3DMark (2013) Scores Thread

Serephucus

Here we go:

IS: 175793
CG: 19427
FS: 6300

3570K @ 4.6
GTX 670 @ 1042(1228 boost)/3402
16GB 1600MHz DDR3

I also think it might be a good idea to include CPU clocks. As most people are running similar things, it would give others a rough idea of how much a given overclock will help.

ED E

6th in every test, least mines consistent :P

dwighet

Were do I find this 3D mark??? Is it free?

SpannerMonkey

dwighet wrote: »

Were do I find this 3D mark??? Is it free?

There is a link to it in the first post ;-)

Serephucus

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/06/3dmark-wars-nvidia-and-amd-go-head-to-head-on-our-test-rig-who-wins/

Bit of an interesting read. Seems like the weird behaviour with AMD cards hasn't been rectified quite yet, though this is a new benchmark. Doesn't say what drivers are being used, but seeing as it was published yesterday, I'd imagine they're up to date.

W0LFMAN

Humm, Can't seem to edit the top post any more..

Any Idea's?

BloodBath

Amd cards always seem to spike more in games if you look at any benchmarks that provide graphs.

I really don't mind though when i'm getting better than 680gtx performance for nearly half the price.

Damn you all with your HT processors.

I tried squeezing a bit more out of my clocks but couldn't get enough to improve the scores by much. This sapphire card doesn't run as cool as I was hoping but it's rock solid at 1200/6200 so I can't complain really.

I could probably get to 1300/6500 if I set the fan speed to manual 100% just for the benchmark.

Serephucus

It's a pity, but my 670 doesn't seem to be a great overclocker. I'm currently sitting at +125/+400, and I'm hitting the power limit. Thing is that the card never goes above 45°C, and thermal throttling doesn't kick in until 70. I have so much more headroom thermally it's killing me. I considered a voltage unlocked BIOS, but really it would only be for e-peen.

CPU clocks seem to help quite a bit in this. Obviously not nearly as much as GPU clocks, but more-so than in Vantage and 11.

BloodBath

It could be worth it. Voltage locks was one of the main things that put me off the Nvidia cards. That and the price.

You could probably get reasonably higher clocks. My card will only do about 1050/6000 at stock voltage. It will do 1250-1300 if I could keep it cooler. It starts pushing 70c at 1200 with my current reasonably relaxed fan profile to keep it quiet.

If you have that thing water cooled then you would be crazy not to. Does it have a dual BIOS?

Yeah the cpu clocks/threads are helping because of the physics tests in every benchmark. They seem to affect the score more in some of the benchmarks. The second test is heavily affected by it. I have 25% lower scores than some people with HT chips but my frames drop right down in the physics tests on that into the low 20's towards the end.

W0LFMAN

Guys, I think There is a time limit on editing posts (24 hours or maybe a bit longer) but after that, maybe moderator will have to do the editing from now on?

ED E

W0LFMAN wrote: »

Guys, I think There is a time limit on editing posts (24 hours or maybe a bit longer) but after that, maybe moderator will have to do the editing from now on?

Yep, there is.

Serephucus

BloodBath wrote: »

It could be worth it. Voltage locks was one of the main things that put me off the Nvidia cards. That and the price.

You could probably get reasonably higher clocks. My card will only do about 1050/6000 at stock voltage. It will do 1250-1300 if I could keep it cooler. It starts pushing 70c at 1200 with my current reasonably relaxed fan profile to keep it quiet.

If you have that thing water cooled then you would be crazy not to. Does it have a dual BIOS?

Yeah the cpu clocks/threads are helping because of the physics tests in every benchmark. They seem to affect the score more in some of the benchmarks. The second test is heavily affected by it. I have 25% lower scores than some people with HT chips but my frames drop right down in the physics tests on that into the low 20's towards the end.

I watercool for the silence first though, any performance benefits are a bonus, and really, the 670 does everything I want at present. I specifically bought it as a stop-gap card because I got twice the length to Step-Up. I have until June or something to upgrade, so I'll probably just jump to a 780 or Titan or whatever it ends up being. And no, no dual BIOS sadly.

marco_polo

Serephucus wrote: »

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/06/3dmark-wars-nvidia-and-amd-go-head-to-head-on-our-test-rig-who-wins/

Bit of an interesting read. Seems like the weird behaviour with AMD cards hasn't been rectified quite yet, though this is a new benchmark. Doesn't say what drivers are being used, but seeing as it was published yesterday, I'd imagine they're up to date.

The latency issue is still there, they shored up the problem for some of the identified games in 13.1 but there were still a few weeks away from completing a rewrite the memory subsystem as a more general fix.

I suppose the silver lining for AMD card owners is that since this shows that since the driver team still haven't fully got to grips with the newer GCN architecture, there may still be a bit more to squeeze out of current cards in future driver updates.

BloodBath

Yep it's an ongoing fix. 13.2's aren't even officially out yet and there will be more latency fixes in future revisions.

