# Single GPU Fire Strike Top 30



## Forceman

First off, thanks to PedroC1999 for setting up this thread and running it for the first 6 months. He's gotten busy with real world stuff, so the thread was handed off to me so he can focus on that stuff for now. I'll try to keep it up to his high standards.

Post your 3DMark Firestrike validation URL, and a screenshot with your OCN Name and date. This is mandatory, I will try to keep this as updated as possible









Leave all Catalyst Control Center and Nvidia Control Panel settings to the defaults for these runs as well, no tessellation or LOD changes.

Also, please include your GPU clock and memory speed in the post, as I've started collecting that data as well - just use whatever numbers are set in Afterburner/Precision. For example - GTX Titan @ 1250/1800 or R9 290X @ 1150/1350.

Please structure your post like so...

Code:



Code:


'........'

OCN Name - CPU @ Clock speed - GPU @ core speed / memory speed -  Score 
- Date (DD/MM/YYYYY)

Please replace the '........' with either...

'*New Entry*'
or
'*Update*'
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AsR3WxGUn9YGdF84RXFmell6RHVTdlRZUzN0YzB3dGc&output=html&widget=true
*Depending on if your Accepted, Updated or Rejected, you will get a sign made by our very own Alancsalt!*



*Please check and make me aware of any mistakes in regards of the spreadsheet, as I will happily correct anything*


----------



## PedroC1999

Reserved, and the spreadsheet will be up tomorrow GMT


----------



## Nittygritty

I will post mine in the morning Pedro.

Paul.


----------



## jezzer

Nice, thanks for making this thread









Here's my result, no LOD tweaks

Jezzer - 2700K @ 5.2 - GTX 780 iChill - 10321 - 4.7.2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/618683

If anyone knows some tweaks that are no cheats like LOD pls let me know, Always trying to improve my score


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1254MHz -- 12,382 -- June 10th 2013*



*http://www.3dmark.com/fs/533662*


----------



## ghostrider85

LOL, your list will gonna be dominated by titans


----------



## Yungbenny911

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghostrider85*
> 
> LOL, your list will gonna be dominated by titans


IKR? I won't even bother posting my 770


----------



## ghostrider85

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> IKR? I won't even bother posting my 770


there should be divisions like: titans only, 680 and 670 only, etc.


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghostrider85*
> 
> there should be divisions like: titans only, 680 and 670 only, etc.


I will be heading off to school in a bit, I will add more devisions later


----------



## Nittygritty

Here is mine for now room for some improvement.

*Nittygritty --- i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ---HD7970 Vapor X 3GB @ 1230MHz --- 7813 --- 5th July 2013*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/880684


----------



## jezzer

Small improvement









Jezzer - 2700K @ 5.2 - GTX 780 - 10624 - 5.7.2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/621573


----------



## PedroC1999

Ok Guys, going to work on the thread and spreadsheet layout abit.

Just got back from 6 hours off Football/Working out ready for some upcoming school sports days, so bear with me


----------



## jezzer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Ok Guys, going to work on the thread and spreadsheet layout abit.
> 
> Just got back from 6 hours off Football/Working out ready for some upcoming school sports days, so bear with me


No problemo we will bear with u!


----------



## PedroC1999

Please check the updates, TITAN section is below.

I will link the 'Score' tab to your post in here, let me just get it done


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezzer*
> 
> Small improvement
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jezzer - 2700K @ 5.2 - GTX 780 - 10624 - 5.7.2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/621573


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> Here is mine for now room for some improvement.
> 
> *Nittygritty --- i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ---HD7970 Vapor X 3GB @ 1230MHz --- 7813 --- 5th July 2013*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/880684


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1254MHz -- 12,382 -- June 10th 2013*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/fs/533662*




























All of you in! Please check your validations and links, as this is only my 2nd club with a spreadsheet (2Ghz Club being first)


----------



## Nittygritty

Looks good to me Pedro, nice one.


----------



## PedroC1999

Thanks Paul, nice to see you a bit more active now


----------



## Nittygritty

I am always around every day, I just don't post much.

I need to post in the 5ghz club, got a 5.2ghz validated on my 3770k the other day.


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> I am always around every day, I just don't post much.
> 
> I need to post in the 5ghz club, got a 5.2ghz validated on my 3770k the other day.


I manage the +2Ghz club, feeling adventurous?


----------



## Nittygritty

I take it that's + 2GHz from stock speed? Seriously I ain't getting any further than 5.2GHz unless I pump like 1.6V though the bugger and I ain't gonna go there lol.


----------



## PedroC1999

How much vCore for 5.2?

You should need about 1.65v for 5.5GHz, but its a stretch, but I seriously doubt a high run will damage a chip, Ive pumped 1.78v on my 6300 and hasnt degraded a bit yet


----------



## alancsalt

Over 1.6v is risky with Intel unless you are running sub zero....although Ivy is a bit tougher than usual...AFAIK


----------



## PedroC1999

Ive seen lots of people eventually go over to get the last few MHz, even with just watercooling.

Yes its dangerous for some chips, but some come from stronger batches and live on from +2v being fed for a very short period


----------



## Nittygritty

Here was my 5.2 , I don't fancy pushing it any higher!


----------



## Nittygritty

Sorry this has gone way off topic.

But I guess the thread is pretty quiet right now anyway


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Just stay under 1.6v at all times with air and water. alancsalt is right, intel doesn't react well with over 1.6v on air or water. I know SB-E doesn't!


----------



## Nittygritty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Just stay under 1.6v at all times with air and water. alancsalt is right, intel doesn't react well with over 1.6v on air or water. I know SB-E doesn't!


Yeah man, as you can see I am pretty close to 1.6V at 5.2, I ain't gonna risk any higher although it would give me a good reason to change my CPU if I fried it lol.


----------



## PedroC1999

What si your 24/7 voltage, just wondering.

And apart from Paul's follow up post, could you please try to cut down off topic talk, sorry If I started it


----------



## Nittygritty

Yeah sorry for the off topic Pedro.

I run it in offset mode, 1.5ghz idle with less than a volt, and 4.6ghz under load at 1.27v

Paul.


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> Yeah sorry for the off topic Pedro.
> 
> I run it in offset mode, 1.5ghz idle with less than a volt, and 4.6ghz under load at 1.27v
> 
> Paul.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1406269/overclock-club-roundup-index/0_40


----------



## Paul17041993

eh might as well, even though my DCII seemed to have gotten burned at the clocks it was at...

Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @ 4.6GHz - HD7970 - 6778
- 7/6/2013 (converted to US date to be nice







)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/606724

not expecting to stay on the chart, but I might come back after a semi-rebuild...


----------



## Baghi

Baghi - Core i3-2100 @ 3,10 GHz - Radeon HD 7850 - 4494 - 7 July 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/624589


----------



## Yungbenny911

To show some support.









Yungbenny911 - Core i7-3770k @ 4.8 GHz - GTX 770 - 8039 - July 7th, 2013


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/626597


----------



## PedroC1999

I will add these as soon as im out of OCN mobile,and im in the Uk, not USA so dd/mm/yyyy
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> eh might as well, even though my DCII seemed to have gotten burned at the clocks it was at...
> 
> Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @ 4.6GHz - HD7970 - 6778
> - 7/6/2013 (converted to US date to be nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/606724
> 
> not expecting to stay on the chart, but I might come back after a semi-rebuild...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baghi*
> 
> Baghi - Core i3-2100 @ 3,10 GHz - Radeon HD 7850 - 4494 - July 7th, 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/624589


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> To show some support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yungbenny911 - Core i7-3770k @ 4.8 GHz - GTX 770 - 8039 - July 7th, 2013
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/626597


----------



## Baghi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> and im in the Uk, not USA so dd/mm/yyyy


Fixed! lol


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> eh might as well, even though my DCII seemed to have gotten burned at the clocks it was at...
> 
> Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @ 4.6GHz - HD7970 - 6778
> - 7/6/2013 (converted to US date to be nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/606724
> 
> not expecting to stay on the chart, but I might come back after a semi-rebuild...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baghi*
> 
> Baghi - Core i3-2100 @ 3,10 GHz - Radeon HD 7850 - 4494 - 7 July 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/624589


Baghi, have you thouhg of messing with the BCLK a tiny bit to get a bit of a p[erformancfe boost? Go up 0.5MHz on the BCLK and try to boot up, you can probably get to 3.25-3.35GHz Which can be a few FPS if you CPU is bottlenecking
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> To show some support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yungbenny911 - Core i7-3770k @ 4.8 GHz - GTX 770 - 8039 - July 7th, 2013
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/626597


----------



## Baghi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Baghi, have you thouhg of messing with the BCLK a tiny bit to get a bit of a p[erformancfe boost? Go up 0.5MHz on the BCLK and try to boot up, you can probably get to 3.25-3.35GHz Which can be a few FPS if you CPU is bottlenecking


Nope, I've a H61-based motherboard so ABSOLUTELY no CPU overclocking. Only RAM and iGPU which I'm not using anyway. I know my CPU ain't holding my GPU back in real-world applications and games.

Thanks for the update.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> I am always around every day, I just don't post much.
> 
> I need to post in the 5ghz club, got a 5.2ghz validated on my 3770k the other day.


must have missed it . . . did you run that Firestrike bench at 5GHz? if you did it might get you over the 8000 mark. here is a 7950 (*NOT an entry*) . . . .

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/67300


----------



## Nittygritty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> must have missed it . . . did you run that Firestrike bench at 5GHz? if you did it might get you over the 8000 mark. here is a 7950 (*NOT an entry*) . . . .
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/67300


Hi bud,

No I ran it at 4.6GHz, I know I can improve it a bit and I am gonna give it a go once it cools down a bit, we are having a bit of a heat wave at the moment.

The GPU was just at my regular OC too, and that can be pushed a bit further.

I would like to think 5GHz on the CPU and a bit more of an OC on the GPU should push me into the 8000s


----------



## PedroC1999

Bump For Awareness!


----------



## drdreey

drdreey, core i7 [email protected], EVGA GTX 780 SC ACX, 10778, July 12 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/642078


----------



## killerhz

My Entry -

killerhz - i7 920 @ 4,189 MHz -NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 - 7243 - July 12, 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/643362


----------



## PedroC1999

Heeey guys, I will do a big update as soon as I have some time, as im having some trouble with my BIOS and GPU's that need to be resolved by the 28th, sorry for the delay


----------



## killerhz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Heeey guys, I will do a big update as soon as I have some time, as im having some trouble with my BIOS and GPU's that need to be resolved by the 28th, sorry for the delay


no worries at all. im just getting back into some benchies.


----------



## PedroC1999

Thanks for understanding


----------



## drdreey

@PedroC1999

Good luck solving your problems.


----------



## PedroC1999

I've kinda got the answer to them, so I will update tonight


----------



## killerhz

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/651857

*killerhz - i7 920 @ 4,189 MHz -NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 - 7355 - July 14, 2013*

Going to keep pushing to see how far i can get on the overclock for runs and gaming











EDIT UPDATED SCORE. Getting some nice overclocks on this bad boy with just air cooling


----------



## killerhz

updated new post


----------



## BBEG

BBEG --- i7 2600k at 4.7 GHz --- Reference EVGA GTX 680 at 1306 MHz / 3602 MHz --- 7430

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/925911


----------



## killerhz

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/655080

*killerhz - i7 920 @ 4399.18 MHz -NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 - 7513 - July 14, 2013*






























going to go for a few runs tonight.. got to keep pushing...


----------



## BlueNasser

Bluenasser - i7 3930k @ 4.5 GHz - GTX 770 lightning @ 1330 MHz / 4006 MHz - Score 8480 - July 16, 2013
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/929878?


----------



## BBEG

That new Samsung RAM is awesome. Looks like everyone's getting 8GHz easy.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBEG*
> 
> That new Samsung RAM is awesome. Looks like everyone's getting 8GHz easy.


I'm not sure it's the ram chips themselves, but the memory controller that is enhanced this gen

I mean all of a sudden the new 770s hit 7000MHz effective stock compared to 6000Mhz of last gen models.









That's +500 when you overclock a GTX 680s memory, which is a lot.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I'm not sure it's the ram chips themselves, but the memory controller that is enhanced this gen
> 
> I mean all of a sudden the new 770s hit 7000MHz effective stock compared to 6000Mhz of last gen models.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's +500 when you overclock a GTX 680s memory, which is a lot.


likely a combination of both, newer memory controller is possibly now exposing the maturity that the memory has grown, that or there is also a slightly better circuit layout on the board too...

side note; whats with nvidia cards and the memory being shown as 1/2 the total instead of 1/4? I'm confused...


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I'm not sure it's the ram chips themselves, but the memory controller that is enhanced this gen
> 
> I mean all of a sudden the new 770s hit 7000MHz effective stock compared to 6000Mhz of last gen models.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's +500 when you overclock a GTX 680s memory, which is a lot.


i hit 7000 easy w my 680


----------



## BBEG

7000 is definitely easy on the 680, but on both of my cards there's a wall somewhere around 7300 MHz. Keep in mind that we need to overclock our memory to get up to 7k, where the 770s are coming out of the box with 7k and about every one people have shown off can OC to 8k. This explains quite a bit of the 770s owning 680s in Unigine benchmarks, which in my experience are much more memory sensitive than 3DMark benchmarks.


----------



## BBEG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBEG*
> 
> BBEG --- i7 2600k at 4.7 GHz --- Reference EVGA GTX 680 at 1306 MHz / 3602 MHz --- 7430
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/925911


Movin' on up. Tryin' out this 770 BIOS and it's working pretty well.

BBEG --- i7 2600k at 4.7 GHz --- Reference EVGA GTX 680 Superclocked at 1280 MHz / 7160 MHz effective (+88 & +330) --- 7632

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/930416


----------



## Baghi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> side note; whats with nvidia cards and the memory being shown as 1/2 the total instead of 1/4? I'm confused...


Not just memory but core as well (e.g. it displays as 549 MHz instead of 1098 MHz sometimes). Don't know what science is behind this. lol


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baghi*
> 
> Not just memory but core as well (e.g. it displays as 549 MHz instead of 1098 MHz sometimes). Don't know what science is behind this. lol


nvidia, can u even math...?

anywho, at one point I had the memory on my DCII 7970 @ 1750 (7k total) without any extra voltage (its hardware locked anyway >:{ ), but that was only for a short amount of time before it grew errors...

newer card getting 8k total on a similar design doesn't sound surprising really, especially with DDR3 taking it up to [email protected] in less then a year...


----------



## killerhz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBEG*
> 
> Movin' on up. Tryin' out this 770 BIOS and it's working pretty well.
> 
> BBEG --- i7 2600k at 4.7 GHz --- Reference EVGA GTX 680 Superclocked at 1280 MHz / 7160 MHz effective (+88 & +330) --- 7632
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/930416


damn i am trying hard to keep up with you. im so far behind on other tech it's hard. you have a better PC than me and i am jealous. i think this might be all i can hit...

+220 on the core +600 on the mem







this is a nice overclock.. im afraid to game like this lol might blow up..


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killerhz*
> 
> damn i am trying hard to keep up with you. im so far behind on other tech it's hard. you have a better PC than me and i am jealous. i think this might be all i can hit...
> 
> +220 on the core +600 on the mem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is a nice overclock.. im afraid to game like this lol might blow up..


that doesn't seem too dangerous, provided you keep it cool enough, though I cant actually see what peak voltage your getting so I'm not particularly sure...

a lot of reference 7970s will run up to 1250-1300 MHz core and around 1750MHz mem with little bother, not particularly sure how well 680s clock though...


----------



## KyesaRRi

Entry:

KyesaRRi
i5 2500k @ 4.7
GTX Titan @ 1178 Core / 3754 Mem
10196 Firestrike Score

17 - July - 2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/662880

I should be able to push this higher with a few tweaks


----------



## BBEG

Kingpin and TiN showed that 680s are mostly limited by voltage. Once you give them that full 1.2125V or so to work with, they overclock _much_ better. I used V3DT's online 680 bios mod tool to open up my fan speed range and my voltage (set both tables to 1.2125V). Keep in mind both of my 680s are reference boards; one is a vanilla 680, the other is a 680 Superclocked. The vanilla 680 became a great overclocker (1306 MHz core, 7200-something MHz mem) once it could use the full 1.212V. The Superclocked, on the other hand, crashed under Heaven and Valley on *stock settings*.

To get my Superclocked to work, and because I was curious, I flashed a modded 770 bios onto it (http://www.overclock.net/t/1409584/cl-bios-flash-can-enable-gpu-boost-2-0-on-gtx-600-series-gpus/60#post_20415467). _Now_ it can overclock pretty darned well. It's 26 MHz less core (1280) and about 130-ish MHz less memory (7100-ish), but it scored better in both Valley and 3DMark Fire Storm.

I last night I also flashed the modded 770 bios to my vanilla 680. It can still do 1306 core, but lost over 100MHz on memory and scores 2 FPS lower in Valley. Sucks, but I'm pretty sure I can't SLI the two cards on such different bios's and a slightly reduced clock on one card beats not being able to use my 2nd card at all.


----------



## killerhz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBEG*
> 
> Kingpin and TiN showed that 680s are mostly limited by voltage. Once you give them that full 1.2125V or so to work with, they overclock _much_ better. I used V3DT's online 680 bios mod tool to open up my fan speed range and my voltage (set both tables to 1.2125V). Keep in mind both of my 680s are reference boards; one is a vanilla 680, the other is a 680 Superclocked. The vanilla 680 became a great overclocker (1306 MHz core, 7200-something MHz mem) once it could use the full 1.212V. The Superclocked, on the other hand, crashed under Heaven and Valley on *stock settings*.
> 
> To get my Superclocked to work, and because I was curious, I flashed a modded 770 bios onto it (http://www.overclock.net/t/1409584/cl-bios-flash-can-enable-gpu-boost-2-0-on-gtx-600-series-gpus/60#post_20415467). _Now_ it can overclock pretty darned well. It's 26 MHz less core (1280) and about 130-ish MHz less memory (7100-ish), but it scored better in both Valley and 3DMark Fire Storm.
> 
> I last night I also flashed the modded 770 bios to my vanilla 680. It can still do 1306 core, but lost over 100MHz on memory and scores 2 FPS lower in Valley. Sucks, but I'm pretty sure I can't SLI the two cards on such different bios's and a slightly reduced clock on one card beats not being able to use my 2nd card at all.


i know this is off topic but may have to hit you up via some kind of chat to walk me thorugh a new bios. i feel like this card as u can see, is needing more voltage so i can really push this. i am thinking of selling the card but want to see what else it can do before i let her go....


----------



## BBEG

At work now, but when I get home I'll message you with what I did and how it worked out. The primary downside right now is not being able to get SLI to work on 680s with 770 BIOs. Worked great with a single card though, as you can see.


----------



## 614318




----------



## killerhz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBEG*
> 
> At work now, but when I get home I'll message you with what I did and how it worked out. The primary downside right now is not being able to get SLI to work on 680s with 770 BIOs. Worked great with a single card though, as you can see.


yeah that is a bummer. still for one card performance it's killer. when ever you get a moment hit me up. no rush as i have heaps of work but got sunday off


----------



## PedroC1999

Everyone has been updated!

Apart from thus guy


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *614318*


----------



## Nittygritty

Nice one Pedro


----------



## SonDa5

Entry:

SonDa5
i7-4770k @ 4.7
HD7950 @ 1265 Core / 6000mhz Mem
8,012 Firestrike Score

19 - July - 2013



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/956324


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Entry:
> 
> SonDa5
> i7-4770k @ 4.7
> HD7950 @ 1265 Core / 6000mhz Mem
> 8,012 Firestrike Score
> 
> 19 - July - 2013
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/956324


my 2700K @ 5GHz only managed 12900 physics. that chip is a beast for its price. the gpu, too.









edit: btw, highest 7950 in firestrike score i have seen is 8400.


----------



## Baghi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baghi*
> 
> Baghi - Core i3-2100 @ 3,10 GHz - Radeon HD 7850 - 4494 - 7 July 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/624589


LOL







I came to post this:

Baghi - Core i3-2100 @ 3,10 GHz - Radeon HD 7850 - 4498 - 19 July 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/674003



Then I realized my overclock ain't stable.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Hey Pedro I hope you don't mind multiple submissions from different cards









HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2398 ASUS GTX 570 CU 2 4355

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/675727

[email protected]@2398 Gigabyte 680 SOC 7573

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/675320

[email protected]@2400 Gigabyte GTX 760 Windforce 3 6962

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/664022


----------



## PedroC1999

What you mean buddy? 1 podium spot per GFx card?


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> What you mean buddy? 1 podium spot per GFx card?


Yeah , why not







Good idea


----------



## PedroC1999

Dont think that's fair, as im basing this thread of the original multi GPU thread


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Dont think that's fair, as im basing this thread of the original multi GPU thread


Put the highest one in then the Giga 680 SOC


----------



## PedroC1999

I can put all 3 validations, just can replace other peoples to sports with yours, only bump them down etc


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> I can put all 3 validations, just can replace other peoples to sports with yours, only bump them down etc


Go for it , put em all in then


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> my 2700K @ 5GHz only managed 12900 physics. that chip is a beast for its price. the gpu, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit: btw, highest 7950 in firestrike score i have seen is 8400.


Thanks.

I can get higher score than this with my other HD7950.

Was my score acceptable for the list pedro?


----------



## PedroC1999

Yes, just haven't got around to updating yet, later today if I can


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Updated 680 SOC score







Getting there......

HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@1600 Gigabyte GTX 680 SOC 8062



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/965584


----------



## Clairvoyant129

Clairvoyant129 - 3930K @ 4.9GHz - GTX Titan - 11196 - 7/20/13









http://www.3dmark.com/fs/680355


----------



## MerkageTurk

MerkageTurk - [email protected] Stock - EVGA GTX 780 - 10156 - 04-06-13

GTX 780 running around @ 1130 Core and 3350 Memory


----------



## muhd86

nice scores --will be posting my gtx 760 score shortly --


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *muhd86*
> 
> nice scores --will be posting my gtx 760 score shortly --


while you're at it . . . mind submitting one here, too?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1361939/top-30-3dmark11-score-list-single-dual-tri-quad

thanks.


----------



## FtW 420

FtW 420 - i7 4770k @ 5.7Ghz - gtx Titan FtW @ 1502/1852 - 13304 - July 21 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/680733


----------



## Yungbenny911

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> FtW 420 - i7 4770k @ 5.7Ghz - gtx Titan FtW @ 1502/1852 - 13304 - July 21 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/680733


That's just ridiculous! XD


----------



## h2spartan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> FtW 420 - i7 4770k @ 5.7Ghz - gtx Titan FtW @ 1502/1852 - 13304 - July 21 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/680733


Nothing to see here...move along please....


----------



## 113802

My highest score so far! http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/971698?

WannaBeOCer - 3770k @ 5Ghz - GTX 780 1280 Mhz and 1737Mhz core - 10784 - 7/22/13


----------



## PedroC1999

Will update later today, as I havnt slept for 50 hours, lol


----------



## M3TAl

Assuming there should be a chart in the OP? Can't see it, using Chrome browser. Any ideas?


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> FtW 420 - i7 4770k @ 5.7Ghz - gtx Titan FtW @ 1502/1852 - 13304 - July 21 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/680733


0MHz cpu? 0GB RAM? lolwut? side note your cores only 1187MHz max, not "1502"...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> Assuming there should be a chart in the OP? Can't see it, using Chrome browser. Any ideas?


only half of the post is being loaded by the looks of it, try refreshing, or not use chrome...

firefox is fine on my end...


----------



## M3TAl

Tried refreshing multiple times, disabling adblock, and I used to love Firefox but I can't go back. Too many problems with it not loading pages at all (sites like newegg or amd.com would require ~20 refreshes to load). This was on two separate PC's with different Firefox versions too and my friend had the same problem with the same sites but this was around 2+ years ago.


----------



## PedroC1999

Im using Chrome and it will come up, try signing into Google Docs on another page


----------



## SonDa5

works find with my google chrome.


----------



## M3TAl

Didn't mean to derail the thread lol, obviously I have problems or the very least my chrome has problems considering it's fine for everyone else. Will have to figure out the problem much later today.

Thanks guys.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> FtW 420 - i7 4770k @ 5.7Ghz - gtx Titan FtW @ 1502/1852 - 13304 - July 21 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/680733


I am so glad my 660ti TRI SLI scored 200pts higher.......Phew


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> Didn't mean to derail the thread lol, obviously I have problems or the very least my chrome has problems considering it's fine for everyone else. Will have to figure out the problem much later today.
> 
> Thanks guys.


maby [your] chrome has some funky cache, who knows, there should be 3 images below it too, not just the table missing...


----------



## M3TAl

Signed into Google Docs, that fixed it. The images were always at the bottom too, just a chart problem.


----------



## alancsalt

There are a few ways you can have Google docs.. visible only to editors, only to site members, to anyone... i've taken to making them visible to web, but only editable by editors..otherwise members need to log in to see ..

Just my private opinion.. not policy or anything.

Ah yeah, I add other editors in case I get run over by a truck or jihadi mistake me for a cartoonist...


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> There are a few ways you can have Google docs.. visible only to editors, only to site members, to anyone... i've taken to making them visible to web, but only editable by editors..otherwise members need to log in to see ..
> 
> Just my private opinion.. not policy or anything.
> 
> Ah yeah, I add other editors in case I get run over by a truck or jihadi mistake me for a cartoonist...


so does chrome have a thing that it needs you to be signed in for google stuff to work correctly, but its fine otherwise on other browsers?
or was this just some one-time oddity...?


