest. Some changes from previous...... Forget the top. But, that should keep me from the basement for a while. He He.

I reset my FX-8350's clock speed back to 4.0 Ghz.

Nice, what do you think of the card? I bet you like the boost up from the 560 :P

The main reason I stuck with a GTX 770 versus going with a GTX 780 is because I'm sticking with 1080p. I managed to snag the 4Gb version on a sale. A GTX 780 is still over $100 more. I could've gone with a cheaper 2Gb version. But, the VRAM requirements of Watch Dogs convinced me to get one with more VRAM.

I also don't have to beef up the "MEH" cooling of my microATX minitower case. If I had decided to buy say, an R9 290, I would've had to rework the cooling subsystem. I'm feeling too lazy right now. ;)

It is quite a step up from the GTX 560 Ti. Since I'm fine with framerates of at least in the upper 30's and 40's, I can go with Very High 4xSMAA in Crysis 3, Ultra (HDAO) 4xMSAA in Far Cry 3, and Ultra Temporal SMAA in Watch Dogs. I haven't seen the stuttering that's plagued some players.

I'm not a big fan of the increasing sizes though. I think it's becoming ridiculous.

MSI GTX 770 compared to Gigabyte Windforce GTX 560 Ti.

Edit: The antialiasing settings above are all application-based. I can go higher via Nvidia Control Panel when they work. Some games do not seem to use Control Panel settings.

#1209 Edited by The_Animator420 (227 posts) -

Fire Strike:

10161 - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2277456

CPU: 5.149 Ghz

Cloud Gate:

28867 - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3284966?

CPU: 4.83 Ghz

Catzilla:

23547 - http://www.catzilla.com/showresult?lp=279479|*|Result%20Details

CPU: 4.98 Ghz

#1211 Posted by kitty (114805 posts) -

@jun_aka_pekto said:

@kitty said:
@jun_aka_pekto said:

I finally replaced the GTX 560 Ti with a 4Gb GTX 770. So, I did a retest. Some changes from previous...... Forget the top. But, that should keep me from the basement for a while. He He.

I reset my FX-8350's clock speed back to 4.0 Ghz.

Nice, what do you think of the card? I bet you like the boost up from the 560 :P

The main reason I stuck with a GTX 770 versus going with a GTX 780 is because I'm sticking with 1080p. I managed to snag the 4Gb version on a sale. A GTX 780 is still over $100 more. I could've gone with a cheaper 2Gb version. But, the VRAM requirements of Watch Dogs convinced me to get one with more VRAM.

I also don't have to beef up the "MEH" cooling of my microATX minitower case. If I had decided to buy say, an R9 290, I would've had to rework the cooling subsystem. I'm feeling too lazy right now. ;)

It is quite a step up from the GTX 560 Ti. Since I'm fine with framerates of at least in the upper 30's and 40's, I can go with Very High 4xSMAA in Crysis 3, Ultra (HDAO) 4xMSAA in Far Cry 3, and Ultra Temporal SMAA in Watch Dogs. I haven't seen the stuttering that's plagued some players.

I'm not a big fan of the increasing sizes though. I think it's becoming ridiculous.

MSI GTX 770 compared to Gigabyte Windforce GTX 560 Ti.

Edit: The antialiasing settings above are all application-based. I can go higher via Nvidia Control Panel when they work. Some games do not seem to use Control Panel settings.

Makes sense. Don't need all that horse power if you aren't gonna use it all. :P With games going forward from now, we should see more use more than 2 GB.
I wanna try watch dogs, but i don't think I'll touch it until I switch over to the 290. I'll probably get the same performance I do now, but the only exception is that I'll have 4 GB of Vram to use.

I hear you. :P I wouldn't go through the trouble if I didn't have to. As long as you are happy with that card, I think thats what matters.

Watchdogs did get a patch, maybe that helped. Wasn't the stuttering more on AMD cards? or am I wrong about that? I haven't been keeping up with it much.
But I should since I plan to get it a bit later.

Yeah quite the difference. I've posted a picture of my computer before. There is a 2inch difference in the size of my current cards.
And both are bigger than my 6850. Not really a fan of it either. But I guess with things getting more powerful, they have to get bigger.

You know which games work? I haven't bothered too much with my catalyst, but if there is a difference I wouldn't mind testing it.

#1212 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3300 posts) -

9542

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3316998

This will probably be my last update before the Titan Black SC's arrive next week.

#1213 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3904 posts) -

3DMark Skydiver... LINK

I will update this with my bench run off of it.

If you want to add this to the benchmarking list, hopefully put more life into this thread.

#1214 Posted by The_Animator420 (227 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

3DMark Skydiver... LINK

I will update this with my bench run off of it.

If you want to add this to the benchmarking list, hopefully put more life into this thread.

I would also be willing to participate in a Skydiver bench leaderboard.

#1215 Edited by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3904 posts) -

My first attempt with my daily OC's for CPU and GPU = 22877

I will try and see what I can get out of it...

EDIT:

Well I just remembered that my crappy i5 4670K can't do more than 4.1GHz... I BSOD'ed at 4.2Ghz just now.

Also the benchmark is very cpu heavy, at the physics stress test it drops to 20fps. I saw some results showing a FX 6300 at 4.8Ghz with a better physics score than my 4670k... and a i7 4960X with almost twice the score as my 4670K.

CPU heavy indeed.

#1216 Posted by CWEBB04z (4590 posts) -

I dont know if I clicked on the wrong link, but when I proceeded to download the 3d mark software, I got a Trojan horse.. it caused my cpu temps to rise to 70 degrees Celsius on idle according to my temp monitor.

#1217 Posted by Postmortem123 (7711 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

My first attempt with my daily OC's for CPU and GPU = 22877

I will try and see what I can get out of it...

EDIT:

Well I just remembered that my crappy i5 4670K can't do more than 4.1GHz... I BSOD'ed at 4.2Ghz just now.

Also the benchmark is very cpu heavy, at the physics stress test it drops to 20fps. I saw some results showing a FX 6300 at 4.8Ghz with a better physics score than my 4670k... and a i7 4960X with almost twice the score as my 4670K.

CPU heavy indeed.

Yep Sky Diver is all about CPU.

#1218 Edited by GoldenElementXL (3300 posts) -

Fire Strike 14953 - First run with the new cards. I have a ton of work to do with the overclocks now. CPU is only at 4.2 right now because my PSU is being a pain for some reason.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3373481?

Edit:

Fire Strike 15891 - With CPU at 4.67 and I don't know if I can push it much more.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3377041

And boy do I need an SSD.

Edit 2:

Got a SSD. Fire Strike 16312 - CPU at 4.5 because Fire Strike crashes for me now above 4.6. So a slower CPU clock with an SSD got me a better score. I got a 15698 at 4.2 with the SSD which is close to my highest CPU clock score.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3406519?

Now I'm gonna put everything in the new case.

#1219 Posted by The_Animator420 (227 posts) -

It's sad, but I think this benchmark thread is pretty much dead. It's been over 22 days since we have gotten an update, and still no Sky Diver benchmark added, among other things.

I would be willing to start and maintain a new benchmark thread if the mods approve and if anyone is interested in continuing.

#1220 Edited by GoldenElementXL (3300 posts) -

I would like to keep going. I PM'd TC a week or so ago and still no answer. It may be time to move on.

#1221 Edited by kitty (114805 posts) -

*Note* My username is different on this one because I recently deleted 3dmark and installed the steam demo version. So it goes by my steam name. For proof just check my other links. It merged my other account with this one, so my other scores should have the same name now.

New firestrike score 9071.
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2388481

Sky Diver score: 24766
http://www.3dmark.com/sd/2203976

#1222 Posted by kitty (114805 posts) -
@The_Animator420 said:

It's sad, but I think this benchmark thread is pretty much dead. It's been over 22 days since we have gotten an update, and still no Sky Diver benchmark added, among other things.

I would be willing to start and maintain a new benchmark thread if the mods approve and if anyone is interested in continuing.

TC hasn't been active since May 8th according to the profile. If you can gather all the new scores and make a new and updated topic. I'll sticky it. Just shoot me a PM and I'll sticky the new topic.
Dark has maintained this topic for what seems like forever. I bet life/school/work has caught up and he hasn't been active. Hope everything is okay with him.

#1223 Edited by kitty (114805 posts) -

This is now unpinned from the top of the board, if you have any new results and want them updated. Please post them in the new benchmark topic.