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

#251 Posted by nightz2k (456 posts) -

lol. I know for a fact with higher overclocks most 670/680 SLI setups can pass me. Unless they have bad overclockers, which unfortunately happens.

I know I got lucky with these 7950's and they're not even under water - yet. ;)

#252 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

update:

firestrike score 7152 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/644991

cpu stock

gpu core clock 1060, memory clock 1575

darksusperia

updated, you jumped 2 places, taking out a 680 and a 7970 in the process.

 

ill make short work of postmortem...bahaha, the problem is nightz2k

#253 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

update:

fire strike 7495 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/452902

gpu core clock 1150, memory clock 1650

power tuning +20%, voltage +25mV at 1200mV

cpu still stock (to make things fair)

im gunning for you nightz2k

#254 Posted by Elann2008 (32991 posts) -
@Blazn Oh man.. totally misread that. I'm even more impressed. But Micro ATX board in a mid-size to large-size tower look badass unless you have a small LAN PC type of case, those are cool too. Nice man.
#255 Posted by Elann2008 (32991 posts) -
[QUOTE="FaustArp"]Holy Crap!...Nightz2k passed acanofcoke!! :o Those 7950s should be banned from gaming, I tell ya...

lmao. AMD gpus are beast. xD
#256 Posted by darksusperia (6914 posts) -

update:

fire strike 7495 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/452902

gpu core clock 1150, memory clock 1650

power tuning +20%, voltage +25mV at 1200mV

cpu still stock (to make things fair)

im gunning for you nightz2k

blaznwiipspman1
updated. Overclock that CPU 4.5 is easy to hit unless you got an unlucky chip.
#257 Posted by nightz2k (456 posts) -

update:

fire strike 7495 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/452902

gpu core clock 1150, memory clock 1650

power tuning +20%, voltage +25mV at 1200mV

cpu still stock (to make things fair)

im gunning for you nightz2k

blaznwiipspman1

lol, That's OK. You should be well ahead of my single GPU score IMO, afterall, you do have an HD7970. (And a 3770k, even better)

There's no fairness is benchmarks, if you have the better setup, you should be up there in the ranks. ;)

I am definitely more than satisfied with my build. =)

#258 Posted by darksusperia (6914 posts) -

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

update:

fire strike 7495 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/452902

gpu core clock 1150, memory clock 1650

power tuning +20%, voltage +25mV at 1200mV

cpu still stock (to make things fair)

im gunning for you nightz2k

nightz2k

lol, That's OK. You should be well ahead of my single GPU score IMO, afterall, you do have an HD7970. (And a 3770k, even better)

There's no fairness is benchmarks, if you have the better setup, you should be up there in the ranks. ;)

I am definitely more than satisfied with my build. =)

well, as long as its the same settings its fair (which we know it is). Hardware is a free run into what you can get from it.
#259 Posted by FaustArp (1038 posts) -
Lol, the top 3 consists of Titans...and 7950s. :o I've said it before, I'll say it again...7950s should be banned from PC gaming. :P Lol.
#260 Posted by Elann2008 (32991 posts) -
I want to see someone with 2x 7970
#261 Posted by nightz2k (456 posts) -

Lol, the top 3 consists of Titans...and 7950s. :o I've said it before, I'll say it again...7950s should be banned from PC gaming. :P Lol.FaustArp

lol.. We haven't even seen dual 7970's around here yet. As long as they're good overclockers, they'll crush my score(s).

I want to see someone with 2x 7970Elann2008

Exactly, need more results.

I even have some headroom yet. I ran my gpu clocks up to 1250/1775 in a Valley benchmark.

#262 Posted by FaustArp (1038 posts) -
I want to see someone with 2x 7970Elann2008
Well, ShadowdeathX has 3 of the friggin' things, if he would bother posting here he'd probably put most people to shame. :P
#263 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

[QUOTE="FaustArp"]Lol, the top 3 consists of Titans...and 7950s. :o I've said it before, I'll say it again...7950s should be banned from PC gaming. :P Lol.nightz2k

lol.. We haven't even seen dual 7970's around here yet. As long as they're good overclockers, they'll crush my score(s).