----------



## alancsalt

I'm just saying that I think that if the google doc is set up as above by the owner, then no need for ppls to sign in to google or gmail to view...
The "owner" has a number of "member" access choices.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> I'm just saying that I think that if the google doc is set up as above by the owner, then no need for ppls to sign in to google or gmail to view...
> The "owner" has a number of "member" access choices.


pretty sure he already has it set to public, otherwise I should have at least needed to sign in too, that's whats confusing...
though i tested it yesterday with chrome and it seemed to load fine, apart from all the smilies being replaced with null image icons









probably was just one of google's many random bugs, (servers and/or browser), don't think there's any need to talk about it, though at least its keeping this topic active


----------



## SonDa5

I never have problems like that with Google Chrome. Your computer is probably screwed up.


----------



## FtW 420

Speaking of the google doc, never had a problem with it until looking just now & it has disappeared. Running firefox.


----------



## M3TAl

All I know is once I signed into Google Docs it's working fine now. This Win8 install is only ~4 weeks old.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Speaking of the google doc, never had a problem with it until looking just now & it has disappeared. Running firefox.


doing it on firefox now? guess something strange going on with google's servers...


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> All I know is once I signed into Google Docs it's working fine now. This Win8 install is only ~4 weeks old.


That did the trick, signed into google, reloaded the OP & there it was. Google is being flakey...


----------



## drdreey

New highscore!



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/698021

PS
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Will update later today, as I havnt slept for 50 hours, lol


You still sleeping...


----------



## MerkageTurk

i guess OP should retire lol too old for this now jokes aside bro you need to update man. not to sound bossy or anything but i want my name on the chart lol


----------



## PedroC1999

All Update once again!


----------



## drdreey

@PedroC1999
Thx bro









PS:
jezzer and wannabeocer need to be switched.


----------



## KyesaRRi

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/699556

The best I can push out of my system at the moment, my 2500k is holding my card back









10243 - i5 2500k @ 4.7 / GTX Titan @ 1178 / 3758


----------



## Nittygritty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KyesaRRi*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/699556
> 
> The best I can push out of my system at the moment, my 2500k is holding my card back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10243 - i5 2500k @ 4.7 / GTX Titan @ 1178 / 3758


Hi bud, just out of interest and please don't take this the wrong way as I am really just interested, the Titan is like around £800 here in the UK, how come you spent so much on a GPU and only run a 2500k?
Obviously the 2500k is a good CPU and works well, but it is very cheap compared to how much you must have spent on the Titan. I assume you would have know it would bottleneck before you bought the Titan?

Paul.


----------



## KyesaRRi

I have had the CPU for a while and was really getting sick of 6970 Crossfire and all of its issues so I decided to waste some money. No plans on upgrading the CPU as of yet, I have the cash to but the current Intel lineup does not interest me whatsoever. And yes I knew I would run into these issues but outside of benchmarking the system runs fine.


----------



## M3TAl

Hopefully I didn't miss something. First 7870 XT score







.

M3TAl - FX-8320 @ 4.6ghz - 7870 XT - 5702 - 7/27/2013



Spoiler: Warning: Noob Move!







Lol I typed 2012 in the picture







. Let me fix that


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Thanks pedro for chuckin in my results








Heres another one







.......
HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 GTX 770 Phantom 4Gb Stock Clocks 1125 / 3500 7298


----------



## rdr09

7950 at 1100/1575 (7970 GHz clocks) - 7300

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/144796


----------



## Baghi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Thanks pedro for chuckin in my results
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heres another one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .......
> HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 GTX 770 Phantom 4Gb Stock Clocks 1125 / 3500 7298


Why does your GPU-Z screenshot looks so beautiful? Nice big fonts, etc.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baghi*
> 
> Why does your GPU-Z screenshot looks so beautiful? Nice big fonts, etc.


Mucked around with sizes and dpi so on and so forth but the down side is very small afterburner . Hard to see from 3 meters away


----------



## SonDa5

Pedro thanks for the update. My card is Hd7950 not hd7970.


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> All Update once again!


Good morning!


----------



## 113802

Is there a reason why I am still third on the list even after the update?


----------



## Baghi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Mucked around with sizes and dpi so on and so forth but the down side is very small afterburner . Hard to see from 3 meters away


Lol I made changes to mine as well, 125% and it looks cool (could be because my eyes are new to this, but anyway).



Thanks!


----------



## muhd86

my bad that i cant go with the key online --will gave to get a legit key i guess --but still here is some thing ..

gigabyte gtx 780 bios flashed thanks to sky ---still loads of improvement .


----------



## tweek43110

I'm amazed I even place with my old system, popped the 7850 outta the box about 2 hours ago. Kinda motivates me to try to OC this guy a little bit more.

Tweek43110 - Phenom 965 BE @ 3.8Ghz - Sapphire HD7850 @ 1175/1450 - Score: 4866 - 29.7.2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/710518


----------



## SonDa5

Good day Pedro. Could you please edit my card score from HD7970 to HD7950 after you are well rested with energy and time?


----------



## PedroC1999

Hello People,

As you may have noticed, tonight I am leaving for a 3000Mile+ journey, which we stop in Portugal for 3 weeks, I will be very minimally active, so, I have asked our very own SmokinWaffle, to lock this thread for the time being, take care and a have a nice holiday


----------



## SmokinWaffle

Locked.


----------



## Jpmboy

marc0053 posted this on the multigpu thread:

http://www.overclock.net/t/872945/top-30-3d-mark-13-fire-strike-scores/2630#post_20966001


----------



## M3TAl

AH, thread is back eh?


----------



## alancsalt

Hopefully.


----------



## marc0053

marc0053 - i7 3930k @4.9GHz - EVGA GTX titan - 1306MHz - 3802 MHz - score=12148 october 11, 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1382786?


----------



## marc0053

score with I7 3930k at 4.9GHz and +800mem on Extreme settings - score 6179 - october 11, 2013
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1382732?


----------



## SonDa5

I'm running hd7950 not hd7970.


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3930k @4.9GHz - EVGA GTX titan - 1306MHz - 3802 MHz - score=12148 october 11, 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1382786?



























Added

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> AH, thread is back eh?


Yes
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> score with I7 3930k at 4.9GHz and +800mem on Extreme settings - score 6179 - october 11, 2013
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1382732?












Please only on default settings
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> I'm running hd7950 not hd7970.


Fixed


----------



## M3TAl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> Hopefully I didn't miss something. First 7870 XT score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> M3TAl - FX-8320 @ 4.6ghz - 7870 XT - 5702 - 7/27/2013
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Noob Move!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lol I typed 2012 in the picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Let me fix that


What about mine? Did I miss a requirement or anything? On an 8350 instead of 8320 now btw.


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Thanks pedro for chuckin in my results
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heres another one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .......
> HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 GTX 770 Phantom 4Gb Stock Clocks 1125 / 3500 7298




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> 7950 at 1100/1575 (7970 GHz clocks) - 7300
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/144796











Full info please
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> Hopefully I didn't miss something. First 7870 XT score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> M3TAl - FX-8320 @ 4.6ghz - 7870 XT - 5702 - 7/27/2013
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Noob Move!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lol I typed 2012 in the picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Let me fix that




























Sorry - Didnt realise I missed those out


----------



## Mr-Mechraven

Can i be added









Mr-Mechraven i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz - HD7970 = Score = *8031* --- 08/10/13

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1358058?





Despite what you see the score is for a 7970 not a 280X lol 3DMark









Edit : second screenshot added showing correct gpu, i think 3dmark is working now lol.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Update pls Junior








MSI Hawk 760

Firestrike [email protected]@2400 Hawk 760 1411 / 3808 @ 1.344v *7182*










http://www.3dmark.com/fs/979878


----------



## huzzug

HD 7850 @ 1120Mhz

huzzug- i5 2500K @ 4.2 Ghz

*Here's* mine 

@Baghi


----------



## Yungbenny911

Where are the GK104 competitors?









*Yungbenny911 - Core i7-3770k @ 4.8 GHz - GTX 770 - 8439 - Oct 12th, 2013*



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/956669


----------



## szeged

quick game stable overclock run, ill actually push it in a few minutes to see what i can get lol

Szeged - I7 4770k @ 4.8ghz - gtx titan 1150/3254 - 10484 - 10/12/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1391207?



gonna see how it runs at 1300mhz or so lol


----------



## FtW 420

Not replacing my titan P score, but have a few others to post

Performance score
Core i7-3770k @ 6174MHz - hd7970 - 10182
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/97246



Extreme settings, tessellation was disabled for the competition score
Core i7-4770k @ 5700MHz - hd7970 - 6063
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/701252



And a titan on extreme settings
Core i7-4770k @ 5700MHz - gtx titan - 6773
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/680742


----------



## szeged

Szeged - I7 4770k @ 4.8ghz - gtx titan 1163/3504 - 10756 - 10/12/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1391250?



bumped it up just a little bit to see how well firestrike scales with overclocks lol, 300 more with just a tiny bit more overclock, now gotta put custom bios back on this card and let er fly.

hey ftw 420, glad you showed up, havent done much firestrike testing, just curious, what kind of scores should i expect around 1202/3900 on a titan? if you ever benched around that? thats about the most i can do on this particular card with 1.212v, just wanna know if my upcoming scores are correct or not, i really gotta move 3dmark onto a bench drive with all my other OC related stuff.


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Szeged - I7 4770k @ 4.8ghz - gtx titan 1163/3504 - 10756 - 10/12/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1391250?
> 
> 
> 
> bumped it up just a little bit to see how well firestrike scales with overclocks lol, 300 more with just a tiny bit more overclock, now gotta put custom bios back on this card and let er fly.
> 
> hey ftw 420, glad you showed up, havent done much firestrike testing, just curious, what kind of scores should i expect around 1202/3900 on a titan? if you ever benched around that? thats about the most i can do on this particular card with 1.212v, just wanna know if my upcoming scores are correct or not, i really gotta move 3dmark onto a bench drive with all my other OC related stuff.


I was benching around there on the stock bios when I first got the card, at 1228/1755 (3510) it was throttling to about 1202


----------



## szeged

ah thanks, yeah i wanted to max out stock bios first before flashing again so i could compare max vs max lol, newest titan has been acting weird with different bios but i dont wanna break down my loop to put my best clocker in lol


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Mechraven*
> 
> Can i be added
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr-Mechraven i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz - HD7970 = Score = *8031* --- 08/10/13
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1358058?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite what you see the score is for a 7970 not a 280X lol 3DMark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit : second screenshot added showing correct gpu, i think 3dmark is working now lol.




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Update pls Junior
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Hawk 760
> 
> Firestrike [email protected]@2400 Hawk 760 1411 / 3808 @ 1.344v *7182*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/979878




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> HD 7850 @ 1120Mhz
> 
> huzzug- i5 2500K @ 4.2 Ghz
> 
> *Here's* mine
> 
> @Baghi












Full info please
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> Where are the GK104 competitors?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Yungbenny911 - Core i7-3770k @ 4.8 GHz - GTX 770 - 8439 - Oct 12th, 2013*
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/956669




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Not replacing my titan P score, but have a few others to post
> 
> Performance score
> Core i7-3770k @ 6174MHz - hd7970 - 10182
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/97246




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Szeged - I7 4770k @ 4.8ghz - gtx titan 1163/3504 - 10756 - 10/12/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1391250?
> 
> 
> 
> bumped it up just a little bit to see how well firestrike scales with overclocks lol, 300 more with just a tiny bit more overclock, now gotta put custom bios back on this card and let er fly.
> 
> hey ftw 420, glad you showed up, havent done much firestrike testing, just curious, what kind of scores should i expect around 1202/3900 on a titan? if you ever benched around that? thats about the most i can do on this particular card with 1.212v, just wanna know if my upcoming scores are correct or not, i really gotta move 3dmark onto a bench drive with all my other OC related stuff.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Thanks junior


----------



## SonDa5

Thanks


----------



## huzzug

huzzug - 2500K @ 4.3Ghz - HD 7850 - 4849
- 12th Oct 2013



Can i be accepted now









*Link*


----------



## M3TAl

Pic needs your OCN name and date on it in something like notepad.


----------



## huzzug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> Pic needs your OCN name and date on it in something like notepad.


Will do once i'm home


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> huzzug - 2500K @ 4.3Ghz - HD 7850 - 4849
> - 12th Oct 2013
> 
> 
> 
> Can i be accepted now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Link*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> Pic needs your OCN name and date on it in something like notepad.


Thanks
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> Will do once i'm home


Yes okay


----------



## PedroC1999

Please check the OP, it has been updated, new rules apply from now on


----------



## pharma57

Welcome back PedroC.








.. benchy from the archives.

pharma57 - Core i7-3960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 780 - 13317 - Oct 13th, 2013

1306.5 / 1900.8 - Classified on Air


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/752367


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Welcome back PedroC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .. benchy from the archives.
> 
> pharma57 - Core i7-3960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 780 - 13317 - Oct 13th, 2013
> 
> 1306.5 / 1900.8 - Classified on Air
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/752367












Sorry dude, no name, no accept


----------



## pharma57

Name? You need something else besides 3DMark score link having my name?
Quote:


> a screenshot with your OCN Name and date is mandatory,


Date? Date of score or date submitted?

Edit: Maybe only I can see my name since I'm logged in as myself in 3DMark. Will try another screenshot.
Kindly verify which date you would like to see.


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Name? You need something else besides 3DMark score link having my name?
> Date? Date of score or date submitted?
> 
> Edit: Maybe only I can see my name since I'm logged in as myself in 3DMark. Will try another screenshot.
> Kindly verify which date you would like to see.


In the screenshot, with your score and 3DMARK page, there must be a Notepad or a note saying your OCN name and date, check the other validations for an example


----------



## pharma57

Re-submitted for missing Name/Date ...
pharma57 - Core i7-3960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 780 - 13317 - 08/11/2013

1306.5 / 1900.8 - Classified on Air

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/6/fy0t.png/
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/752367


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Re-submitted for missing Name/Date ...
> pharma57 - Core i7-3960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 780 - 13317 - 08/11/2013
> 
> 1306.5 / 1900.8 - Classified on Air
> 
> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/6/fy0t.png/
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/752367



























You sir, have beaten every validation (Including Titans and 6GHz+ 4770k's) congratulations


----------



## pharma57

Thanks Pedro! Just one of the events you missed on vacation, but I would willing trade the score for a nice vacation.


----------



## PedroC1999

Im gonna make a screenshot myself of how its supposed to be submitted, as this is happening too often (People getting rejected) (Not your fault)


----------



## huzzug

"updated"

huzzug- i5 2500K @ 4.3Ghz - HD 7850 - 4829 - 13 Oct 2013

*Link*



How about now ??


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> "updated"
> 
> huzzug- i5 2500K @ 4.3Ghz - HD 7850 - 4829 - 13 Oct 2013
> 
> *Link*
> 
> 
> 
> How about now ??


----------



## 113802

Just curious why I am in fourth place when my score is higher than the person in third place?


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Re-submitted for missing Name/Date ...
> pharma57 - Core i7-3960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 780 - 13317 - 08/11/2013
> 
> 1306.5 / 1900.8 - Classified on Air
> 
> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/6/fy0t.png/
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/752367


Nice! I'll have to fire up the Titan again!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> Just curious why I am in fourth place when my score is higher than the person in third place?


He obviously thinks you can do better!


----------



## pharma57

Thanks FTW 420! I'm really curious to see what kind of competition the AMD 290x's bring to the table ... from what I've read they
should post high scores but there is a question mark regarding OC'ing bandwidth. Should be interesting ...


----------



## Yungbenny911

I like the new rules with the name and date, that is what other benching threads should have done


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> Just curious why I am in fourth place when my score is higher than the person in third place?



















Human error, sorry guys!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> I like the new rules with the name and date, that is what other benching threads should have done


Haha thanks!


----------



## 113802

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> He obviously thinks you can do better!


Ha I know I can but my board is out for RMA because the first ram slot is defective and it's only been 9 months!


----------



## Yungbenny911

I believe you missed something Pedro. FTW's score is a 7970, not a 7950.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1406832/single-gpu-firestrike-top-30/100_100#post_20972308


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> I believe you missed something Pedro. FTW's score is a 7970, not a 7950.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1406832/single-gpu-firestrike-top-30/100_100#post_20972308



















Sorry guys, running this and updating it on a hourly basis is harder than it looks and leads to little mistakes like this, please keep me informed of anything else


----------



## aidhanc

New Entry
aidhanc - 1090T @ 3.8GHz - 7850 - 4831 - October 11 2013


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/979222


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aidhanc*
> 
> New Entry
> aidhanc - 1090T @ 3.8GHz - 7850 - 4831 - October 11 2013
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/979222


----------



## PedroC1999

I will be downloading Firestrike soon, so I can submit my own Validation, and to provide a decent example for you guys to follow


----------



## ski-bum

New Entry
ski-bum - [email protected] - TITAN - 5306 - 10/13/2013


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ski-bum*
> 
> New Entry
> ski-bum - [email protected] - TITAN - 5306 - 10/13/2013


run it on firestrike non extreme


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> run it on firestrike non extreme


Also date must be in Notepad too!


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Also date must be in Notepad too!


Is the date in a validation link OK?
I usually have a text file with my name on it but never change it while benching, old habits might be hard to change...


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Is the date in a validation link OK?
> I usually have a text file with my name on it but never change it while benching, old habits might be hard to change...


Yes, just realised I mean to say date in screenshot instead of notepad haha


----------



## slothiraptor

New Entry
slothiraptor - i7 4820k @4.8ghz - 680 - 7720 - 10/13/2013


----------



## ski-bum

New Entry
ski-bum - [email protected] - TITAN/stock bios - 10471 - 10/13/2013


----------



## Remij

New Entry
Remij - i7 3930k @ 4.7 - TITAN - 10486 - 10/13/2013


----------



## szeged

Szeged --- I7 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- gtx Titan @ 1176/3704 --- 10856 --- oct 14 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1401102?



stock bios still for this card, can maybe get a little bit more out of it before i have to flash


----------



## szeged

Szeged --- I7 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- gtx titan @ 1189/3730 --- 10939 --- oct 14 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1401147?



sorry for the two posts in a row







just wanted to see how far i could take it on stock bios, i think its got maybe one more bump in core clock in her before she craps out on stock bios.

then its skyn3t bios and 1.3v


----------



## Remij

So close to 11000, you gotta try to hit that before you switch the BIOS









Nice score


----------



## szeged

thanks









yeah i wanna hit 11000 before flashing bios lol, can probably get it, will test more soon.


----------



## r0l4n

r0l4n --- i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz --- GTX 780 @ 1241/3650 --- 10387 --- oct 14 2013

Stock 3A vBios.



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/973587


----------



## szeged

1202 core on stock bios just isnt happening with this card lol, all i can do is bump the mem higher till i get 11000 but i think ill go ahead and flash it now lol.


----------



## szeged

Szeged --- i7 [email protected] 4.8ghz --- gtx titan 1202/3729 --- 11096 --- oct 14 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1402019?



same stock bios, managed to get it stable at those clocks finally, all i had to do was knock the memory clock back by 1 rofl









now for the skyn3t bios.


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slothiraptor*
> 
> New Entry
> slothiraptor - i7 4820k @4.8ghz - 680 - 7720 - 10/13/2013




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ski-bum*
> 
> New Entry
> ski-bum - [email protected] - TITAN/stock bios - 10471 - 10/13/2013




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Remij*
> 
> New Entry
> Remij - i7 3930k @ 4.7 - TITAN - 10486 - 10/13/2013




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r0l4n*
> 
> r0l4n --- i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz --- GTX 780 @ 1240/3650 --- 10387 --- oct 14 2013
> 
> Stock 3A vBios.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/973587




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Szeged --- i7 [email protected] 4.8ghz --- gtx titan 1202/3729 --- 11096 --- oct 14 2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1402019?
> 
> 
> 
> same stock bios, managed to get it stable at those clocks finally, all i had to do was knock the memory clock back by 1 rofl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> now for the skyn3t bios.


----------



## r0l4n

Thanks!


----------



## ski-bum

Update
ski-bum - [email protected] - TITAN 1202/3726 - 10549 - 10/14/2013

Also on stock bios.


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ski-bum*
> 
> Update
> ski-bum - [email protected] - TITAN 1202/3726 - 10549 - 10/14/2013
> 
> Also on stock bios.


you need to OC that cpu some more


----------



## ski-bum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> you need to OC that cpu some more


I'm on air and this 3930K is a terrible OC. I'm sure I could go allot more, but this is also my business machine and I'm not going to risk it.


----------



## szeged

ahh, very valid reason to keep it there indeed


----------



## Koniakki

Koniakki --- i7 3770K @ 4.8ghz --- GTX 780 @ 1280/3445 --- 10632 --- Oct 15 2013


----------



## M3TAl

Titans... Titans evreee whurrr (Cleveland Brown voice).


----------



## djriful

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/918795

DJRiful

CPU @ 4.8Ghz

GPU: TITAN

Score: 10935

Date: September 29 2013


----------



## hmanlow

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1406654 

FIRE STRIKE

SCORE
4025 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and AMD FX-4100


----------



## Dreamxtreme

Dreamxtreme - i7 3820 @ 4.8Ghz - GTX Titan - 10927 - 15/10/2013



5mins later









Dreamxtreme - i7 3820 @ 4.8Ghz - GTX Titan - 11017 - 15/10/2013


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ski-bum*
> 
> Update
> ski-bum - [email protected] - TITAN 1202/3726 - 10549 - 10/14/2013
> 
> Also on stock bios.












No link
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djriful*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/918795
> DJRiful
> CPU
> @ 4.8Ghz
> GPU: TITAN
> Score:
> 10935
> 
> Date: September 29 2013












Wrong layout and NO picture
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hmanlow*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1406654
> 
> FIRE STRIKE
> 
> SCORE
> 4025 with AMD Radeon HD 7850(1x) and AMD FX-4100












Wrong layout and NO name in picture

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dreamxtreme*
> 
> Dreamxtreme - i7 3820 @ 4.8Ghz - GTX Titan - 10927 - 15/10/2013
> 
> 
> 
> 5mins later
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dreamxtreme - i7 3820 @ 4.8Ghz - GTX Titan - 11017 - 15/10/2013












Read below(Last one

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ski-bum*
> 
> Update
> ski-bum - [email protected] - TITAN 1202/3726 - 10549 - 10/14/2013
> 
> Also on stock bios.












No Link
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> Koniakki --- i7 3770K @ 4.8ghz --- GTX 780 @ 1280/3445 --- 10632 --- Oct 15 2013












Obviously edited, cant accept it

Overly dissapointed


----------



## slothiraptor

Lol, so many rejections


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slothiraptor*
> 
> Lol, so many rejections


Sad to see so many rules being ignored.

Please can I suggest EVERYONE re reads the rules, as this is atrocious, I know accidents happening, but really? Editing confirmations, thats like hiring a baby sitter named Dave and his passport saying hes Jeremy Kyle!


----------



## Dreamxtreme

What was wrong with my mine. Just says read below last one. I did e ethical fashion you asked


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dreamxtreme*
> 
> What was wrong with my mine. Just says read below last one. I did e ethical fashion you asked


As far as I can see, you edited your screenshot using Paint or Photoshop so it shows the date and name, this should be on a open Notepad


----------



## Dreamxtreme

Its called hyperdesktop a great tool for this very purpose. Look it up


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dreamxtreme*
> 
> Its called hyperdesktop a great tool for this very purpose. Look it up


never heard of it...

just use notepad man (or notepad++, who doesn't use this?)


----------



## hmanlow

oppppppppsssssssss...... okay.. will post a new one later


----------



## Centuar

*New Entry*

Centuaris - i7 4770K @ 4,6 - GTX 780 - 9526 - 10/16/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1413554





For some reason the Graphics driver ain't approved, its version: 326.01


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dreamxtreme*
> 
> Its called hyperdesktop a great tool for this very purpose. Look it up


Its clearly stated notepad and notes ONLY
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Centuar*
> 
> *New Entry*
> 
> Centuaris - i7 4770K @ 4,6 - GTX 780 - 9526 - 10/16/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1413554
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For some reason the Graphics driver ain't approved, its version: 326.01












No name and please a full screen screenshot


----------



## Eggy88

'New Entry'

Eggy88 - 4770k @ 4.9Ghz - GTX 780 - 10830 - 10.17.2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/913315


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong layout and NO picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong layout and NO name in picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read below(Last one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously edited, cant accept it
> 
> Overly dissapointed











What a bunch of sillys


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggy88*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Eggy88 - 4770k @ 4.9Ghz - GTX 780 - 10830 - 10.17.2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/913315












Once again, no name


----------



## Cobrah

cobrah= i7 3770k 4.6 ghz= gtx 780 [email protected] 1160 core= 10000=10/17/13=http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1419933 wont let me upload picture just the link


----------



## ski-bum

Update
ski-bum - 17-3930K @ 4.2 - TITAN @ 3726/1202 - 10538 - 10/17/2013
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1006070


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ski-bum*
> 
> Update
> ski-bum - 17-3930K @ 4.2 - TITAN @ 3726/1202 - 10538 - 10/17/2013
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1006070


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Update pls Junior








HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 760 Hawk [email protected]@[email protected] *7218*











http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1424958


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cobrah*
> 
> cobrah= i7 3770k 4.6 ghz= gtx 780 [email protected] 1160 core= 10000=10/17/13=http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1419933 wont let me upload picture just the link











Nope sorry
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Update pls Junior
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 760 Hawk [email protected]@[email protected] *7218*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1424958



















Yours lucky, I can only accept it with your name, and the OHM has it, lucky dude!


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope sorry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yours lucky, I can only accept it with your name, and the OHM has it, lucky dude!


I did that on purpose








This is how I do my screenshots for HWBOT








And if I gets a new entry i'll work something out


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> I did that on purpose
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is how I do my screenshots for HWBOT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if I gets a new entry i'll work something out


Wow,. thats epic thinking!


