# [Guru3d] Guru3D Releases "Catzilla" benchmark



## Digikid

Meow......


----------



## Evil Penguin

Too bad it's not cross-platform.


----------



## Chris13002

Only one of my GPU's were being utilized... Tiger preset (1080p)


----------



## mavere

I would have preferred less dupstep, but at least the art direction seems several magnitudes less sterile than the 3DMark next-gen teasers.


----------



## ElectroGeek007

> Cats
> Lasers

> Downloading.


----------



## Art Vanelay

I'm looking forward to trying this; that trailer was just weird.


----------



## ghostrider85

catzilla!!!


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ElectroGeek007*
> 
> > Cats
> > Lasers
> > Downloading.


Pretty much this, lol.


----------



## tombom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ElectroGeek007*
> 
> > Cats
> > Lasers
> > Downloading.


Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep.


----------



## XiCynx

*1080p*


*1440p*


Either this isn't the best benchmark in the world for utilizing resources, or my PC is BAD!
I never saw my CPU cores actually reach 100%, maybe 50% at the most.

That is with a 3930K and a 7970 OC'd to 1125/1575.


----------



## Mad Pistol

There is absolutely no reason that you should NOT be downloading this right now.


----------



## ElectroGeek007

Tiger:



Catzilla:


----------



## utterfabrication

That was a much more entertaining to watch than Heaven or 3dMark imo.
tiger preset
gtx 660 @stock


with +68 core


----------



## blkdoutgsxr

(Tiger : 5854) With Sig rig, was interesting for sure!


----------



## ghostrider85

ok how do i enable msi afterburner recording with this one?


----------



## The KurrK

I fear I'm bottlenecked


----------



## Vlasov_581

lol....for some reason i thought it was like MSI Kombustor but with a kitty


----------



## Aftermath2006

New Scores Much Happier with these

Tiger 18956


Catzilla 11626


----------



## K62-RIG

Downloading it now. OMG 500MB.


----------



## Junkboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aftermath2006*
> 
> my scores dont seem right
> tiger 9834
> Catzilla 5910
> with Sig rig just doesnt seem right


Look at XiCynx post #11 you're scoring really nice above him so I think it sounds like ballpark plus what did you get for physics? The bench might love NV from so that would be good for team green







and help in this bench!

*Note* seems like SLI/CF might not be working on bench so that's why i said seems pretty normal.


----------



## DzillaXx

4800- Tiger
SLI not working as well, Guess we gotta wait for the next *beta* nvidia driver


----------



## furyn9

Tiger

Catzilla


----------



## Legonut

I can't get the test to start. The demo and benchmark buttons are faded out.


----------



## The-Real-Link

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ElectroGeek007*
> 
> > Cats
> > Lasers
> > Downloading.


Quoted for awesome quoting. Also downloading!


----------



## MGX1016

someone should upload a video the PC I'm on can barely run OCN.net


----------



## ghostrider85

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MGX1016*
> 
> someone should upload a video the PC I'm on can barely run OCN.net


msi afterburner recorder doesn't seem to work with this program


----------



## General123

Pretty cool stuff

This was only at 1293/7408, forgot to increase the clocks and the benchmark is quite long


----------



## Tom1121

Edit: Settings were the 1440P Catzilla.


----------



## axiumone

I LOVED the trailer! Downloading, thank you.


----------



## The-Real-Link

Did pretty well I think. Amongst the tops in both charts, woot. Just left GPU at 1,200 boost and that's it.


----------



## Helmsdg

Happy with my results.
Much more entertaining than other benches ^_^

--David--


----------



## SimpleTech

3770K (stock) - HD Graphics 4000


----------



## XiCynx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Legonut*
> 
> I can't get the test to start. The demo and benchmark buttons are faded out.


If it is greyed out look at the critical tab, you may have some driver that is out of date and the benchmark will not run with out of date drivers.


----------



## th3illusiveman

Seems to prefer GTX cards

Catzilla
1175Mhz Core 1450Mhz Memory


Tiger
1175Mhz Core 1450Mhz Memory

Tiger
1225Mhz Core 1450Mhz Memory


----------



## Tom1121

LOL OCN Represent.


----------



## BinaryDemon

Sig Rig


----------



## flyin15sec

FX8320 5ghz
EVGA GTX 660Ti SC stock clocks

Tiger


----------



## Trev0r269

Tiger results. Entertaining bench. Sig rig: 2500k @ 4.6, 1 6970 lightning stock, 1 6970 reference stock.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## S1L3Nt

I get the feeling I need a new setup soon


----------



## thestache

That looks awesome.


----------



## zinfinion

*Full Video -* *http://vimeo.com/54077172*


----------



## Forceman

Does this use GPU Physx? Here's my Tiger run with CPU Physics.

Looks like the Physics is pretty heavily multithreaded - the 2600Ks and 3770ks are scoring a lot higher there.



Edit: No, it doesn't use Physx, but turning off my Display Link monitor boosted my score for some reason.

Edit 2: I'll enjoy my moment in the sun of being of the first page of results.


----------



## zinfinion

*SLI Profile* - *http://shadowdane.com/public/AllBenchmark_SLISettings.png*


----------



## ghostrider85

So, is this better than heaven?


----------



## th3illusiveman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Does this use GPU Physx? Here's my Tiger run with CPU Physx.


jelly


----------



## CJRhoades

Doesn't seem to be working... or maybe I'm just impatient. When I click run all benchmark, it changes the theme to basic and my CPU ramps up to 25% usage but nothing else happens.


----------



## ghostrider85




----------



## ZeProfessor




----------



## The-Real-Link

Just tested again since I wanted to install the latest Nvidia driver anyway... 306.23 > 310.70. Doesn't seem to affect the bench by more than +/-20 points. Guess it's all good.


----------



## dizzy4

I am itching to try it, but it doesn't seem to be working on my tablet. as soon as I hit run it says that the program stopped working. I was thinking it was a windows 8 thing, but then I saw a win 8 screenshot...


----------



## ghostrider85

that's what you get when you suddenly start shooting a poor kitty without any reason, stop shooting cats!


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dizzy4*
> 
> I am itching to try it, but it doesn't seem to be working on my tablet. as soon as I hit run it says that the program stopped working. I was thinking it was a windows 8 thing, but then I saw a win 8 screenshot...


Maybe its not arm compatible?


----------



## dizzy4

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> Maybe its not arm compatible?


Maybe I'm not running it on an arm tablet?


----------



## dizzy4

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> Maybe its not arm compatible?


stupid double post.... I dunno I wanted to see how it did on my i5-3317U with HD4000


----------



## Mygaffer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dizzy4*
> 
> Maybe I'm not running it on an arm tablet?


Wow, snippy comment for someone just offering an option.


----------



## Tman5293

Here's my scores:

Tiger:


Catzilla:


----------



## dizzy4

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mygaffer*
> 
> Wow, snippy comment for someone just offering an option.


ya it was a little much.. especially with that double post. anyway, Sorry norlig.


----------



## von rottes

Tiger,


----------



## drufause

Sig Rig


----------



## DoctorNick

Seems ok for stock


----------



## El_Capitan

Eh, my 2nd GTX 680 didn't even get utilized.

Tiger:


----------



## Derp

My poor GTX460







. I need to upgrade.


----------



## DoctorNick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Derp*
> 
> My poor GTX460
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I need to upgrade.


You need to OC your 920


----------



## HeadlessKnight

GTX 470 @ 800/3700



Not too bad for a 3 generations old card ...


----------



## Chobbit

Cats I'm a kitty cat and I meaow Kill meaow, meaow lazer meaow, try this tonight


----------



## EkseF

Tiger Stock 8350 with 2000MHz ram and somewhat overclocked gtx 680 - *9448*

Tiger 5016MHz FX 8350 with 2000MHz ram and somewhat overclocked gtx 680 - *9584*
Same on catzilla - *5799*

see http://www.overclock.net/t/1318995/official-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club/5940#post_18866382 for images


----------



## sbuck333

What an awesome benchmark! Seriously, this is so much fun to run compared to other benches. Here's my catzilla result for i5 760 @ 3.8, 7950 @ 1150/1550


----------



## Catscratch

A Benchmark with a Cat ? Definitely gonna try at home


----------



## TDurden80

GTX680 was maxed out at 1228mhz. I tried to push it further but it wouldn't go any higher even if I raised the offset further in GPU tweak. GPU memory at 7114mhz and 3770k at 4.7ghz

I love the kitty


----------



## K62-RIG




----------



## King4x4

Need some profile urgently to optimize this awesome kitty powah... Three stock [email protected]~60% Utilization on this benchmark.


----------



## Tomus

Havent oc my gpu yet, so just factory setting for now (gigabyte windforce - boost clock 1058MHz)

Kitty - 18139 (in a top 10 for now







)
Tiger - 8580
Catzilla - 5065


----------



## Tarnix

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ElectroGeek007*
> 
> > Cats
> > Lasers
> 
> > Downloading.


^This.
Will post my results in a few.


----------



## EkseF

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tomus*
> 
> Havent oc my gpu yet, so just factory setting for now (gigabyte windforce - boost clock 1058MHz)
> Kitty - 18139 (in a top 10 for now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> Tiger - 8580
> Catzilla - 5065


kitty is for laptops bro?


----------



## flyin15sec

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DoctorNick*
> 
> You need to OC your 920


This Benchmark likes bigger faster video cards. CPU overclocks didn't affect much.