I want to see someone with 2x 7970Elann2008

Exactly, need more results.

I even have some headroom yet. I ran my gpu clocks up to 1250/1775 in a Valley benchmark.

 

Beating your gpu score is proving to be a PITA.  You really got some hardcore 7950s.  I was able to get 1180/1700 @ 1250mv complete firestrike w/o crashing/artifacting, but the gpu score (8844) is STILL below yours (8922) of 1200/1750.  What is the voltage you're running it at?  Also hell yeah I want to see xshadowx do the test...

#264 Posted by nightz2k (456 posts) -

 

Beating your gpu score is proving to be a PITA.  You really got some hardcore 7950s.  I was able to get 1180/1700 @ 1250mv complete firestrike w/o crashing/artifacting, but the gpu score (8844) is STILL below yours (8922) of 1200/1750.  What is the voltage you're running it at?  Also hell yeah I want to see xshadowx do the test...

blaznwiipspman1

I had my voltage up to the max (1300) in AB, not sure if it ran at that, but that's what I did anyway.

You'll probably have to up the voltage then. Some GPU's just overclock better than others. 7970's should easily hit 1800+ on memory clocks.

EDIT: Misread, thought you said you were artifacting, so you're definitely fine yet. ;)

#265 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

 

Beating your gpu score is proving to be a PITA.  You really got some hardcore 7950s.  I was able to get 1180/1700 @ 1250mv complete firestrike w/o crashing/artifacting, but the gpu score (8844) is STILL below yours (8922) of 1200/1750.  What is the voltage you're running it at?  Also hell yeah I want to see xshadowx do the test...

nightz2k

I had my voltage up to the max (1300) in AB, not sure if it ran at that, but that's what I did anyway.

You'll probably have to up the voltage then, but if you're already artifacting, then you're pushing your limits and probably shouldn't do much more. Not worth it causing possible damage just to beat some benchmark score IMO. Some GPU's just overclock better than others. But, 7970's should easily hit 1800+ on memory clocks.

 

this card is resilient and I definitely won't be keeping this card at this kind of oc in the future.  Also I finally beat ya! bahaha, took a while daamn.  Card didn't even break a sweat beating the highest ranked 680's gpu score, but trying to take you down caused alot of artifacts/shutdowns/cooldowns/restarts

Firestrike: 7880 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/645365? (gpu score of 8982)

coreclock 1190mhz 

memclock 1750mhz

voltage at 1250mV (stock +75mV) 

Im going to try and push it a little further, but im going to keep the voltage at this level.  You're right, pushing it too far isnt worth it.

#266 Posted by Elann2008 (32991 posts) -
[QUOTE="Elann2008"]I want to see someone with 2x 7970FaustArp
Well, ShadowdeathX has 3 of the friggin' things, if he would bother posting here he'd probably put most people to shame. :P

Yup. He'll be second place for sure, behind Adam.
#267 Posted by darksusperia (6914 posts) -
[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="nightz2k"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"] updated.

[QUOTE="FaustArp"][QUOTE="Elann2008"]I want to see someone with 2x 7970Elann2008
Well, ShadowdeathX has 3 of the friggin' things, if he would bother posting here he'd probably put most people to shame. :P

Yup. He'll be second place for sure, behind Adam.

definitely, if they scale correctly.

#268 Posted by ferrari2001 (16966 posts) -

Did a test on my phone

 

2zj9boj.jpg

 

3506uqg.jpg

#269 Posted by darksusperia (6914 posts) -

[spoiler]

Did a test on my phone

?ui=2&ik=0fb819d94d&view=att&th=13e9c096

?ui=2&ik=0fb819d94d&view=att&th=13e9c09a

[/spoiler] ferrari2001

Please upload the images to a hosting service of some nature. We cant see your gmail attachments.

