Waggle your 'Joystick' - Post your 3Dmark Scores here

MarkAnthony · 20-07-2016 10:39am #1

For the craic!

Which one will we use, is there a free one which can post results. It should be a link as I don't trust any of you lot! :pac:

MarkAnthony · 20-07-2016 11:47am

Finally!

DX11: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13445536?

DX12: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13445872?

wotzgoingon · 20-07-2016 1:03pm

DX11:http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9410006

DX12:http://www.3dmark.com/spy/108101

MarkAnthony · 20-07-2016 1:11pm

1200Mhz on a 290? Nice! Watercooled?

wotzgoingon · 20-07-2016 1:17pm

MarkAnthony wrote: »

1200Mhz on a 290? Nice! Watercooled?

No air but it is loud as hell. But I have headphones on while gaming so I do not hear the loudness.

wotzgoingon · 20-07-2016 1:28pm

I noticed you have the same SSD as me. I got it during the sales. I do you find it? It is no where near as fast as my old 120GB OCZ Vertex 3. If I had a newer system I could have kept the 120GB as a boot drive and the 960GB as a storage for games etc.. but my system only has one SATA III connection and the rest SATA II.

MarkAnthony · 20-07-2016 1:31pm

I think 'fast enough' would be my review of it :pac: It's not great on heavy workloads I have to admit but general day to day and gaming it's pretty nippy! TBH I think the era of SATA SSDs is coming to a close for the performance segment anyway. I'll eventually grab a NVMe drive and this one will get relegated to the steam library then eventually storage.

jonerkinsella · 20-07-2016 5:31pm

Stock speed,
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/59072

Slight gpu oc,

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/78283

wotzgoingon · 20-07-2016 5:45pm

jonerkinsella wrote: »

Stock speed,
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/59072

Slight gpu oc,

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/78283

You could up that GPU overclock and get a better score as you hammered me in the CPU score but I won on the GPU test. We both have 290's.

Yours: 4215

Graphics Score: 4018, CPU Score: 5849

Mine: 4450

Graphics Score: 4364, CPU Score: 5016

ED E · 20-07-2016 5:52pm

Need a new GPU

3DMark Score 5715
Graphics Score 6099
Physics Score 20045
Combined Score 2247
Graphics Test 128.71 fps
Graphics Test 224.64 fps
Physics Test 63.64 fps
Combined Test 10.45 fps

jonerkinsella · 20-07-2016 5:56pm

wotzgoingon wrote: »

You could up that GPU overclock and get a better score as you hammered me in the CPU score but I won on the GPU test. We both have 290's.

Yours: 4215

Graphics Score: 4018, CPU Score: 5849

Mine: 4450

Graphics Score: 4364, CPU Score: 5016

Aye.

There was a time when I would of gave a crap :P

That's some turbo on your cpu .
I haven't bothered overclocking at all in years till the other day when I just knocked the gpu up 100mhz . I know it will go further but I'm not arsed anymore ... but i might get pi$$ed and give it a lash at some stage , just like the old days

wotzgoingon · 20-07-2016 6:02pm

jonerkinsella wrote: »

That's some turbo on your cpu .

Rock solid stable too.

jonerkinsella · 20-07-2016 6:02pm

Meanwhile ... 11 years ago today ,
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm03/4128724

0nm manufacturing process . It's amazing how things where so much better back then

I'm old now .

Lu Tze · 20-07-2016 6:07pm

Awesome - twice as fast as a gaming laptop from 2013 apparently! My HD7970 showing up as a 280x

K.O.Kiki · 20-07-2016 7:57pm

DX11
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13458138

10 562

DX12
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13457725

3 826
========
For some reason, the DX12 test kept crashing at my normal CORE +120 / MEM +450 overclock.

thegreenbean · 20-07-2016 9:20pm

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13459686?

DX12

I should be good for another few years

TerrorFirmer · 21-07-2016 1:33am

Only have the basic Firestrike benchmark.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13465058?

Firestrike 1.1 - 15, 640.

Better than 92% of results.

Funny, I remember last time I ran Firestrike, it chugged like crazy, even though my PC at the time was pretty decent.

Last time I really used 3DMark to bench a lot though, was actually 3DMark 06....:o

DX12 PC Spy: 5,657

Better than 69% of results

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13465502?

jonerkinsella · 21-07-2016 11:05am

Interesting read regarding Time Spy and DX12 ,AMD and Nvidia and how the benchmark uses asynchronous for you techies ,

http://www.futuremark.com/pressreleases/a-closer-look-at-asynchronous-compute-in-3dmark-time-spy?_ga=1.136205553.1110393204.1468547815

Reddit discussion,

Nvidia side , https://m.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/4tnsqo/a_closer_look_at_asynchronous_compute_in_3dmark/

AMD side , https://m.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4tnuob/futuremark_releases_statement_regarding_timespy/

Cuddlesworth · 21-07-2016 12:46pm

jonerkinsella wrote: »

Interesting read regarding Time Spy and DX12 ,AMD and Nvidia and how the benchmark uses asynchronous for you techies ,

http://www.futuremark.com/pressreleases/a-closer-look-at-asynchronous-compute-in-3dmark-time-spy?_ga=1.136205553.1110393204.1468547815

Reddit discussion,

Nvidia side , https://m.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/4tnsqo/a_closer_look_at_asynchronous_compute_in_3dmark/

AMD side , https://m.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4tnuob/futuremark_releases_statement_regarding_timespy/

From what I have read, its a bit more complicated then what either biased side are saying.

Furturemarks implementation of async is correct, but favours Nvidia more then AMD due to the architectures. But only slightly and in theory AMD still does better out of it. AMD should see a 10% increase and nvidia 5-8% using this type of async.