----------



## flyin15sec

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DoctorNick*
> 
> You need to OC your 920


duh, double.


----------



## Tarnix

I used fraps. That works.




*Sorry about the sound desync...*


----------



## Kane2207

My score on this blows, only around ~1500 and SLI doesn't appear to be kicking in (according to MSI). I would have thought I would have scored slightly better than that?

I'll have to give it another shot when I get home.


----------



## KingT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sbuck333*
> 
> What an awesome benchmark! Seriously, this is so much fun to run compared to other benches. Here's my catzilla result for i5 760 @ 3.8, 7950 @ 1150/1550
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I've scored little higher with HD7950 @ 1070/1750MHz and 2500K @ 4.5GHz..



CHEERS..


----------



## Tarnix

There. Sig rig.


----------



## Kindredice

There is a post your scores topic aswell just fyi

GTX 570 960/2250 - i5 3570k 4.9Ghz - DDR3 1600 CL8-9-8-21

Tiger 1080p score


----------



## [CyGnus]

My Results:
Tiger 1080P
3570K @ 4.7GHz
7770 @ 1275/1500


----------



## HeadlessKnight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kindredice*
> 
> There is a post your scores topic aswell just fyi
> GTX 570 960/2250 - i5 3570k 4.9Ghz - DDR3 1600 CL8-9-8-21
> Tiger 1080p score


That is one awesome GTX 570. congrats on that awesome card







.


----------



## Kindredice

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeadlessKnight*
> 
> That is one awesome GTX 570. congrats on that awesome card
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Thanks, I have to wait till 760ti or 770 so it better stay awesome for a bit more








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[CyGnus]*
> 
> My Results:
> Tiger 1080P
> 3570K @ 4.7GHz
> 7770 @ 1275/1500


Are you sure your cpu was at 4.7? howcome your physics score is 378 and mine is at 658, yours was faster in 3dmark with the wonder ram you got







and the pic is showing 3.4ghz.


----------



## [CyGnus]

something wrong re run and gave about the same score.... and the CPU was 4.7 dont know what was up with that.
And you know every bench is different


----------



## MunneY

My install keeps hanging and won't install... I've done everything I can think of and I can't get it installed


----------



## Derp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kindredice*
> 
> Thanks, I have to wait till 760ti or 770 so it better stay awesome for a bit more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure your cpu was at 4.7? howcome your physics score is 378 and mine is at 658, yours was faster in 3dmark with the wonder ram you got
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and the pic is showing 3.4ghz.


The CPU score can be held back by the video card in this bench. If you look at the results of a few that posted both tiger and catzilla presets you can see the CPU score plummet.

His 7770 is significantly slower than your GTX570.


----------



## EkseF

So I decided to star over.

Stock, all stock.



CPU 4.5GHz (302fsb, 2400 nb / ht), 2000MHz Ram 7-9-7-24-33-t2, gpu 1228/3225


Same as above, added some to gpu, forgot exact numbers.


CPU 4.8GHz (302fsb, 2400 nb / ht), 2000MHz Ram 7-9-7-24-33-t2, gpu 1280/3251


Skipped over 5Ghz, Tried 5,213 but failed, not enought voltage, not enought time to find needed voltage, will try again later maybe.

CPU 5.1 Ghz (302fsb, 2400 nb / ht), 2000MHz Ram 7-9-7-24-33-t2, gpu 1280/3276

Kitty


Cat


Tiger


Catzilla


got top 20 on every category.


----------



## metal_gunjee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ElectroGeek007*
> 
> > Cats
> > Lasers
> > Downloading.


I like the way you think.


----------



## Someguy316

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> There is absolutely no reason that you should NOT be downloading this right now.


I watched the video they posted on it; that was horrible at the end; I'm also not that big on cats.


----------



## Aparition

D-D-D-D-Downloaded


----------



## The KurrK

Why is my processor so bad with the physics? I get 151 points.


----------



## El_Capitan

Looks like Xfire works on my 7970's.

Tiger:


----------



## Zen00

I don't get how the individual scores tally up, can anyone enlighten me?


----------



## RenHoakRex

Such an awesome bench. It should be included on hwbot


----------



## Ashtyr

No bad i think









Tiger



Phenom x6 1055T @4,16 Ghz

Asus GTX 670 direct CU II top


----------



## pengs

SLI isn't on by default. Alt frame rendering 2 fixes it on nV cards.

With it on I'm able to do 716 instead of 460 in CPU physics... which is a bit weird.


----------



## El_Capitan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pengs*
> 
> SLI isn't on by default. Alt frame rendering 2 fixes it on nV cards.
> With it on I'm able to do 716 instead of 460 in CPU physics... which is a bit weird.


Will try that.


----------



## El_Capitan

Here we go. Two scores on Tiger, both using 3930K at 4.8GHz. One with overclocked GTX 680's in SLI and one with overclocked HD 7970's in Xfire.

GTX 680 SLI:


HD 7970 Xfire:


Looks like Peng found a bug. CPU score should be the same, but with Alt frame rendering with 2 cards in SLI, the score gets increased. Could it be because of PhysX?


----------



## GanjaGeek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The KurrK*
> 
> I fear I'm bottlenecked


You are...



I was downloading PlanetSide 2 and doing some things in the background... but a decent score nonetheless









I'm on a 960T (4c) and a 670 - you're on a 1055 (6c) and a 680 - Overclock them both and beat me = profit


----------



## grunion

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say NV had their hand in this cookie jar.

My stock 670 is matching my heavily clocked 7970.
Or maybe the 670 is just that much better of a card


----------



## Malo

CANT WAIT TO TRY WHEN I GET HOME


----------



## Kane2207

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grunion*
> 
> I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say NV had their hand in this cookie jar.
> My stock 670 is matching my heavily clocked 7970.
> Or maybe the 670 is just that much better of a card


I dunno about that, I only get 7500 when I force AFR 2 through NCP because SLI isn't scaling (only 34% on the second GPU) yet other on here are getting 6000+ on a single 570


----------



## Ashtyr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The KurrK*
> 
> I fear I'm bottlenecked


Didn't see this before.

Much better comparison is my results with the same CPU (4,16Ghz /NB 3,2 Ghz /HT 1,92 Ghz/ V core 1,53 Ram 1700Mhz 1,65V) with a 670



Rise your CPU, and your NB and of course your 680, my 670 is to 1350 core and 7300 ram in that bench


----------



## Tarnix

lol, my score is so low... Needs more AVX in this test.


----------



## EkseF

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ashtyr*
> 
> No bad i think
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tiger
> 
> Phenom x6 1055T @4,16 Ghz
> Asus GTX 670 direct CU II top


I see the benchmark doesn't care too much about cpu, I got 3 times your cpu test score and only +100 points. :-S


----------



## GanjaGeek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ashtyr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *The KurrK*
> 
> I fear I'm bottlenecked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't see this before.
> 
> Much better comparison is my results with the same CPU (4,16Ghz /NB 3,2 Ghz /HT 1,92 Ghz/ V core 1,53 Ram 1700Mhz 1,65V) with a 670
> 
> 
> 
> Rise your CPU, and your NB and of course your 680, my 670 is to 1350 core and 7300 ram in that bench
Click to expand...

That's more what I would expect from his rig, if he'd follow our advice.

I wouldn't call it a "much better comparison" though because our processors are the same architecture/design only mine has two cores disabled - since I'm getting a better score than he is, with two less processors and a 670 instead of a 680 like "The KurrK's" - I would say that our scores are great comparison (as are yours) because mine directly shows how his CPU frequency is causing his bottleneck - when a machine (mine) with two less processors and GPU which gets 10-15% less performance (stock) than his GPU, beats his score, no?

Anyway, nice score for that rig


----------



## Aparition

Just installed. Every time I go to run it the application hangs... any ideas?
Tried every preset option and every time the bench goes to a black screen and I have to force shut it down


----------



## solar0987

Think the benchmark is flawed..

The cpu portion of the test is dependant on a gfx card it should be cpu only!
Anyway here's my scores that's with a 580 at 950 and my 3570k at 4.7...


----------



## ep45-ds3l

.. Downloading ..


----------



## PuntyMario

if i noticed one thing. its that this benchmark does not like phenoms. it seems everyone is getting in the 100s with cpu physics.


----------



## Kindredice

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *solar0987*
> 
> Think the benchmark is flawed..
> The cpu portion of the test is dependant on a gfx card it should be cpu only!
> Anyway here's my scores that's with a 580 at 950 and my 3570k at 4.7...


what are your ram speed/timings? you got more physics score than my 4.9Ghz, my gtx 570 was at 960.


----------



## El_Capitan

3770K at 4.8GHz with an overclocked GTX 690.

Tiger:


----------



## y2kcamaross

How are you guys getting crossfire to work?


----------



## Sir Amik Vase

All I could think of when I saw this...


----------



## USFORCES

Tri-sli and my old 980X at 4GHz


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sir Amik Vase*
> 
> All I could think of when I saw this...


lol yup.

bout to run this and see what its all about in a few mins


----------



## Quantium40

Funny... the benchmark wouldn't let me run it until I let it half my virtual memory size. Anyhow...

2500k 4589Mhz
GTX680 @ stock
stock Samsung 35nm @1.35v

Catzilla:


Tiger:


Thought it might be nice to see a bench with stock memory and GPU (plus I'm waiting to do a kuhler 620 mod on the 680).


----------



## MadGoat

Not too bad i must say...

sig rig:

2x gtx 285 Sli
1100t @ 4ghz


----------



## Pillz Here

GPU Stock.