#270 Posted by nightz2k (456 posts) -

Also I finally beat ya! bahaha, took a while daamn.  Card didn't even break a sweat beating the highest ranked 680's gpu score, but trying to take you down caused alot of artifacts/shutdowns/cooldowns/restarts

Firestrike: 7880 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/645365? (gpu score of 8982)

coreclock 1190mhz 

memclock 1750mhz

voltage at 1250mV (stock +75mV) 

Im going to try and push it a little further, but im going to keep the voltage at this level.  You're right, pushing it too far isnt worth it.

blaznwiipspman1

Congrats! :cool:

Told ya it could do better and I'm sure it can even do better yet. I'm pretty sure I won't even hit that high, so I won't even try, lol. I'm content where I'm at with a single GPU, it's doing more than it's worth. ;)

#271 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

thanks man, well I think reached the peak of my cards capabilities:

FireStrike: 8129 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/453068 (gpu score of 9271)

gpu core clock: 1225mhz

gpu mem clock: 1825mhz

core volt: 1300mV

I would like to say that I repeated this test twice at this clock/mem speed and got a successful run through both times.  But the only way to test the stability of this borderline clock speeds is to run furmark for 2-3 hours continuous.  Needless to say, I won't even be running anywhere near this setting when gaming, in fact I might consider undervolting the card after I revert to default settings.

Im a little dissapointed since one review site I read for the 7970 said they reached 1260mhz on the gpu core, but only 1750 on the memory.  Still, this is an amazing result for me so overall im happy.

When I get some time next, i'll over clock my cpu.  I heard ivy bridge can handle up to 1.6v without danger of getting fried :shock: intel is pretty crazy.  The overheating of ivybridge will be tricky to solve on my stock cooler though.

Well thats all for today folks, good night.

#272 Posted by ferrari2001 (16966 posts) -
Also, fixed some settings and bios and updated graphics card drivers.. New score on firestrike -3690 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/645520
#273 Posted by Elann2008 (32991 posts) -
Is yours the GHz edition? I'd imagine the GHz edition could go as far as 1260MHz, good batch and all. Even then, that's mighty impressive. Thanks for taking the time to do the benchmarks. Always nice to see AMD results. *calling out all AMD FX CPU owners!* :-P
#274 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

Is yours the GHz edition? I'd imagine the GHz edition could go as far as 1260MHz, good batch and all. Even then, that's mighty impressive. Thanks for taking the time to do the benchmarks. Always nice to see AMD results. *calling out all AMD FX CPU owners!* :-PElann2008

 

no mine is the non ghz edition, im a cheap guy at heart and yeah you're probably right the ghz editions could probably go a bit further than me.  It was fun doing the tests and really amazing how far it went when you compare it to a geforce titans score. A little over 3/4 the performance for 1/3 the price (well mine was), pretty awesome bang for buck.

#275 Posted by darksusperia (6914 posts) -

thanks man, well I think reached the peak of my cards capabilities:

FireStrike: 8129 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/453068 (gpu score of 9271)

gpu core clock: 1225mhz

gpu mem clock: 1825mhz

core volt: 1300mV

I would like to say that I repeated this test twice at this clock/mem speed and got a successful run through both times.  But the only way to test the stability of this borderline clock speeds is to run furmark for 2-3 hours continuous.  Needless to say, I won't even be running anywhere near this setting when gaming, in fact I might consider undervolting the card after I revert to default settings.

Im a little dissapointed since one review site I read for the 7970 said they reached 1260mhz on the gpu core, but only 1750 on the memory.  Still, this is an amazing result for me so overall im happy.

When I get some time next, i'll over clock my cpu.  I heard ivy bridge can handle up to 1.6v without danger of getting fried :shock: intel is pretty crazy.  The overheating of ivybridge will be tricky to solve on my stock cooler though.