What people are getting pissy about is they heard all about DX12 and a-sync and at this point think its some magical process that will bring AMD back to the market. Well it will, because GCN on new and old cards are well set up for it. Older Nvidia cards not so much but newer ones are fine.

So why did Doom see such huge improvements with Vulkan? Because Vulkan uses low level API's to talk directly to the hardware. Its what AMD have been working on for the last few years. DX12 should be able to do some of it, but Vulkan is better at it and AMD cards are better at using them. And its been assumed that AMD has been CPU limited the last few years due to ****ty driver overhead, which partly the reason why the cards do so well with Vulkan and in theory DX12 if developers start implementing them.

cherryghost · 21-07-2016 1:34pm

Here's my result with Async off:
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/50417

Dx11 Firestrike without overclocking anything:
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8917409

jonerkinsella · 21-07-2016 4:00pm

From what I can gather with my limited tech intellect ( I'm a spanner guy

) ... Timespy is not a DX12 demo as it is basically running in single channel , as in a single core cpu vs a multi core , and not utilizing multi core . Amd has been heading towards spreading the load on their core over more channels where Nv has been concentrating on brute force power single channel . In theory Amd will come good when DX12 games kick in .

That's what I think I'm hearing in layman terms . I may be wrong of course

We are living in interesting times .

Cuddlesworth · 21-07-2016 5:02pm

jonerkinsella wrote: »

From what I can gather with my limited tech intellect ( I'm a spanner guy ) ... Timespy is not a DX12 demo as it is basically running in single channel , as in a single core cpu vs a multi core , and not utilizing multi core . Amd has been heading towards spreading the load on their core over more channels where Nv has been concentrating on brute force power single channel . In theory Amd will come good when DX12 games kick in .

That's what I think I'm hearing in layman terms . I may be wrong of course

We are living in interesting times .

From what I understand, Nvidia with Pascal can now do compute + graphics using dynamic load balancing(concurrent), where as before it was one or the other at a time. Meanwhile GCN for either can do either over multiple threads using ACE's which hard hardware level controllers(parallel).

Future mark has claimed that Timespy is a DX12 demo stress test and it is. But it is a demo that uses concurrent async compute and to be my understanding no real low level API use of the cards themselves. Those are the juicy API's, the ones that let you use multiple card types, vendor types and better performance for both vendors(skewed heavily in AMD's favour, the newer the card the better).

In a very basic sense, we have a problem. You either build a game to work well on 1 vendor or the other, since their architecture is so different. This is a bit like gameworks but it could be much worse as certain games could have insane swings in peformance. 3D mark should be above that and should have built a Demo that uses both architectures to their fullest.

thegreenbean · 22-07-2016 4:30pm

4790K @ 4.8GHz max temp 80c

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13514430?

Can't believe it ran

Pushed the gpu and cpu to the limit. She has no more lol.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13524309?

Nedved85 · 22-07-2016 8:33pm

My results

GPU Overclocked using Gigabytes 'OC' Mode

CPU - Tried to overclock it using the bios standard gaming OC - Not sure if it actually took hold as when I look at My Computers properties - It has it at stock speed. For some reason my ram has a speed of 2400 MHz in this test, it should be 3200 Mhz.

DX 11

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13521054

DX 12

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13521261

thegreenbean · 22-07-2016 8:39pm

Nedved85 wrote: »

My results

GPU Overclocked using Gigabytes 'OC' Mode

CPU - Tried to overclock it using the bios standard gaming OC - Not sure if it actually took hold as when I look at My Computers properties - It has it at stock speed. For some reason my ram has a speed of 2400 MHz in this test, it should be 3200 Mhz.

DX 11

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13521054

DX 12

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13521261

Have you tried the Intel Extreme Tuning Utility? Much easier to push for big overclocks. That's a great overall score.

MarkAnthony · 22-07-2016 8:44pm

Beat me on DX12 I feel some overclocking coming on!

Nedved85 · 22-07-2016 8:49pm

thegreenbean wrote: »

Have you tried the Intel Extreme Tuning Utility? Much easier to push for big overclocks. That's a great overall score.

Not yet - New to this overclocking game so I will have a look over the weekend at that - Interested enough to see how much of a difference overclocking makes to the result.

wotzgoingon · 22-07-2016 8:55pm

Nedved85 wrote: »

My results

GPU Overclocked using Gigabytes 'OC' Mode

CPU - Tried to overclock it using the bios standard gaming OC - Not sure if it actually took hold as when I look at My Computers properties - It has it at stock speed. For some reason my ram has a speed of 2400 MHz in this test, it should be 3200 Mhz.

DX 11

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13521054

DX 12

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13521261

You would score more if you had a better CPU score. Me and MarkAnthony beat you on the CPU score.

Maybe overclock it a bit more if you can. Try that at your own discretion, as I don't know anything about the 6700 or how good your silicon is.

thegreenbean · 22-07-2016 8:55pm

Nedved85 wrote: »

Not yet - New to this overclocking game so I will have a look over the weekend at that - Interested enough to see how much of a difference overclocking makes to the result.

It's the quickest and easiest way to OC the newer intel K chips.

thegreenbean · 22-07-2016 9:22pm

The 1080 scores are seriously impressive. It's leaps and bounds ahead of the last generation. I need one of these :eek:

Dp, sorry

ShadowHearth · 22-07-2016 11:45pm

So did a fast firestriker bench with new 1060

2500k (OCed to 4.2ghz )
8gb ram
Gtx 1060 ( stock )

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13526008

I guess not bad considering its better then 73%.

Actually, my cpu might be stock lol.

Okay, edit. Before work, I just slightly OCed my CPU to 4.0ghz

New result:
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13538791

Not bad, it bumped up to 10k now.

Waggle your 'Joystick' - Post your 3Dmark Scores here

Comments