----------



## alancsalt

HOMECINEMA-PC, not just a pretty face...


----------



## PedroC1999

Haha, how are you Alan? Havnt had a good chat in a while..


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Wow,. thats epic thinking!
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> HOMECINEMA-PC, not just a pretty face...
Click to expand...


----------



## alancsalt




----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*


Been doin some voltage hack .....


----------



## alancsalt

With boost cards?

The 760's..?


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> With boost cards?
> 
> The 760's..?


Been beta testin vbios's for 760 .
Giga bios is worst to modd








Stock seems to be the best . Same with Hawk
Got a hawk so I can voltup properly , 1.3v + 1400Mhz / + 1000 on the mem
Gonna gets another one on tues an beats me sli and tri scores








Then it will be time for sum more hack


----------



## Forceman

*New Entry*

Forceman - [email protected] - GTX 680 @ 1280/3250 - 7554 - 19 Oct 2013



I think my crappy memory overclock is holding me back.

www.3dmark.com/3dm/1438222


----------



## Ashuiegi

what would be the difference on average in point between an i5 4670 k and an i7 4770k ?


----------



## szeged

not much i would imagine, basically just 4 threads vs 8 threads, unless they are clocked differently. They are the same architecture and everything besides hyper threading.


----------



## Ashuiegi

i keep having the tag your gpu want to play but your cpu is not ready to brawl with a 4670k at 4,5 ghz ,....


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - i5 3579k @ 5ghz - gtx 780 sc acx- 1306mhz/ 1840mhz - score 10460 - 10/23/2013
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1466002?


----------



## Remij

*Update*

Remij - i7-3930K @ 4.7 - TITAN @ 3252/1176 - 11101 - 10/23/2013


----------



## The EX1

'*New Entry*'
The EX1 - i7 4770K @ 4.6 - GTX 780 - 10034 - 10/16/13


----------



## Dreamxtreme

Right then another try









New Entry

Dreamxtreme - i7 3820 @ 4.8 - GTX Titan - 11483 - 25/10/13



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1474605?


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> *New Entry*
> 
> Forceman - [email protected] - GTX 680 @ 1280/3250 - 7554 - 19 Oct 2013
> 
> 
> 
> I think my crappy memory overclock is holding me back.




























Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The EX1*
> 
> '*New Entry*'
> The EX1 - i7 4770K @ 4.6 - GTX 780 - 10034 - 10/16/13











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dreamxtreme*
> 
> Right then another try
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Dreamxtreme - i7 3820 @ 4.8 - GTX Titan - 11483 - 25/10/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1474605?




























Sorry for delay, GTA V...


----------



## huzzug

Update
huzzug - i5 2500 @ 4300Mhz-HD7850 - 4960- 25-Oct-2013

*Link*


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for delay, GTA V...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - i5 3579k @ 5ghz - gtx 780 sc acx- 1306mhz/ 1840mhz - score 10460 - 10/23/2013
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1466002?


what about me


----------



## The EX1

*New Entry*

The EX1 - i7 4770K @ 4.6 - GTX 780 - 10034 - 10/25/13


----------



## RatPatrol01

RatPatrol01 - Xeon E3-1230v2 @ 3.3Ghz - GTX 770 - 7581 - 10/25/2013


----------



## Arizonian

Arizonian - 290X 1150 Core -/1350 Memory - i7 3770K 4.49 Ghz - Stock Cooler - 10749 Score - 10/26/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1484478


----------



## Remij

*Update*

Remij - i7-3930K @ 4.7 - TITAN @ 3295/1189 - 11101 - 10/26/2013



Well, I made it into the top 50







but that ain't gonna last for long. I think that's as far as this particular card is gonna go on air.


----------



## Moustache

Arizonian - 290X 1150/1350 Graphics Score: 12515
Remij - TITAN 1189/3295 Graphics Score: 12387

So far, the 290X is pretty impressive.


----------



## Remij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Moustache*
> 
> Arizonian - 290X 1150/1350 Graphics Score: 12515
> Remij - TITAN 1189/3295 Graphics Score: 12387
> 
> So far, the 290X is pretty impressive.


Indeed it is, considering the only reason I scored higher than him is because of my CPU. He beat me on every gfx test and probably would have easily beaten me if he was running a 3930k at 4.7ghz.

I wonder how much farther that 290x can go on air?


----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Remij*
> 
> Indeed it is, considering the only reason I scored higher than him is because of my CPU. He beat me on every gfx test and probably would have easily beaten me if he was running a 3930k at 4.7ghz.
> 
> I wonder how much farther that 290x can go on air?


It's not going more than 1150 / 1350 for me without failing. I don't have access to voltage control to get more out of it. Perhaps if I did add just a little more juice it would allow for 1200 / 1400 which I would be more than happy to run 24/7 if I could and call it a day.


----------



## 66racer

*New entry*

66racer - i7 2700k @ 4.9ghz - asus gtx 770 - 1502mhz8020mhz - 8692 - 10/26/13



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1048505


----------



## M3TAl

Uh oh, here come the 290X's. Any one put the 290X under water yet?


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> Uh oh, here come the 290X's. Any one put the 290X under water yet?


Working on it.


----------



## M3TAl

Can't wait for the results!


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Working on it.


got a block for the VRMs? also EK will have their blocks available in half a month, or at least in AU anyway...


----------



## DampMonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> got a block for the VRMs? also EK will have their blocks available in half a month, or at least in AU anyway...


In the US, they didnt go on sale until the day before the 290x released. I don't think anyone has received theirs in the mail (yet)


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> got a block for the VRMs? also EK will have their blocks available in half a month, or at least in AU anyway...


I ordered the acrylic and copper EK block from frozen CPU 5 minutes after I ordered the 290x.

I am going to use the heat sinks in the photo to cover PCB hot spots on the 290x and the block for the GPU till the EK block arrives.


----------



## Ashuiegi

new entry

Ashuiegi - i5 4670k 4,4ghz - asus matrix *hd7970* 1280mhz 1800mhz - 8349 - 27.10.2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1051763


----------



## Shultzy

Here's my gtx 780 reference card under water at 1.275v. I'm not sure this result is acceptable, I just installed the latest beta driver from NVidia for the new shadowplay feature.

Shultzy - i7 3770k 4.7ghz - EVGA GTX 780 (Reference/Watercooled) 1385/3650 - 11304 - 28.10.2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1056092



Edit: Uploaded wrong picture lol. (Fixed)


----------



## szeged

szeged --- i7 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- gtx titan 1300/3800 --- 11704 --- 10/29/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1508846?



ever since i put on new drivers for nvidia, the time and date on this rig has been stuck at 6:39 10/26/2013, keeps making my 3dmark scores have a " time measurement not available"

anyone know whats up with that?


----------



## Eggy88

Eggy88 - 4770K @ 4.7Ghz - GTX 780 Classified (1450 / 1930) - 11907 - 10.29.2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1062726


----------



## strong island 1

GTX 780 Classified - 1411 / 7406 - 4930k - 4.6ghz - score - 12057


----------



## Eggy88

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> GTX 780 Classified - 1411 / 7406 - 4930k - 4.6ghz - score - 12057


And in comes Strong and beats me with a lousy 150 points. Won't be for long, got some cold weather + Evbot incoming


----------



## PedroC1999

All updated - Literally sweating...


----------



## Ashuiegi

ahh thanks , i m glad i could put a little bit more amd gpu and i5 cpu on the sheet








i will get my 280x toxic soon , and i will see if i can improve this score ,....

i had a bug like that with my gtx 670 when it s was oced too much , i did a 10800 points score and it told me the frame time where too short and the result was not valid or something strange like that.


----------



## huzzug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> Update
> huzzug - i5 2500 @ 4300Mhz-HD7850 - 4960- 25-Oct-2013
> 
> *Link*


You forgot me









You gave my score to a wrong person !!!


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggy88*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> GTX 780 Classified - 1411 / 7406 - 4930k - 4.6ghz - score - 12057
> 
> 
> 
> And in comes Strong and beats me with a lousy 150 points. Won't be for long, got some cold weather + Evbot incoming
Click to expand...

i think your graphic score was much higher though. It's the cpu that did it. This 4930k is actually pretty amazing at only 4.6ghz. If I could finally get a rive black edition it could get some really high physics scores. I have to check what my 3930k at 5.0ghz was getting in physics to see how a 4.6ghz 4930k compares.


----------



## Eggy88

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> i think your graphic score was much higher though. It's the cpu that did it. This 4930k is actually pretty amazing at only 4.6ghz. If I could finally get a rive black edition it could get some really high physics scores. I have to check what my 3930k at 5.0ghz was getting in physics to see how a 4.6ghz 4930k compares.


Not much, 13556 vs 13426 on the GPU. Them damn hexacores are OP vs the quads


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggy88*
> 
> Not much, 13556 vs 13426 on the GPU. Them damn hexacores are OP vs the quads


looks at my 3570k
damn HT and hex cores


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> looks at my 3570k
> damn HT and hex cores


You do get nicer graphics scores with 3570k or Haswell, but lower graphics with higher physics & overall score with hexcores still win. I want an ivy-e too, better balance of graphics & physics...


----------



## Mikecdm

I need to get a proper run in one of these days


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> looks at my 3570k
> damn HT and hex cores
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do get nicer graphics scores with 3570k or Haswell, but lower graphics with higher physics & overall score with hexcores still win. I want an ivy-e too, better balance of graphics & physics...
Click to expand...

It's not as bad as everyone says, when I get home I have to look up my 3930k at 5.0ghz and compare the physics score with the 4930k. I'm at 4.6ghz right now with a rampage iv gene. I don't want to push it until the black edition comes out. I want it to be fresh. But even at 4.6ghz the 4930k is scoring 17500 physics and the ram is only at 2133, that's pretty good. I have some scores saved of my 3930k at 5.0ghz and 2400 ram so it will be interesting to see the scores.


----------



## strong island 1

ok so my 3930k at 4.8ghz and 2400 samsung ram scored 17416 in firestrike physics. My 4930k at 4.6ghz and 2133 ram scored 17500. I wish I had the 3930k still to do more testing because I'm not sure how much of a difference the 2400ram vs. 2133 ram would make. Either way that's pretty cool that a 4930k at 4.6 with slower ram beats a 3930k at 4.8 with faster ram. If I could get to 5.0 and the crazy ram speeds people are getting with the black edition I will be very happy with the 4930k. Plus it runs much cooler.

Also I am using a rampage iv gene to overclock the 4930k until the black edition arrives. I remember some reviewers saying the gene didn't overclock as high as the RIVE so I hope it does better on the black edition or a regular RIVE.


----------



## DampMonkey

290x

Score : http://i.imgur.com/mujk5UH.jpg
Details: http://i.imgur.com/vmga0sw.jpg


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - i5 3570k @5.1ghz - gtx 780 @ 1359 / 3700 - P10879 - 10/29/13
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1518710


... guna need the skyn3t's 440%pt bios to go any higher








max pt that run was 112% PT


----------



## Nittygritty

New entry

Nittygritty---i7 [email protected] 780 @ +100MHz---10123---31st Oct 13

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1520661


----------



## Blue Dragon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> New entry
> 
> Nittygritty---i7 [email protected] 780 @ +100MHz---10123---31st Oct 13
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1520661


are you running two different RAM speeds or is that just 3DMark reporting back wrong?


----------



## Eggy88

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggy88*
> 
> Eggy88 - 4770K @ 4.7Ghz - GTX 780 Classified (1450 / 1930) - 11907 - 10.29.2013
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1062726


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> GTX 780 Classified - 1411 / 7406 - 4930k - 4.6ghz - score - 12057


No love for my bronze score?









Also Strong's score was 12057, front page says the same score as the 1'st place.


----------



## Nittygritty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blue Dragon*
> 
> are you running two different RAM speeds or is that just 3DMark reporting back wrong?


It is just reporting it wrong, It's all running at 2400MHz


----------



## yawa

Eh know I'll never crack it, but just throwing this out there on my modest system. I'm proud of it anyway.



and on extreme...


----------



## Ashuiegi

you can do 7500 pt with a gtx 670 , at around 1400 mhz on core ^^.


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - 3570k @ 5.1ghz - GTX 780 .ref - 1411/3650 11/2/13
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1543242


----------



## r0l4n

'Update'

r0l4n --- i7 2600K @ 4.8ghz --- GTX 780 @ 1319/3800 --- 10962 --- nov 3 2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1089694

Hall Of Fame - Firestrike - 1 GPU
http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.1/1+gpu


----------



## the9quad

New Entry

the9quad --- i7 4930 @ 4.3ghz --- R9 290X @ 1150/5800 --- 10966 --- nov 4 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1552701?


----------



## DarkrReign2049

New Entry

DarkrReign2049 --- i7 3930K @ 4.8ghz --- 780 Classified @ 1293/6890 --- 11002 --- NOV 5th 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1564045


----------



## RX7-2nr

RX7-2nr - i7 920 @ 4.2 - Gigabyte HD 7950 - 7936 - 11/4

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1555087


Funny thing is, my 7950 is showing its age more than the CPU.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> RX7-2nr - i7 920 @ 4.2 - Gigabyte HD 7950 - 7936 - 11/4
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1555087
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny thing is, my 7950 is showing its age more than the CPU.


doesn't look like you got much voltage in the cpu, so not surprising at all...


----------



## Evange

New Entry

Evange - 3570k @ 4.6GHz - GTX Titan - 10043 - 11/6/13

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1100509


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> doesn't look like you got much voltage in the cpu, so not surprising at all...


1.325 is the most Ive ever given it. It will boot into Windows at 4.4 with that, but its not stable. It crashes IBT in a second or so. HT-on 4.2 will get up to near 80C in stress tests so I need better cooling before I tweak it anymore.


----------



## SonDa5

New Entry
SonDa5 - 4770k @4.8GHZ - AMD R9 290x - 12,132 - 11/07/13



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1573423?


----------



## Kyle1519

'New Entry'

Kyle1519 - 4770K @ 4.5 - GTX 780 - 10245 - 11/5/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1098575


----------



## the9quad

Update

the9quad --- i7 4930 @ 4.5ghz --- R9 290X @ 1180/5800 --- 11186 --- nov 7 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1108699


----------



## the9quad

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> New Entry
> SonDa5 - 4770k @4.8GHZ - AMD R9 290x - 12,132 - 11/07/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1573423?


did you do something with tesselation in the test? It's saying you did, that kind of makes your score not compare to the rest dont it? If im wrong I apologize, that just seems really high and when you click on the 3dmark link it says something about tesselation. Nice OC on that card btw, jeez!


----------



## the9quad

update

the9quad --- i7 4930 @ 4.5ghz --- R9 290X @ 1180/5900-- 11246 --- nov 7 2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1108794



For some reason even though the results went ok, and the test ran fine, it captured default idle clocks for the card instead of the OC clocks.


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *the9quad*
> 
> did you do something with tesselation in the test? It's saying you did, that kind of makes your score not compare to the rest dont it? If im wrong I apologize, that just seems really high and when you click on the 3dmark link it says something about tesselation. Nice OC on that card btw, jeez!










Atari 2600 mode hack.

Jk.

I just used the CCC 3d settings available to tweak maximum performance from my 290x. The pros at Hwbot do the same with AMD cards and Nvidia cards.


----------



## tsm106

Whatever yer doing, it needs work. This is on air below.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1050519


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tsm106*
> 
> Whatever yer doing, it needs work. This is on air below.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1050519


Your post intended for me?

1215/1700 OC is not bad. My voltage is maxed to 1.41 on the GPUTWEAK.

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/fx89r/

Graphics score 14603. http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1576739

My temps are great on water. I just need better BIOS and better voltage control.

Sapphire OC edition 290x with reference PCB and TRIXX should be alot better.


----------



## FtW 420

14603, I gotta get back to work, barely cracking 14k gpu score on the 780 Lightning

Not an official entry since I didn't save the validation


----------



## Ashuiegi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Your post intended for me?
> 
> 1215/1700 OC is not bad. My voltage is maxed to 1.41 on the GPUTWEAK.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/fx89r/
> 
> Graphics score 14603. http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1576739
> 
> My temps are great on water. I just need better BIOS and better voltage control.
> 
> Sapphire OC edition 290x with reference PCB and TRIXX should be alot better.


it s says you messed with the tesselation , not a valid result , i can get my gtx 670 to be over 10000 pt with an unvalid result , pretty easy.


----------



## szeged

thats why he put his notpad over it lol, too bad the link doesnt have it blocked out


----------



## alancsalt

If that is a rule of this thread, then it should be in the OP. It isn't. Maybe invalid in HOF, but not the Bot. So which rules apply in this thread? Pedro1999, what are the rules?

OCN has a team on HWbot, so a lot of ppls go by their rules.....


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> If that is a rule of this thread, then it should be in the OP. It isn't. Maybe invalid in HOF, but not the Bot. So which rules apply in this thread? Pedro1999, what are the rules?
> 
> OCN has a team on HWbot, so a lot of ppls go by their rules.....


glad you brought it up actually, yeah idk if were going by the HOF rules or hwbot, so i guess his score could be valid here.


----------



## Ashuiegi

this thread is for people who like overclocking not for people ready to cheat to try to be on top, in fact this website is for that , there is enough competitive game or team oc competition for epeen , don't come ruin this thread with your lack of confidence and need for care. It s pretty easy to make 3dmark go bunkers and then you are just rendering blank frame , you can double the score of a gpu like that , but what's the point ? are your game blank too ? tsssss

look at this one for exemple , http://www.3dmark.com/fs/923787
10k for a gtx670 , it s pretty easy to do but really pointeless to compare


----------



## the9quad

it would be cool if we had a separate thread than for the people who just OC the cards themselves and not bugger with tweaking the program then. That way we can all be on a level playing field. It would be nice if it was just press" run test" and record results.

Start messing with anything other than that and becomes who can tweak 3dmark better, not who gets a better score from tweaking the hardware.

imo.


----------



## FtW 420

It's Pedro's thread & he can figure the rules. I would guess tess enabled is required since he wants the validation link but it isn't specified.
I saw sonda's graphics score in text & didn't check the link...

As far as tweaking, it is OCN, the pursuit of performance. Overclocking & tweaking is not the same as cheating...


----------



## Yungbenny911

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ashuiegi*
> 
> this thread is for people who like overclocking not for people ready to cheat to try to be on top, in fact this website is for that , there is enough competitive game or team oc competition for epeen , don't come ruin this thread with your lack of confidence and need for care. It s pretty easy to make 3dmark go bunkers and then you are just rendering blank frame , you can double the score of a gpu like that , but what's the point ? are your game blank too ? tsssss
> 
> look at this one for exemple , http://www.3dmark.com/fs/923787
> 10k for a gtx670 , it s pretty easy to do but really pointeless to compare


That user was not actually cheating, if you notice on Graphics test 2, he got *43590.7 fps*







. This is a known bug that happens with both 3dmark11 and firestrike, where FPS on a particular scene spikes up in six figures.


----------



## Ashuiegi

this was an exemple , it my own result , i was making a point , that we are here to get good bench number , not to see who is the best at setting driver for 3dmark.


----------



## SonDa5

Maximizing 3d settings for performance is not cheating. The pros do it. It's a standard, it requires effort and skill.


----------



## the9quad

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Maximizing 3d settings for performance is not cheating. The pros do it. It's a standard, it requires effort and skill.


I am not disagreeing with ya, maybe everyone should post two results then, one with the default benchmark settings(so we can benchmark the hardware itself), and the other so you guys can compare how good you are at tweaking the benchmark and drivers? That way everyone is happy. It would be nice to compare on a level field, is all I am saying.

Dont take this part as sarcastic please it's not meant that way, but your numbers mean nothing to me, because I don't see how they relate to mine ( I know your card is faster, but that's because I can tell by looking at the clocks. (i.e. Your benchmark numbers mean zilch to me, because it's not a level playing field)


----------



## RX7-2nr

Or you could just use default settings only....like in every single one of these type threads. No one cares if you can tweak your drivers or whatever to get 46000 FPS in firestrike. Make your own benchmark thread, title it "Hack, cheat, and/or Photoshop allowed, Firestrike Top 30" It's extremely clear that he even knows its cheating because in his screenshot he put the notepad text box right over the "Benchmark Tessellation warning."

As the9quad said, the entire point of these is to have a level playing field for people to compare their hardware to others.


----------



## DampMonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> Or you could just use default settings only....like in every single one of these type threads. No one cares if you can tweak your drivers or whatever to get 46000 FPS in firestrike. Make your own benchmark thread, title it "Hack, cheat, and/or Photoshop allowed, Firestrike Top 30"
> 
> As the9quad said, the entire point of these is to have a level playing field for people to compare their hardware to others.


The OP rules need to be specified. If the only goal was to attain the highest possible score, then his entry is completely valid. Cheap and incomparable, but valid nonetheless.

Make some rules!


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> Or you could just use default settings only....like in every single one of these type threads. No one cares if you can tweak your drivers or whatever to get 46000 FPS in firestrike. Make your own benchmark thread, title it "Hack, cheat, and/or Photoshop allowed, Firestrike Top 30" It's extremely clear that he even knows its cheating, because in his screenshot he put the notepad text box right over the "Benchmark Tessellation warning."
> 
> As the9quad said, the entire point of these is to have a level playing field for people to compare their hardware to others.


As said several times, no cheating going on as things stand.
The threads that have rules should have posts following the rules. I assumed tess enabled but without it being specified it was my personal interpretation, sonda posted a screen & validation which is what is specified in the OP & basically is OK without the rules being clarified. When the OP responds the score will be allowed or disallowed.

Maybe you don't care about trying to tweak for better scores but you can't apply that to everyone...


----------



## RX7-2nr

New world record!!!1!11

Go look through pretty much every one of these type threads on OCN. They use default settings. If settings are not specified then default it is. These "tweaks" pretty much invalidate any kind of comparison, which is the entire point of these type threads, that could be made by the posted results. As the benchmark editor you already know this.

Also, look back through the thread and you can see that the OP has been rejecting modified entries.


----------



## pharma57

The OP could also ask for a 3DMark url to the score to validate any questionable scores. That way any hack, cheat, or Photoshop modified scores would be easier to identify.


----------



## FtW 420

Photoshop is a pretty extreme cheat, at least we don't see that at OCN, it has happened elsewhere & is a banhammer worthy cheat.

The ranked & official score threads (like this one) generally don't allow tess tweaking & over the top tweaks beyond using the performance slider, I just never realized this one doesn't actually specify anything beyond the screen, name & date, & validation. Leaves it a bit open to misunderstandings. The score probably will be rejected.

There are the 'post your score' threads for various benchmarks that aren't ranked or maintained, those ones are still OK for 'anything goes' scores.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> The OP could also ask for a 3DMark url to the score to validate any questionable scores. That way any hack, cheat, or Photoshop modified scores would be easier to identify.


He has been rejecting entries that are just a screenshot without the link.


----------



## alancsalt

My personal opinion (Not any Official OCN position) : If you make rules that cannot be enforced a thread can degenerate into accusations and hostility. If a tweak cannot be detected it is futile making a rule against it. This is the kind of problem HWbot comes up against. In some cases they have written their own front end for a bench to ensure as level as possible a playing field. So my thinking is that you can only realistically ban those *detectable* tweaks or cheats that you want to.

This is a problem the valley thread has. If someone doesn't believe someone else's result a "war" can break out. That is the sort of problem you can have if "cheats" or "tweaks" are not easily detectable. Obviously a "perfect world" is preferable, but the reality is that mostly we have to settle for what is actually possible.

Futuremark are in a different situation to HWbot because their whole business is writing benchmarks, more so than collecting results. They have the programmers to sort results. Even so, "impossible" results can still turn up in the HOF, and stay for some time before being "cleaned" out. The only frustrating part I find with Futuremark is that they don't accept Beta drivers, and they can even be slow to add WHQL drivers.

Futuremark does detect tessellation changes, so it is possible to disallow such results in this thread. It just needs to be stated in the OP.


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy --- [email protected] --- R 290x -- 10691

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1587379



still gotta learn how to really OC this thing. (stock bios, just using catalyst)
Oh - no cheats or tweaks...


----------



## fwix

can any one post hes result with a stock 780 with the latest nvidia driver ?


----------



## DoctorNick

Will do later


----------



## SonDa5

Guys. Just do it like HWbot and adjust your driver video options to maximize performance and post your results with your over clocked scores. May the best over clocker/tweaker win.


----------



## Jpmboy

Tweaking and driver mods easily add +1000 in score. So what driver mods are allowed, and how is the playing field kept even close to level? Or it's not and "let the hacks fly"?


Stock bios and only Cat OC.
*
WHY IS MY GRAPHICS SCORE SO LOW???*


----------



## GhostDog99

i think poeple shoud at lest need to post there link to Futuremark


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> i think poeple shoud at lest need to post there link to Futuremark


absolutely !!!


----------



## GhostDog99

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.8GHz -- GTX 780 1407 - 1852 -- Score 11826 -- 8/11/2013*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1109996


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Here's mine : http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1091649

will update this in a few days when i get my 8350 up and running


----------



## szeged

Szeged --- i7 [email protected] 4.8ghz --- gtx 780ti @ 1300/3850 --- score 11869 --- 11-8-2013 (ran this yesterday, never posted it)



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1117015

still cant figure out why my computers clock is stuck in a time loop







so ignore that " invalid time measurement reading" its just my clock is being whacked out.


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Szeged --- i7 [email protected] 4.8ghz --- gtx 780ti @ 1300/3850 --- score 11869 --- 10-8-2013 (ran this yesterday, never posted it)
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1117015
> 
> still cant figure out why my computers clock is stuck in a time loop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so ignore that " invalid time measurement reading" its just my clock is being whacked out.