Well thats all for today folks, good night.

blaznwiipspman1
its 1.5v MAX. if your in the upper 1.4v's and you're trying for 5Ghz, its simply not going to happen for you. you should be able to hit 4.5 @ 1.2v if you get a really good chip *updated*
#276 Posted by darksusperia (6914 posts) -
[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]Also, fixed some settings and bios and updated graphics card drivers.. New score on firestrike -3690 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/645520

updated.
#277 Posted by nightz2k (456 posts) -

[QUOTE="Elann2008"]Is yours the GHz edition? I'd imagine the GHz edition could go as far as 1260MHz, good batch and all. Even then, that's mighty impressive. Thanks for taking the time to do the benchmarks. Always nice to see AMD results. *calling out all AMD FX CPU owners!* :-Pblaznwiipspman1

 

no mine is the non ghz edition, im a cheap guy at heart and yeah you're probably right the ghz editions could probably go a bit further than me.  It was fun doing the tests and really amazing how far it went when you compare it to a geforce titans score. A little over 3/4 the performance for 1/3 the price (well mine was), pretty awesome bang for buck.

7970 GHz editions aren't worth the extra cost IMO. You're paying for overclocking you can do yourself easily. ($50-$100 more) Not worth it. It's more of a gimmick than anything, or for those that don't want to overclock at all and just leave it as it is. I don't think they can overclock any higher than a basic 7970 either, it's all luck if you get a high overclocker or not anyway.

On CPU's, I guess Ivy Bridge is pretty finicky with voltage. Sandy Bridge are like tanks, I've gone up past 1.6v, but not for 24/7 use obviously.

#278 Posted by kitty (114791 posts) -
I think I could get the highest score for my card on the site, just 2 spots away actually now. But I don't think I'll try it. :P http://www.3dmark.com/fs/453230
#279 Posted by darksusperia (6914 posts) -
[QUOTE="2ndWonder"]I think I could get the highest score for my card on the site, just 2 spots away actually now. But I don't think I'll try it. :P http://www.3dmark.com/fs/453230

updated. You should go for it..
#280 Posted by kitty (114791 posts) -
[QUOTE="darksusperia"] updated. You should go for it..

I'll try. Looking at the charts, I'll have to get 3,001 to achieve it. :P Anything higher is in crossfire.
#281 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3904 posts) -
I couldn't get my i5 2500k past 4.6GHz and my GTX 680 maxes out at 1244(boost) and 1777 on the memory with +25 on the mV... Still couldn't beat the HD 7950... :( This benchmark may be leaning towards AMD GPU's a fair bit.
#282 Posted by Gambler_3 (7569 posts) -

I couldn't get my i5 2500k past 4.6GHz and my GTX 680 maxes out at 1244(boost) and 1777 on the memory with +25 on the mV... Still couldn't beat the HD 7950... :( This benchmark may be leaning towards AMD GPU's a fair bit.Grey_Eyed_Elf
Ya it is........

#283 Posted by nightz2k (456 posts) -

Nah, IMO, I don't think 3DMark itself is favored towards any brand. There's so many things that matter, like air cooling or watercooling on both CPU and GPU's or just CPU (like me).

AMD may seem to be favored, but I think it's because they tend to overclock a little better. Some users have GPU's that just overclock better than others, whether it's AMD or Nvidia, same goes for the CPU's.

#284 Posted by darksusperia (6914 posts) -

[QUOTE="Grey_Eyed_Elf"]I couldn't get my i5 2500k past 4.6GHz and my GTX 680 maxes out at 1244(boost) and 1777 on the memory with +25 on the mV... Still couldn't beat the HD 7950... :( This benchmark may be leaning towards AMD GPU's a fair bit.Gambler_3

Ya it is........

Nah, IMO, I don't think 3DMark itself is favored towards any brand. There's so many things that matter, like air cooling or watercooling on both CPU and GPU's or just CPU (like me).

AMD may seem to be favored, but I think it's because they tend to overclock a little better. Some users have GPU's that just overclock better than others, whether it's AMD or Nvidia, same goes for the CPU's.

nightz2k
I wouldn't say its biased. its compute heavy and 7000's are good at compute.
#285 Posted by Horgen (110151 posts) -
[QUOTE="Grey_Eyed_Elf"]I couldn't get my i5 2500k past 4.6GHz and my GTX 680 maxes out at 1244(boost) and 1777 on the memory with +25 on the mV... Still couldn't beat the HD 7950... :( This benchmark may be leaning towards AMD GPU's a fair bit.

