Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't personally agree with that but at the same time I think its been a very long time if ever 3dmark has ever graded the cpu power and gpu power it seems equally...Some would argue hyper threading shouldn't be relevant in coming up with a physics score...everyone is entitled to there opinion...I have turned it off to play certain games and just found it to get less performance
It seems the people getting very high scores have very powerful cpus and gpus where as some of the older 3dmark test really only tested the gpus.....is pretty much my take on it
I kind of understand the CPU scoring part of it. It's the GPU part that's throwing me off. like one 290x is right there with my gtx780 sli (cpu score similar between the two) I guess those few extra cpu points really add to your score. I understand that 290x>780 , but normally wouldn't 2x 780 > 1x 290x? Or is my CPU really limited my SLI performance that much?
It's a different story when I run firestrike. The numbers all seem to line up then. That's why I think this particular bench is just wonky with high end rigs. Just my opinion.
That looks really low for SLi 780Ti i get around 43000 score with SLi Titans.
Just rerun the test and scored c.36000.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3416097?
Is that more like it? Not sure what was up with the first test, must have had some background stuff running.
the bottom line is this...your much newer cpu scores around 30% lower than mine...but not in just this test...probably any test that uses multi cores/ threads...skydiver sees this as a bottleneck and drops your score accordingly...im personally glad they finally come out with a test that pushes both...and why is that? because in my opinion a real game should push both......one of my favorite games is bf4...but it only uses like 30% of my cpu while pushing my gpu at 100%...thats telling me im gpu bottle necked.... but i feel like the game could do so much more if it used the cpu to the fullest as well...possibly if i had a 780ti or 290x it would push the cpu harder....its possible i guess
firestrike is a gpu test only...i can see someone scoring a super high score and still not being able to play certain games cause there cpu is to weak
I'm waiting to see how the new 8 core Intel's look....then maybe.....
the bottom line is this...your much newer cpu scores around 30% lower than mine...but not in just this test...probably any test that uses multi cores/ threads...skydiver sees this as a bottleneck and drops your score accordingly...im personally glad they finally come out with a test that pushes both...and why is that? because in my opinion a real game should push both......one of my favorite games is bf4...but it only uses like 30% of my cpu while pushing my gpu at 100%...thats telling me im gpu bottle necked.... but i feel like the game could do so much more if it used the cpu to the fullest as well...possibly if i had a 780ti or 290x it would push the cpu harder....its possible i guess
firestrike is a gpu test only...i can see someone scoring a super high score and still not being able to play certain games cause there cpu is to weak
Yeah, I was noticing that. Comparing our physics scores (and only our physics scores, since they're totally CPU dependent):
Core i5 2500k @ 4.5 GHz = 8244 points
Core i7 4770k @ 4.5 GHz = 11973 points
That's a 45% increase in performance at the same clockspeed... which is pretty nuts. The only thing I can think of that would put such a massive gap between these two chips is if 3DMark seriously loves HyperThreading.
Was hyperthreading running on that 4770k during that run?
Some games benefits from hyperthreading, some do not. A 4770K is a more refined design than the 2500k and has more cache. It's easily possible the performance increase is from the fact it's an i7, a newer design, has more cache. More emphasis on the newer design as 4 core Haswell i7 even beats a 4 core Ivy Bridge E even though the Ivy Bridge E has more cache.
I'd like to see hyperthreading VS. no hyperthreading, with this benchmark.
Now I wonder if someone can compare a 6 core Intel with and without hyperthreading??? Curious to see how many threads this thing scales with.
You guys know that newer nvidia drivers are messed up when running Sky Diver right? I get a black screen on one of the graphics tests and my bench score is shit. Like SLI is not working or something.
Just rerun the test and scored c.36000.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3416097?
Is that more like it? Not sure what was up with the first test, must have had some background stuff running.
Hmm maybe its my 6 Core CPU helping me out looks like this banchmark loves more cores.
Sure, though games generally don't see any gains from HT at all.that is what its supposedly to do Hyper Threading. between 20% to 30% of increased performance depending of the application by just using up to 5% more resources..
Sure, though games generally don't see any gains from HT at all.
Bit weird to see a gaming benchmark weigh it so heavily.
Or it's handing out an arbitrary ~25% bonus because the reported number of cores is higher.Wow, seems like this benchmark is VERY well threaded!
Or it's handing out an arbitrary ~25% bonus because the reported number of cores is higher.
Someone should run FRAPS with HT off and HT on, see if the bench actually runs ~25% faster.
Or it's handing out an arbitrary ~25% bonus because the reported number of cores is higher.
Someone should run FRAPS with HT off and HT on, see if the bench actually runs ~25% faster.
I don't think that it is, as my 6 core Phenom II get's what it deserves.Or it's handing out an arbitrary ~25% bonus because the reported number of cores is higher.
Someone should run FRAPS with HT off and HT on, see if the bench actually runs ~25% faster.
Just rerun the test and scored c.36000.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3416097?
Is that more like it? Not sure what was up with the first test, must have had some background stuff running.
Mine did that till the newest 340.43 beta drivers came out.