----------



## MGX1016

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zinfinion*
> 
> *Full Video -* *http://vimeo.com/54077172*


Even full screen made the PC freeze. It looks really funny. Cats aren't my thing but I like how she takes her bad kitties home.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Someguy316*
> 
> I watched the video they posted on it; that was horrible at the end; I'm also not that big on cats.


It's a bit humorous, I also like dubstep though.


----------



## sixor

why can't be a bench with hot girls or somehting funny at least

no..............boring benchs all the time


----------



## MadGoat

Im still amazed by how well 2 gtx285s keep up nowadays...

dx10 granted... but still...


----------



## furyn9

SLI mode 1176mhz
Tiger

Catzilla


----------



## The KurrK

132% Power
GPU: +135
Memory: 156 mhz

Got a much higher score


----------



## MisterMalv

Ooo, this one makes my fans scream. Though my score seems to warrant an upgrade.


----------



## GanjaGeek

I'm very happy with my 960T + GTX 670 right now when I see my scores beating a bunch of much more expensive i5 and i7 rigs with 680's and 7970's - Overclocking is my friend









Tiger:


Catzilla:


Obviously this doesn't rely all that much on CPU, and my physics score does suffer, as expected.


----------



## SpykeZ

Tiger: 3237 on my sig rig without any overclocking.


----------



## trulsrohk

So would it be safe to say that the "combined" portion of the test makes use of physx?

Cuz somehow my scores are right up there with gtx 680 systems for all the individual tests but on the combined the 680 systems are on average about 1k points ahead..


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GanjaGeek*
> 
> I'm very happy with my 960T + GTX 670 right now when I see my scores beating a bunch of much more expensive i5 and i7 rigs with 680's and 7970's - Overclocking is my friend
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tiger:
> 
> Catzilla:
> 
> Obviously this doesn't rely all that much on CPU, and my physics score does suffer, as expected.


I wanted the 960T. PII's are still kicking!

Sig at 3.8 with gpu 1000/1260:

OpenGL Tiger for giggles:


Tiger:


----------



## solar0987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kindredice*
> 
> what are your ram speed/timings? you got more physics score than my 4.9Ghz, my gtx 570 was at 960.


1600 8-8-8-24-1t


----------



## di inferi

First run at my 24/7 clocks.



Quick 1200/1500 OC.


----------



## Flying Donkey

First run at 1125/1572



They must have been smoking something when they made this lol


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Hmmm, doesn't seem to like my system very much. Well behind the SLI 680 guys....

3960X - 4.7GHz
CF 7970's - 1200MHz / 1650MHz

Catzilla (1440P)


----------



## ghostrider85

is this score ok for a 3570k @ 4.5ghz, gtx 580 sc @ 900mhz?


----------



## ghostrider85

they have catzilla wallpapers here http://www.allbenchmark.com/wallpapers/wallpapers-1920x1080


----------



## trulsrohk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Hmmm, doesn't seem to like my system very much. Well behind the SLI 680 guys....
> 3960X - 4.7GHz
> CF 7970's - 1200MHz / 1650MHz
> Catzilla (1440P)


The claim is that there is no direct benefit from physx but there is something weird going on. I have actually seen a 3570k + gtx680 system "tiger" score where my rig beat every individual score, but their combined hardware score was 1k points higher. The top two tests seem to get extra benefit from Keplar vs a system with an AMD card even if the other numbers don't seem to indicate that that's how it should play out.


----------



## luma

Is anyone else having any problems getting this to run? I can't get it to do anything but crash to desktop on any of the tests. Crossfire is disabled, running on a single monitor, still no love...


----------



## kzone75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *luma*
> 
> Is anyone else having any problems getting this to run? I can't get it to do anything but crash to desktop on any of the tests. Crossfire is disabled, running on a single monitor, still no love...


Got it to run once. Now it'll crash to desktop or just stop working..


----------



## luma

I can get the main interface to run. When I was running in extended mode across 3 displays (not eyefinity), it would crash as soon as you selected a test. Now with just one monitor enabled, it actually starts loading the test and then crashes before actually starting it. Disabling crossfire had no impact. This is a week old install of Win8 enterprise with the 12.11 beta 11 Catalyst drivers, so everything is as fresh and clean as I could arrange.

Not too impressed thus far.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Unexpectedly I've had no issues with the bench thus far. Did have to tame my OC's a bit from what I use in 3dmark11 though...


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *luma*
> 
> Is anyone else having any problems getting this to run? I can't get it to do anything but crash to desktop on any of the tests. Crossfire is disabled, running on a single monitor, still no love...


I'd just like to get it to install.


----------



## Chris13002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chris13002*
> 
> Only one of my GPU's were being utilized... Tiger preset (1080p)


Got SLI working...
Set DX11 SLI bits to '0x00000001 (Dawn)' for anyone else trying to get it to work...


----------



## Aparition

I had to "Run as Admin" to get it to work for me... even though I'm an Admin account


----------



## [CyGnus]

well 3dmark11 is still the better benchmark, the vga in catzilla influences the CPU score... So the overall score is not fair just my 2cents on this


----------



## GanjaGeek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[CyGnus]*
> 
> well 3dmark11 is still the better benchmark, the vga in catzilla influences the CPU score... So the overall score is not fair just my 2cents on this


It also seems like the "loading time" score weighs in far more than it really should in the overall score - from that I've observed when comparing rigs and scores. Kind of silly - but it's definitely still obviously not finished, and 3dmark has been around for quite a while.

I like having a new benchmark, I hope this starts a trend of more exciting ones!


----------



## Malo

I've noticed this bench seems to favor nvidia a little, heres my score


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Here's mine CPU is actually at 4.6GHZ and GPU is 1200/1800


----------



## CyberDemonz101

I tried this out. Eh cats shooting lazers was kinda cool but I will stay with 3dmark11. Fact that you have to force SLi was kinda crappy.


----------



## importflip

Here is my score:


----------



## Search




----------



## TB13

My score on my sig rig


----------



## Wicked x Josh

I'm happy with my score...


----------



## dave12

This stupid thing doesn't make any sense. On Tiger my 5870, 1090t, DDR3 1600 box scored 1500 points higher than my sig rig. I don't like this guy or his stupid cat.


----------



## Majorhi

Here is my Meow Bench score at the 1080 setting. Also I can't select the Catzilla option. It's faded out. Any ideas?


----------



## gotendbz1

tiger

catzilla


----------



## TheLawIX

Sli isn't working for me either


----------



## skyn3t

and here is mine


----------



## Wicked x Josh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLawIX*
> 
> 
> Sli isn't working for me either


you download the EVGA SLI driver?


----------



## LightMassKiller

... ;-;


----------



## 9Thermal9

3D Score with Catzilla Bench

Awesome, bench. However, my scores seem rather low.


----------



## 222Panther222

Tiger 1080p









Wonder if i would bottleneck with a 660ti?


----------



## TheLawIX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wicked x Josh*
> 
> you download the EVGA SLI driver?


Nope, but I will. Thanks!


----------



## skyn3t

for all those fans the wallpaper is almost done


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CyberDemonz101*
> 
> I tried this out. Eh cats shooting lazers was kinda cool but I will stay with 3dmark11. Fact that you have to force SLi was kinda crappy.


You did see the big red lettering saying "BETA", right?


----------



## Milestailsprowe

I;m so sick of this mother board. Its such a bottle neck


----------



## Chobbit

I know alot of people have got this working but I just can't get SLI working,

I've upgraded too the latest Nvidia WHQL drivers for this benchmark, added the Catzilla profile too the .exe in Nvidia inspector, changed it too 0x05 but still no luck.

I've seen people say its as simple as choosing split Frame Rendering alternatively by 2? How do you do this as I can't find the option? please help.


----------



## Deluxe

Sig rig, not bad imo.


----------



## Newbie2009

I cannot upload my results. I tried most up to date one from allbench site but crashes on launch (even at stock) so using guru 3d version.

My Sig - Tiger



My Sig - Catzilla


----------



## USFORCES

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chobbit*
> 
> I know alot of people have got this working but I just can't get SLI working,
> I've upgraded too the latest Nvidia WHQL drivers for this benchmark, added the Catzilla profile too the .exe in Nvidia inspector, changed it too 0x05 but still no luck.
> I've seen people say its as simple as choosing split Frame Rendering alternatively by 2? How do you do this as I can't find the option? please help.


2-GPU for SLI


----------



## Chris13002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chobbit*
> 
> I know alot of people have got this working but I just can't get SLI working,
> I've upgraded too the latest Nvidia WHQL drivers for this benchmark, added the Catzilla profile too the .exe in Nvidia inspector, changed it too 0x05 but still no luck.
> I've seen people say its as simple as choosing split Frame Rendering alternatively by 2? How do you do this as I can't find the option? please help.




Mine worked after this setting
0x00000001 (Dawn)


----------



## Darco19

I *think* it might be safe to say that this is the new benchmark, especially once it goes final. I see a lot of potential here...

It made my 680 Lightning run at temps of 85c @1350mhz on the core clock (the fan speed was set to 70%). Even BF3 and Heaven with maxed out settings doesn't do that to my card







Very interesting...


----------



## Dimaggio1103

this bench is weird. My scores where beating people in this thread with a 3570K and 7970/7950 yet older rigs still beat mine. I know its a beta but I definitly should not be beating anyone with a 7970 or current gen i5.


----------



## djriful

That benchmark version is a day old, better get the latest one from the site. OP please just link to the mail website of Catzilla

http://www.allbenchmark.com/download


----------



## ASSSETS

From this thread scores going from 4 to 10k, but I cannot understand reason for it. Some new systems get low points and some over 10k.
My sig rig Tiger:


----------



## djriful

lol dam, I'm hitting place #3 and #10. My CPU is only clocking at 4.6Ghz and stock speed GPUs... What if I OC them all back to 4.8Ghz.. will I reach #1? =P


----------



## 9Thermal9

Anyone else not able to upload the test result. My results don't upload into my Allbench profile, either. I bought the updated code and installed the new Beta version from the AllBench page.


----------



## djriful

restart that program


----------



## 9Thermal9

Thanks for the reply. Tried restart...no luck


----------



## wimcle

Tiger 1080p
The old 480sli hangs on


----------



## Donkey1514

Something isn't right....







Specs in sig rig


----------



## WiL11o6

Wonder what if it was with two cards.


----------



## RenHoakRex

Running the bench in AFR friendly mode helped ALOT
BEFORE:

AFTER:


----------



## lurker2501

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Donkey1514*
> 
> Something isn't right....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Specs in sig rig
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Yeah. Some of the results in this thread are just beyond me.

Mine:


----------



## 9Thermal9

Photoshop


----------



## GenoOCAU

Did a quick dirty 1400 sli run just to see how system would go and pumped out a 20692 to snag current #4th in the world for Tiger preset.

Direct link: Here

Will more then likely do a 1450 sli run later on.

20692 - 2x MSI 680 Lightnings - 1398/1411 - 7048 - i7 3960x - 5300 - Asus Rampage IV Formula - G.skill 2600 CL10 - 2400 - CL9-11-11-25 2T - Geno - Link


----------



## RenHoakRex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RenHoakRex*
> 
> Running the bench in AFR friendly mode helped ALOT
> BEFORE:
> 
> AFTER:


Results in the bench a fubar'd. Guru should probably fix this in the stable and redo the high scores


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Yeah, I love the bench but the consistency of scores is disappointing. It is still a beta though so there are bound to be fixes incoming...


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Donkey1514*
> 
> Something isn't right....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Specs in sig rig


Well see what happened was they took overall combined system heat into account and then detracted points...because GTX 590 SLI. I'm kidding







. I just wanted to poke some fun tonight







.


----------



## Master__Shake

this is using the bf3 prfile with 7970 crossfire 1125/1525


----------



## circeseye

in catzilla i got 1369 lol


----------



## Koniakki

Here's my score on Tiger.


----------



## randomizer

I wish futuremark would make a benchmark suite with character like this one. 3DMark is dull by comparison.


----------



## bigaluksys

Here's mine.
Tested with the same CPU and GPU clocks of my sig rig.



3DMark is more boring now


----------



## borandi

To the OP, we've been discussing this in the HWBot section for some time









Our thread is at http://www.overclock.net/t/1338017/ if you care to add it to the OP


----------



## Catscratch

Cat 720p


Tiger 1080p


I was suprised to hear sound. It's been a long time since sound was used in synthetic benchmarks


----------



## skyn3t

Just update from my last post

This is tiger 1080 result in SLI


and this is 1440 result in SLI


----------



## ACM

Cat with Sapphire 6870 1000/1200:


Lol just noticed the 6870 almost scored 6870.


----------



## cowie

680 sli tiger


----------



## Catscratch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ACM*
> 
> Cat with Sapphire 6870 1000/1200:
> 
> Lol just noticed the 6870 almost scored 6870.


Nice. If I could get my hands on an Accelero TwinTurbo II , i could try 1ghz too







I just slapped a 12cm high cfm fan onto the original shroudless heatsink, i'll try 900mhz with stock voltage soon.


----------



## skyn3t

I just receveid eamul email from ALLBenchmark.com i dont know if they changed something on this new beta but Im DL now










Edited: Allbenchmark Link


----------



## djriful

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ACM*
> 
> Cat with Sapphire 6870 1000/1200:
> 
> Lol just noticed the 6870 almost scored 6870.


Hey! That's ME on the scoreboard!!


----------



## borandi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RenHoakRex*
> 
> Results in the bench a fubar'd. Guru should probably fix this in the stable and redo the high scores


Just because it's downloadable from Guru doesn't mean it's from Guru. The company that makes it is actually shown in many parts of the benchmark, give them the credit instead.


----------



## strap624

i'm only getting 6700 with my i7 950 @ 4.2ghz and a 7970.







something is wrong. My i3 rig with a 5870 gets 4300.


----------



## BZ1891

http://postimage.org/image/rosod5eab/full/

http://postimage.org/image/otfl6aaab/full/


----------



## blackRott9

FX 6300 @ 4.66GHz
GTX 660 +97 on the core

Tiger

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/gtx660tigercatz.jpg/

I gave my HD 7950 to my nephew. He games much more than I do. I mostly play things like Skyrim with vsync on @ 1920x1200.

EDIT-

Yeah, Beta 12 is a little faster.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/854/catzillab12.jpg/


----------



## Kand

GTX 660 @ stock.


----------



## Tarnix

First Catzilla Beta (did not update to the one posted above yet)
Cranked my GPU OC the best I could, lol. From 912 to 990, the score went up from 3700-ish to 4400. O_O
http://valid.canardpc.com/2627949
http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/a4d2g/


New version...


In the new version, my *max* FPS is about 20 FPS lower... As if it wasn't low enough *already!*


----------



## Chooofoojoo

Not all that stoked with my result. Time to push my 680 lightnings a bit harder.


----------



## cdoublejj

this benchmark sucks, i get 11ish fps on my laptop witch gets 18-20 fps on heave, on high.


----------



## jordanecmusic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cdoublejj*
> 
> this benchmark sucks, i get 11ish fps on my laptop witch gets 18-20 fps on heave, on high.


erm...laptop?


----------



## ShadoX

Heres mine on my Sig rig (Q9550 OC'ed to 3.2Ghz - only 1 GTX580 running at stock)



ps, not bad for such an old rig, plays everything out there with no issues, still havn't found that elusive reason to upgrade mobo/cpu/ram to a current gen









[edit] just got SLI working (the Alt frame rendering 2 trick), decent jump in points



maybe i should run the bench off my SSD, i assume thats what the loading time points are


----------



## bfromcolo

LOL Tiger 1080 score = 2024. Must be time for an upgrade and Santa didn't being me any new toys...


----------



## lurker2501

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ShadoX*
> 
> maybe i should run the bench off my SSD, i assume thats what the loading time points are


Doesn't impact overall score. I ran the test from a ram-drive and got the same results.


----------



## robbo2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lurker2501*
> 
> Doesn't impact overall score. I ran the test from a ram-drive and got the same results.


I tried it on my HDD and scored 9500. Switched to my SSD and got 10200 with the same overclocks.


----------



## Tarnix

Bought myself a GTX660 1020MHz for Xmas. Can't want to bench that.








Because seriously, 3800 with a FX8350 @ 4.7 and a GTX560 @ 990 MHz is pityful. Especially when there's some people having 10 00*0*! If that bench was consistent, that would mean they have have dual-CPU boards OC'd to death, 2xGTX690, 3x GTX680, or 3/4x7990 or some stuff. O_O


----------



## lurker2501

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robbo2*
> 
> I tried it on my HDD and scored 9500. Switched to my SSD and got 10200 with the same overclocks.


Never tried it on HDD. I was speaking about SSD/Ramdrive score difference.


----------



## Tatakai All

I just ran tiger settings and scored a measly 5972, pathetic. I really need to get a new cpu.


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tatakai All*
> 
> I just ran tiger settings and scored a measly 5972, pathetic. I really need to get a new cpu.


Lol , i had a 5800 score with 7850 , seems like very cpu dependant benchmark


----------



## LightMassKiller

Here's mine with an i3-2120 and a OC'd GTX 470


----------



## Tatakai All

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> Lol , i had a 5800 score with 7850 , seems like very cpu dependant benchmark


Yeah the cpu parts of the bench just destroy any attempt at a decent score for my lowly stock 955.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Tiger

Core +70
Memory +300
Power: 140%



At stock my card gets about 7200ish.

Also, my CPU is at 4Ghz.


----------



## KyadCK

8320 @ 5Ghz
6970 Xfire, 940/1450
32GB 1600 10-10-10


----------



## Mad Pistol

I pushed it a little higher by dropping the core clock on the GPU and closing everything else that I could.

Core +60
Mem +300
Power limit: 140%



At that score I'm topped out. I need a better CPU.


----------



## Cloudfire777

GTX 680M + 3610QM. Notebook GPU, not desktop.
All Tiger 1080p

Stock @ 720MHz


Overclocked @ 900MHz


----------



## ponywithaids

This is odd, somehow I'm only getting about 1000 and I'm running an i5 650 @ 4ghz and a GTX 460 @ 800/1900


----------



## qwertymac93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bfromcolo*
> 
> LOL Tiger 1080 score = 2024. Must be time for an upgrade and Santa didn't being me any new toys...


There's always overclocking!


Spoiler: A|| 640 & 5750 Tiger results


----------



## Tarnix

Bah, my CPU just looks ugly at this benchmark (Too bad they don't use AVX), but at least I got my GTX560 to OC bench-stable at 1GHz, and crysis 2-stable at 980MHz. LOL. (I can't add more volts, I'm at afterburner's limit)
Edit: Afterburner won't let me use more than 1087mv on the 2.3.0 build, and 2.1 can'T control my card's voltages at all... Hnnng. Anyway,


----------



## borandi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tarnix*
> 
> Bah, my CPU just looks ugly at this benchmark (Too bad they don't use AVX), but at least I got my GTX560 to OC bench-stable at 1GHz, and crysis 2-stable at 980MHz. LOL. (I can't add more volts, I'm at afterburner's limit)
> Edit: Afterburner won't let me use more than 1087mv on the 2.3.0 build, and 2.1 can'T control my card's voltages at all... Hnnng. Anyway,


It's not as simple as 'just using AVX'. Programming for processor extensions is (a) a pain and a headache nightmare, and (b) only offers up a speed advantage if the calculation can actually take advantage of the feature.

It's like rolling an apple down a slope. If you widen the slope x3, it takes x3 of the effort to actually build the slope. But if you've only got one apple, your throughput of one apple down a slope is still the same and you've made the effort of building the extra slope bits for nothing.


----------



## randomizer

I was getting about 4500 on Tiger with Beta 14. I get just over 600 in beta 15. I'm barely managing 7FPS in the opening camera shot.


----------



## Chris13002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cloudfire777*
> 
> GTX 680M + 3610QM. Notebook GPU, not desktop.
> All Tiger 1080p
> Stock @ 720MHz
> 
> Overclocked @ 900MHz


i'm impressed for a mobile GPU... That stock got a higher score than my one GTX 580 at 800mhz... :/
Shows how this test is really DX11 implemented (CUDA CORES)......


----------



## p3gaz_001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aftermath2006*
> 
> New Scores Much Happier with these
> Tiger 18956
> 
> Catzilla 11626


is that with sli active?

when i tried my sli wasn't working....


----------



## grunion

^^ Force AFR 2


----------



## borandi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chris13002*
> 
> i'm impressed for a mobile GPU... That stock got a higher score than my one GTX 580 at 800mhz... :/
> Shows how this test is really DX11 implemented (CUDA CORES)......


Probably more like DirectCompute, FWIW. GPU Architecture 101 ftw


----------



## randomizer

i7 920
GTX 560 Ti 448 core


----------



## Cloudfire777

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chris13002*
> 
> i'm impressed for a mobile GPU... That stock got a higher score than my one GTX 580 at 800mhz... :/
> Shows how this test is really DX11 implemented (CUDA CORES)......


Since Kepler came out, mobile GPUs from Nvidia took a HUGE leap over the Fermi architecture.
That said, after testing GTX 680M, in real task (i.e gaming) my 680M stock is performance wise is a slightly faster than GTX 570 but below your 580.
It overclocks pretty well though so once you feed it a little more voltage and increase the clock its faster than 580.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cloudfire777*
> 
> Since Kepler came out, mobile GPUs from Nvidia took a HUGE leap over the Fermi architecture.
> That said, after testing GTX 680M, in real task (i.e gaming) my 680M stock is performance wise is a slightly faster than GTX 570 but below your 580.
> It overclocks pretty well though so once you feed it a little more voltage and increase the clock its faster than 580.


If you think about it though, you've got a mobile GPU with the performance of a GTX 580. Do you remember just how much juice a GTX 580 used at full load? That makes the GTX 680M quite a feat of engineering.


----------



## SammichThyme

Wow this thing is a beast. I ran the Catzilla preset and got a 4894 with my SLI rig.


----------



## Duff-Man

Here's another download link : http://www.comogam.net/ext/index.php?/files/file/17-catzilla-benchmark-beta/


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SammichThyme*
> 
> Wow this thing is a beast. I ran the Catzilla preset and got a 4894 with my SLI rig.


That's the score you should be getting with a single. There's a way to make SLI work, but I'm not sure how.


----------



## KyadCK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SammichThyme*
> 
> Wow this thing is a beast. I ran the Catzilla preset and got a 4894 with my SLI rig.
> 
> 
> 
> That's the score you should be getting with a single. There's a way to make SLI work, but I'm not sure how.
Click to expand...

Catzilla, not tiger.


----------



## Tarnix

The more I look at this thread, the less I understand why I'm getting sub 4500, lol.


----------



## Cloudfire777

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> If you think about it though, you've got a mobile GPU with the performance of a GTX 580. Do you remember just how much juice a GTX 580 used at full load? That makes the GTX 680M quite a feat of engineering.


Yes its very impressive. In the mobile world we saw 60% performance increase from GTX 580M -> GTX 680M, a lot more than what desktop users got. And to make it even more impressive, GTX 580M was very hot, averaging around 85C or something while 680M is down to 70-75C in average with the same cooling system.

I can max out any game I want @ 1080p. I would need desktop GPU for higher resolutions, but only Apple have higher specced displays ("retina").


----------



## lurker2501

Btw, what is the name of the track playing in the benchmark?


----------



## borandi

It's custom made for the benchmark. The developers said it will be released free to download at some pont


----------



## RobotDevil666

Wow !! Cats , lazers and Dub ......... best benchmark evarrrrr ?

I did few runs and that's what I'm getting :

Tiger - 8450
Catzilla - 5230

Those are with single card anyone know how to enable SLI ?
Also i upgraded to Basic so i can save my results and I'm getting error when i click on "Submit Results" it says "There is a problem with saving results in your account" anybody else getting that ?


----------



## navit

With my 3770k @ 4.5 and my Lightning at stock.



With my 3770k @4.5 and my Lightning 1100/1500



With 3770k @ 4.5 and lightning @1150/1550



With 3770k @ 4.5 and Lightning @ 1200/1600

Not to sure about this bench....... I got a higher score @ 1100/1500 than with 1150/1550 but a big jump when I went to 1200/1600, hmmmm not much sense there.


----------



## CiBi

Ok here are my results
All my specs and temperatures are on the screenshots (this is the first time i've seen my gpu hit 80°C)

Cat:


and Tiger:


----------



## skyn3t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *p3gaz_001*
> 
> is that with sli active?
> when i tried my sli wasn't working....


You have to force sli in nvidia control panel . Just open up it and add allbenchmark to the programs tab in nvidia control panel when you dine adding scroll down dow till you see. sli option just right click and force redering 1 or 2


----------



## Tarnix

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RobotDevil666*
> 
> Wow !! Cats , lazers and Dub ......... best benchmark evarrrrr ?
> 
> I did few runs and that's what I'm getting :
> 
> Tiger - 8450
> Catzilla - 5230
> 
> Those are with single card *anyone know how to enable SLI ?*
> Also i upgraded to Basic so i can save my results and I'm getting error when i click on "Submit Results" it says "There is a problem with saving results in your account" anybody else getting that ?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skyn3t*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *p3gaz_001*
> 
> is that with sli active?
> *when i tried my sli wasn't working*....
> 
> 
> 
> You have to force sli in nvidia control panel . Just open up it and add allbenchmark to the programs tab in nvidia control panel when you dine adding scroll down dow till you see. sli option just right click and force redering 1 or 2
Click to expand...

^This.
You have to force it in Alternate Frame (AF)
Got myself a GTX660, I will be back with bench pics


----------



## Tonza

Does Nvidia cards perform better in this benchmark due PhysX? Tried at friends place first with stock 670 (around 4900 on 1440P resolution). Then we swapped hes new 7970 in with 1125/1575 clocks (around 5100). Yes i know 7970 got better score, but 7970 is much faster in everything else, it absolutely destroys 670 at 1440p on some games.


----------



## Tarnix

kay, scores with my GTX660.
I think something was definitely wrong with my 560, lol.


----------



## f0rteOC

Official release date?


----------



## trulsrohk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tonza*
> 
> Does Nvidia cards perform better in this benchmark due PhysX? Tried at friends place first with stock 670 (around 4900 on 1440P resolution). Then we swapped hes new 7970 in with 1125/1575 clocks (around 5100). Yes i know 7970 got better score, but 7970 is much faster in everything else, it absolutely destroys 670 at 1440p on some games.


It does favor nvidia cards for whatever reason. Although it seems to be only in the "combined" test. Highest total score I've got with my setup is close to 9500 & I've seen 680 setups were I scored higher in every individual test but their combined test was 1k points higher


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lurker2501*
> 
> Btw, what is the name of the track playing in the benchmark?


Try and Shazam it and see if it'll pickup. If not, someone might know, or you could email them personally and ask







.


----------



## borandi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lurker2501*
> 
> Btw, what is the name of the track playing in the benchmark?
> 
> 
> 
> Try and Shazam it and see if it'll pickup. If not, someone might know, or you could email them personally and ask
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...

Or you could read my direct response under the post you were answering.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *borandi*
> 
> It's custom made for the benchmark. The developers said it will be released free to download at some point


----------



## skyn3t

After some bios issues i manager to fix my mod and have my fixed clock up and running so my card stays on top clock all the time







.
PS: For those have SLI , before flash the cards make sure you remove the SLI BRIDGE before any flash.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *borandi*
> 
> Or you could read my direct response under the post you were answering.


Guess, I missed it, but thanks for being so nice about it.


----------



## That_guy3

Downloading to try out on my AGP 6200 rig For ****s and giggles


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *That_guy3*
> 
> Downloading to try out on my AGP 6200 rig For ****s and giggles


It's a DX11 benchmark. A Geforce 6200 is a DX9 card (and a very low-spec one at that.)


----------



## Acefire

Nvidia biased to the max. Not a legit benchmark by any stretch.


----------



## nismo_usaf

Excuse me Sir, but where is your benchmark? Seems as 95% of your post are "red team biased".


----------



## Acefire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nismo_usaf*
> 
> Excuse me Sir, but where is your benchmark? Seems as 95% of your post are "red team biased".


It doesn't seem fishy to you that this is the only benchmark where Nvidia wins across the board? Stock 670 gets amazing score whilst 7970 @ 1.3ghz pulls in like 8k.

Junk benchmark.


----------



## nismo_usaf

PhysX?


----------



## King4x4

Well my trifire setuo is at max doing 70% optimization on all gpus... This benchmark needs a new driver plain and simple.


----------



## nismo_usaf

But like we said before its just a Beta? Maybe the beta throws in PhysX while AMD doesnt pull anything...

I think give it a couple months and it will we the go to benchmark.


----------



## Acefire

We'll see. Hopefully the scores make some more sense by then. IT you look at the leaderboard there are people with 1 680 that have a score of like 28,000


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Best I've done so far with dual 7970's at 1220MHz and a 3960X at 4.8GHz is a little over 13000 on Tiger preset. My folding rig got about 6500 with a 2600k at 4.8GHz and a single GTX 580 at 940MHz for comparison. The scores do seem all over the place but of course it is a beta so who knows...


----------



## nismo_usaf

Maybe its CPU's throwing the scores off.


----------



## trulsrohk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nismo_usaf*
> 
> Maybe its CPU's throwing the scores off.


nope

plenty of guys like me and the guy above you with 4.8 ghz + SB-E chips that are getting worse overall scores then people with moderately clocked i5's even though they have much worse scores in the physics portion of the test. The Nvidia systems are only winning soundly in the first part of the test; all my other individual scores are usually better then 680 systems but the "Hardware" portion which makes up the bulk of the score always seems to be about 1k points ahead


----------



## randomizer

3DMark Vantage had hardware PhysX enabled by default originally, and that caused some people to get their panties in a knot as well. It's possible that the same is happening here, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## borandi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Acefire*
> 
> Nvidia biased to the max. Not a legit benchmark by any stretch.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Acefire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nismo_usaf*
> 
> Excuse me Sir, but where is your benchmark? Seems as 95% of your post are "red team biased".
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't seem fishy to you that this is the only benchmark where Nvidia wins across the board? Stock 670 gets amazing score whilst 7970 @ 1.3ghz pulls in like 8k.
> 
> Junk benchmark.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Acefire*
> 
> We'll see. Hopefully the scores make some more sense by then. IT you look at the leaderboard there are people with 1 680 that have a score of like 28,000


I hope you're not as stupid as you sound.

Each GPU type has a different architecture. Back in the VLIW days, AMD were counting on 4+1 vector calculations to gain top spot, then they changed to GCN which is still using as much IPC as can be. NVIDIA's take is all about thread scheduling, and simple warp placement within the SMs.

Each physics engine has a particular way of calculating things - some benefit VLIW, others GCN, and some benefit Fermi and Kepler. Different engines will send different calculations to the GPU to be processed.

If you take any one engine in particular and play the same actions on a system, then replace the GPU with a different architecture, they will all have the same commands issued to them through the DirectX/OpenGL/DirectCompute protocols, but it is up to the silicon to decide how to process them. It boils down to scheduling, to IPC, size of caches, texture buffers, among many other things. If the calculation order or process benefits one architecture, then that is the fault of the PHYSICS ENGINE, not the developers. Most developers will use the physics engine they feel most comfortable with or that accurately reflects what they want to do, not out a sense of loyalty for brand XYZ or in the interests of fairness.

Get off your high horse and actually understand the role GPU architecture plays in this.


----------



## KyadCK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *borandi*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Acefire*
> 
> Nvidia biased to the max. Not a legit benchmark by any stretch.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Acefire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nismo_usaf*
> 
> Excuse me Sir, but where is your benchmark? Seems as 95% of your post are "red team biased".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't seem fishy to you that this is the only benchmark where Nvidia wins across the board? Stock 670 gets amazing score whilst 7970 @ 1.3ghz pulls in like 8k.
> 
> Junk benchmark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Acefire*
> 
> We'll see. Hopefully the scores make some more sense by then. IT you look at the leaderboard there are people with 1 680 that have a score of like 28,000
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I hope you're not as stupid as you sound.
> 
> Each GPU type has a different architecture. Back in the VLIW days, AMD were counting on 4+1 vector calculations to gain top spot, then they changed to GCN which is still using as much IPC as can be. NVIDIA's take is all about thread scheduling, and simple warp placement within the SMs.
> 
> Each physics engine has a particular way of calculating things - some benefit VLIW, others GCN, and some benefit Fermi and Kepler. Different engines will send different calculations to the GPU to be processed.
> 
> If you take any one engine in particular and play the same actions on a system, then replace the GPU with a different architecture, they will all have the same commands issued to them through the DirectX/OpenGL/DirectCompute protocols, but it is up to the silicon to decide how to process them. It boils down to scheduling, to IPC, size of caches, texture buffers, among many other things. If the calculation order or process benefits one architecture, then that is the fault of the PHYSICS ENGINE, not the developers. Most developers will use the physics engine they feel most comfortable with or that accurately reflects what they want to do, not out a sense of loyalty for brand XYZ or in the interests of fairness.
> 
> Get off your high horse and actually understand the role GPU architecture plays in this.
Click to expand...

The benchmark does not show the relative difference between the GPUs that is seen both in the real world and in other benchmarks.

It also thinks a stock 2500k should get the same physics score as a 8320 at 5Ghz, and it does use (or tries to use) all 8 threads, by testing done between britishbob and myself.

The benchmark is biased. Get off your high horse and accept it.


----------



## borandi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KyadCK*
> 
> The benchmark does not show the relative difference between the GPUs that is seen both in the real world and in other benchmarks.


Fire up some code that compiles to a naturally easy shortcut in one architecture and the other architecture will seem to struggle. You don't seem to get this. If I write OpenCL code in a normal way and it maps nicer to AMD than NVIDIA, does that show the differences between the GPU? No.

There is no single-algorithm panacea that maps the same to each vendor's hardware. If there is a score difference, then that is representative of the how each architecture deals with the mathematics of the engine.

When you build a bit of silicon, you determine what are the easy wins from the last silicon (more cache, more schedulers, better rasterisers) and hope it works for the next gen. It's not the fault of the programmer if the silicon makers decided to go after one area they thought would benefit than something else which just happens to be what you are testing.
Quote:


> It also thinks a stock 2500k should get the same physics score as a 8320 at 5Ghz, and it does use (or tries to use) all 8 threads, by testing done between britishbob and myself.


You do understand how a 8320 works, right? Four modules, and each module has two INT units and one FP unit for calculation. That means that in floating point arithmetic, it acts like an 4-core, and in integer arithmetic, it acts like an 8-core. AMD went this way on the understanding that OS logic is often driven by int loops. But most physics and mathematics is driven by floating point mathematics, like physics in games. Only the highly optimised algorithms solely use integer arithmetic.

It has been shown repeatedly that the 2500K in floating point arithmetic is 30% faster in single threaded mode than an 8320. This is shown in the AnandTech 3DPM test which is memory independent and uses solely FP mathematics (using an 8150):



Even when using ALL 8 THREADS of that 8120, the i5-2500K still beat it:



Primary physics, such as those used in games, are only slightly multithreaded. They involve memory fences and synchronization gaps which slow down the system, and if the scheduler of the processor is not up to the task, then context thread switching performance literally sucks. This is why only secondary physics, which is allowed to make mistakes because it doesn't influence the game one iota, can be sent to GPUs.

Unless you can show me that the physics operations in the engine that the benchmark uses contains primarily integer mathematics (highly unlikely if you have EVER worked with a physics engine), I would happily believe the results are realistic and real-world, regardless if you think they are biased.


----------



## xzamples

that's a pretty awesome animation


----------



## KyadCK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *borandi*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> It also thinks a stock 2500k should get the same physics score as a 8320 at 5Ghz, and it does use (or tries to use) all 8 threads, by testing done between britishbob and myself.
> 
> 
> 
> You do understand how a 8320 works, right? Four modules, and each module has two INT units and one FP unit for calculation. That means that in floating point arithmetic, it acts like an 4-core, and in integer arithmetic, it acts like an 8-core. AMD went this way on the understanding that OS logic is often driven by int loops. But most physics and mathematics is driven by floating point mathematics, like physics in games. Only the highly optimised algorithms solely use integer arithmetic.
> 
> It has been shown repeatedly that the 2500K in floating point arithmetic is _30% faster_ in single threaded mode than an 8320. This is shown in the AnandTech 3DPM test which is memory independent and uses solely FP mathematics (using an 8150):
Click to expand...

8320. At 5Ghz. which is 43% faster then stock. Where's your math now?

Also, at least _try_ to find a modern test. BD is not PD.

Actually, you know what? Lets use your multithreaded graph. The 8150 is just behind the 2500k, yes? Good. Now add my 7% IPC advantage for having PD instead. And now add my 39% clock speed bonus on top of that. I should be coming out with a score of *505* assuming perfect scaling, but even without that I still absolutely destroy the 2500k at stock, which is what my CPU ties with according to Catzilla.

Still think it's "realistic"?


----------



## BradleyW

I score 10300 on Tiger Preset on sig rig. Very disappointed in 7970 CF on this bench.