Wow, you get the memory speed up high. Kepler cards are poor overclockers =/ I want to break the 7000 mark, but unless OC'ing the CPU more can do it for me, I don't think I can reach it. :(

Nah, IMO, I don't think 3DMark itself is favored towards any brand. There's so many things that matter, like air cooling or watercooling on both CPU and GPU's or just CPU (like me).

AMD may seem to be favored, but I think it's because they tend to overclock a little better. Some users have GPU's that just overclock better than others, whether it's AMD or Nvidia, same goes for the CPU's.

nightz2k
I bet you would water cooling is worth it, right?
#286 Posted by nightz2k (456 posts) -

I bet you would water cooling is worth it, right? horgen123

Thinking about it yet, watecooling gets expensive fast though. (ie: Blocks, fittings, tubes, more coolant, another 240 rad, things like that)

I wanna be sure I'll be keeping these GPU's for a good while before investing more into them because most GPU blocks are not universal. The H220 is universal so I'm not worried about upgrading CPU at any time. ;)

#287 Posted by Horgen (110151 posts) -
slightly higher score, rest of system ran just as before.
#288 Posted by Horgen (110151 posts) -

[QUOTE="horgen123"] I bet you would water cooling is worth it, right? nightz2k

Thinking about it yet, watecooling gets expensive fast though. (ie: Blocks, fittings, tubes, more coolant, another 240 rad, things like that)

I wanna be sure I'll be keeping these GPU's for a good while before investing more into them because most GPU blocks are not universal. The H220 is universal so I'm not worried about upgrading CPU at any time. ;)

Well if you change GPU often then that will cost a bit extra. I hope to have my GTX 680 for 2-3 years. Maxwell refresh generation/whatever AMD has at that time.
slightly higher score, rest of system ran just as before. horgen123
I will try once more, now I shall beat the 7K mark :x
#289 Posted by Horgen (110151 posts) -
7K mark! :D Might do another run with the CPU at 4.5 or 4.6... I'll see about that later. Edit: I see there is one person who broke the 9K barrier with a single GTX 680... 1489 on the core and 3470 on the memory.
#290 Posted by Klunt_Bumskrint (4013 posts) -
[QUOTE="horgen123"]7K mark! :D Might do another run with the CPU at 4.5 or 4.6... I'll see about that later. Edit: I see there is one person who broke the 9K barrier with a single GTX 680... 1489 on the core and 3470 on the memory.

1489 on the core. Holy monkey.
#291 Posted by Elann2008 (32991 posts) -
[QUOTE="acanofcoke"][QUOTE="horgen123"]7K mark! :D Might do another run with the CPU at 4.5 or 4.6... I'll see about that later. Edit: I see there is one person who broke the 9K barrier with a single GTX 680... 1489 on the core and 3470 on the memory.

1489 on the core. Holy monkey.

D:
#292 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

7K mark! :D Might do another run with the CPU at 4.5 or 4.6... I'll see about that later. Edit: I see there is one person who broke the 9K barrier with a single GTX 680... 1489 on the core and 3470 on the memory. horgen123

keep pushing bro. 9k barrier seems to be a really good score for a 680.  I just hope AMD doesn't follow nvidias lead and strip away compute from their desktop cards so they can chase $$$.  

#293 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

what is a good cooler for the 3770k/3930k.  The really high cpu overclocks seems to be from people with water cooling.  Would you guys recomend a water cooling system or is a good air cooling system good enough?  Id like to get 4.7ghz on a 3770k

#294 Posted by Postmortem123 (7704 posts) -

what is a good cooler for the 3770k/3930k.  The really high cpu overclocks seems to be from people with water cooling.  Would you guys recomend a water cooling system or is a good air cooling system good enough?  Id like to get 4.7ghz on a 3770k

blaznwiipspman1

I have the Antec Kuhler 620 and it's pretty awesome.

