3DMark (2013) Scores Thread

W0LFMAN

Boards.ie 3DMark (2013) Leader Board.




ICESTORM

Rank |Member Name|Score - Rig Specs
1.|SpannerMonkey|180,798 - (I7 3770k (CPU Clock 4.50Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 690)
2.|Bloodbath|177,300 - (I5 3570k (CPU Clock 4.50Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7970)
3.|Serephucus|175,793 - (I5 3570k (CPU Clock 4.60Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 670)
4.|Deano12345|174,417 - (I7 2600k (CPU Clock 4.80Ghz), 32g Ram, GTX 680)
5.|Sickboy|140,748 - (I7 2600 (CPU Clock 4.10Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 670)
6.|W0LFMAN|128,509 - (I7 990x (CPU Clock 3.60Ghz), 24g Ram, GTX 480)
7.|ED_E|106,327 - (Quad Core Q6600 (CPU Clock 3.50Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7870 )
8.|Marco_Polo|104,438 - (AMD Phenom II X4 965 (CPU Clock 3.70Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7850 )
9.||
10.||
11.||
12.||
13.||
14.||
15.||


CLOUDGATE

Rank |Member Name|Score - Rig Specs
1.|SpannerMonkey|27,870 - (I7 3770k (CPU Clock 4.50Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 690)
2.|Deano12345|24,989 - (I7 2600k (CPU Clock 4.80Ghz), 32g Ram, GTX 680)
3.|Sickboy|21,266 - (I7 2600 (CPU Clock 4.10Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 670)
4.|W0LFMAN|19,645 - (I7 990x (CPU Clock 3.60Ghz), 24g Ram, GTX 480)
5.|Bloodbath|19,568 - (I5 3570k (CPU Clock 4.50Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7970)
6.|Serephucus|19,427 - (I5 3570k (CPU Clock 4.60Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 670)
7.|ED_E|12,734 - (Quad Core Q6600 (CPU Clock 3.50Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7870 )
8.|Marco_Polo|12,008 - (AMD Phenom II X4 965 (CPU Clock 3.70Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7850 )
9.||
10.||
11.||
12.||
13.||
14.||
15.||



FIRESTRIKE

Rank |Member Name|Score - Rig Specs
1.|SpannerMonkey|9,693 - (I7 3770k (CPU Clock 4.50Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 690)
2.|Bloodbath|7,505 - (I5 3570k (CPU Clock 4.50Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7970)
3.|Deano12345|6,758 - (I7 2600k (CPU Clock 4.80Ghz), 32g Ram, GTX 680)
4.|Serephucus|6,300 - (I5 3570k (CPU Clock 4.60Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 670
5.|Sickboy|5,830 - (I7 2600 (CPU Clock 4.10Ghz), 16g Ram, GTX 670)
6.|Marco_Polo|4,557 - (AMD Phenom II X4 965 (CPU Clock 3.70Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7850 )
7.|ED_E|4,515 - (Quad Core Q6600 (CPU Clock 3.50Ghz), 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7870 )
8.|W0LFMAN|2,960 - (I7 990x (CPU Clock 3.60Ghz), 24g Ram, GTX 480)
9.||
10.||
11.||
12.||
13.||
14.||
15.||


(* thanks to Serephucus for table idea )

Rules to enter:-

Information required is outlined below. Anything missing = invalid post and leaderboard will not be updated.

Please provide a screenshot of:
Two (2) instances of CPU-Z(Memory and CPU Tabs)
GPU-Z,
ORB site with your score showing
An open copy of Notepad with the date and your BOARDS.IE username


In the post include:
Driver version
CPU/Clockspeed/GPU Model/Number of GPU Cores/GPU Core Clock/GPU Memory Clock

Downloads link:

Free Version of 3DMark.
http://www.guru3d.com/files_details/3dmark_download.html

GPU-Z Download Link
http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/

CPU-Z Download Link.
http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html


RULES:

NO AMD vs nVidia Fighting
NO unsubstantiated claims without references/links
NO Spaming Please

W0LFMAN

ED E

I'll bite:

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/73428

ICE: 106327
CLOUD: 12734
FIRE: 4515



XFX 7870 Beta 13.1 Stock clocks
Q6600 @ 3.5
2x4GB @650Mhz
128GB 830


If this thread actually takes off I'll be way down the chart.

Serephucus

Wow that took a long time to run.

Ice: 176,345
Cloud: 19,386
Fire: 6,052

marco_polo

Card: HIS 7850 OC to 1,100MHz(core)/1,350MHz(memory).