----------



## USFORCES

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skyn3t*
> 
> After some bios issues i manager to fix my mod and have my fixed clock up and running so my card stays on top clock all the time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> PS: For those have SLI , before flash the cards make sure you remove the SLI BRIDGE before any flash.


I've flashed mine around 10 times and I've never removed the SLI bridge.


----------



## BradleyW

Does my score look normal for stock 7970's on stock speeds?
Tiger Preset

Cheers.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *borandi*
> 
> Fire up some code that compiles to a naturally easy shortcut in one architecture and the other architecture will seem to struggle. You don't seem to get this. If I write OpenCL code in a normal way and it maps nicer to AMD than NVIDIA, does that show the differences between the GPU? No.
> There is no single-algorithm panacea that maps the same to each vendor's hardware. If there is a score difference, then that is representative of the how each architecture deals with the mathematics of the engine.
> When you build a bit of silicon, you determine what are the easy wins from the last silicon (more cache, more schedulers, better rasterisers) and hope it works for the next gen. It's not the fault of the programmer if the silicon makers decided to go after one area they thought would benefit than something else which just happens to be what you are testing.
> You do understand how a 8320 works, right? Four modules, and each module has two INT units and one FP unit for calculation. That means that in floating point arithmetic, it acts like an 4-core, and in integer arithmetic, it acts like an 8-core. AMD went this way on the understanding that OS logic is often driven by int loops. But most physics and mathematics is driven by floating point mathematics, like physics in games. Only the highly optimised algorithms solely use integer arithmetic.
> It has been shown repeatedly that the 2500K in floating point arithmetic is 30% faster in single threaded mode than an 8320. This is shown in the AnandTech 3DPM test which is memory independent and uses solely FP mathematics (using an 8150):
> 
> Even when using ALL 8 THREADS of that 8120, the i5-2500K still beat it:
> 
> Primary physics, such as those used in games, are only slightly multithreaded. They involve memory fences and synchronization gaps which slow down the system, and if the scheduler of the processor is not up to the task, then context thread switching performance literally sucks. This is why only secondary physics, which is allowed to make mistakes because it doesn't influence the game one iota, can be sent to GPUs.
> Unless you can show me that the physics operations in the engine that the benchmark uses contains primarily integer mathematics (highly unlikely if you have EVER worked with a physics engine), I would happily believe the results are realistic and real-world, regardless if you think they are biased.


Wow, you sound really smart and knowledgeable. But all of your points ignore the simple fact that the results from this benchmark are absolutely all over the map even with similar hardware. This is still a beta afterall. Of course all benches tend to favor one architecture over another (Heaven is GCN optimized while 3dmark11 has been Kepler optimized) but the results are usually predictable given GPU, core clock, etc. This bench is utterly unpredictable from what I've seen....


----------



## borandi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KyadCK*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *borandi*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> It also thinks a stock 2500k should get the same physics score as a 8320 at 5Ghz, and it does use (or tries to use) all 8 threads, by testing done between britishbob and myself.
> 
> 
> 
> You do understand how a 8320 works, right? Four modules, and each module has two INT units and one FP unit for calculation. That means that in floating point arithmetic, it acts like an 4-core, and in integer arithmetic, it acts like an 8-core. AMD went this way on the understanding that OS logic is often driven by int loops. But most physics and mathematics is driven by floating point mathematics, like physics in games. Only the highly optimised algorithms solely use integer arithmetic.
> 
> It has been shown repeatedly that the 2500K in floating point arithmetic is _30% faster_ in single threaded mode than an 8320. This is shown in the AnandTech 3DPM test which is memory independent and uses solely FP mathematics (using an 8150):
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 8320. At 5Ghz. which is 43% faster then stock. Where's your math now?
Click to expand...

You really think that a processor scales perfectly with processor speed? You really think that 100% speed increase gives 100% increase in benchmark results?

Wow. Just wow.
Quote:


> Also, at least _try_ to find a modern test.


Modern as you like. It's currently being used in scientific research as we speak based on papers published over the past three years.

Quote:


> Actually, you know what? Lets use your multithreaded graph. The 8150 is just behind the 2500k, yes? Good. Now add my 7% IPC advantage for having PD instead. And now add my 39% clock speed bonus on top of that. I should be coming out with a score of *505* assuming perfect scaling, but even without that I still absolutely destroy the 2500k at stock, which is what my CPU ties with according to Catzilla.
> 
> Still think it's "realistic"?


OK lets go with some PD, because screw architecture similarities. I'm sure the



A10-5800K (2M/4T) at 4.2G ST = 73.66

Assuming perfect scaling, a 4M/8T PD @ 5G = 5/4.2 (ratio) * (4 to 8) (INT to FP threads) * 73.66 (score) = 350.78 to 701.52

If the calculations are perfectly integers, and scaling is perfect, then yes, the 8320 would be better. Show me a physics demonstration that uses purely integers please.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Wow, you sound really smart and knowledgeable. But all of your points ignore the simple fact that the results from this benchmark are absolutely all over the map even with similar hardware. This is still a beta afterall. Of course all benches tend to favor one architecture over another (Heaven is GCN optimized while 3dmark11 has been Kepler optimized) but the results are usually predictable given GPU, core clock, etc. This bench is utterly unpredictable from what I've seen....


My point was to express that simply because a 7970 isn't around a 680 is not bias in the hands of the developer. It's bias at the hands of the engine, which will be configured to do the math a certain way. The same commands will be sent to both architectures and it's up to the silicon to handle it. Users crying out bias in the face of the contrary is what was irking me.

With regards unpredictable results, I've seen otherwise. Fresh installs across my test beds provide repeatable results, with NVIDIA coming out on top due to the way it handles the mathematics and memory accesses, or how the drivers interpret the commands from the protocols. Regular overclocks provided measurable and graphical gains given all else equal.


----------



## KyadCK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *borandi*
> 
> *stuff*


Welp, you didn't even read my post, so OK.

Also, Trinity has no L3, find a Piledriver one, I'm sure you can.

Lastly? Single-thread? Really? Dear god just really don't want to admit my 8320 should win, do you?









Even assuming I did have just bulldozer, at my clock speed I would nuke the hell out of the 2500k at stock. Look at your own Multithread graph. You trying to deny it and defend a _beta benchmark that has a long way to go_ is very funny though. So please, keep it up so I can laugh more.


----------



## quadx

Where's the linux download?


----------



## Mad Pistol

Just broke 8000 with my GTX 660 Ti FTW Sig 2 and my CPU @ 4.2Ghz



Core: +100
Mem: +385
Powerlimit: 140%
CPU: 4.2Ghz
Bus: 2800Mhz

Here's a hint to all Kepler users.

Use the Forceware 306.97 drivers. They allow you to overclock higher than the 310.70's.


----------



## FTWRoguE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BradleyW*
> 
> Does my score look normal for stock 7970's on stock speeds?
> Tiger Preset
> 
> Cheers.


No. I got this on a single 680


----------



## trulsrohk

They seriously need to re-vamp they physics portion of this test... GPU overclocks should not improve your CPU score...nor should a 2600k beat a 3930k due to having a 680 paired with it


----------



## BradleyW

Can anyone with dual 7970's help confirm?
I score 8000 on Tiger preset with a single 7970 and 10,300 with CF enabled.


----------



## Mad Pistol

I can finally say that I am topped out on my 660 Ti, but what a ride it was. All in all, I netted nearly a thousand points from overclocking.











Forceware 306.97
Core: +110
Memory: +500
Power Limit: 140%
CPU 4.2Ghz

http://www.allbenchmark.com/profil/userprofile/Mad%20Pistol

Core:1320Mhz








Memory: 1753Mhz (7012Mhz effective)

To all of you with a 660 Ti, good luck beating the GPU score.

What's even more amazing is that I did that on a Phenom II quad core. I don't even have an Intel SB or IB quad. If I did, that score would be much higher.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BradleyW*
> 
> Can anyone with dual 7970's help confirm?
> I score 8000 on Tiger preset with a single 7970 and 10,300 with CF enabled.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Best I've done so far with dual 7970's at 1220MHz and a 3960X at 4.8GHz is a little over 13000 on Tiger preset. My folding rig got about 6500 with a 2600k at 4.8GHz and a single GTX 580 at 940MHz for comparison. The scores do seem all over the place but of course it is a beta so who knows...


----------



## BradleyW

It seems my scores are about right then. Cheers.
Rep+

Edit: here are some scores which people might find useful.
Tiger preset
7970

7970 1125/1575

7970 CF

7970 CF 1125/1575


----------



## wrigleyvillain

Ok this is hilariously awesome (and looks pretty damn good).


----------



## grunion

Where can we get a working version?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I can finally say that I am topped out on my 660 Ti, but what a ride it was. All in all, I netted nearly a thousand points from overclocking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Forceware 306.97
> Core: +110
> Memory: +500
> Power Limit: 140%
> CPU 4.2Ghz
> http://www.allbenchmark.com/profil/userprofile/Mad%20Pistol
> Core:1320Mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Memory: 1753Mhz (7012Mhz effective)
> To all of you with a 660 Ti, good luck beating the GPU score.
> What's even more amazing is that I did that on a Phenom II quad core. I don't even have an Intel SB or IB quad. If I did, that score would be much higher.


Wow, compare your Physics score (160) to FTWRoguE's (1109).


----------



## Ashtyr

I've gone back, my result was 9797, but in the first beta, now with the latest beta 16



CPU phenom x6 [email protected] Mhz
GTX 670 @1230/7200
driver 310.70

Almost the same results


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Wow, compare your Physics score (160) to FTWRoguE's (1109).