It's futuremark. Windows 8 doesn't have the real time clock that is in every other OS (mobile device OS), so futuremark updated to check for time measurement data to make sure win 8 isn't being time hacked.
The time measurement data isn't needed for win 7 so it can be ignored, have to watch the warning with win 8 subs though, it is the only way to tell if win 8 cheats are used.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Szeged --- i7 [email protected] 4.8ghz --- gtx 780ti @ 1300/3850 --- score 11869 --- 10-8-2013 (ran this yesterday, never posted it)
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1117015
> 
> still cant figure out why my computers clock is stuck in a time loop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so ignore that " invalid time measurement reading" its just my clock is being whacked out.


Nice score you just passed me now I need to run it again

And your date is is off you have 10.8.2013
It should be 11.8.2013 or 8.11.2013

And ya I have had that time thing happen to me once on windows 7
Didn't now why just ran it again and it was ok and I got a better score by a little


----------



## szeged

thanks lol, fixed the date.

my actual clock on my computer has been stuck in a time loop between 9:03 pm and 10:47pm on 10/30/2013 ive tried everything and cant get it to correct itself, if i set the time manually it just gets stuck at that time and date.


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> thanks lol, fixed the date.
> 
> my actual clock on my computer has been stuck in a time loop between 9:03 pm and 10:47pm on 10/30/2013 ive tried everything and cant get it to correct itself, if i set the time manually it just gets stuck at that time and date.


Lol, the actual time on the PC, thought you meant the time measurement stuff at FM.

Need more coffee, failing at being observant in the morning...


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> thanks lol, fixed the date.
> 
> my actual clock on my computer has been stuck in a time loop between 9:03 pm and 10:47pm on 10/30/2013 ive tried everything and cant get it to correct itself, if i set the time manually it just gets stuck at that time and date.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol, the actual time on the PC, thought you meant the time measurement stuff at FM.
> 
> Need more coffee, failing at being observant in the morning...
Click to expand...

It was showing " Time measurement data not available. The validity of the result cannot be determined. (What is this?) " at Futuremark...

Can an incorrect time/date do this?


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Lol, the actual time on the PC, thought you meant the time measurement stuff at FM.
> 
> Need more coffee, failing at being observant in the morning...


haha







i might just redo windows, its been like this for 3 weeks now and its really getting annoying lol.


----------



## fwix

so no one here can run a 780 at stock (902mhz) ?


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> It was showing " Time measurement data not available. The validity of the result cannot be determined. (What is this?) " at Futuremark...
> 
> Can an incorrect time/date do this?


I'm not sure, I've seen a couple posts with it showing for win7 but haven't seen it myself. I've been using win8 for firestrike, I have win 8 & FS is the only thing it's good for, so making use of it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fwix*
> 
> so no one here can run a 780 at stock (902mhz) ?


I probably can later, just finishing painting up the PCB & needs a bit of dry time, I'll be testing it out afterwards.


----------



## fwix

thx


----------



## lilchronic

lol i cant even get my card run run @ 902Mhz on skyn3ts bios, AB will only let me go -105 core clock and that turns out to be 1019Mhz


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lol i cant even get my card run run @ 902Mhz on skyn3ts bios, AB will only let me go -105 core clock and that turns out to be 1019Mhz


I'll have to look at my stock bios, still on the card but never checked if it can clock to 902, although I guess 902Mhz set for base & then the boost on top of that.

fwix what does your card boost to, might be easier to just clock it to match what your card does for boost at stock settings so the final clock is the same.


----------



## Kyle1519

'Updated Entry'

Kyle1519 - 4770K @ 4.5 - GTX 780 - 11185 - 11/9/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1122845

HALL OF FAME FIRE STRIKE SINGLE GPU #65 as of 11/9/2013


----------



## Jpmboy

A little better with R290x voltage unlocked - still need to work the mV higher

New Entry

jpmboy --- [email protected] --- R290x --- 11550 --- 11/09/13

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1123124


----------



## Mad Pistol

Mad Pistol - FX 8320 @ 4.8Ghz - HD 7870XT @ 1200/1500 - 6262 - 11/9/2013



Not sure I'm going to be able to get much higher than that on a single HD 7870XT


----------



## h2spartan

h2spartan - i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz - GTX Titan @ 1215/1800 - 11,082 - 11/10/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1597295



I still haven't used the voltage tweak because I haven't finished my modded water rig yet. It is taking forever. But I guess this is reasonable on air. I know my Titan can be pushed a lot further, I can feel it.


----------



## h2spartan

Lets say once I get my cpu under water, obviously I will overclock much higher (hopefully to around 4.8ghz), will the higher cpu clock boost the graphics score some?


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2spartan*
> 
> Lets say once I get my cpu under water, obviously I will overclock much higher (hopefully to around 4.8ghz), will the higher cpu clock boost the graphics score some?


Probably not...unless your CPU was bottlenecking your GPU. I don't imagine a 3770k would bottleneck a Titan at any clocks. Your physics score will certainly increase though.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2spartan*
> 
> Lets say once I get my cpu under water, obviously I will overclock much higher (hopefully to around 4.8ghz), will the higher cpu clock boost the graphics score some?


it'll push the physics score higher, which more then likely will increase the overall score.


----------



## M3TAl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Mad Pistol - FX 8320 @ 4.8Ghz - HD 7870XT @ 1200/1500 - 6262 - 11/9/2013
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure I'm going to be able to get much higher than that on a single HD 7870XT


At least it gives me something to take a shot at. Too scared to raise the voltage any higher until I get an Enzotech MST-88 copper heatsink modded onto the VRM's. They like to get in the 90-100C range in intense games.


----------



## thrasherht

Just thought I would throw it out there, the second place person in the chart has the wrong score displayed. Might want to correct that in your spreadsheet.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2spartan*
> 
> Lets say once I get my cpu under water, obviously I will overclock much higher (hopefully to around 4.8ghz), will the higher cpu clock boost the graphics score some?


OC CPU will boost the physics score in this benchmark, and overall score significantly.


----------



## GhostDog99

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5.2GHz -- GTX 780 1407 / 1852 -- Score 11905 -- 10/11/2013*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1125654

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-3930k-GTX78011905.jpg.html


----------



## jomama22

Here's my best so far

Jomama22 - 3960x @ 5.1Ghz - 290x @ 1335/1740 - 13002 - 11/10/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1127453


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Here's my best so far
> 
> Jomama22 - 3960x @ 5.1Ghz - 290x @ 1335/1740 - 13002 - 11/10/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1127453


Boom! very nice









PT3 or PT1 ... or ??


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Boom! very nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PT3 or PT1 ... or ??


Thanks man.

Pt3 bios.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Thanks man.
> 
> Pt3 bios.


thanks


----------



## pharma57

@Mad Pistol & Jomama22 ... Excellent runs!

Look at some of the posts on previous pages that were accepted --- To avoid having your submission rejected, you'll need your name and date (notepad) on the screenshot. Valid link to 3DMark score below screenshot is also nice to have.


----------



## MunneY

MunneY - 3930K @ 5.0 - 780 Ref Air 11320/3402 - 11065 - 11/10/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1603700


----------



## Jpmboy

slow updating on this bench thread...


----------



## alancsalt

Single GPU Firestrike Top 30 - PedroC1999 posted in this thread in Benchmarking Software and Discussion 10/30/13 at 9:43pm | 354 replies | 9778 views
Last Online: 11 hours, 9 minutes ago

Maybe too much life happening?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Single GPU Firestrike Top 30 - PedroC1999 posted in this thread in Benchmarking Software and Discussion 10/30/13 at 9:43pm | 354 replies | 9778 views
> Last Online: 11 hours, 9 minutes ago
> 
> *Maybe too much life happening*?


a good thing.


----------



## pharma57

You never know what life brings, but maybe the OP needs some help maintaining this thread.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Ill do some more runs on the weekend once I get my 8350 running stable and get the stock cooler off my 290x.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> You never know what life brings, but maybe the OP needs some help maintaining this thread.


We found a volunteer?


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> We found a volunteer?


Jpmboy your going to up date this thread too mate


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> Jpmboy your going to up date this thread too mate


nope - but with a new gfx card launched, the OP hopefully shows up soon.


----------



## Sazz

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1117688

FX-8350 @ 5.1Ghz
R9 290x @ 1275/1466
Graphics score: 13379
Nov. 9 2013


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sazz*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1117688
> 
> FX-8350 @ 5.1Ghz
> R9 290x @ 1275/1466
> Graphics score: 13379
> Nov. 9 2013


You need to put the 3dmark score and not the GFX Score.


----------



## Forceman

Update

Forceman - 4770K @ 4.4 - R9 290 flashed to 290X @ 1200/1450 - 11259 (13355) - 15 Nov 13

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1155472



Edit: reposted with my flashed 290X score.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Update
> 
> Forceman - 4770K @ 4.4 - R9 290 @ 1180/1375 - 10715 (12617) - 14 Nov 13


ok, Forceman. What's your highest score so far after flashing your 290 to X?


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Firestrike: 9011

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1151742

FX-8350 at 4.9Ghz

290x, 1170/1430

EDIT: Adding a screencap


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> ok, Forceman. What's your highest score so far after flashing your 290 to X?


I edited my last post to put up the flashed score. It was 11055/13100


----------



## pharma57

Nice scores!







Don't forget to put valid 3DMark links to score along with snapshot including your name/date (notepad) you want to be included in the rankings. You should follow the format below:
*
OCN Name - CPU @ Clock speed - GPU - Score - Date*

*Score* is 3DMark overall score, *NOT* 3DMark Graphics Score

Check out some of the previously *Accepted* submitted scores if you get confused.








OP maintaining the rankings is very specific and will reject your score if incorrect/unnecessary information is provided.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I edited my last post to put up the flashed score. It was 11055/13100


I think you need the validation link?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think you need the validation link?


It was visible in the screenshot, but I went ahead and added it in the post also.


----------



## alancsalt

Far better to include a link. Not every OP wants to have to get links out of screenshots. Better to make it easy for OP...


----------



## yawa

Decided to some very serious, gritty overclocking of my Sig rig in regard's to CPU. For far too long I have not even bothered to push the limits of my custom water cooling setup.

So here is my FX-8350 at 5.1Ghz with my GTX 670 overclocked to 1241 Mhz and 3189 Memory. Memory is Samsung Miracle Ram 1866 9-9-9-24 1T and Northbridge (after putting up the fight of it's life tonight) and HT overclocked to 2400 Mhz (in regard's to the Northbridge, it simply refuses to go any higher.)

PScore: 6670 (ironic)
Graphics: 7468
Physics: 9887 (so close to 10K)
Combined: 2915





Direct Link:

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1643369?


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Update pls Pedro if you out there. ..........

HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@[email protected] 760 Hawk *1411 / 2822 / 3980 7342*











http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1650343


----------



## yawa

670 at 1306Mhz +160 Ram.

FX8350 at 4.7 Ghz.



Link: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1651604?

To push her anyfurther I'd need to do a hard Voltmod. That is unless anyone else knows how to get a GTX 670's voltage unlocked beyond 1.212 Volts anyway.


----------



## szeged

hard mod it!

for science!


----------



## Eggy88

Wrong thread. Delete.


----------



## rdr09

rdr09 i7 [email protected] 1.28v; R9 [email protected] 1155/1500 - 10660 11/17/13

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1656055


----------



## Jpmboy




----------



## SonDa5

Bump for Pedro.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> New Entry
> SonDa5 - 4770k @4.8GHZ - AMD R9 290x - 12,132 - 11/07/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1573423?


----------



## Sazz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> You need to put the 3dmark score and not the GFX Score.


very well let me re-do that.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1117688

FX-8350 @ 5.1Ghz
R9 290x @ 1275/1466
3Dmark Score: 10020
Nov. 9 2013


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sazz*
> 
> very well let me re-do that.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1117688
> 
> FX-8350 @ 5.1Ghz
> R9 290x @ 1275/1466
> 3Dmark Score: 10020
> Nov. 9 2013


There we go... Make sure you follow the formula on the first page... Nice score and OC!


----------



## PedroC1999

Im very sorry, I have been unreliable to OCN for the past few months.

I have updated this thread, and will continue to update it, once again im very sorry. I will be active but less that before, as I need to work harder in school this year, as its more important than priors.


----------



## Nittygritty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Im very sorry, I have been unreliable to OCN for the past few months.
> 
> I have updated this thread, and will continue to update it, once again im very sorry. I will be active but less that before, as I need to work harder in school this year, as its more important than priors.


School must take priority Pedro, this thread has become very busy. Perhaps if you don't have the time maybe pass it on to someone else to run so you can fully concentrate on your school work.


----------



## PedroC1999

Ive passed the rougher bit of this term, should be smooth sailing untill about March now anyway.

And I could have made more time for OCN if I cut out some activities, but their just as important.

For now im okay running this solo, il ask if I struggle again


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> Ive passed the rougher bit of this term, should be smooth sailing untill about March now anyway.
> 
> And I could have made more time for OCN if I cut out some activities, but their just as important.
> 
> For now im okay running this solo, il ask if I struggle again


awesome glad you're back



















... hope it just takes a lil time to update is all


----------



## PedroC1999

Had it all updated 2 hours ago (Took me 4 hours to get through 3 months of updates) published it, went in again two minutes ago because of a spelling mistake, and forgot to republish, done now


----------



## PedroC1999

^^^^^Me During!^^^^^



^^^^^Me After!^^^^^


----------



## lilchronic

lolz not sure you're done yet








#1 forceman his score is 11259 and not 13355


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lolz not sure you're done yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #1 forceman his score is 11259 and not 13355


Done, in the middle of the MASS updates, your bound to make 1 or 2 mistakes


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*


haha, trust me, programming in the last minute is just as bad...


----------



## PedroC1999

hahaha - Just glad I manage to control this derailing runaway train!


----------



## Nittygritty

I have changed GPU's 3 times since the last update Pedro lol, I went from the Vapor X 7970 to a R9 290X to a HOF GTX 780 and finally settled on an EVGA Classified 780, I never ran the 290X on FIrestrike, it was so noisy I couldn't handle it. The Classy scores higher than the HOF, around 10600 so I will update soon.


----------



## PedroC1999

Okay Paul, enjoy the 'Clocking


----------



## SonDa5

Accepteed or Rejected?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> New Entry
> SonDa5 - 4770k @4.8GHZ - AMD R9 290x - 12,132 - 11/07/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1573423?


When you reject a score please explain why. Also since you have been out there has been a debate about what is a valid and acceptable score. A thorough rule of what is allowed to standardize the results should be explained at the start of the thread to keep everyone on the same sheet of code.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Accepteed or Rejected?
> When you reject a score please explain why. Also since you have been out there has been a debate about what is a valid and acceptable score. A thorough rule of what is allowed to standardize the results should be explained at the start of the thread to keep everyone on the same sheet of code.


i think this is why

you're screen shot is clearly trying to hide that...

rules should be added to the op, if the op wants them


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> i think this is why
> 
> you're screen shot is clearly trying to hide that...
> 
> rules should be added to the op, if the op wants them


Not trying too hard to hide it when the link is right there.
I would assume tess has to be enabled since the other ranked OCN threads are for default/enabled but it isn't really clear here.

A ranked thread for benchies with all out scores wouldn't be a bad idea for the hardcore benchers.


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Not trying too hard to hide it when the link is right there.
> I would assume tess has to be enabled since the other ranked OCN threads are for default/enabled but it isn't really clear here.
> 
> A ranked thread for benchies with all out scores wouldn't be a bad idea for the hardcore benchers.


Well considering mine is higher with tess on...lol


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> *Not trying too hard to hide it when the link is right there.*
> I would assume tess has to be enabled since the other ranked OCN threads are for default/enabled but it isn't really clear here.
> 
> A ranked thread for benchies with all out scores wouldn't be a bad idea for the hardcore benchers.


yeah but still

... lets open notepad and put it directly over the error ? perfectly covering it


----------



## MunneY

Well I finally broke down... unboxed the 780 Ti and stuck it in...

This card is an absolute BEAST... I'm on Stock Bios here.

MunneY - 3930k @ 5.0Ghz - EVGA GTX 780 Ti Ref - 12060
- 19/11/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1670505?


----------



## friskiest

-New Entry-

friskiest - 2700k @ 5.2GHz - MSI GTX 780 Ref - 11125 - 19/11/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1172933


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lolz not sure you're done yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #1 forceman his score is 11259 and not 13355


Spoilsport


----------



## szeged

Heres one i forgot to submit, hope thats okay, if not ill just re run it

Szeged --- i7 [email protected] 4.8ghz --- gtx 780ti @ 1296/1975 --- score 11950 --- 11-18-2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1167378


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Spoilsport


sorry


----------



## huzzug

So will there not be any mid range GPU's from now on ??? My hd 7850 and the likes


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Accepteed or Rejected?
> When you reject a score please explain why. Also since you have been out there has been a debate about what is a valid and acceptable score. A thorough rule of what is allowed to standardize the results should be explained at the start of the thread to keep everyone on the same sheet of code.


I will make the rule official later on in the day, but *ALL RUNS MUST BE PERFORMED WITH DEFAULT FIRESTRIKE SETTINGS*

Not your fault, but for now, rejected


----------



## modd3er

MoDD3er (miss.mike) GTX Titan - 1320 / 3750 - 3930k - 5.125 Ghz - score - 12362

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1171455


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Heres one i forgot to submit, hope thats okay, if not ill just re run it
> 
> Szeged --- i7 [email protected] 4.8ghz --- gtx 780ti @ 1296/1975 --- score 11950 --- 11-18-2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1167378


i had that same error when i ran firestrike extreme. (time measurment) thing

i think its just a bug since you're on windows 7. if you were on windows 8.1 then there might be a problem.

anyway i think FTW420 could explain it better


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> I will make the rule official later on in the day, but *ALL RUNS MUST BE PERFORMED WITH DEFAULT FIRESTRIKE SETTINGS*
> 
> Not your fault, but for now, rejected


My run was at default Firestrike settings. I didn't change a thing in my Firestrike settings.

I did make adjustements to the AMD 3d PErformance settings in the AMD CCC. These are my settings for CCC.



It's going to be impossible to get exact same graphic settings between NVIDIA and AMD driver settings because they are completely different systems. Bummer that you don't honor the highest performance settings that AMD or NVIDIA drivers make possible.

HWBOT.org does allow it for professional world championship standards.

IMO allowing the highest performance settings possible between AMD and NVIDIA drivers should be the standard.


----------



## SonDa5

Dude that time measurement error means something is screwed up with your system and the score is invalid.


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> i think this is why
> 
> you're screen shot is clearly trying to hide that...
> 
> rules should be added to the op, if the op wants them


That is just a standard error from Futurmark because they don't like AMD drivers.

If you look at HWbot.org you will see that the pros except the score as valid.


----------



## szeged

Ive explained it a million times now.

The clock on my comp is messed up it is stuck on 10/30/2013 at 9:37 am. That's what's causing the error. The score is the same as if the clock was working.


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Ive explained it a million times now.
> 
> The clock on my comp is messed up it is stuck on 10/30/2013 at 9:37 am. That's what's causing the error. The score is the same as if the clock was working.


Clock error to me sounds like it is more related to false clock speeds on GPU or CPU that are screwing with the calculator for the score.


----------



## szeged

My clock speeds on my gpu and cpu are not false. It is my time on my computer that's messed up. You can argue it all you want but that's how it is. Unless you have proof that I'm lying about my clocks...


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> My clock speeds on my gpu and cpu are not false. It is my time on my computer that's messed up. You can argue it all you want but that's how it is. Unless you have proof that I'm lying about my clocks...


Dude its a well known problem that leads to improper scores. FIX your OS and get your system running right.

Hwbot.org policed up this problem well:
http://www.hwbot.org/news/9824_breaking_windows_8_benchmark_results_no_longer_accepted_at_hwbot/


----------



## lilchronic

^^ thats for windows 8.1

i had the same problem right after a fresh install of windows , its just a bug
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1664383


.....wish i could disable tessellation


----------



## szeged

Its on win7 btw not 8


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Its on win7 btw not 8


Well fix it. Google it and get it fixed.


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> .....wish i could disable tessellation


Not off just set as low as possible.

NVIDIA has its own tweaks that AMD benchmarkers complain about as well.


----------



## szeged

IDK why my systems clock is bothering you so much, ill be reinstalling windows sometime this weekend anyways.


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> IDK why my systems clock is bothering you so much, ill be reinstalling windows sometime this weekend anyways.


Because your scores are being reported from Furuturemark has having a problem with the clock which can effect the score calculator as the ink from HWbot.org I provided shows.

Get your OS reinstalled and working right and then get that GTX 780ti going so that we can see what it is capable of.

Good luck.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Because your scores are being reported from Furuturemark has having a problem with the clock which can effect the score calculator as the ink from HWbot.org I provided shows.
> 
> Get your OS reinstalled and working right and then get that GTX 780ti going so that we can see what it is capable of.
> 
> Good luck.


oops dbl post


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Because your scores are being reported from Furuturemark has having a problem with the clock which can effect the score calculator as the ink from HWbot.org I provided shows.
> 
> Get your OS reinstalled and working right and then get that GTX 780ti going so that we can see what it is capable of.
> 
> Good luck.


im pretty sure its just a bug with futuremark, as i said before i have a fresh install of windows and still got this error message. whats up with that ???

....ocn is super slow right now


----------



## szeged

im just gonna do the install now, i want the drive to be cleaned anyways for the arrival of the 780ti classified


----------



## szeged

Windows freshly installed, no extra drivers except chipset drivers installed, first thing that happens? clock is messed up again.

what the hell is going on.

edit - apparently its a widespread problem for asus ROG VI series motherboards, they have a temp fix for it atm, which i did, and its working again, idk how long though, most people are saying theyve had it working for a week or so now lol.

Anyways, decided to do a bit more overclocking on this 4770k while i was playing around in the bios, ended up with this http://valid.canardpc.com/i7rl1c

not bad imo







hopefully itll help my scores a little lol.


----------



## Eggy88

Eggy88 - 4770K @ 4.6Ghz - 780 Classified @ 1489 / 1927 - *12057* - 15.11.2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1152106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Anyways, decided to do a bit more overclocking on this 4770k while i was playing around in the bios, ended up with this http://valid.canardpc.com/i7rl1c
> 
> not bad imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hopefully itll help my scores a little lol.


I've also have a better chip on the way, new one is supposed to do 5Ghz @ 1.35v so hope to send it through some rounds @ 1.45v and see if i can get some 5.2Ghz scores.


----------



## szeged

Szeged --- i7 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- 780ti @ 1296/1980 --- 12059 --- 11/20/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1673607



clean install of windows bumped it up by about 100 points lol.


----------



## Mydog

Mydog - 3960X @ 5.0 Ghz - 780 Classified @ 1435 / 1877 - 12074 - 11/13/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1144016



Still got a little headroom on both CPU and GPU


----------



## PedroC1999

I wont be updating this untill I find out what I should do with Sonda5, I will contact some extreme benchers and keep you guys in touch


----------



## pharma57

Sonda5? Is there a link to the thread?

Edit: Never mind ...









@Szeged
Congrats on getting it sorted and better scores!


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Mydog - 3960X @ 5.0 Ghz - 780 Classified @ 1435 / 1877 - 12074 - 11/13/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1144016
> 
> 
> 
> Still got a little headroom on both CPU and GPU


I know from experience what your "little headroom" means ...









Nice run!


----------



## pharma57

@PedroC1999,

I think there might be some small update issues on the Rankings. Score is correct, but CPU is incorrect (should be Core i7-3960x @ 4.9 GHz).

Thanks for you dedication and commitment! Glad your over the hump in school ....


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> I know from experience what your "little headroom" means ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice run!


Thanks








With -6C outside I might be able to do 5.2 GHz+ on the CPU and 1530/1900 MHz + on the GPU(s)


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> That is just a standard error from Futurmark because they don't like AMD drivers.


never seen that error on any of mine...? bit unfair to the people who use the default settings if there are people trying to sneak in decreased detail settings to improve their score...

also looks like I dropped off the chart finally...


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> I wont be updating this untill I find out what I should do with Sonda5, I will contact some extreme benchers and keep you guys in touch


I'll put it to you this way. My 290x score in 2nd place is with Tess on and all other stock driver settings. Meaning 'use application settings' for everything. That score still beats his. Which makes it funnier to me about how much he is defending it.

For forums and most threads, it is known that AMD drivers MUST leave Tess set at at least 'amd optimized" and AA/ambiant Osc. Set to 'use application settings"

This is not HWBot. There is HWbot for that. Settings should be kept to as stock as possible.

Just because:
Jomama22 - 3960X @ 5.1 Ghz - 290x @ 1345 / 1749 - 13099 - 11/20/2013

Gfx score - 14653. No driver tweaks, Tess on.



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1131183


----------



## PedroC1999

So, after talking to FtW 420 and Mr Salt, I have came to this conclusion...

I will be coming up with a complete new layout for this thread, which will have a diffrent 'table' per card competition, so...

R9 290(x) | GTX Titan
HD 7970 | GTX 780/680
HD 7950 | GTX 770/760ti/670/660ti
HD 78xx | GTX 660/750/750ti
HD 77xx | GTX 650ti/650/TI Boost/740

I am sorry, but due to impracticability, the lowest end car I will accept is a 7750/GTX 640/740

And above all these, will be a OVERALL TOP 8


----------



## M3TAl

I like the sound of the new layout







. Classes are a good thing. You don't race a GT1 car against a GT3.


----------



## PedroC1999

Will take allot of work to get set up, going to start a thread to ask about the competitors, as I need to have a few opinions on where each card will lie....

Should be done by the end of this week hopefully


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PedroC1999*
> 
> So, after talking to FtW 420 and Mr Salt, I have came to this conclusion...
> 
> I will be coming up with a complete new layout for this thread, which will have a diffrent 'table' per card competition, so...
> 
> R9 290(x) | GTX Titan
> HD 7970 | GTX 780/680
> HD 7950 | GTX 770/760ti/670/660ti
> HD 78xx | GTX 660/750/750ti
> HD 77xx | GTX 650ti/650/TI Boost/740
> 
> I am sorry, but due to impracticability, the lowest end car I will accept is a 7750/GTX 640/740
> 
> And above all these, will be a OVERALL TOP 8


I would assume the 780ti would be in the top one, and are these going to be new submissions/re-submissions or are you going to spend some time going through the older posts? otherwise seems like a pretty good idea to have it separated into tiers.


----------



## PedroC1999

Spend time to sort it obviously, its gonna take a while obviously


----------



## MunneY

Me personally I think there should be an overall Top 10 and then if you wanna break it down.

I also agree that it should be as "stock" as you can get in a sense... I'm all for whatever though.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Me personally I think there should be an overall Top 10 and then if you wanna break it down.
> 
> I also agree that it should be as "stock" as you can get in a sense... I'm all for whatever though.


yea a global top 5-10 would be interesting too...


----------



## PedroC1999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> yea a global top 5-10 would be interesting too...


Thats what I meant by OVERALL TOP 8


----------



## DStealth

As 1.2v limitation








DStealth - 3960X @ 4.8 Ghz - Palit 780 Ti @ 1310 / 1895 - 12434 - 11/21/2013


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> As 1.2v limitation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DStealth - 3960X @ 4.8 Ghz - Palit 780 Ti @ 1310 / 1895 - 12434 - 11/21/2013


Nice score. Props to Nvidia for going with that kick ass Samsung vram ic.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> I'll put it to you this way. My 290x score in 2nd place is with Tess on and all other stock driver settings. Meaning 'use application settings' for everything. That score still beats his. Which makes it funnier to me about how much he is defending it.
> 
> *For forums and most threads, it is known that AMD drivers MUST leave Tess set at at least 'amd optimized" and AA/ambiant Osc. Set to 'use application settings"
> *
> This is not HWBot. There is HWbot for that. Settings should be kept to as stock as possible.
> 
> Just because:
> Jomama22 - 3960X @ 5.1 Ghz - 290x @ 1345 / 1749 - 13099 - 11/20/2013
> 
> Gfx score - 14653. No driver tweaks, Tess on.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1131183


Agree 100%. Just select "optimal performance" in CCC or NVCP.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> Nice score. Props to Nvidia for going with that kick ass Samsung vram ic.


My TI has Hynix


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> My TI has Hynix


Hynix is good VRAM too


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> Hynix is good VRAM too


in that case...


----------



## PedroC1999

Can I please ask for no more validations untill at least Saturday, untill I finish making and porting the SS over


----------



## SonDa5

The Samsung is better.

I thought the Sammy was exclusive secret win sauce of the Ti.


----------



## Eggy88

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> The Samsung is better.
> 
> I thought the Sammy was exclusive secret win sauce of the Ti.


Don't know if there has been testing with large number of Samsung vs Hynix, but EVGA-Jacob posted some results from their 780 Classified cards running Hynix and some running Samsung and they where close to identical. As long as you don't get Elpida you're OK


----------



## brazilianloser

Nvm more testing still now that futuremark is picking up the whql drivers


----------



## brazilianloser

brazilianloser - i7 3770k @ 4.5 Ghz - Asus R9 290 @ 1125/1250 - 10075 - 10/23/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1196063

Updated to a valid result above 10k


----------



## FtW 420

I can put pharma back to work while I try to figure out how he is doing so well in the 1st game test, I have to play with different drivers...

FtW 420 - i7 3930k @ 5.5Ghz - GTX 780 Lightning @ 1593/1912 - 13361 - 11/22/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1188038



Just noticed when uploading the screenshot that i missed setting the memory tab, memory was at 2400mhz 9-11-11 28 128 1t


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> I can put pharma back to work while I try to figure out how he is doing so well in the 1st game test, I have to play with different drivers...
> 
> FtW 420 - i7 3930k @ 5.5Ghz - GTX 780 Lightning @ 1593/1912 - 13361 - 11/22/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1188038
> 
> 
> 
> Just noticed when uploading the screenshot that i missed setting the memory tab, memory was at 2400mhz 9-11-11 28 128 1t


Holy crap that LN2...


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Holy crap that LN2...


Sort of, I was using ln2 but my temperatures weren't that cold, cpu at -30° & gpu at -25°. Have to get my monitor cables & monitor to use sorted out, I was losing signal to the monitor just under -30° & I know this card can run a lot colder with the right monitor & cable.
All my cards seem to hate my 1440p monitor & dual link DVI cable when frozen.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Sort of, I was using ln2 but my temperatures weren't that cold, cpu at -30° & gpu at -25°. Have to get my monitor cables & monitor to use sorted out, I was losing signal to the monitor just under -30° & I know this card can run a lot colder with the right monitor & cable.
> All my cards seem to hate my 1440p monitor & dual link DVI cable when frozen.


I'd love to see how ya'll do that with LN2... Such crazy numbers!


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> I can put pharma back to work while I try to figure out how he is doing so well in the 1st game test, I have to play with different drivers...
> 
> FtW 420 - i7 3930k @ 5.5Ghz - GTX 780 Lightning @ 1593/1912 - 13361 - 11/22/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1188038
> 
> 
> 
> Just noticed when uploading the screenshot that i missed setting the memory tab, memory was at 2400mhz 9-11-11 28 128 1t


Great run, FtW 420 ... I knew you had a lot left for the final leg!









I also noticed a great 780 Ti score (13600 on stock voltage) that has my highest score beat , so I'm kinda expecting to be looking at "alot of dust" in the near future.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1438886/official-nvidia-gtx-780-ti-owners-club/1780_20#post_21185410

Edit: What's the max memory clock on x79 platform for i7 3960x? To get the max (2933mhz) rated memory clock and the MB supports it, is the limiting factor in this case the CPU? I'm stable at 2607mhz with 125 strap, BLCK freq. 122.25, and ratio 39 @4767 for everyday use, but wondered if it was the cpu or amount of memory (32gb).


----------



## Mikecdm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Sort of, I was using ln2 but my temperatures weren't that cold, cpu at -30° & gpu at -25°. Have to get my monitor cables & monitor to use sorted out, I was losing signal to the monitor just under -30° & I know this card can run a lot colder with the right monitor & cable.
> All my cards seem to hate my 1440p monitor & dual link DVI cable when frozen.


You try hdmi?


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Great run, FtW 420 ... I knew you had a lot left for the final leg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also noticed a great 780 Ti score (13600 on stock voltage) that has my highest score beat , so I'm kinda expecting to be looking at "alot of dust" in the near future.
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1438886/official-nvidia-gtx-780-ti-owners-club/1780_20#post_21185410
> 
> Edit: What's the max memory clock on x79 platform for i7 3960x? To get the max (2933mhz) rated memory clock and the MB supports it, is the limiting factor in this case the CPU? I'm stable at 2607mhz with 125 strap, BLCK freq. 122.25 strap, and ratio 39 @4767 for everyday use, but wondered if it was the cpu or amount of memory (32gb).


The Ti are getting great clocks for the voltage, it will be hard to beat them once some voltage control comes.
2600mhz memory is already doing great for an sb-e cpu, quite a few have trouble with 2400mhz. The max frequency capable is mainly in the cpu's IMC, although 32Gb of memory is probably putting a bit of strain on it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mikecdm*
> 
> You try hdmi?


I haven't yet, I cleaned up & 'organized' here a bit & it took me a while to find everything. Have a DVI & a couple VGA with adapters to try, & will grab an HDMI off the TV to try out

Finally got a chance to test the new probes I picked up, much better than the ones that came with the thermo. New ones go to -196, -195, -195 & -193.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> I also noticed a great 780 Ti score (13600 on stock voltage) that has my highest score beat


Just broke 14k on stock voltage and reference cooler









Great run, FtW 420


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Just broke 14k on stock voltage and reference cooler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great run, FtW 420


That's a great graphics score, DStealth! Your Overall score isn't too far off the 13600 reported above by your brother!









Hopefully he will post results here along with his 3DMark validation links.


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> I can put pharma back to work while I try to figure out how he is doing so well in the 1st game test, I have to play with different drivers...
> 
> FtW 420 - i7 3930k @ 5.5Ghz - GTX 780 Lightning @ 1593/1912 - 13361 - 11/22/2013


The 1st game and 2nd game test were the most difficult. In 1st game test it was frustrating because the card would crash at certain scenarios in same spot (going around a particular corner) ... eventually passed by playing a lot with the 3 voltages, specifically the PEXVDD. I think this was the first time I really started playing with PEXVDD to see if it could influence results where the card has issues, but usually also involved backing down slightly on NVVDD or FBVDD until I had a clean run.

I'm really curious to see how the new 780 Ti Classifieds are going to apply the 3 voltages without EvBots for sale. I'm glad kept mine but a software solution would be great but only if they have the same voltage limits.


----------



## pharma57

Pharma57 - 3960X @ 4.9 Ghz - GTX 780 @ 1319/1939 - 13459 - 08/12/2013
eVGA GTX 780 Classified on Air


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/756265


----------



## Nittygritty

Update

Nittygritty---3770K @ 4.8GHz---GTX 780 @ 1320/1685---10630---24/11/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1707458


----------



## Jpmboy

*UPDATE post #472*
jpmboy --- [email protected] --- GTX Titan --- 1332/1866 --- 12262 -- Nov. 24, 2013
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1707739


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







It's Cold:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## szeged

Szeged --- i7 [email protected] 4.8ghz --- gtx 780ti @ 1298/1993 --- 12077 --- 11/24/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1708049

got bored, did a bit of ram OCing, gonna try to break 14k gpu score on this card lol, shouldnt be too hard.

gonna grab a RIVE BE when i can, step out of haswell benching for a bit and do some ivy-e


----------



## Paul17041993

has pedro finished the new system or have I missed something...?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Pharma57 - 3960X @ 4.9 Ghz - GTX 780 @ 1319/1939 - 13459 - 08/12/2013
> eVGA GTX 780 Classified
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/756265


you should run that rig in a few other benches.


----------



## szeged

Szeged --- i7 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- gtx 780ti @ 1300/2000 --- 12112 --- 11/25/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1708906

getting closer!


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy --- [email protected] --- GTX Titan @ 1332/1866 --- 12381 --- 11/25/13
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1712818


----------



## smokedawg

New Entry
smokedawg - i5 2500k @ 4.7ghz - 290x @ 1210 / 1625 - 10626 - 25/11/2013
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1206605


----------



## Jpmboy

update

jpmboy -- [email protected] -- R9 [email protected] 1265/1550 --- 11644 - 11/25/13
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1715287


this was the run just before:
1265/1575... ? 11748.
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1209057


----------



## Arizonian

Arizonian - *i7 3770K 4.5 Mhz* - Firestrike *11044* Score - ACX 780Ti 1106 Mhz Core / *1237 Mhz Boost / 1818 Mhz Memory*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1751434



*EDIT - updated since OP hasn't added the previous score.*

Arizonian - *i7 3770K 4.5 Mhz* - Firestrike *11075* Score - ACX 780Ti 1106 Mhz Core / *1237 Mhz Boost / 1815 Mhz Memory* Just a tad better second run.









http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1760095


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> Arizonian - *i7 3770K 4.5 Mhz* - Firestrike *11044* Score - ACX 780Ti 1106 Mhz Core / *1224 Mhz Boost / 1818 Mhz Memory* (On Air no voltage bumps)
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1751434










that is a great card! You really should flash it to one of the better bios' and drop PrecisionX for afterburner.


----------



## szeged

szeged --- i7 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- gtx 780ti @ 1300/2000 --- 12166 --- 11/29/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1228137


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> update
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] -- R9 [email protected] 1265/1550 --- 11644 - 11/25/13
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1715287
> 
> 
> this was the run just before:
> 1265/1575... ? 11748.
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1209057


smoke's oc is lower but beats your graphics score. could it be unstable?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> Arizonian - *i7 3770K 4.5 Mhz* - Firestrike *11044* Score - ACX 780Ti 1106 Mhz Core / *1224 Mhz Boost / 1818 Mhz Memory* (On Air no voltage bumps)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1751434


guess you're happy with the new card. have you tried BF4 with it?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> *smoke's oc is lower but beats your graphics score. could it be unstable?*
> guess you're happy with the new card. have you tried BF4 with it?


Probably is. Otherwise, no explanation. (using asus bios, and GPT)


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Probably is. Otherwise, no explanation. (using asus bios, and GPT)


i think it is Win 8.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> i think it is Win 8.


prolly gonna reconfigure parkbench in the next days, so I'll see if it's an over..overclock before teardown.









I'll likely try to sell this 290x on OCN with the EK block... towards a new mobo.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> i think it is Win 8.


same clocks: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1755966

IDK, win8 maybe:

Capture.PNG 30k .PNG file


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> same clocks: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1755966
> 
> IDK, win8 maybe:
> 
> Capture.PNG 30k .PNG file


could very well be. here is Forceman's at 1200/1450

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1155472

edit: maybe MS is making us want to upgrade. i read Win8 works better in BF4. lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> could very well be. here is Forceman's at 1200/1450
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1155472
> 
> edit: maybe MS is making us want to upgrade. i read Win8 works better in BF4. lol


ugh... it needs more than a few pts in FS and BF4 for me. Here's one I just did with a valid driver: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1756312
Without getting a controllable way to disable/modulate LLC like with the NPC vrms in the titans/780s, the r290 is limited (i do not like pt1 or pt3).

... back out to hang more lights!


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy -- [email protected] -- R290x -- 1265/1715 --- 11982 -- 11/30/13
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1234180


----------



## Renairy

*to the OP, the gold place was taken with a 3960x not a 4770K @ 4.8ghz... please fix*


----------



## Jpmboy

*Too slow to Update*


----------



## Nittygritty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> *Too slow to Update*


He is busy with School, I told him school takes priority, if you are too busy let someone help you out on here, he said no, he will keep on top of it from now on. That was a couple of weeks back and no updates since.
I run 11 leaderboards for all the main benchmarks on another forum, I update them daily, it takes a few minutes of my time. If you leave it weeks it becomes a mountain to get through.

I have to recommend that Pedro hands it over to someone with more time, it's not fair on him or all the folks that are posting new scores.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> He is busy with School, I told him school takes priority, if you are too busy let someone help you out on here, he said no, he will keep on top of it from now on. That was a couple of weeks back and no updates since.
> I run 11 leaderboards for all the main benchmarks on another forum, I update them daily, it takes a few minutes of my time. If you leave it weeks it becomes a mountain to get through.
> I have to recommend that Pedro hands it over to someone with more time, it's not fair on him or all the folks that are posting new scores.


Rightly so.. I do agree with your recommendation. If you let the backlog get too large the update is a real burden... Pedro can do what CDman did - share the Google file with another user - split the workload.


----------



## Ricdeau

Ricdeau -- i7 4770K @ 4.6GHz -- R290X -- 1190/1400 --- 10819 -- 12/04/13
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1784188


----------



## Arizonian

Update my 780Ti ACX - finally tested this as far as I can go on Air....I'm done.









Firestrike
*Arizonian* - 3770K 4.5 Ghz - GTX 780Ti ACX 1116 Core *1241 Boost* / *1925 Memory* - Firestrike *11254*

*CPU-Z Validation*
*GPU-Z Validation*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1788552


----------



## MunneY

I've got my 780 under water and figured I'd push it and see how it goes.. Results this far!



MunneY - 3930K 4.4 Ghz - GTX 780 1359 Core / 1850 Memory - Firestrike 11361


----------



## Jpmboy

It's a shame. This is Futuremark's newest (and free!) benchmark. A new generation of cards launches, OCN users keep posting results, and weeks go by without an update. Pedro...it's okay to be busy and have priorities - really! Delegate... Dont give up the thread, share the update burden with another OCN brother. It's easy to do.


----------



## ImJJames

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1263033
*
New Entry

ImJJames - 4770k @ 4.3Ghz - r9 290 - 10801
- 12/6/2013*


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> It's a shame. This is Futuremark's newest (and free!) benchmark. A new generation of cards launches, OCN users keep posting results, and weeks go by without an update. Pedro...it's okay to be busy and have priorities - really! Delegate... Dont give up the thread, share the update burden with another OCN brother. It's easy to do.


Agreed man . Prolly blew up his rig again or got a girlfreind









*New card*

HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2428 Stock R9 290 Sapphire @[email protected] *10255*











http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1773136


----------



## alancsalt

PS4 and GTA5?


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> PS4 and GTA5?


HAHAHA LOOOOL









So much for his dream being a mod LOOOOL


----------



## Arizonian

Only a few points but I'll take it.

*Firestrike*
*Arizonian* - 3770K 4.5 Ghz - GTX 780Ti ACX 1120 *Core 1251Boost* / *1925 Memory* - Firestrike *11623*

*GPU-Z Validation*
*CPU-Z Validation*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1799571


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Thats only 1k more than my 290


----------



## ImJJames

*UPDATE*

GPU-Z Validation http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/umdg9/
CPU-Z Validation http://valid.canardpc.com/1wp8hy

Stock cooler

*ImJJames - 4770k @ 4.3Ghz- r9 290, 1270 Core / 1500 Memory - Firestrike 11066
12/07/2013*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1806283?


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Firestrike: 9011
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1151742
> 
> FX-8350 at 4.9Ghz
> 
> 290x, 1170/1430
> 
> EDIT: Adding a screencap


I think i got missed somewhere


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Thats only 1k more than my 290


check the graphics score.


----------



## ImJJames

Anyone know why this is happening... I seem to be getting lower GPU score as I increase GPU clock, but it will increase physics score.

Here are examples, no changes in CPU or ram between these test.

Clock 1270 / Mem 1500
GPU Score: 12831 Physics: 12274
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1268103

Clock 1225/ Mem 1500
GPU Score: 12964 Physics: 10966
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1265096


----------



## brazilianloser

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Anyone know why this is happening... I seem to be getting lower GPU score as I increase GPU clock, but it will increase physics score.
> 
> Here are examples, no changes in CPU or ram between these test.
> 
> Clock 1270 / Mem 1500
> GPU Score: 12831 Physics: 12274
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1268103
> 
> Clock 1225/ Mem 1500
> GPU Score: 12964 Physics: 10966
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1265096


Are the cards down clocking to keep themselves in a safe temp range?


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brazilianloser*
> 
> Are the cards down clocking to keep themselves in a safe temp range?


They don't pass 68C on reference air.


----------



## brazilianloser

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> They don't pass 68C on reference air.


That seems like unrealistic temps for the reference cooling. You should look at the clock to see if it is downclocking.


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brazilianloser*
> 
> That seems like unrealistic temps for the reference cooling. You should look at the clock to see if it is downclocking.


Unrealistic? I have it running at 90% fan when benching and its 11-13C ambient temp


----------



## Menthol

Menthol 3930K @ 5300MHZ GTX 780 Classified
Firestrike score = 12568

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/894922

Menthol i7 - 3930k @ 5.3 - GTX 780 - 12568 - 9/12/2013

Will get back with scores later


----------



## brazilianloser

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Unrealistic? I have it running at 90% fan when benching and its 11-13C ambient temp


I am gonna go ahead and recommend that you visit an Otolaryngologist.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I think i got missed somewhere


You didn't get missed... The OP is missing


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Anyone know why this is happening... I seem to be getting lower GPU score as I increase GPU clock, but it will increase physics score.
> 
> Here are examples, no changes in CPU or ram between these test.
> 
> Clock 1270 / Mem 1500
> GPU Score: 12831 Physics: 12274
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1268103
> 
> Clock 1225/ Mem 1500
> GPU Score: 12964 Physics: 10966
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1265096


physics increases... that doesn't quite make sense for only a change in GPU clock...

also, check your power settings, the 290/290X will downclock based on TDP too, run afterburner in the background to monitor the clock...


----------



## mxthunder

not valid for submission, just fooling around on an air cooled reference 780Ti. Should be able to do much better once I get this puppy under water:


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> physics increases... that doesn't quite make sense for only a change in GPU clock...
> 
> also, check your power settings, the 290/290X will downclock based on TDP too, run afterburner in the background to monitor the clock...


Could it be my PSU? Its only 630 Watt, and I was pushing 1.4+ volts on GPU, and 1.3volts on CPU


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Could it be my PSU? Its only 630 Watt, and I was pushing 1.4+ volts on GPU, and 1.3volts on CPU


I think 630W would still be enough, but that could be a droop issue, have you run any burn tests on both cpu and gpu simultaneously to be sure your rig is stable?

doesn't exactly make sense that your physics score has such a large difference with a very small gpu core change, something must be bottlenecking somewhere, I could say your cpu may not have quite enough grunt but seeing as the physics increases by a good 1200 points just by giving the gpu a bit more clock, it must be something else...


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> I think 630W would still be enough, but that could be a droop issue, have you run any burn tests on both cpu and gpu simultaneously to be sure your rig is stable?
> 
> doesn't exactly make sense that your physics score has such a large difference with a very small gpu core change, something must be bottlenecking somewhere, I could say your cpu may not have quite enough grunt but seeing as the physics increases by a good 1200 points just by giving the gpu a bit more clock, it must be something else...


Yeah something weird is definitely going on...what burn test you recommend that would test both at same time?


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> check the graphics score.


Oh yeah


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Yeah something weird is definitely going on...what burn test you recommend that would test both at same time?


I wouldnt recommend doing those two tests at once . Its a good way of overheating your vrms .

P95 27.7 has avx instructions for CPU . Valley loops are a reasonable burn for grphx , or firestrike demo perhaps . Benchnmarking is a good way to get stability , like your doing now


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> I wouldnt recommend doing those two tests at once . Its a good way of overheating your vrms .
> 
> P95 27.7 has avx instructions for CPU . Valley loops are a reasonable burn for grphx , or firestrike demo perhaps . Benchnmarking is a good way to get stability , like your doing now


Well my system is stable then so something else is going on. Whats even weirder is I just OC'ed my CPU to 4.5Ghz and ran 3dmark again and got lesser score on both Graphics and Physics...


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Anyone know why this is happening... I seem to be getting lower GPU score as I increase GPU clock, but it will increase physics score.
> 
> Here are examples, no changes in CPU or ram between these test.
> 
> Clock 1270 / Mem 1500
> GPU Score: 12831 Physics: 12274
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1268103
> 
> Clock 1225/ Mem 1500
> GPU Score: 12964 Physics: 10966
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1265096


Your card is throttling. When you lose performance while overclocking, that's a sure sign you've gone too far.


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tsm106*
> 
> Your card is throttling. When you lose performance while overclocking, that's a sure sign you've gone too far.


What causes the discrepancy in the phsyics then?


----------



## Ricdeau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Well my system is stable then so something else is going on. Whats even weirder is I just OC'ed my CPU to 4.5Ghz and ran 3dmark again and got lesser score on both Graphics and Physics...


Have you done other CPU intensive benchmarks that give you metrics to see if you are still getting an increase in performance at 4.5GHz over a lesser overclock? Overclocking can be a fickle thing in that you can appear stable, but you receive degraded performance. I usually see this happen more frequently on GPUs, but I've seen CPUs display the same behavior in the odd circumstance.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Well my system is stable then so something else is going on. Whats even weirder is I just OC'ed my CPU to 4.5Ghz and ran 3dmark again and got lesser score on both Graphics and Physics...


Maybe It's an unstable cpu overclock... Open event viewer, apps&services, microsoft, and look for kernel-whea. Are there any machine-check errors recorded? Ivy will check a proccall "checksum" and if it is off, will redo the proc. this error trap is great, but wil mask an unstable system. Looping back to correct a chksum error will chew cpu time and make it complete a task slower.... But correctly! Sandy bridge do not have this feature... And just bsod when the accumulated errors become too much. Nice for OC, but not in a production environment.


----------



## marc0053

I don't want to replace my existing score but this is with my new PNY GTX 780

marc0053- i7 3930k @ 5.0GHz- GTX 780 - 11888 - 9/12/2013
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1817309?


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> I wouldnt recommend doing those two tests at once . Its a good way of overheating your vrms .


cpu and gpu VRMs are completely isolated, the idea of doing a burn on both simultaneously is to "burn" your PSU, if your volts droop too much (12V, 5V etc) and/or your PSU trips, you need a bigger one.

OCCT I think is good at this, it has both cpu and gpu, and a power supply test which does both, or you could just run furmark and prime at the same time, you mainly just need to be sure your 12V stays above 11.8V and 5V stays above 4.8V, don't think 3.3V will have much droop but it should be about 3.1V at least.


----------



## Jpmboy

*Still no update???*

whoa - what a backlog.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

I think Pedro might need someone to take care of the thread for him, I'm not gonna nominate myself but I'm sure someone will help out around here


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I think Pedro might need someone to take care of the thread for him, I'm not gonna nominate myself but I'm sure someone will help out around here


You get my vote as long as you're active


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> You get my vote as long as you're active


Sorry, i won't be very active in here at all for the next month, tis the season of family and junk


----------



## Forceman

I can do it, if someone can get ahold of him to switch it over.


----------



## alancsalt

I can edit, but sharing edit rights is locked. You need to talk to Pedro.

Multiple spreadsheets with single card categories would be a lot of data entry.. Maybe a bit ambitious for someone with exams, sports, etc....

*Anyway, Merry Christmas, giving you all an UPDATE!*



Sorry about your individual accepted, updated

or rejected.
DStealth - No URL provided.
MunneY - 3930K 4.4 Ghz - GTX 780 1359 Core / 1850 Memory - Firestrike 11361 - No URL provided.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Pharma57 - 3960X @ 4.9 Ghz - GTX 780 @ 1319/1939 - 13459 - 08/12/2013
> eVGA GTX 780 Classified on Air
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/756265


are you sure that's running at 1319 not 1519? I was comparing your score to Mydog and I can't figure why so much different.

Mydog - 3960X @ 5.0 Ghz - 780 Classified @ 1435 / 1877 - 12074 - 11/13/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1144016


----------



## jomama22

LOD possibly...but I am not about to get into that lol.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> LOD possibly...but I am not about to get into that lol.


could be a typo, could be the driver or unstable oc on the part of one.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> I can edit, but sharing edit rights is locked. You need to talk to Pedro.
> 
> Multiple spreadsheets with single card categories would be a lot of data entry.. Maybe a bit ambitious for someone with exams, sports, etc....
> 
> *Anyway, Merry Christmas, giving you all an UPDATE!*
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry about your individual accepted, updated
> 
> or rejected.
> DStealth - No URL provided.
> MunneY - 3930K 4.4 Ghz - GTX 780 1359 Core / 1850 Memory - Firestrike 11361 - No URL provided.


*Thank you!!!*

Just merge the multiple sreadsheets... Easy to see which cards are leading in class.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> LOD possibly...but I am not about to get into that lol.


Doubtful. What's more interesting, that card/rig is nowhere near #1 in any other bench.







pharma studied the score equation! It's a legit score.


----------



## alancsalt

I think the multiple sheets was what Pedro was thinking of.. *ALL* is what most will look at. I'll leave it to whoever keeps editing.

It's set up so the individual entries in all can just be cut by highlighting the row from extreme left and hitting Control - X and highlight and paste the same way with Control - V into the other sheets....


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Doubtful. What's more interesting, that card/rig is nowhere near #1 in any other bench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pharma studied the score equation! It's a legit score.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> could be a typo, could be the driver or unstable oc on the part of one.


I am well aware how the metric is calculated. But the guy is beating 1400+/1900+titans by a hair in gfx score. What it's really about is combined, that score is upwards of 700 pts over what anyone with a titan/780ti/780 is getting, or close to 12%.

I'm not here to argue validity, doesn't really matter to me. But I would like to know how only a certain few nvidia card owners get 10-12% combined score boost in combined and 1-3% in gfx.

I would like to know ram timings and clock though.


----------



## jomama22

I cant get edit to work so sorry.

Just to prove my point: this is 8pack's (a well-known clocker) 780 under ln2 with a [email protected] 5.6.
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/770278
List it came from: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18485414

Ignoring the lower gfx score by 1-2% even though its clocked higher, 8packs combined score is still lower by 5% even with a massive 700mhz difference in CPU clocks and much higher GPU clocks.

Things ussualy are what they smell like. If there is a legit reason for the differences I am more then happy to listen and use it to be better. That is something I believed would be most beneficial anyway as I'm sure everyone would love to know how to achieve higher combined and gfx score from lower clocks all around.

Like I said, I am just making this aware as it isn't a small bump here or there. This is a 4.9 3960x and 1319/1900+ 780 beating an ln2 780 @1600/1900+ and 3930k @ 5.6 in combined and gfx score from a well known am achieved overclocker.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> I think the multiple sheets was what Pedro was thinking of.. *ALL* is what most will look at. I'll leave it to whoever keeps editing.
> 
> It's set up so the individual entries in all can just be cut by highlighting the row from extreme left and hitting Control - X and highlight and paste the same way with Control - V into the other sheets....


Could link the google sheets and update only "All" ?


----------



## Nittygritty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> I can edit, but sharing edit rights is locked. You need to talk to Pedro.
> 
> Multiple spreadsheets with single card categories would be a lot of data entry.. Maybe a bit ambitious for someone with exams, sports, etc....
> 
> *Anyway, Merry Christmas, giving you all an UPDATE!*
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry about your individual accepted, updated
> 
> or rejected.
> DStealth - No URL provided.
> MunneY - 3930K 4.4 Ghz - GTX 780 1359 Core / 1850 Memory - Firestrike 11361 - No URL provided.


Nice work, thank you for the update Alan.

Paul.


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> I think the multiple sheets was what Pedro was thinking of.. *ALL* is what most will look at. I'll leave it to whoever keeps editing.
> 
> It's set up so the individual entries in all can just be cut by highlighting the row from extreme left and hitting Control - X and highlight and paste the same way with Control - V into the other sheets....
> 
> 
> 
> Could link the google sheets and update only "All" ?
Click to expand...

You know a way to do that?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> I cant get edit to work so sorry.
> 
> Just to prove my point: this is 8pack's (a well-known clocker) 780 under ln2 with a [email protected] 5.6.
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/770278
> List it came from: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18485414
> 
> Ignoring the lower gfx score by 1-2% even though its clocked higher, 8packs combined score is still lower by 5% even with a massive 700mhz difference in CPU clocks and much higher GPU clocks.
> 
> Things ussualy are what they smell like. If there is a legit reason for the differences I am more then happy to listen and use it to be better. That is something I believed would be most beneficial anyway as I'm sure everyone would love to know how to achieve higher combined and gfx score from lower clocks all around.
> 
> Like I said, I am just making this aware as it isn't a small bump here or there. This is a 4.9 3960x and 1319/1900+ 780 beating an ln2 780 @1600/1900+ and 3930k @ 5.6 in combined and gfx score from a well known am achieved overclocker.


Like i said, that card/rig is nowhere near #1 in ANY other benchmark pharma posted to. Hopefully pharma can explain.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> You know a way to do that?


Can't test right now (iPad) but will look into it. If it's anything like excel, then yes i know how to do that, even conditional link parsing.


----------



## ImJJames

Thanks for everyone's help, I found out what was causing inconsistencies in my 3dmark13 scores. Seems like PT 1 bios was unstable for me and was affecting not only my graphic score but also my physics score. Using Asus stock bios I was able to get much better results at lower clocks









*UPDATE

ImJJames - 4770k @ 4.5Ghz- r9 290, 1250 Core / 1500 Memory - Firestrike 11254
12/011/2013*
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1285324


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Like i said, that card/rig is nowhere near #1 in ANY other benchmark pharma posted to. Hopefully pharma can explain.


Well, that card/rig was only run in this benchmark before it was sold. In other benchmark the cards/rig used were most likely my 780 ACX's, or possibly my other Classifieds. I've been through this before and will end it here ... if you guys have a problem you can take it up with 3DMark -- to my knowledge the scores have been checked twice. High CPU OC's aren't going to buy you much in this bench (graphics 75%., physics 15%, combined 10%). If you have problems with equations it has graphics written all over it.

@jomama22
Fortunately I don't know how to cheat (yes, you can say it) and really don't need to. What would be the point? I've only had one truly golden card and that was it - sounds like you never had one. If I did cheat why stop with that card? I have 3 other 780 classifieds and 2 780 ACX's that, according to you should be able to attain the similar scores if I cheat. Didn't someone accuse you of cheating not to long ago in one of these benchmarks?









@MrTOOShort
Congrats on beating my HOF score with your water-cooled Titan!







I guess (according to Jomama22) that means you have also beat some ln2 scores as well.


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Well, that card/rig was only run in this benchmark before it was sold. In other benchmark the cards/rig used were most likely my 780 ACX's, or possibly my other Classifieds. I've been through this before and will end it here ... if you guys have a problem you can take it up with 3DMark -- to my knowledge the scores have been checked twice. High CPU OC's aren't going to buy you much in this bench (graphics 75%., physics 15%, combined 10%). If you have problems with equations it has graphics written all over it.
> 
> @jomama22
> Fortunately I don't know how to cheat (yes, you can say it) and really don't need to. What would be the point? I've only had one truly golden card and that was it - sounds like you never had one. If I did cheat why stop with that card? I have 3 other 780 classifieds and 2 780 ACX's that, according to you should be able to attain the similar scores if I cheat. Didn't someone accuse you of cheating not to long ago in one of these benchmarks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @MrTOOShort
> Congrats on beating my HOF score with your water-cooled Titan!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess (according to Jomama22) that means you have also beat some ln2 scores as well.


Excuse me? Are you trying to be smart? Firstly, i was never accused of cheating as I am more then happy to provide whatever information or tips to get where I am. Pretty sure my 3 290x above 1340 should provide you my "golden chip" status. I dont think you realize that i do know a thing or two about this. I can also have others set their 290x's to the exact same clocks as me and guess what? They all score the same within 1-2%. I had 10 290xs and at 1250/1500 and guess what, they all scored 1-2%. Take a look at 100s of 780 benches and guess what, they all score the same within 1-2% at the same clocks.

I dont care how many cards you have had as I really have no trust in your data or scores at all. Unless you have found a titan mislabeled as a 780 classy, you are pulling something out your butt.

Your scores alone show that you are doing something. There are mountains of scores and data showing this, from everyday clockers to pros.

Like I said, please tell us your whole setup so you can prove me wrong and make me look dumb, as a 780 @1319/1900+ and a 3960x @4.9 do not score that high.

heres some proof, you would officially have the highest 780 gfx score not on ln2 ever by 900 gfx pts in firestrike and the 2nd highest combined score single gfx card ever: Highest water 780gfx: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/894922 8packs ln2 run: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/770278
next highest combined:http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1017987
I trust FTW420, and somehow, his gfx and physics score are higher then yours, as they should be at monstrously higher clocks, but he gets smeered in combined by 13% compared to yours. http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1188038

Sorry bro, but your doing something. Defend yourself all you want but anyone with any sense in this matter will just ignore you from now on.


----------



## pharma57

From the sounds of it your butt is big enough for your 3 290x's and then some. I remember when people in this forum thought a "golden" card in Valley was a Titan (non ln2) that scored around 86 ... no other Titan could come close. Then a Classy pulling much higher volts with below average ASIC barely beat it for the #2 spot. I wouldn't call that Classy a "golden" card the same way I wouldn't call your 290's "golden cards".

The only advice I'm going to give you before I totally ignore your posts is feel free to contact 3DMark. At least there is a way to check the validity of my scores, which is something more than can be said about your "questionable" past scores.


----------



## ImJJames

On the data sheet 290's flashed to 290x should be labeled as 290x...


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> From the sounds of it your butt is big enough for your 3 290x's and then some. I remember when people in this forum thought a "golden" card in Valley was a Titan (non ln2) that scored around 86 ... no other Titan could come close. Then a Classy pulling much higher volts with below average ASIC barely beat it for the #2 spot. I wouldn't call that Classy a "golden" card the same way I wouldn't call your 290's "golden cards".
> 
> The only advice I'm going to give you before I totally ignore your posts is feel free to contact 3DMark. At least there is a way to check the validity of my scores, which is something more than can be said about your "questionable" past scores.


You and I both know (and everyone should know)3dmark does not catch many nvidia modifications, why do you think hwbot allows tess off for amd?

There is enough proof here to know you cheat. And you ignoring any sort of question asked about them and just responding by spewing garbage only supports this more.

Again, what is your entire setup? and can you explain the obscenely high combined score? Make me look dumb, I dont care, I just want to know so everyone can benefit.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Well, that card/rig was only run in this benchmark before it was sold. In other benchmark the cards/rig used were most likely my 780 ACX's, or possibly my other Classifieds. I've been through this before and will end it here ... if you guys have a problem you can take it up with 3DMark -- to my knowledge the scores have been checked twice. High CPU OC's aren't going to buy you much in this bench (graphics 75%., physics 15%, combined 10%). If you have problems with equations it has graphics written all over it.
> 
> @jomama22
> Fortunately I don't know how to cheat (yes, you can say it) and really don't need to. What would be the point? I've only had one truly golden card and that was it - sounds like you never had one. If I did cheat why stop with that card? I have 3 other 780 classifieds and 2 780 ACX's that, according to you should be able to attain the similar scores if I cheat. Didn't someone accuse you of cheating not to long ago in one of these benchmarks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @MrTOOShort
> Congrats on beating my HOF score with your water-cooled Titan!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess (according to Jomama22) that means you have also beat some ln2 scores as well.


relax dude - as I said before, it would have been nice to see how it performed elsewhere. unfortunately it's like a one-hit wonder.








Mr Short is at 1.5V


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> relax dude - as I said before, it would have been nice to see how it performed elsewhere. unfortunately it's like a one-hit wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Short is at 1.5V


Agreed, it would have been nice. 1.5v is excellent on a Titan if you're refering to NVVDD volts, and is the EvBot max for Classy's using the latest EvBot firmware.


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Agreed, it would have been nice. 1.5v is excellent on a Titan if you're refering to NVVDD volts, and is the EvBot max for Classy's using the latest EvBot firmware.


So how come you're ignoring people's request of your comp setup?


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> So how come you're ignoring people's request of your comp setup?


There's little else I can tell you that 3DMark doesn't reveal on my computer setup. If it's GPU-Z sensor readings/clocks you can find them in the original post. This benchmark thread was locked when I first posted scores, and everyone dumped in the SLI benchmark thread.


----------



## Paul17041993

pharma's top score looks to have been manipulated on the 1st graphics test, rest look legit, 74fps on first test vs 64fps on the next neighbor titan, but the rest are 5-10 frames lower, I don't think so son, unless your bench really fudged up somehow...

says default settings but I have no idea what these defaults are, I only ran mine on the trial edition settings...

edit; also the rig stats 3Dmark shows are never accurate...


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> There's little else I can tell you that 3DMark doesn't reveal on my computer setup. If it's GPU-Z sensor readings/clocks you can find them in the original post. This benchmark thread was locked when I first posted scores, and everyone dumped in the SLI benchmark thread.


I don't mean to put you in a bind but I was just curious that you might have just put the wrong numbers for the core. now, check out FTW's 780 here . . .

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1188038

that was almost 1600 core and 1900 mem. it could also be a glitch which I know happens with these benchmarks.


----------



## sugarhell

Lol he beats a 1600 780 with 1300 core clock and you still discuss it? Rofl


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> pharma's top score looks to have been manipulated on the 1st graphics test, rest look legit, 74fps on first test vs 64fps on the next neighbor titan, but the rest are 5-10 frames lower, I don't think so son, unless your bench really fudged up somehow...
> 
> says default settings but I have no idea what these defaults are, I only ran mine on the trial edition settings...
> 
> edit; also the rig stats 3Dmark shows are never accurate...


Its the combined score, the last test, that is worlds different...Scoring 7100+ is hard enough, to do it with a 780 @1319 and a 3960x @ a lowly 4.9....not possible. Just look at mrtooshort right above him in fs hof, he only gets a 6550+ with a titan and 5.3 3970x. 29.2 fps vs 33 fps? lol what a joke. A full 10%.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Lol he beats a 1600 780 with 1300 core clock and you still discuss it? Rofl


sugar, off topic. you want to see something really funny? go see the interpreter at Nelson Mandela's Memorial. The guy was faking the sign language. lol

http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/nelson-mandela-memorial-interpreter-angers-deaf-community-21185135


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Its the combined score, the last test, that is worlds different...Scoring 7100+ is hard enough, to do it with a 780 @1319 and a 3960x @ a lowly 4.9....not possible. Just look at mrtooshort right above him in fs hof, he only gets a 6550+ with a titan and 5.3 3970x. 29.2 fps vs 33 fps? lol what a joke. A full 10%.


sorry, also made a bit of a typo, he has 78fps on graphics 1 with 32fps combined, he also used driver version 9.18.13.2049 according to 3Dmark, although, a bench with the same driver version doesn't have nearly enough of a difference through its scores to determine if this driver has a fault, either way, something was not being rendered in the bench for there to be a 10fps advantage in graphics1 and 5fps in combined, everything else points to lower values so the high score he has is only held by these two rates.

as a side note, there is no such thing as a piece of computational silicon gaining higher performance then another at the same or similar cycle clocks UNLESS the silicon is significantly different, this can include in the case of gpus; more shaders enabled, tighter internal timings, both of which are generally hardware-level and very rarely can be manipulated by BIOSs, you may be able to do something like flash a titan with a 780 BIOS but it will still perform the exact same as a titan clock-to-clock.

the other thing may be that the card was in fact completely unstable at those clocks and somehow error correction was disabled or otherwise not being triggered, could be related to the driver version, if this is indeed the case a lot of render components could be missed and performance gained while displaying artifacts, but not something detectable by the application.


----------



## alancsalt

New HOF single GPU FireStrike record http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.1/1+gpu

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1276002

K|NGP|N 16770 with EVGA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Classified(1x) and Intel Xeon Processor E5-1660 v2

Graphics Score
18922

Physics Score
18804

Combined Score
8323


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> New HOF single GPU FireStrike record http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.1/1+gpu
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1276002
> 
> K|NGP|N 16770 with EVGA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Classified(1x) and Intel Xeon Processor E5-1660 v2
> 
> Graphics Score
> 18922
> 
> Physics Score
> 18804
> 
> Combined Score
> 8323


$1200 CPU jeebus


----------



## alancsalt

That's a K|NGP|N GTX 780 Ti Classified, not the 780 Ti Classified.. not on the market yet..just in case anyone didn't realize


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> New HOF single GPU FireStrike record http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.1/1+gpu
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1276002
> 
> K|NGP|N 16770 with EVGA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Classified(1x) and Intel Xeon Processor E5-1660 v2
> 
> Graphics Score
> 18922
> 
> Physics Score
> 18804
> 
> Combined Score
> 8323


I'm just wondering of the result when the lightning or similar 290Xs come, GCN has shown potential of up to 1800MHz, could be pretty interesting...


----------



## strong island 1

strong island 1 --- i7 4930k @ 4.5ghz --- gtx 780ti Classified @ 1250/7500 --- 12564 --- 12/12/13



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1293035


----------



## Arizonian

*Announcement to make everyone.*

*PedroC1999* has graciously handed over reigns as thread starter due to real life time constraints and responsibilities. I'd like to take a moment and thank him for his hard work and starting this thread that's gained much popularity with our hardcore benchers. Thank you PecroC1999









With blessings from our Benchmark Editor *FtW420* I'd like to welcome *Forceman* to the task.









Let's give Forceman a day or two to get OP under control and he will begin the heavy task of going through the posts where it was left off to get those scores updated.

Thank you Forceman for taking the helm.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Thanks for taking over Forceman. I'm sure you'll do a great job here!









I'll post my contribution...

*MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1476MHz/ 1900MHz -- 13,560 -- Dec 8th 2013:*



*http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1813277*


----------



## Yungbenny911

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thanks for taking over Forceman. I'm sure you'll do a great job here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll post my contribution...
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1476MHz/ 1900MHz -- 13,560 -- Dec 8th 2013:*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1813277*


Oh my days....







, is that underwater?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Yes it is Yungbenny911.


----------



## h2spartan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Yes it is Yungbenny911.


With a little winter air thrown in?


----------



## Forceman

Thanks Arizonian. I've gotten the spreadsheet migrated and all the current data imported and updated the OP with the new spreadsheet, and I'll start making sure I have everyone's submissions included - expect that to be done by this weekend.

Looking for everyone's opinions on a couple of things. I'm thinking just specify running the test at the respective control panel defaults - does that work for both AMD and Nvidia? Do those settings give an unfair or unrealistic advantage to either side? I'm also going to individual members post more than one score if they have more than one setup, unless people don't like that idea. I'm not sure how it was before, but I noticed FTW420 had two scores listed so maybe that's the way it already was. I'm also going to put the score for a 290 flashed to 290X in the 290X category - not really fair (and confusing) to keep them mixed in with the 290s.

I'll update the OP with the new instructions after some feedback.


----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Thanks Arizonian. I've gotten the spreadsheet migrated and all the current data imported and updated the OP with the new spreadsheet, and I'll start making sure I have everyone's submissions included - expect that to be done by this weekend.
> 
> Looking for everyone's opinions on a couple of things. I'm thinking just specify running the test at the respective control panel defaults - does that work for both AMD and Nvidia? Do those settings give an unfair or unrealistic advantage to either side? I'm also going to individual members post more than one score if they have more than one setup, unless people don't like that idea. I'm not sure how it was before, but I noticed FTW420 had two scores listed so maybe that's the way it already was. I'm also going to put the score for a 290 flashed to 290X in the 290X category - not really fair (and confusing) to keep them mixed in with the 290s.
> 
> I'll update the OP with the new instructions after some feedback.


Glad to hear.









*Almost forgot.*

Let's remember guys - unless Forceman asks for re-posting - please don't re-post scores already submitted or Forceman will be doing twice the work and make it harder on him. He's got about a months worth of scores to catch up.


----------



## ahimoth

Congrats and good luck with the new job!


----------



## ImJJames

Congrats


----------



## Sgt Bilko

I have the utmost faith in you Forceman









And thanks for all the hard work Pedro


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thanks for taking over Forceman. I'm sure you'll do a great job here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll post my contribution...
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1476MHz/ 1900MHz -- 13,560 -- Dec 8th 2013:*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1813277*


@MrTOOSHORT
Great score!







I heard managed to pull some very high NVVDD volts for this run. Looks like I'll have to do alittle work once I get my 780Ti KingPin Classified.








From the details of the KingPin score above it looks like I might get similar performance as I did with my old card!

@Forceman ... Congrats and welcome onboard!


----------



## ImJJames

Just small update, I've tried up to 1.475 volts on CPU and I still couldn't get 4.6 Ghz to pass on 3dmark physics test -.- When will it be my turn for golden CPU chip

*ImJJames -- 4770K @4.5GHz -- r9 290 @1250MHz/ 1500MHz -- 11,261 -- Dec 13th 2013:*
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1294263


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Thanks Arizonian. I've gotten the spreadsheet migrated and all the current data imported and updated the OP with the new spreadsheet, and I'll start making sure I have everyone's submissions included - expect that to be done by this weekend.
> 
> Looking for everyone's opinions on a couple of things. I'm thinking just specify running the test at the respective control panel defaults - does that work for both AMD and Nvidia? Do those settings give an unfair or unrealistic advantage to either side? I'm also going to individual members post more than one score if they have more than one setup, unless people don't like that idea. I'm not sure how it was before, but I noticed FTW420 had two scores listed so maybe that's the way it already was. I'm also going to put the score for a 290 flashed to 290X in the 290X category - not really fair (and confusing) to keep them mixed in with the 290s.
> 
> I'll update the OP with the new instructions after some feedback.
> 
> 
> 
> Glad to hear.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Almost forgot.*
> 
> Let's remember guys - unless Forceman asks for re-posting - please don't re-post scores already submitted or Forceman will be doing twice the work and make it harder on him. He's got about a months worth of scores to catch up.
Click to expand...

_Well, actually there is not much to catch up. I used to be able to edit. Should only be three days to catch up.._

12/11/13 at 10:49pm
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> I can edit, but sharing edit rights is locked. You need to talk to Pedro.
> 
> Multiple spreadsheets with single card categories would be a lot of data entry.. Maybe a bit ambitious for someone with exams, sports, etc....
> 
> *Anyway, Merry Christmas, giving you all an UPDATE!*
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry about your individual accepted, updated
> 
> or rejected.
> DStealth - No URL provided.
> MunneY - 3930K 4.4 Ghz - GTX 780 1359 Core / 1850 Memory - Firestrike 11361 - No URL provided.


Glad to see there is a new OP. Thanks for stepping forward Forceman.


----------



## Jpmboy

Good job Pedro!

And thanks Forceman! This will be a busy thread with all the new cards just launched!!


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thanks for taking over Forceman. I'm sure you'll do a great job here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll post my contribution...
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1476MHz/ 1900MHz -- 13,560 -- Dec 8th 2013:*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1813277*


Wow. Just Wow. Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off my desk.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> I can edit, but sharing edit rights is locked. You need to talk to Pedro.
> 
> Multiple spreadsheets with single card categories would be a lot of data entry.. Maybe a bit ambitious for someone with exams, sports, etc....
> 
> *Anyway, Merry Christmas, giving you all an UPDATE!*
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry about your individual accepted, updated
> 
> or rejected.
> DStealth - No URL provided.
> MunneY - 3930K 4.4 Ghz - GTX 780 1359 Core / 1850 Memory - Firestrike 11361 - No URL provided.


dang it... how could I forget that.

anyways, heres a better score

3930K - 4.7 Ghz - GTX 780 1402 Core / 1850 Memory - 11585

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1256664

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Thanks Arizonian. I've gotten the spreadsheet migrated and all the current data imported and updated the OP with the new spreadsheet, and I'll start making sure I have everyone's submissions included - expect that to be done by this weekend.
> 
> Looking for everyone's opinions on a couple of things. I'm thinking just specify running the test at the respective control panel defaults - does that work for both AMD and Nvidia? Do those settings give an unfair or unrealistic advantage to either side? I'm also going to individual members post more than one score if they have more than one setup, unless people don't like that idea. I'm not sure how it was before, but I noticed FTW420 had two scores listed so maybe that's the way it already was. I'm also going to put the score for a 290 flashed to 290X in the 290X category - not really fair (and confusing) to keep them mixed in with the 290s.
> 
> I'll update the OP with the new instructions after some feedback.


I vote one big chart... thats just me.


----------



## Paul17041993

thanks for your work Pedro and hope you keep this topic rolling @Forceman

and my opinion for the sheets is have seperate ones for each card or tier, 78x0/270(X)/670/760, 79x0/280(X)/680/770, 290(X)/780/780ti/titan, that's 3 sheets, maby have a 4th for the lower-ends, then have a top10 sheet for the top performers of the lot, not sure if google sheets can be linked like databases or not though...