Screenshot: https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/79932/239764.jpg

Scores:
Ice Storm: 104438
Cloud Gate: 12008
Fire Strike: 4557

EDIT: Just noticed an annoying GPU-z screenshot popup is kind of blocking it but drivers version was 13.1

Deano12345

So it seems 3DMark did a run then didnt upload my details properly even though the scores validated. I'll run a proper one tomorrow but this will do as a placeholder :

Card : GTX680 Lightning @ 1202/6008 (Stock) on 313.96 drivers

Scores :

Ice Storm : 174417
Cloud Gate : 24989
Fire Strike : 6758

Screenshot : https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/268008/239771.jpg

Since 3DMark didnt upload any details, I'll fill them in here I guess !

CPU is a 2600K, 4.8GHz on a UP5-TH (with F12G beta bios).
4x8GB of RAM @ 1866MHz
Corsair H100 cooling with P/P SP120 fans

BloodBath

Card - Sapphire 7970 dual-x.

Clocks - 1200/6200. Cata 13.2 beta driver.

Virtu MVP was enabled with hyperformance. I'll have to try another run with it disabled to see how it compares.

Scores;

Ice Storm : 177300
Cloud Gate : 19568
Fire Strike : 7505

Screenshot: https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/21470/239774.jpg

Deano12345

@BloodBath : How's your vCore so low man ? Im jealous here

BloodBath

It drops down while idling. The cpu speed is supposed to drop down as well but it's not for some reason.

I'll have to check that. It's 1.2 under load. I can get to 4.6@ 1.3 but it's not worth it.

Looks like the 680gtx is about 50% better at the physics tests. The ati card makes up the ground in other areas. I don't understand why ati cards are still so far behind on the physics side. This benchmark doesn't use phys-x for the physics parts does it? Or is it using cpu based physics calculations? Your hyper threading might explain your performance there.

Deano12345

BloodBath wrote: »

It drops down while idling. The cpu speed is supposed to drop down as well but it's not for some reason.

I'll have to check that. It's 1.2 under load. I can get to 4.6@ 1.3 but it's not worth it.

Ah right, mines the opposite, the clocks drop down on idle but not the voltage. I've only gotten mine stable at 4.8 with this new board, the old one just couldn't do any more than 4.5 for some reason

BloodBath

Deano12345 wrote: »

Ah right, mines the opposite, the clocks drop down on idle but not the voltage. I've only gotten mine stable at 4.8 with this new board, the old one just couldn't do any more than 4.5 for some reason

I've edited that last post since

It's back downclocking to 1600mhz when idle. I think cpu-z is just bugged.

Deano12345

BloodBath wrote: »

I've edited that last post since

It's back downclocking to 1600mhz when idle. I think cpu-z is just bugged.

Yeah I think clock for clock the 680 and 7970 are pretty even. I'll see what I can do about overclocking the 680 I guess Interesting about the Physics part though, I'll do a run with HT off tomorrow and see what happens

marco_polo

BloodBath wrote: »

It drops down while idling. The cpu speed is supposed to drop down as well but it's not for some reason.

I'll have to check that. It's 1.2 under load. I can get to 4.6@ 1.3 but it's not worth it.

Looks like the 680gtx is about 50% better at the physics tests. The ati card makes up the ground in other areas. I don't understand why ati cards are still so far behind on the physics side. This benchmark doesn't use phys-x for the physics parts does it? Or is it using cpu based physics calculations? Your hyper threading might explain your performance there.

If this test ( I wish not mine , from overclock.net) with the same card clocked a shade higher and paired with an i7-3970X is anything to go by, I'd say the physics test is a little bit CPU bound (I also saw another HD7970 paired with an i7-3770K get about 12500ish on the physics too, which is in the same ballpark as Deano12345 i7-2600k).

Deano12345

I'm kinda surprised on the increase in Fire Strike with a 350MHz bump to the GPU memory (core is still stock).

Second Screenshot is at 1293/3602. Stable, but it runs too hot for me to consider keeping it there (70 on load on the GPU, plan is to add a second 680 in march/april so I want temps under 60). Memory and VRM's are well within range though so I'll leave the memory OC there I think !

SpannerMonkey

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/56521


FIRESTRIKE
3D Mark Score 9637

Graphics Score 12005
Physics Score 11377
Combined Score 3558

i7 3770k @4.3 Ghz
GTX 690 @915 / 1502
Air cooled with BeQuiet Dark Rock Pro 2



Seem to get worse scores if I put my overclockers back up to 4.6

W0LFMAN

Serephucus and SpannerMonkey

If you can upload screenshot like other, more than happy to up them on leader board.

ED E

You do know that'd be ridiculously easy to fake right?

W0LFMAN

ED E wrote: »

You do know that'd be ridiculously easy to fake right?

Sure, could easily do it myself.

But looking for a sense of honest Playmanship here, wouldn't make sense to Fake a score, would do nothing but ruin the integrity of the Boards PC overclocking forum members.