I know.

As of writing this, I have the highest core clock of any 660 Ti on the Catzilla ladder. In fact, I have a higher clock than most 670's and 680's too.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Wish they'd hurry up and release the final version so we could get some accurate results. Its a cool bench but there are just too many inconsistencies...


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trulsrohk*
> 
> They seriously need to re-vamp they physics portion of this test... GPU overclocks should not improve your CPU score...nor should a 2600k beat a 3930k due to having a 680 paired with it


The physics test should be done like 3DMark's: very low resolution and every possible fancy graphical effect disabled. Instead it's just as graphically intensive as the rest of the suite. Hopefully they are not measuring framerate because that is a horrible metric for physics testing.


----------



## ASUSfreak

sub'd

So in 1080p with ALL on or off it isn't much of a difference with my setup???

3500 or 4100 points...

And what is so taxing on the cards when all is OFF? I still get max 45fps

Is it cause it's BETA?

Does it support SLI?


----------



## KyadCK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomizer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *trulsrohk*
> 
> They seriously need to re-vamp they physics portion of this test... GPU overclocks should not improve your CPU score...nor should a 2600k beat a 3930k due to having a 680 paired with it
> 
> 
> 
> The physics test should be done like 3DMark's: very low resolution and every possible fancy graphical effect disabled. Instead it's just as graphically intensive as the rest of the suite. Hopefully they are not measuring framerate because that is a horrible metric for physics testing.
Click to expand...

They are measuring Physics with FPS, you can see the counter along the top.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomizer*
> 
> The physics test should be done like 3DMark's: very low resolution and every possible fancy graphical effect disabled. Instead it's just as graphically intensive as the rest of the suite. Hopefully they are not measuring framerate because that is a horrible metric for physics testing.


Agreed. Too many variables when measured at high detail and high res. 3Dmark's method is much better.


----------



## Vonnis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ASUSfreak*
> 
> sub'd
> So in 1080p with ALL on or off it isn't much of a difference with my setup???
> 3500 or 4100 points...
> And what is so taxing on the cards when all is OFF? I still get max 45fps
> Is it cause it's BETA?
> Does it support SLI?


You have to force alternate frame rendering in nVCP for SLI to work. That doesn't fully explain your score though.


----------



## BradleyW

Anyone tried AFR for CF on catzilla?


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KyadCK*
> 
> They are measuring Physics with FPS, you can see the counter along the top.


I did notice the FPS counter, but we can't know for certain if that's what they are using to generate the score. Same goes for the GPU arithmetic test, which seems to run slowly on the two cards I've tested (a GTX 560 Ti and a HD 5850) but is hardly visually impressive.


----------



## ceteris

EVGA came out with SLI Enhancement for those who have EVGA cards (and who are too lazy to go rumaging through the folder to manually change settings.)

EVGA SLI Enhancement

It was the first thing that popped out on Google when I couldn't figure out why my score kept sucking.


----------



## KyadCK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomizer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KyadCK*
> 
> They are measuring Physics with FPS, you can see the counter along the top.
> 
> 
> 
> I did notice the FPS counter, but we can't know for certain if that's what they are using to generate the score. Same goes for the GPU arithmetic test, which seems to run slowly on the two cards I've tested (a GTX 560 Ti and a HD 5850) but is hardly visually impressive.
Click to expand...

Maybe not the Final score, but the FPS you get there is your Physics score on the scores page.


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KyadCK*
> 
> Maybe not the Final score, but the FPS you get there is your Physics score on the scores page.


Well that's just plain terrible.

On another note: FWIW I tried running with PhysX forced on the CPU and then GPU and it may no appreciable difference, so I don't think this benchmark is doing NVIDIA-specific hardware accelerated physics like 3DMark Vantage once did.


----------



## strap624

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BradleyW*
> 
> It seems my scores are about right then. Cheers.
> Rep+
> Edit: here are some scores which people might find useful.
> Tiger preset
> 7970
> 
> 7970 1125/1575
> 
> 7970 CF
> 
> 7970 CF 1125/1575


Interesting, On my 7970 CF setup I get 10476 stock clocks on tiger, your CPU is getting a much better score than mine and your loading time is much less. Seems like this bench favors NVIDIA.


----------



## D1G1TALD3ATH

interesting. dl'ing it now.


----------



## FTWRoguE

Tried out the Beta 16, got pretty much identical scores from Beta 12.



Same OC as last time 1280 core 3420 memory.


----------



## StreekG

Hi guys, not understanding my score at all on Tiger setting. Beta 16

GTX680 Lightning SLI with +105 on the core with LN2 Bios.
9963 is the score i get...

What the hell?

Edit: Fixed SLI profile


----------



## sixor

http://img715.imageshack.us/i/catqp.jpg/
cat mode
latest nvidia

http://img23.imageshack.us/i/tigerchg.jpg/
tiger


----------



## strap624

Small overclock on crossfire 7970's 1085/1500 on driver ver 12.8. tiger:


Edfit: also I am noticing a significant drop in temps with the 12.8 drivers. My cards are idling about 2 degrees apart, whereas before they were nearly 10-15 degrees apart. 20 degree difference under load at times.


----------



## snitchkilla11

how do you enable sli?


----------



## Spongeboy5040

Force Alternate Frames in the Nvidia Control Panel


----------



## fewness

Force alternate frame rendering 2, 680 SLI + [email protected] Maybe I can go over 20K if I further overclock CPU but doesn't seem worth it....at least not before they release a non-beta version which supports SLI.


----------



## fewness

updated to beta17 which seems supporting SLI now but Tiger is no longer free to play, lulz

680 SLI + [email protected], Cat


----------



## ceteris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fewness*
> 
> updated to beta17 which seems supporting SLI now but Tiger is no longer free to play, lulz
> 
> 680 SLI + [email protected], Cat
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


You should bump your CPU OC another .2Ghz to see if you can bump up in front of me


----------



## fewness

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ceteris*
> 
> You should bump your CPU OC another .2Ghz to see if you can bump up in front of me


As you suggested 680SLI + [email protected], Cat Beta18.
but CPU physics score actually dropped, funny


----------



## CyberWolf575

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KingT*
> 
> I've scored little higher with HD7950 @ 1070/1750MHz and 2500K @ 4.5GHz..
> 
> 
> 
> CHEERS..


May I ask how did you get your memory above 1575, which is what it seems to max out at on my MSIAfterburn. Or at least, I should say, that is the max it shows I can set it at. I'm sure I could push the card farther.

Edit: Why are the Tiger and Catzilla grayed out for me? I def, can run them...and under recommended everything is Green. I am confused.


----------



## Ashtyr

Beta 18

Phenom II [email protected]
GTX670 1240/7300

TIGER



CAT i get 14554, no image sorry


----------



## Chris13002

Beta 19... Don't feel like purchasing this now...


Glad to see their SLI is now working...


----------



## ceteris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fewness*
> 
> As you suggested 680SLI + [email protected], Cat Beta18.
> but CPU physics score actually dropped, funny


LOL overall score is all that matters!







But with a system like yours, you should put your one post on Catzilla if you are using free version. Not sure what you post your name as on the leaderboards though.

They just updated the BETA again.... Probably explains the higher AMD scores!


----------



## fewness

680SLI + [email protected], Cat Beta19. I think that's the limit of my system.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fewness*
> 
> 680SLI + [email protected], Cat Beta19. I think that's the limit of my system.


Are your cards OC'ed? Push harder







Up those fan speeds to push those maximum clock speeds.


----------



## ceteris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fewness*
> 
> 680SLI + [email protected], Cat Beta19. I think that's the limit of my system.


lol why are you running the "Cat" bench? Do "Catzilla" and save the score!

Will install Beta19 this weekend and rebench.

Not sure if you are on water, but I pushed my 690 to the limit w/c'ing it. I'm sure you can squeeze more out of those Keplers if you are


----------



## SpykeZ

Wow...I'm amazed this little CPU is still chugging out haha. going to try and push a little higher OC cause I'm pretty sure my cpu is holding the GPU back now.


----------



## Ashtyr

Phenom II [email protected] 4,2 Ghz
GTX 670



Do not think I can take much more of my rig, at least not with a single 670.

Is my personal record on this bench


----------



## SauS

Seems that Crossfire ain't working properly in this benchmark:

1 card:


2 cards:


----------



## SpykeZ

Ha! I didn't know you were a member here ^__^ post more!


----------



## fewness

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ceteris*
> 
> lol why are you running the "Cat" bench? Do "Catzilla" and save the score!
> 
> Will install Beta19 this weekend and rebench.
> 
> Not sure if you are on water, but I pushed my 690 to the limit w/c'ing it. I'm sure you can squeeze more out of those Keplers if you are


Don't really have the feeling to spend 15$ on it...
My cards are the oldest reference design cards, 100% fan speed provides no performance boost except for huge noise. They are at 1250/7200 now.


----------



## ceteris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fewness*
> 
> Don't really have the feeling to spend 15$ on it...
> My cards are the oldest reference design cards, 100% fan speed provides no performance boost except for huge noise. They are at 1250/7200 now.


Huh? I thought you can bench at any setting, but just post only one of the scores! Oh well... maybe they just changed it recently.


----------



## SpykeZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ceteris*
> 
> Huh? I thought you can bench at any setting, but just post only one of the scores! Oh well... maybe they just changed it recently.


Yathe new release costs money, I bought the 1080p version, was only 5 bucks


----------