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

And so it begins......... Tess on and Beta 9.4

HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 Gigabyte R9 290 [email protected] *10782*



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1849280


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> I've got my 780 under water and figured I'd push it and see how it goes.. Results this far!
> 
> 
> 
> MunneY - 3930K 4.4 Ghz - GTX 780 1359 Core / 1850 Memory - Firestrike 11361




No link provided
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> strong island 1 --- i7 4930k @ 4.5ghz --- gtx 780ti Classified @ 1250/7500 --- 12564 --- 12/12/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1293035



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thanks for taking over Forceman. I'm sure you'll do a great job here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll post my contribution...
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1476MHz/ 1900MHz -- 13,560 -- Dec 8th 2013:*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1813277*



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Just small update, I've tried up to 1.475 volts on CPU and I still couldn't get 4.6 Ghz to pass on 3dmark physics test -.- When will it be my turn for golden CPU chip
> 
> *ImJJames -- 4770K @4.5GHz -- r9 290 @1250MHz/ 1500MHz -- 11,261 -- Dec 13th 2013:*
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1294263



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> And so it begins......... Tess on and Beta 9.4
> 
> HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 Gigabyte R9 290 [email protected] *10782*
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1849280




Also, please be sure to indicate whether you are posting a new score, or updating an old one.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> No link provided
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, please be sure to indicate whether you are posting a new score, or updating an old one.


Check my last post.. I updated the score and link
Quote:


> dang it... how could I forget that.
> 
> anyways, heres a better score
> 
> MunneY - 3930K - 4.7 Ghz - GTX 780 1402 Core / 1850 Memory - 11585
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1256664


----------



## ImJJames

How come people's r9 290 scores not showing on main "ALL GPU" list?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Check my last post.. I updated the score and link



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> How come people's r9 290 scores not showing on main "ALL GPU" list?


I messed up the combiner formula. Fixed now.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Sorry forceman my 290 score is a updated one


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Sorry forceman my 290 score is a updated one


Since your old score was a GTX 680, I left both of them in. I don't see any reason to only allow one score per user when so many users have more than one system. One score per card/system seems more fair, and also gives others looking to compare more info. Otherwise we'd probably have no scores at all for older cards.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Since your old score was a GTX 680, I left both of them in. I don't see any reason to only allow one score per user when so many users have more than one system. One score per card/system seems more fair, and also gives others looking to compare more info. Otherwise we'd probably have no scores at all for older cards.


I like this.. +rep


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Since your old score was a GTX 680, I left both of them in. I don't see any reason to only allow one score per user when so many users have more than one system. One score per card/system seems more fair, and also gives others looking to compare more info. Otherwise we'd probably have no scores at all for older cards.


Would you also like 760 , 770 , 7850 and 660ti as well ?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Would you also like 760 , 770 , 7850 and 660ti as well ?


Maybe 770 and 7950, not sure it's worth going lower than that.

Also, what's the significance of a "time measurement data not available" warning message? I'm going through adding graphics scores to the spreadsheet and noticed that one of the top result is showing that error on the 3DMark page. The error is blacked out on the submission screenshot, which makes me think it impacts the score in some way and the submitter was trying to hide it. Anyone have any info on that error?

Edit: Also, what does it mean if the result no longer exists in 3Dmark? Like, you click the link and get a "result not found" error on a link that used to be good (since it shows on the screenshot)?


----------



## M3TAl

D#/Eb? What are we talking about music theory?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> D#/Eb? What are we talking about music theory?


Ha, apparently I typo'd some kind of BB Code or something.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Maybe 770 and 7950, not sure it's worth going lower than that.
> 
> Also, what's the significance of a "time measurement data not available" warning message? I'm going through adding graphics scores to the spreadsheet and noticed that one of the top result is showing that error on the 3DMark page. The error is blacked out on the submission screenshot, which makes me think it impacts the score in some way and the submitter was trying to hide it. Anyone have any info on that error?
> 
> Edit: Also, what does it mean if the result no longer exists in 3Dmark? Like, you click the link and get a "result not found" error on a link that used to be good (since it shows on the screenshot)?


My Local Mod asked for me

"Time measurement inaccurate" is unacceptable. "Time measurement data not available" is OK ...

http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?p=282683#post282683

and if the url link is missing usually the submission is deleted......... if there are complaints on the bot anyways









I hope its not one of mine


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Also, what's the significance of a "time measurement data not available" warning message?
> 
> Edit: Also, what does it mean if the result no longer exists in 3Dmark? Like, you click the link and get a "result not found" error on a link that used to be good (since it shows on the screenshot)?


"Time measurement data" inaccuracies came up before (few weeks ago) in this thread and I think a decision was made how to handle it. FTW420 would probably be the best source ...

Also if the result doesn't exist in 3DMark they may be updating the 3DMark database and sometimes you'll need to wait some minutes. The other reason may be the person was cleaning up their scores and may have deleted this result. I think 3DMark personnel will only remove incorrect results on the HOF.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC




----------



## Khrome

Going to post the score from my old PC as I think it's the lowest score haha.

Khrome - i7 2600 - GT 545 3GB - 4x4GB 600mhz RAM

Score 1131


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Not sure whether laugh or cry....


----------



## alancsalt

For Windows 7
Time measurement not available - OK
Time measurement data inaccurate - Not OK
http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=92310
Also asked FtW 420 - he said his testing suggested as above.

Not sure about Win 8 - HWbot wont accept Win 8 results.

Quote:


> 18.8.2013
> News, benchmarks, Editorials, Articles
> 91
> HWBOT
> 
> As the result of weekend-time research, the HWBOT staff has decided to invalidate all benchmark records established with the Windows8 operating system. Due to severe validity problems with the Windows8 real time clock ("RTC"), benchmarks results achieved with Windows8 cannot be trusted. The main problem lies with the RTC being affected when over- or underclocking under the operating system. The operating system uses the RTC as reference clock, and benchmarks use it to reference (benchmark) time


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

UPDATE...

*MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1515MHz /1900MHz -- 13,806:*



*http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1865805*


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> UPDATE...
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1515MHz /1900MHz -- 13,806:*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1865805*


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> UPDATE...
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1515MHz /1900MHz -- 13,806:*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1865805*


Really nice run!







K|ngp|n definitely sees you in his rear view mirror.
Geez, a max temp of 30c .... lol, I can picture you freezing when doing these benchmark runs.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Really nice run!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> K|ngp|n definitely sees you in his rear view mirror.
> Geez, a max temp of 30c .... lol, I can picture you freezing when doing these benchmark runs.


LoL...Thanks pharma57!


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Sorry guys, but another update....

*MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1542MHz/ 1914MHz -- 14,058:*



*http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1872175*


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Sorry guys, but another update....
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 3970x @5.3GHz -- GTX TITAN @1542MHz/ 1914MHz -- 14,058:*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1872175*




And if everyone could post their GPU clock and memory speed when they submit a result, I'm starting to put that in the chart as well.


----------



## ImJJames

lol @ #1 290x on standard stock cooling beating out Titans/780ti on liquid nitrogen/water

http://hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark_-_fire_strike/halloffame


----------



## pharma57

lol ... yea, wonder what they have under the hood? They are even beating a 290x's on liquid nitrogen as well!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> 
> lol @ #1 290x on standard stock cooling beating out Titans/780ti on liquid nitrogen/water
> http://hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark_-_fire_strike/halloffame


turn off tess and 290x's will be at the top here too. But you know that....


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> 
> 
> lol @ #1 290x on standard stock cooling beating out Titans/780ti on liquid nitrogen/water
> 
> http://hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark_-_fire_strike/halloffame


If you check the actual submission the CPU is under LN2, but the videocards are listed as "Standard Stock Cooling"


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> turn off tess and 290x's will be at the top here too. But you know that....


So you're trying to say that Nvidia cards can't get away with having tess off also? lol


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> So you're trying to say that Nvidia cards can't get away with having tess off also? lol


They don't, here & at hwbot the benchmarks are run at default or specified settings, which includes leaving tesselation on in the benchmark. AMD can disable tess in the driver so the bench can still run default settings, Nvidia doesn't have that driver option.


----------



## szeged




----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> They don't, here & at hwbot the benchmarks are run at default or specified settings, which includes leaving tesselation on in the benchmark. AMD can disable tess in the driver so the bench can still run default settings, Nvidia doesn't have that driver option.


So how do you exactly run tess off without 3dmark showing it?


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> So how do you exactly run tess off without 3dmark showing it?


It still shows at at futuremark, although that doesn't matter for hwbot or threads here that allow 'all tweaks allowed' scores.

But the difference between Nvidia & AMD for disabling tess is that with Nvidia it has to be disabled in the benchmark, so it isn't running at default settings.
AMD can disable it in the driver & still run benches at the default settings (although not really default, tess is disabled, the benchmark result window shows everything normal though).


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> So you're trying to say that Nvidia cards can't get away with having tess off also? lol


Yes, that's correct... lol.

See FTW's explanation. It's cool tho, as long as the rules are clear.


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> It still shows at at futuremark, although that doesn't matter for hwbot or threads here that allow 'all tweaks allowed' scores.
> 
> But the difference between Nvidia & AMD for disabling tess is that with Nvidia it has to be disabled in the benchmark, so it isn't running at default settings.
> AMD can disable it in the driver & still run benches at the default settings (although not really default, tess is disabled, the benchmark result window shows everything normal though).


Got it thanks, so how come the 290x doesn't say tess is modified on 3dmark but jpmboy saying it is off?

Also are we going to ignore the fact Nvidia can do some customization that 3dmark doesn't detect?


----------



## szeged

trying to hard too prove your card is better

shining example right here.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Got it thanks, so how come the 290x doesn't say tess is modified on 3dmark but jpmboy saying it is off?
> 
> Also are we going to ignore the fact Nvidia can do some customization that 3dmark doesn't detect?


Futuremark has no idea what these guys are doing:



But it's not relevant to HWBot anyway.

You've seen this thread - there's about 6-10% gain with tess off: http://www.overclock.net/t/1361939/top-30-3dmark11-scores-for-single-dual-tri-quad


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> From the sounds of it your butt is big enough for your 3 290x's and then some. I remember when people in this forum thought a "golden" card in Valley was a Titan (non ln2) that scored around 86 ... no other Titan could come close. Then a Classy pulling much higher volts with below average ASIC barely beat it for the #2 spot. I wouldn't call that Classy a "golden" card the same way I wouldn't call your 290's "golden cards".
> 
> The only advice I'm going to give you before I totally ignore your posts is feel free to contact 3DMark. At least there is a way to check the validity of my scores, which is something more than can be said about your "questionable" past scores.


Just an FYI, your score has been invalidated by futurmark. "Clearly tampared combined score and invalidated".

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/756309

Have a good day and try to keep your cheekiness and cheating to yourself.


----------



## Jpmboy

Derped.


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Just an FYI, your score has been invalidated by futurmark. "Clearly tampared combined score and invalidated".
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/756309
> 
> Have a good day and try to keep your cheekiness and cheating to yourself.


I will inquire to futuremark about this and why they invalidate the score now instead of before when it was questioned. As I mentioned before, I have never cheated and do not see the point. All I do is run the cards I get for what they are worth - regardless of whether the card performs mediocre or great.


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> I will inquire to futuremark about this and why they invalidate the score now instead of before when it was questioned. As I mentioned before, I have never cheated and do not see the point. All I do is run the cards I get for what they are worth - regardless of whether the card performs mediocre or great.


Sounds good. Look forward to their response.

Why don't you at least post your full system specs. At this point, it looks like you cheated and there isn't much trust to be gained, at least from me. But, know in the least that that score, regardless if you cheated or not, is in no way possible at the clocks you used. Its not a golden chip, its a defunked score that even with cheating is difficult to obtain.

If you did indeed cheat, it would be to your and everyonelses benefit if you came forward or even pm a mod about what you did, so in the future, this can be a much easier problem to deal with.


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Sounds good. Look forward to their response.
> 
> Why don't you at least post your full system specs. At this point, it looks like you cheated and there isn't much trust to be gained, at least from me. But, know in the least that that score, regardless if you cheated or not, is in no way possible at the clocks you used. Its not a golden chip, its a defunked score that even with cheating is difficult to obtain.
> 
> If you did indeed cheat, it would be to your and everyonelses benefit if you came forward or even pm a mod about what you did, so in the future, this can be a much easier problem to deal with.


I look forward to their response as well, because since I did not cheat something must be wrong either their benchmarking system or their review process. You seem to quite good at putting words in the Futuremark description of invalid result, I'm surprised you did not include the entire description:
Quote:


> This message appears if your result was otherwise deemed invalid. Usually this indicates a corrupt or tampered result file or tampered benchmark executable. If the problem persists, contact Futuremark support with as much detail as possible.


While it is possible the result file became corrupt, I have no way of knowing since I assume that is sent automatically at the end of the benchmark. So far all this tells me is someone, like yourself can arbitraily question any score and through 3DMark's "black box" analysis have that score become invalidated. Doesn't say much for them or for your stance ... and there is no need to pm anyone about cheating because I did not. It should be considered a problem here because I worked very hard to get that score through running their benchmark and I standby the results submitted, and that's not likely to change whether you or 3Dmark say otherwise.


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> I look forward to their response as well, because since I did not cheat something must be wrong either their benchmarking system or their review process. You seem to quite good at putting words in the Futuremark description of invalid result, I'm surprised you did not include the entire description:
> While it is possible the result file became corrupt, I have no way of knowing since I assume that is sent automatically at the end of the benchmark. So far all this tells me is someone, like yourself can arbitraily question any score and through 3DMark's "black box" analysis have that score become invalidated. Doesn't say much for them or for your stance ... and there is no need to pm anyone about cheating because I did not. It should be considered a problem here because I worked very hard to get that score through running their benchmark and I standby the results submitted, and that's not likely to change whether you or 3Dmark say otherwise.


Everyone was saying you cheated, and now 3dmark just invalidated your results and you're still claiming it was a legit run? oh lawd have mercy


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> I look forward to their response as well, because since I did not cheat something must be wrong either their benchmarking system or their review process. You seem to quite good at putting words in the Futuremark description of invalid result, I'm surprised you did not include the entire description:
> While it is possible the result file became corrupt, I have no way of knowing since I assume that is sent automatically at the end of the benchmark. So far all this tells me is someone, like yourself can arbitraily question any score and through 3DMark's "black box" analysis have that score become invalidated. Doesn't say much for them or for your stance ... and there is no need to pm anyone about cheating because I did not. It should be considered a problem here because I worked very hard to get that score through running their benchmark and I standby the results submitted, and that's not likely to change whether you or 3Dmark say otherwise.


Like I said, post your specs, its the absolute bare minimum you could do to even start trying to determine what happened.


----------



## Paul17041993

@pharma57 specs or it never happened, why haven't you even put your rig/s in your sig by now...?


----------



## FtW 420

Might be an idea to make a desktop screenshot mandatory for submissions, hwbot style with cpu-z main & memory tabs & a gpu-z tab to show the main system & gpu specs.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Might be an idea to make a desktop screenshot mandatory for submissions, hwbot style with cpu-z main & memory tabs & a gpu-z tab to show the main system & gpu specs.


Makes sense. Would eliminate doubt in some cases


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Futuremark has no idea what these guys are doing:
> 
> 
> 
> But it's not relevant to HWBot anyway.
> 
> You've seen this thread - there's about 6-10% gain with tess off: http://www.overclock.net/t/1361939/top-30-3dmark11-scores-for-single-dual-tri-quad


That one is getting a bit of controversy at the bot, disabling systeminfo is kind of a no-no. If firestrike was worth points at hwbot I'm pretty sure that would be blocked.

No way to see if it was done in windows 8 & windows 8 FM results without the newer systeminfo are banned.


----------



## alancsalt

Only FireStike Extreme gets points on the bot, in that bench suite..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Only FireStike Extreme gets points on the bot, in that bench suite..


It does seem a bit silly to benchmark test today's cards (R290x, 780's titans... etc) at anything less than 1440P. And at 4K all these cards are humbled.
( I do like 3DMK 11 tho







)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> *That one is getting a bit of controversy at the bot,* disabling systeminfo is kind of a no-no. If firestrike was worth points at hwbot I'm pretty sure that would be blocked.
> No way to see if it was done in windows 8 & windows 8 FM results without the newer systeminfo are banned.


Justifiably.


----------



## Nittygritty

Update

Nittygritty - i7 3770K @ 4.9GHz - GTX 780 @ 1333/1707 - 10911 - 18/12/13

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1884901


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy --- [email protected] --- GTX780TI C --- 1228/1932(?) --- 13051
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1885424


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> Update
> 
> Nittygritty - i7 3770K @ 4.9GHz - GTX 780 @ 1333/1707 - 10911 - 18/12/13
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1884901



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy --- [email protected] --- GTX780TI C --- 1228/1932(?) --- 13051
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1885424




I updated that one, but that graphics score is much higher than other GTX 780 Ti results, even ones at significantly higher clocks (like Szeged's). New drivers?


----------



## Nittygritty

Thanks for updating Forceman.

Paul.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I updated that one, but that graphics score is much higher than other GTX 780 Ti results, even ones at significantly higher clocks (like Szeged's). New drivers?


nah - same drivers, the recent whql. the clocks are certainly not reporting correctly. i'm at +208 on the gpu with this ftw2002 bios and 1.32V (i think







). i didn't have gpuZ or precX running cause it seems to foul things up sometimes. Frankly, I'm too n00b to cheat, but leave it off the chart if you need to verify first.
here's the progression:
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323825
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323845
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323867
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323882
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323897
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323917


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nah - same drivers, the recent whql. the clocks are certainly not reporting correctly. i'm at +208 on the gpu with this ftw2002 bios and 1.32V (i think
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). i didn't have gpuZ or precX running cause it seems to foul things up sometimes. Frankly, I'm too n00b to cheat, but leave it off the chart if you need to verify first.
> here's the progression:
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323825
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323845
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323867
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323882
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323897
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1323917


Can you post the actual clock speeds? I have no problem with the score, I'd just like to make sure the chart reflects accurately.

Edit: And now I get the significance of the ? after the clock speeds in your first post.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Can you post the actual clock speeds? I have no problem with the score, I'd just like to make sure the chart reflects accurately.
> 
> Edit: And now I get the significance of the ? after the clock speeds in your first post.


I'll try another single card run with precX in the background.

just did these with PX:

21367.png 960k .png file


21233.png 961k .png file


20786.png 950k .png file


----------



## Jpmboy

Hey Force: Here's an update with clocks!

jpmboy --- [email protected] ---- GTX780Ti C -- 1346/1944 --- 13063
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1892651


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Hey Force: Here's an update with clocks!
> 
> jpmboy --- [email protected] ---- GTX780Ti C -- 1346/1944 --- 13063
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1892651


That is almost clock for clock with my 290x

jomama22 --- [email protected] ---- R9 290x -- 1351/1740 --- 13099



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1131183

its also strange, this was the only bench where my physics score got knocked down from its ~18290


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Hey Force: Here's an update with clocks!
> 
> jpmboy --- [email protected] ---- GTX780Ti C -- 1346/1944 --- 13063
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1892651











That clock speed makes a lot more sense than what I had before.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> That is almost clock for clock with my 290x
> 
> jomama22 --- [email protected] ---- R9 290x -- 1351/1740 --- 13099
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1131183
> 
> its also strange, this was the only bench where my physics score got knocked down from its ~18290


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> That is almost clock for clock with my 290x
> jomama22 --- [email protected] ---- R9 290x -- 1351/1740 --- 13099
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1131183
> its also strange, this was the only bench where my physics score got knocked down from its ~18290


Nice run bud!









Not sure if the clock comparison can be made across the different architectures, but I'm really flying these cards blind (and need to stop!). We do not have a way to read the vddc... gpuZ, PrecX, OHM... are all stuck at 1.187V. Blind trust in the volttool








And it seems that the evbot just tells you what the overtool tool has applied... never varies even from full load to idle.

probelts arriving next week... will be able to measure what I'm doing with one of the DMMs around here.

very close: http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/1328971/fs/1131183


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Might be an idea to make a desktop screenshot mandatory for submissions, hwbot style with cpu-z main & memory tabs & a gpu-z tab to show the main system & gpu specs.


Thats how it always should be done


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Thats how it always should be done


i kinda agree... how would that help with the issue that brought this up?


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i kinda agree... how would that help with the issue that brought this up?


Well there is really only so much that can be done interms of validation.

Clock speeds can never be truly known as futermark rarely reads them properly and anyone can easily change them after a bench, unless we made afterburner clock speed graphs mandatory. But, its understandable that some people, including myself, do not like to run monitoring programs during the bench itself.

I mean video evidence is really the end all be all, but there are many obvious issues with that as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Well there is really only so much that can be done interms of validation.
> 
> Clock speeds can never be truly known as futermark rarely reads them properly *and anyone can easily change them after a bench, unless we made afterburner clock speed graphs mandatory. But, its understandable that some people, including myself, do not like to run monitoring programs during the bench itself.
> *
> I mean video evidence is really the end all be all, but there are many obvious issues with that as well.


that's where I'm at on this. I still think peer-review (skeptical, but unbiased) is the onlyway to police this stuff. Same as with scientific publications - eventually fraud is exposed.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

I give the screen shot of AB and gpuz to help give out information to other people. Shows what I did to get a score.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i kinda agree... how would that help with the issue that brought this up?


In this case not that much , but f/mark needs to be ' on to it ' more than it is


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pharma57*
> 
> Pharma57 - 3960X @ 4.9 Ghz - GTX 780 @ 1319/1939 - 13459 - 08/12/2013
> eVGA GTX 780 Classified on Air
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/756265


After discussion with moderators, and based on the divergence of this score from scores with similarly clocked cards and the fact that other similar submitted results were invalidated by Futuremark, I have decided to remove this score from the chart. If you wish to submit another run it will be reviewed for acceptance.


----------



## SonDa5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> After discussion with moderators, and based on the divergence of this score from scores with similarly clocked cards and the fact that other similar submitted results were invalidated by Futuremark, I have decided to remove this score from the chart. If you wish to submit another run it will be reviewed for acceptance.


what are the ryles.


----------



## The EX1

'Update'

The_EX1 - i7 4770k @ 4.8 - GTX 780 Classified @ 1293/1902 - 11100 - 22/12/2013

www.3dmark.com/fs/1335767


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SonDa5*
> 
> what are the ryles.


For now, still same as the OP. Default settings, screenshot, 3DMark link, valid result (or invalid for acceptable reasons, like driver version). Considering requiring proof of speed, but not sure how to work it in practice. That score was removed because the GS was 2000 points higher than comparable cards/clocks with 30% higher FPS on GT1.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The EX1*
> 
> 'Update'
> 
> The_EX1 - i7 4770k @ 4.8 - GTX 780 Classified @ 1293/1902 - 11100 - 22/12/2013




















I updated it because I could pull the 3DMark link off the screenshot, but please edit the direct link into your post.


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - 3570k @ 5Ghz - 780TI classified 1385Mhz / 2001Mhz - P12146 - 12/21/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1902557

.......got more overclocking to do


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - 3570k @ 5Ghz - 780TI classified 1385Mhz / 2001Mhz - P12146 - 12/21/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1902557
> 
> .......got more overclocking to do


nice score mate








did you get your classy working with more than 1.21v with the new Vbios ?


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> nice score mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you get your classy working with more than 1.21v with the new Vbios ?


yeah, the classified tool shows my volts 1.35v core 1.7v mem


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - 3570k @ 5Ghz - 780TI classified 1385Mhz / 2001Mhz - P12146 - 12/21/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1902557
> 
> .......got more overclocking to do












That 3570 is holding you back.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> yeah, the classified tool shows my volts 1.35v core 1.7v mem


nice


----------



## Sgt Bilko

3DMark has dropped to $2.50 on Steam atm for those looking to pick it up cheap


----------



## Arm3nian

New
Arm3nian - 4930k @ 4.8GHz - 780ti reference 1326MHz / 2050MHz - P12723 - 12/12/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1908954


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arm3nian*
> 
> New
> Arm3nian - 4930k @ 4.8GHz - 780ti reference 1326MHz / 2050MHz - P12723 - 12/12/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1908954












Need user name in the screenshot, or visible in the 3DMark validation (if the username is the same).


----------



## Arm3nian

Arm3nian - 4930k @ 4.8GHz - 780ti reference 1326MHz / 2050MHz - P12723 - 12/21/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1908954


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arm3nian*
> 
> Arm3nian - 4930k @ 4.8GHz - 780ti reference 1326MHz / 2050MHz - P12723 - 12/21/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1908954


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Out of all 58 entries I'm the only one with an AMD CPU.....that makes me a little sad


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Out of all 58 entries I'm the only one with an AMD CPU.....that makes me a little sad


I used to run FX4100 and 990FXA but that was ages ago .


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Out of all 58 entries I'm the only one with an AMD CPU.....that makes me a little sad


58 entries? maby mine could be re-added then...? found my post, mymy has this topic grown since...

( AGED RE-ENTRY )
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> eh might as well, even though my DCII seemed to have gotten burned at the clocks it was at...
> 
> Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @ 4.6GHz - HD7970 - 6778
> - 7/6/2013 (converted to US date to be nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/606724
> 
> not expecting to stay on the chart, but I might come back after a semi-rebuild...


Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @4.6GHz - 7970 @1050/1650 - 6778 (7974) - 06/07/2013



adequate? it was accepted the first time fine so I don't see how it could be an issue, not really able to get a better score currently for various reasons, not at least until I get my hands on a 290X, entry was only removed due to dropping off the chart, likely will be the same here but I couldn't care really...


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> 58 entries? maby mine could be re-added then...? found my post, mymy has this topic grown since...
> 
> ( AGED RE-ENTRY )
> Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @4.6GHz - 7970 @1050/1650 - 6778 (7974) - 06/07/2013
> 
> 
> 
> adequate? it was accepted the first time fine so I don't see how it could be an issue, not really able to get a better score currently for various reasons, not at least until I get my hands on a 290X, entry was only removed due to dropping off the chart, likely will be the same here but I couldn't care really...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> I used to run FX4100 and 990FXA but that was ages ago .