Could understand it there was a Prize in it. but as there is only Stats here, I'm sure they would be information useful in there own right.

what you think?

ED E

Exactly, so I dont see the point in the image checks, it'll just mean less people will bother.

Anyways, I'm wondering if I should go back and try and push my ram clocks

Serephucus

I only have the free version, and those bloody demos make the thing pretty damn long. I'll try run it later I guess. Personally I don't really see the need for all the info, name, etc. except maybe if other people are curious of specs.

SpannerMonkey

I have my boards user name in my link . And the link is direct to their records . Thats impossible to fake.
And the hassle of going uploading screenshots etc
I can change my name to boards.ie if you want

W0LFMAN

I Understand your comments fellas

Going to let a poll Decide.

Poll will be up for week.

What-ever get the majority vote, we be the rule.

Can't be fairer than that now boys can I really?

Serephucus

Might I suggest something like:

ICESTORM
Rank |Member Name|Score - Rig Specs
1.|Bloodbath|177,300 - (I5 3570k, 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7970)
2.|Deano12345|174,417 - (I7 2600k, 32g Ram, GTX 680)
3.|W0LFMAN|128,509 - (I7 990x, 24g Ram, GTX 480)
4.|ED_E|106,327 - (Quad Core Q6600, 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7870 )
5.|Marco_Polo|104,438 - ( AMD Phenom II X4 965, 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7850 )
6.||
7.||
8.||
9.||
10.||
11.||
12.||
13.||
14.||
15.||


For the main layout? Others can be adjusted if you copy my table into a post box then edit.

SpannerMonkey

W0LFMAN wrote: »

I Understand your comments fellas

Going to let a poll Decide.

Poll will be up for week.

What-ever get the majority vote, we be the rule.

Can't be fairer than that now boys can I really?

i dont think you should just be able to claim what you want , but if you provide a link to your score on their website with your boards user name on it surely thats enough ?

Deano12345

ED E wrote: »

Exactly, so I dont see the point in the image checks, it'll just mean less people will bother.

Anyways, I'm wondering if I should go back and try and push my ram clocks

Lemme know if you do and it makes a difference ! I reckon theres a little bit more left in this IMC, I'd go for 2133 if it helps my score

W0LFMAN

Serephucus wrote: »

Might I suggest something like:

ICESTORM
Rank |Member Name|Score - Rig Specs
1.|Bloodbath|177,300 - (I5 3570k, 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7970)
2.|Deano12345|174,417 - (I7 2600k, 32g Ram, GTX 680)
3.|W0LFMAN|128,509 - (I7 990x, 24g Ram, GTX 480)
4.|ED_E|106,327 - (Quad Core Q6600, 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7870 )
5.|Marco_Polo|104,438 - ( AMD Phenom II X4 965, 8g Ram, Radeon HD 7850 )
6.||
7.||
8.||
9.||
10.||
11.||
12.||
13.||
14.||
15.||


For the main layout? Others can be adjusted if you copy my table into a post box then edit.

Thanks Serephucus for the generous help. Compliments posted on main body.

SickBoy

Driver Version: 310.70
CPU: i7-2600 @ 4.1ghz
GPU: 1 x EVGA GTX670 FTW @stock

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/96016


What's with the "Graphics Driver is not approved" warnings?

Deano12345

SickBoy wrote: »

Driver Version: 310.70
CPU: i7-2600 @ 4.1ghz
GPU: 1 x EVGA GTX670 FTW @stock

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/96016


What's with the "Graphics Driver is not approved" warnings?

I'd imagine its to do with drivers that were released before/after this version of 3DMark was and the program hasn't been updated to register those drivers as legit, or something to that effect, since my 96's are Beta drivers and are picked up fine, but they would have been released just before 3DMark was

SpannerMonkey

will this do ?

I7 3770k
16GB Corsair Vengance
Gtx 690

Direct links (for a more zoomed in view)
http://i.imgur.com/yUmmxFH.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ZFjxwRH.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/DQ2gM1J.jpg

[IMG][/img]

[IMG][/img]

[IMG][/img]

W0LFMAN

Updated. 06-02-13

(Very Nice Rig SpannerMonkey)
(Overclock CPU to 5Gz and throw in another GTX 690, I think you would be unbeatable)

SpannerMonkey

W0LFMAN wrote: »

Updated. 06-02-13

(Very Nice Rig SpannerMonkey)
(Overclock CPU to 5Gz and throw in another GTX 690, I think you would be unbeatable)

Haha cheers
. But nah i normally keep cpu at 4.6 but any more than that and it becomes unstable . And oddly i get better results on this at 4.5 , and as for a secong gtx 690 , not for quite a while they are a tad pricey ;-P
May go 2011 socket in time but thats about it :-)
its already hugely overkill for what i need