I don't understand why people claim Ati driver's are ****. There's constant updates and fixes to any issues. Maybe not as fast as Nvidia but far from slow.

I wonder how it will impact their performance though when they do get to fixing the latency fully. There has been some small drops in frame rates from the initial fixes.

I notice the difference in the 13.2 betas though. Everything is a lot smoother. Could be a placebo but I don't think so. Is there any benchmark for testing frame latency?

ED E

13.2 fixed some issues for me with my 7870.

Have to agree, alwasy found ATI are on the ball for patching drivers till they get them just right.

ED E

Did some testing just to see

Base tests to get an idea of what I should get
Test # |Settings|Scores|URL
1.|Stock Clocks|106811|
|Misc Programs off|12790|
|MSE ON|4517|
|AB ON||http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/126114
2.|Stock Clocks|106456|
|Misc Programs off|12649|
|MSE ON|4519|
|AB ON||http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/126544
3.|Stock Clocks|105756|
|Misc Programs off|12784|
|MSE ON|4521|
|AB OFF||http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/127009
4.|Stock Clocks|106625|
|Misc Programs off|12812|
|MSE OFF|4518|
|AB OFF||http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/127618


Then two more with some tweaks to see what affect they have:

Test # |Settings|Scores|URL
5.|1150C/1250M|105745|
|Misc Programs off|12838|
|MSE OFF|4807|
|AB OFF||http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/128409
6.|Stock|106332|
|Misc Programs off|12781|
|MSE OFF|4518|
|AB OFF||http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/128820
|CataSettingsSetToNoAAEtc


Notes
Initial tests are stable/repeatable. Good for a benchmark and something Id expect from futuremark. Changes didnt increase things at all, except bumping clocks which only increased the Firestrike test, which makes sense. FPS is super high in the first tests so its probably not GPU limited.

First time I ran things it detected my CPU clock and memory, none of these tests did

Serephucus

AB?

ED E

Afterburner, should have put that in

Deano12345

Serephucus wrote: »

AB?

Afterburner I'd say !

Serephucus

Deano12345 wrote: »

Afterburner I'd say !

Hey, I was proud of myself for figuring out Security Essentials!

(Though thinking about it, not much else AB could be)

dwighet

card...saphire 7970@ 1125/1575
cpu...2500k @4.8
amd driver 13.1
ram...16gig... 4x4gig 1600 corsair vengance lp
[IMG][/img]

Deano12345

Nice Icestorm score man !

SpannerMonkey

AMD cards are scoring extremly well in this , very impresive
need to try and squeeze a bit more out of my cpu

Deano12345

SpannerMonkey wrote: »

AMD cards are scoring extremly well in this , very impresive
need to try and squeeze a bit more out of my cpu

Ivy definitely seem to have an advantage in it too

BloodBath

Nice scores dwighet.

It seems the 13.1 drivers give better scores than the 13.2 betas. My 7970 is clocked higher but scoring lower in the first 2 tests but strangely higher in the third.

It makes sense though as the latency fixes in 13.2 had small frame impacts in most of the game benchmarks.

Can a mod give the op rights to edit his first post?

dwighet

BloodBath wrote: »

Nice scores dwighet.

It seems the 13.1 drivers give better scores than the 13.2 betas. My 7970 is clocked higher but scoring lower in the first 2 tests but strangely higher in the third.

It makes sense though as the latency fixes in 13.2 had small frame impacts in most of the game benchmarks.

Can a mod give the op rights to edit his first post?

How did you get your card to clock higher???? Mine is flat out at 1125/1575 with afterburner

BloodBath

dwighet wrote: »

How did you get your card to clock higher???? Mine is flat out at 1125/1575 with afterburner

I'm just using Trixxx at the moment.

+20% for the board power and 1300Mv for the volatage and it's stable at 1200/1550.

It would go higher I think but the temps are getting toasty at that.

70c or so under load, VRM's might be pushing closer to 80c. That's with the fan maxing at around 55%.

My case has great airflow though.

dwighet

BloodBath wrote: »

I'm just using Trixxx at the moment.

+20% for the board power and 1300Mv for the volatage and it's stable at 1200/1550.

It would go higher I think but the temps are getting toasty at that.

70c or so under load, VRM's might be pushing closer to 80c. That's with the fan maxing at around 55%.

My case has great airflow though.

Ah right...must take a look at that trixxx... My real world clock is only 1050/1450 +20%power.CPU @4.4 ghz That gives me 60fps for bf3...@ 1080 res..

I just wind the card and cpu up for messing around with benchmarks and stuff..I dont see any advantage in having the rig going flat out for gaming..Maybe when I get my hands on crysis 3 I may have to put the foot down and rev it up a bit more..

glynf

[IMG][/img]



pass 2.jpg

Must OC the CPU properly instead of the lazy bastard asus auto job:o

SpannerMonkey

glynf wrote: »

[IMG][/img]

Must OC the CPU properly instead of the lazy bastard asus auto job:o

might want to do something with the pic i cant see it its too small , but if im seeing it right :eek::cool: