3DMark11 Score

Depending on whether cmay run his card at stock or oc'd for that bench would be helpful to know. If he run stock I'd stand by my initial statement.

Here's a compare between my OC'd 460 and his 5870, and considering my card is at a 20%+ overclock his 5870 performs well (if it's at stock).



Here's a direct compare over at Anandtech - http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/162?vs=180

Bearing in mind also that at higher resolutions cmays 5870 would pull ahead even more.

I'm impressed with the physics score his similarly clocked i7-950 puts out compared to my Q6600. Obviously his i7-950x is newer and cost more but it's still impressive.
 
I7 920 @4ghz, sli GTX 470's @ 800/1600/1700.

7365

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/93499

3DMark Score
P7365
Graphics score
9692
Physics Score
8569
Combined Score
2446
GraphicsTest1
41.79 FPS
GraphicsTest2
43.68 FPS
GraphicsTest3
61.26 FPS
GraphicsTest4
31.47 FPS
PhysicsTest
27.2 FPS
CombinedTest
11.38 FPS

Sli isnt working properly though on the 260.99 drivers im using.
 
Yep, i was running a similair fix, resulted in a lot of flickering, but the combined score was still low, my first run on 3dm 11, (cards at 750/1502/1674) scored only 5090, only one card was being used. Think ill wait for an official fix.
 
P5359

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/98484

Specs in sig:

Win7 Ultimate 64bit
i7-950 @ 4.00GHz + Scythe Yasya
Gigabyte X58A-UD3R
OCZ 6GB (3×2GB) DDR3-1600
Galaxy GTX 480
X-Fi Ti PCI-E + Onkyo TX-SR605 7.1
SeaSonic X750 PS
Antec Nine Hundred Two
 
im assuming my q6600 is holding me back and preventing the new gtx 580 from stretching its legs. and i completely understand the 'point' of benchmarking. im happy with my score based on my current system, and i don't believe anything is wrong, simply slightly out of date ;)
 
Unknown-One said:
Hmm, I just blew past that score after adjusting the overclock on my HD 5850.

I imagine that 5870 has a lot more performance to offer.
Click to expand...

It all depends on core speed. Clock for clock, the 5870 and 5850 perform extremely close. I've seen a few post comparing the two at the same clock speed, and the difference was never more than a few percent in games, and I doubt this benchmark will be any different.
 
The HD 5870 has 11% more stream processors than the HD 5850. Even if you equalized the core clock on both cards, that still provides roughly a 10% performance boost.

What would be interesting to see is an HD 5850 running at 945 MHz up against an HD 5870 running at 850 MHz. The HD 5850 would have 11% fewer Stream Processors, but also an 11% higher core clock.
 
Unknown-One said:
The HD 5870 has 11% more stream processors than the HD 5850. Even if you equalized the core clock on both cards, that still provides roughly a 10% performance boost.

What would be interesting to see is an HD 5850 running at 945 MHz up against an HD 5870 running at 850 MHz. The HD 5850 would have 11% fewer Stream Processors, but also an 11% higher core clock.
Click to expand...

You're assuming a linear increase in performance when you increase the ALU count. But they don't scale that well, so you're looking at a 5-7% difference. There's a reason AMD clocked the 5850 so low, and it's not because they wanted to lower power consumption. It's the only way to differentiate the two cards sine the additional ALUs and TMUs didn't make much of a difference.
 
SicKlown42012 said:
You're assuming a linear increase in performance when you increase the ALU count. But they don't scale that well, so you're looking at a 5-7% difference.
Click to expand...
You're assuming a matched memory clock on both cards. I only said equalized core clocks (which still leaves you with 1000MHz RAM on the HD 5850 vs 1200MHz RAM on the HD5870).

A 20% increase in RAM clock makes the divide a lot larger.
 
P4848
HD5850 @1000/1300
i7 920 @3.5 *dual channel* ( ram stick bad) Ram @ 1056MHz
I just cant get over 5k. I'm hoping when i get my new ram in Tuesday I can get back to 4.2hz and pass 5k, but this is what I'm able to do right now.
3dmark11.jpg
 
Your HD 5850 needs 1.35v to stay stable at 1000 MHz? :eek: That seems really high...are you running water cooling on that?
 
no it doesnt need it... it was a quick push for 1Ghz. i was really hoping for 5k... but i normally run the card at 960MHz @ 1.21v. it give me the best cooling/Fan speed to performance ratio for quietness. but im confident my card can go higher... but the stock cooler is holding it back. its very stable at 1050MHz or more, but when the card hits 90c it throttles the clocks for temps.. and that sucks...
 
First post on the forum! Glad to be here. :)

My rig pulled a P3478. Looking forward to a Core i7 for my next upgrade. :cool:
 
Unknown-One said:
This canned benchmark hardly scores your CPU at all, making your choice of CPU doubly pointless.
Click to expand...

Generation/platform of CPU seems to have a MASSIVE affect.
I get 51** (first page) with a single GTX470 where as HotShotMedic back there gets 52** with a GTX580 @ 800MHz.... because he is on a Q6600 @ 3.2GHz. The same happens with people on Phenoms also.
 
I scored P7628 running the bog standard Basic Edition with everything at default.

Not sure if that's good or bad.
 
Nicocat said:
What's wrong with a Phenom II? Besides the fact that they never, ever do well on these canned benchmarks.
Click to expand...

You know what the term bottleneck means?

That is what your CPU is doing to those cards... look at my score and a few others running 2x5850s and you are getting a few 1000 less, only difference is your CPU... sorry to break the bad news, not trying to be mean, just throwing it out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top