#295 Posted by Gambler_3 (7569 posts) -

[QUOTE="horgen123"]7K mark! :D Might do another run with the CPU at 4.5 or 4.6... I'll see about that later. Edit: I see there is one person who broke the 9K barrier with a single GTX 680... 1489 on the core and 3470 on the memory. blaznwiipspman1

keep pushing bro. 9k barrier seems to be a really good score for a 680.  I just hope AMD doesn't follow nvidias lead and strip away compute from their desktop cards so they can chase $$$.  

And why is that so? Which actual games take advantage of this heavy compute?

#296 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6047 posts) -

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="horgen123"]7K mark! :D Might do another run with the CPU at 4.5 or 4.6... I'll see about that later. Edit: I see there is one person who broke the 9K barrier with a single GTX 680... 1489 on the core and 3470 on the memory. Gambler_3

keep pushing bro. 9k barrier seems to be a really good score for a 680.  I just hope AMD doesn't follow nvidias lead and strip away compute from their desktop cards so they can chase $$$.  

And why is that so? Which actual games take advantage of this heavy compute?

 

I can't make a comment on that since I don't have the knowledge.  But I can clearly say that the radeon 7000 series had an advantage over the geforce 600 series in $300-$500 category, while the $200 and under shifted more towards nvidia.  Here is a quote from anandtech in a review they did when kepler first released:

"What is clear at this time though is that NVIDIA is pitching GTX 680 specifically for consumer graphics while downplaying compute, which says a lot right there. Given their call for efficiency and how some of Fermis compute capabilities were already stripped for GF114, this does read like an attempt to further strip compute capabilities from their consumer GPUs in order to boost efficiency. Amusingly, whereas AMD seems to have moved closer to Fermi with GCN by adding compute performance, NVIDIA seems to have moved closer to Cayman with Kepler by taking it away."


Nvidia sacrificed performance for efficiency while AMD sacrificed efficiency for performance.  You can see alot of games favor AMD this gen, while some do favor nvidia (mainly because nvidia has more resources for drivers and have better relations with game devs ie $$$)

#297 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3904 posts) -
[QUOTE="horgen123"][QUOTE="Grey_Eyed_Elf"]I couldn't get my i5 2500k past 4.6GHz and my GTX 680 maxes out at 1244(boost) and 1777 on the memory with +25 on the mV... Still couldn't beat the HD 7950... :( This benchmark may be leaning towards AMD GPU's a fair bit.

Wow, you get the memory speed up high. Kepler cards are poor overclockers =/ I want to break the 7000 mark, but unless OC'ing the CPU more can do it for me, I don't think I can reach it. :(

Nah, IMO, I don't think 3DMark itself is favored towards any brand. There's so many things that matter, like air cooling or watercooling on both CPU and GPU's or just CPU (like me).

AMD may seem to be favored, but I think it's because they tend to overclock a little better. Some users have GPU's that just overclock better than others, whether it's AMD or Nvidia, same goes for the CPU's.

nightz2k
I bet you would water cooling is worth it, right?

Its not extreme at all its actually can be done with out breaking a sweat... Nvidia just went conservative with the memory clock, almost every GTX 680 can hit 7Ghz on the memory. Getting the core clock past 1250Mhz is where its a silicon lottery.
#298 Posted by Klunt_Bumskrint (4013 posts) -

Just improved my score again 12175, I'm determined to get my 3rd place back from Nightz2k

#299 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3904 posts) -

Just improved my score again 12175, I'm determined to get my 3rd place back from Nightz2k

acanofcoke
Pump in another 50-7Mhz into those puppies and get your CPU to 4.8GHz and you will have him. The only reason his score is so high is because of his insane CPU overclock.
#300 Posted by Klunt_Bumskrint (4013 posts) -
[QUOTE="acanofcoke"]

Just improved my score again 12175, I'm determined to get my 3rd place back from Nightz2k

Grey_Eyed_Elf
Pump in another 50-7Mhz into those puppies and get your CPU to 4.8GHz and you will have him. The only reason his score is so high is because of his insane CPU overclock.

My gpu's are already at 1267 now can't really do more. bumping up the cpu now, i wanna make sure it's stable first.