I've just gotten my power back on (5 hrs and 30mins later







)

Thats a nice run, i only have 1 normal FS run with the 8150 and 290x

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1087050

Sgt Bilko : FX-8150 4.5Ghz / R9 290x 1150/1400

Score: 8101, Date: No idea tbh, I've forgotten. now, Sometime in November though









Not bothered if this one doesn't get accepted, just more a reference than anything


----------



## cam51037

This isn't an entry, but I figured I'd test out my GTX 670 today on Fire Strike.

My 2600k was at 4.4GHz for this test, and I flashed the BIOS of the GTX 670 to the 1.212V BIOS, here's the score: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1947555

Not too shabby, but now I'm having issues passing 6.5k points, I'll try restarting and try again, driver crashed a few times so a restart would probably be good.


----------



## DooRules

DooRules--- 3960x @ 5.2 --- sli 780 ti SC @ 1391/1913 13036 just a little shy









http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1366488



Passing firestrike at 1391 core on 1.212 volts is pretty impressive to me, love these 780 ti's


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> 58 entries? maby mine could be re-added then...? found my post, mymy has this topic grown since...
> 
> ( AGED RE-ENTRY )
> Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @4.6GHz - 7970 @1050/1650 - 6778 (7974) - 06/07/2013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> adequate? it was accepted the first time fine so I don't see how it could be an issue, not really able to get a better score currently for various reasons, not at least until I get my hands on a 290X, entry was only removed due to dropping off the chart, likely will be the same here but I couldn't care really...











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I've just gotten my power back on (5 hrs and 30mins later
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> Thats a nice run, i only have 1 normal FS run with the 8150 and 290x
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1087050
> 
> Sgt Bilko : FX-8150 4.5Ghz / R9 290x 1150/1400
> 
> Score: 8101, Date: No idea tbh, I've forgotten. now, Sometime in November though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not bothered if this one doesn't get accepted, just more a reference than anything


I didn't update this one since it was lower than your existing score.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules--- 3960x @ 5.2 --- sli 780 ti SC @ 1391/1913 13036 just a little shy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1366488
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Passing firestrike at 1391 core on 1.212 volts is pretty impressive to me, love these 780 ti's












I took this one because your user name is in the 3DMark link, but everyone please throw up a notepad with your user name on it in the screenshot.


----------



## Arm3nian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules--- 3960x @ 5.2 --- sli 780 ti SC @ 1391/1913 13036 just a little shy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1366488
> 
> 
> 
> Passing firestrike at 1391 core on 1.212 volts is pretty impressive to me, love these 780 ti's


Does your memory not go up any higher or do you keep it there to get a higher core clock? I get mem clocks up to 2065 in firestrike but can't push the core anymore


----------



## DooRules

Not sure yet to be honest. Only been playing with the cards on their blocks for a couple of days now. I have been concentrating more on the core though.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I didn't update this one since it was lower than your existing score.


No problems, If the 7970 i'm using atm had the Voltage unlocked then i'd submit a score for that but atm it's just not worth it.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Out of all 58 entries I'm the only one with an AMD CPU.....that makes me a little sad


Would this pep ya up some? http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1265902

Not sure if it will be accepted because of the drivers









Graphics card at stock- FX-8350 at 5327 mhz







on a thermaltake 2.0 water extreme 68F ambient's.

I was just working on my physics score, I need to go back an throw some more clock into the card and play with the htt and ram etc.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Would this pep ya up some? http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1265902
> 
> Not sure if it will be accepted because of the drivers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Graphics card at stock- FX-8350 at 5327 mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> on a thermaltake 2.0 water extreme 68F ambient's.
> 
> I was just working on my physics score, I need to go back an throw some more clock into the card and play with the htt and ram etc.


Thats pretty nice









I really need to work on my Physics score a bit more it seems


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Thats pretty nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really need to work on my Physics score a bit more it seems


If we could combine my physics with your graphics , we might have a pretty decent score as AMD rigs go







. Not sure what that would work out to for a total score.

Very few submissions for your combo at the orb.

I would sure like to have a 290X but with prices the way they are, It's going to have to wait







.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If we could combine my physics with your graphics , we might have a pretty decent score as AMD rigs go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Not sure what that would work out to for a total score.
> 
> Very few submissions for your combo at the orb.
> 
> I would sure like to have a 290X but with prices the way they are, It's going to have to wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Well i don't actually have my 290x atm, had to send it back due to some nasty artifacts at stock but i'll be picking up a non-ref 290x when they launch so hopefully the weather gets a bit cooler and i can get a good all AMD run sometime, I'd like to break 10k but i can't see that happening


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Well i don't actually have my 290x atm, had to send it back due to some nasty artifacts at stock but i'll be picking up a non-ref 290x when they launch so hopefully the weather gets a bit cooler and i can get a good all AMD run sometime, I'd like to break 10k but i can't see that happening


You are getting a pretty good clock for the voltage out of your cpu, should have some headroom there if you can keep it cool









Too bad about the Video card, I am hoping prices come down a bit when the non ref's come out- time will tell.

EDIT : in going through my scores, it looks like you might be able to add 600 marks to your score if you could get the physics score that I had with mine - very rough guess however.


----------



## SoloCamo

Here's mine...

I'm gunning to take the top AMD cpu + AMD spot... 200 points shy










http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1966369

New Entry
SoloCamo - FX-9590 @ 4.7ghz (stock) - Sapphire R9 290x @ 1190 / 1405 - 8793 - 22/12/2013



Stock 9590

Seems the 200 point lead is due to 200mhz on the cpu over me and not much else. Have 20mhz lead on the gpu core (I'm on stock ref air lol) and slower by 25mhz on the mem so it's pretty close.

Perhaps I'll give the 9590 a little bump to see what it can do


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Here's mine...
> 
> I'm gunning to take the top AMD cpu + AMD spot... 200 points shy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1966369
> 
> New Entry
> SoloCamo - FX-9590 @ 4.7ghz (stock) - Sapphire R9 290x @ 1190 / 1405 - 8793 - 22/12/2013
> 
> 
> 
> Stock 9590
> 
> Seems the 200 point lead is due to 200mhz on the cpu over me and not much else. Have 20mhz lead on the gpu core (I'm on stock ref air lol) and slower by 25mhz on the mem so it's pretty close.
> 
> Perhaps I'll give the 9590 a little bump to see what it can do


I've no doubt you can go higher than me









the 9590 should be able to hit 5.2Ghz pretty easy and your 290x looks like a better clocker than mine was so you've got a good chance there


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Would this pep ya up some? http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1265902
> 
> Not sure if it will be accepted because of the drivers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Graphics card at stock- FX-8350 at 5327 mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> on a thermaltake 2.0 water extreme 68F ambient's.
> 
> I was just working on my physics score, I need to go back an throw some more clock into the card and play with the htt and ram etc.












I'll take it since we don't have many 7970 results, but really need a screenshot for any new submissions.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Here's mine...
> 
> I'm gunning to take the top AMD cpu + AMD spot... 200 points shy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1966369
> 
> New Entry
> SoloCamo - FX-9590 @ 4.7ghz (stock) - Sapphire R9 290x @ 1190 / 1405 - 8793 - 22/12/2013
> 
> 
> 
> Stock 9590
> 
> Seems the 200 point lead is due to 200mhz on the cpu over me and not much else. Have 20mhz lead on the gpu core (I'm on stock ref air lol) and slower by 25mhz on the mem so it's pretty close.
> 
> Perhaps I'll give the 9590 a little bump to see what it can do


----------



## Wickedtt

Ill throw my hat in the ring i just got it so this is my rough GPU score. Xeon L5639 @ 4ghz 780 Lightning 1320/1755

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1972320


----------



## cssorkinman

Not a submission , just a point of reference for FX 8XXX users
Nearly the same overall score with the cpu at 4.8ghz - card at 1060core 1600 mem as cpu at 5.3ghz- card at 1000 core 1375 mem. I believe all other settings such as HTT , PCI-E etc. were the same.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## MunneY

Its amazing to me how much an AMD cpu criples these benchmarks.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

*Update*

HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 Giga WB 290 [email protected] *11144*











http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1380899

Just had to do it......


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Its amazing to me how much an AMD cpu criples these benchmarks.


Just comparable to ht 4 core intels. This list does make it a bit skewed since most of the top half have 3930ks or higher hex core intels.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Just comparable to ht 4 core intels. This list does make it a bit skewed since most of the top half have 3930ks or higher hex core intels.


This is true...
Quote:


> Update
> 
> HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 Giga WB 290 [email protected] 11144 thumb.gif
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1380899
> 
> Just had to do it......
> 
> guitar.gif


would you recommend those quick disconnect fittings? i thought about using them for my gpus as well.

I just wish they werent effing massive.


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> This is true...
> would you recommend those quick disconnect fittings? i thought about using them for my gpus as well.
> 
> I just wish they werent effing massive.


Quick disconnects are the shiznit lol. I have 12 pairs in my 2 loop system and it makes breakdowns a breeze. I personally have the qdc at each radiator port and on each pump intake and Output.

Benching 10 gfx cards was never so easy haha.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Quick disconnects are the shiznit lol. I have 12 pairs in my 2 loop system and it makes breakdowns a breeze. I personally have the qdc at each radiator port and on each pump intake and Output.
> 
> Benching 10 gfx cards was never so easy haha.


I guess Im gonna have to splurge and get me a pair for the gpus... I just hate how long they are LOL


----------



## jomama22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> I guess Im gonna have to splurge and get me a pair for the gpus... I just hate how long they are LOL


they are long so space is an issue...and they do look a bit obnoxious just hanging off the gfx card lol. Depending where the in and out lines go, you could connect them to the ends of the tubing instead of at the gfx card itself.


----------



## Jpmboy

the new koolance zero spill QDCs are really well designed. the previous generation (twist lock) were good too, these new ones are great!


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Its amazing to me how much an AMD cpu criples these benchmarks.


Same card at stock in my 3770k rig @ 4.5 ghz - just for reference http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1980000
In watching the benchmarks , I really can't tell a freckle's difference visually. I'll see what the 3770K has for legs and get back with a better score.

EDIT : Max stable on card clocks ( voltage locked 7970) with the 3770k at 4.8 ghz http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1980493


----------



## ImJJames

Forceman a quick question, I am sure you know Nvidia LOD modifications are undetected by firestrike and gives them valid results. On the other hand tess modification with AMD is detected, why not allow tess modification to give a even playing field? Its allowed in 3dmark11 thread and HWBOT rules.


----------



## cssorkinman

Same 7970 as in my 8350 submissions , same ram @ same clockspeed. There is a difference in driver's however.

cssorkinman 3770K @ 4.8 ghz HT enabled 7970 @ 1050/1600 ( max stable on voltage locked card) 7338 -12/23/13
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1980493


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> This is true...
> would you recommend those quick disconnect fittings? i thought about using them for my gpus as well.
> 
> I just wish they werent effing massive.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jomama22*
> 
> Quick disconnects are the shiznit lol. I have 12 pairs in my 2 loop system and it makes breakdowns a breeze. I personally have the qdc at each radiator port and on each pump intake and Output.
> Benching 10 gfx cards was never so easy haha.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the new koolance zero spill QDCs are really well designed. the previous generation (twist lock) were good too, these new ones are great!
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Hell yeah dudes QDC's are da go . I use QD3's in my loop and its saves heaps of time . Took 30mins to fit block and do that mod









Just need 4more pairs and the rads will be done too . Pump , block , Vid card so far . Its a XSPC full cover copper w/block and with the aircon on last nite i had 23c idle and 29c - 32c load temps







. Thats a 20c drop in idle temps and nearly 50c drop 100% load temps


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> Ill throw my hat in the ring i just got it so this is my rough GPU score. Xeon L5639 @ 4ghz 780 Lightning 1320/1755
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1972320












No screenshot or user name.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> *Update*
> 
> HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2400 Giga WB 290 [email protected] *11144*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1380899
> 
> Just had to do it......
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












You need to push it a little farther for that first place.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Forceman a quick question, I am sure you know Nvidia LOD modifications are undetected by firestrike and gives them valid results. On the other hand tess modification with AMD is detected, why not allow tess modification to give a even playing field? Its allowed in 3dmark11 thread and HWBOT rules.


I don't know how much of a relative advantage the different tweaks give, to know what would be fair. I'm inclined to leave the validation up to Futuremark since I don't know that much about it (or how to police it), unless someone wants to educate me on it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Same 7970 as in my 8350 submissions , same ram @ same clockspeed. There is a difference in driver's however.
> 
> cssorkinman 3770K @ 4.8 ghz HT enabled 7970 @ 1050/1600 ( max stable on voltage locked card) 7338 -12/23/13
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1980493
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Screenshot doesn't match the linked 3DMark score.


----------



## cssorkinman

whooops, I'll try that again.

cssorkinman 3770K @ 4.8 ghz HT enabled 7970 @ 1050/1600 ( max stable on voltage locked card) 7338 -12/23/13
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1384013


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> whooops, I'll try that again.
> 
> cssorkinman 3770K @ 4.8 ghz HT enabled 7970 @ 1050/1600 ( max stable on voltage locked card) 7338 -12/23/13
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1384013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That's actually lower than the current result I have for you (on the beta drivers).


----------



## ssiperko

New Entry
OCN Name - Perko CPU i7 4770k @ 4.5 - GPU R9 290 Speed @ 1250/1650 - Score 11210 22/12/2013



SS


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> New Entry
> OCN Name - Perko CPU i7 4770k @ 4.5 - GPU R9 290 Speed @ 1250/1650 - Score 11210 22/12/2013
> 
> 
> 
> SS












No screenshot, username, or link.


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> I don't know how much of a relative advantage the different tweaks give, to know what would be fair. I'm inclined to leave the validation up to Futuremark since I don't know that much about it (or how to police it), unless someone wants to educate me on it.


Theres a reason why its allowed on HWBOT


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> That's actually lower than the current result I have for you (on the beta drivers).


Yes this is the same Video card in a different rig ,my 3770k vs the other score which was my FX-8350 . The scores are so close that It might surprise some people, if you see no value in including it , that's fine







.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> whooops, I'll try that again.
> 
> cssorkinman 3770K @ 4.8 ghz HT enabled 7970 @ 1050/1600 ( max stable on voltage locked card) 7338 -12/23/13
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1384013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


that's curious, even with more clocks and 2k extra physics the score continues to be lower then your 8350, graphics its at least 300 points lower, I wonder why this is so...


----------



## strong island 1

strong island 1 --- 4930k / 4.8ghz --- 780 TI Classified --- 1424mhz core / 8400mhz memory --- Score 13801 --- Date 12/24/13



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1314850


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> that's curious, even with more clocks and 2k extra physics the score continues to be lower then your 8350, graphics its at least 300 points lower, I wonder why this is so...


Could be the drivers, they are older on the lower score


----------



## Forceman

Update

Forceman --- 4770k @ 4.5ghz --- R9 290X --- 1250/1425 --- Score 11376 --- Date 12/23/13



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1388838

Couldn't let a R9 290 beat me out. Voltage spiked a little higher than I expected though.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> strong island 1 --- 4930k / 4.8ghz --- 780 TI Classified --- 1424mhz core / 8400mhz memory --- Score 13801 --- Date 12/24/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1314850












Curious why there is a gray bar over the Valid Result notice on your screenshot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Update
> 
> Forceman --- 4770k @ 4.5ghz --- R9 290X --- 1250/1425 --- Score 11376 --- Date 12/23/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1388838
> 
> Couldn't let a R9 290 beat me out. Voltage spiked a little higher than I expected though.


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> strong island 1 --- 4930k / 4.8ghz --- 780 TI Classified --- 1424mhz core / 8400mhz memory --- Score 13801 --- Date 12/24/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1314850
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Curious why there is a gray bar over the Valid Result notice on your screenshot.
Click to expand...

ya that is wierd. It only seems to happen to me in internet explorer. I just went to my results in chrome and here is a new screenshot. Sorry. It's also number 10 on the hall of fame chart so it's definitely valid. thanks for updating my score.



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1314850


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You need to push it a little farther for that first place.


that brings me to this , can you please tell me what to do to get 200mv slider by useing the AB command line switch ?

Thanks in advance

and Merry Christmas


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> that brings me to this , can you please tell me what to do to get 200mv slider by useing the AB command line switch ?
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> and Merry Christmas


I just used the new Trixx, it supports +200mV directly.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VaporX*
> 
> Guys I posted this in the Greetings thread but figured I should post here as well..
> 
> TRIXX_installer_4.8.1.zip 3542k .zip file
> 
> 
> This is still in final testing and I personally have not yet had a chance to run it but I am being told this should give you what you are looking for. Let me know how it works for you.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1444892/sapphire-290-290x-trixx-voltage-control-missing/0_30#post_21375294


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I just used the new Trixx, it supports +200mV directly.
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1444892/sapphire-290-290x-trixx-voltage-control-missing/0_30#post_21375294


And a Merry Christmas to you Forceman!!

Can't wait for those non-ref cards now


----------



## Nittygritty

Pretty chuffed, I finally broke the 11K barrier









Update

Nittygritty--i7 3770K @ 5GHz--GTX 780 @ 1333/1747--11017--24/12/13

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1990666


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> strong island 1 --- 4930k / 4.8ghz --- 780 TI Classified --- 1424mhz core / 8400mhz memory --- Score 13801 --- Date 12/24/13
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1314850


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> strong island 1 --- 4930k / 4.8ghz --- 780 TI Classified --- 1424mhz core / 8400mhz memory --- Score 13801 --- Date 12/24/13


Really nice run Strong Island! That's how Classy's are supposed to perform.







Hope to see more 780 Ti Classy runs here!









Comparing the details of your run to mine makes me think my old card may have been 'broken" -- I can see where my scores are skewed more in certain segments. Info has been submitted to 3DMark for analysis but was told will need to wait till after the New Year. If they also find an anolmaly I'll remove my other "valid" scores for that card which may appear on the HOF.

Happy Holidays


----------



## rdr09

rdr09 - 2700K @ 4.5GHz - 290 @ 1280 / 1500 - 10975
- (24/12/2013)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1994002



Happy Holidays and thanks!


----------



## The EX1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I updated it because I could pull the 3DMark link off the screenshot, but please edit the direct link into your post.


Will do. Thank you!


----------



## Wickedtt

This is my Fixed run with screen shot Login everything i could put on my monitor is there haha.

11037 P score - Tricky-2 L5639 Xeon @ 4ghz 780 Lightning 1355/1802 12-24-2013 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1394139


----------



## TommyMoore

'New Entry'

TommyMoore - 3770k @ 4.2 - R9 290 @ 1198 / 1497 - 10214
- Date (24/12/2013)

Score 10214
Graphics 12717
Physics 10064
Combined 4164


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> Pretty chuffed, I finally broke the 11K barrier
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Update
> 
> Nittygritty--i7 3770K @ 5GHz--GTX 780 @ 1333/1747--11017--24/12/13
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1990666
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> rdr09 - 2700K @ 4.5GHz - 290 @ 1280 / 1500 - 10975
> - (24/12/2013)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1994002
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy Holidays and thanks!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> This is my Fixed run with screen shot Login everything i could put on my monitor is there haha.
> 
> 11037 P score - Tricky-2 L5639 Xeon @ 4ghz 780 Lightning 1355/1802 12-24-2013 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1394139
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TommyMoore*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> TommyMoore - 3770k @ 4.2 - R9 290 @ 1198 / 1497 - 10214
> - Date (24/12/2013)
> 
> Score 10214
> Graphics 12717
> Physics 10064
> Combined 4164
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Updated because the user name was in the 3DMark link, but please include it in your screenshot going forward.


----------



## Darhant

Heres my R9 290 entry









Currently running 1100/1401 at a power limit of 20+.
Plan on taking it further with some tinkering. Cooled via a EK FC waterblock

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1390461

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/va2bw/


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darhant*
> 
> Heres my R9 290 entry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Currently running 1100/1401 at a power limit of 20+.
> Plan on taking it further with some tinkering. Cooled via a EK FC waterblock
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1390461
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/va2bw/


The screenshot doesn't match the linked 3DMark result.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

*Update*

HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2428 Giga WB 290 [email protected] *11629*











http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1397593

Merry xmas to me


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - 3570k @ 5.2Ghz - 780 TI classified - 1450Mhz / 2001Mhz - score: 12671 - 12/25/2013
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2001779


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> *Update*
> 
> HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2428 Giga WB 290 [email protected] *11629* :thumb
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1397593
> 
> Merry xmas to me












Great, now I've got to spend my Christmas flashing the Asus BIOS and getting back ahead.







Crazy-high 4770K voltage here I come.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - 3570k @ 5.2Ghz - 780 TI classified - 1476Mhz / 2001Mhz - score: 12671 - 12/25/2013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2001779












You need to get a HT chip - that 3570K is hamstringing your score.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great, now I've got to spend my Christmas flashing the Asus BIOS and getting back ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crazy-high 4770K voltage here I come.
> [/spoiler]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to get a HT chip - that 3570K is hamstringing your score.


yeah i do need HT. probably going to get a i7 in the next couple day's....... hopefully


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Great, now I've got to spend my Christmas flashing the Asus BIOS and getting back ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crazy-high 4770K voltage here I come


LooooL







Your sayin a bios flash is gonna fix it eh


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> LooooL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your sayin a bios flash is gonna fix it eh


I could get 1250/1500 on the Asus BIOS, so then it's just down to how far I can push my cranky 4770K. But I'm coming for you.







Going to be hard to overcome the CPU deficit though.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I could get 1250/1500 on the Asus BIOS, so then it's just down to how far I can push my cranky 4770K. But I'm coming for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Going to be hard to overcome the CPU deficit though.


Well best of luck to ya









Im running stock bios , got it to bench at [email protected] . Interesting to see how that works out for you . If your looking for me i will be just ahead of you


----------



## GhostDog99

Firs Run With 780 TI Classified

*GhostDog99 -- 3930K @ 4.6GHz -- GTX 780Ti 1371/1950 -- 12974 -- 12/25/2013*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1402125


----------



## ImJJames

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I could get 1250/1500 on the Asus BIOS, so then it's just down to how far I can push my cranky 4770K. But I'm coming for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Going to be hard to overcome the CPU deficit though.


He is running 3930K, its impossible bro. Unless you plan on switching out that 4770K for a 3930


----------



## Darhant

Fixed, please list
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darhant*
> 
> Heres my R9 290 entry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Currently running 1100/1401 at a power limit of 20+.
> Plan on taking it further with some tinkering. Cooled via a EK FC waterblock
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1390461
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/va2bw/


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> The screenshot doesn't match the linked 3DMark result.


Sorry posted wrong link from site but heres a fresh one anyways

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1402728


----------



## GhostDog99

Guys I need some help I up the CPU to 4.8 GHZ but I got time measurement data not available
im using windows 7 i thought it can only happen on windows 8

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.8GHz -- GTX 780 Ti 1371/1950 -- 13084 -- 12/25/2013*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1404254

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-48Ghz-1371780TI.jpg.html


----------



## alancsalt

No Win7 can get that too. From what FtW 420 tells me, in Win7, time measurement unavailable is OK, time measuring innacurate is no OK....


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> No Win7 can get that too. From what FtW 420 tells me, in Win7, time measurement unavailable is OK, time measuring innacurate is no OK....


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i kinda agree... how would that help with the issue that brought this up?


The warning in Win7 is just a byproduct of fixing validation for win8, win7 still has the real time clock so the way windows sees time can't be changed.

The time warnings with win7 can be completely ignored, only win 8/8.1 can be affected by the time issues.


----------



## GhostDog99

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.6 GHz -- GTX 780 Ti 1397/1975 -- 13217 -- 12/25/2013*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1404633


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> Guys I need some help I up the CPU to 4.8 GHZ but I got time measurement data not available
> im using windows 7 i thought it can only happen on windows 8
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.8GHz -- GTX 780 Ti 1371/1950 -- 13084 -- 12/25/2013*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1404254
> 
> http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-48Ghz-1371780TI.jpg.html


Monster score bud


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Monster score bud


Thanks mate to bad I can't run SLI lol


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> He is running 3930K, its impossible bro. Unless you plan on switching out that 4770K for a 3930


I was hoping the higher IPC of the 4770K and the 290X would make up for the missing cores, but I can't overclock my CPU far enough; 4.6 is as far as it can go, and that wasn't enough to close the gap.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darhant*
> 
> Fixed, please list
> 
> Sorry posted wrong link from site but heres a fresh one anyways
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1402728
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.6 GHz -- GTX 780 Ti 1397/1975 -- 13217 -- 12/25/2013*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1404633
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












You couldn't run the card at 1397 with the CPU at 4.8?


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I was hoping the higher IPC of the 4770K and the 290X would make up for the missing cores, but I can't overclock my CPU far enough; 4.6 is as far as it can go, and that wasn't enough to close the gap.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You couldn't run the card at 1397 with the CPU at 4.8?


I didn't try but right now I'm using my 2 PC with haf broken parts that I'm just happy they even boot lol
Once I'm get home in 2 more weeks and put the cards in to my main rig my score will go up
My main rigs 3930k can do 5.2ghz and has a 1200w psu
And this PC can only do 4.8ghz and only haves a 860w psu so it lemits me


----------



## The EX1

*'Update'*

The_EX1 -i7 4770k @ 4.8 - GTX 780 @ 1346 / 7712 - 11421 - 26-12-2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1398366

Broke down and flashed a new BIOS. Sorry to update so quickly.


----------



## GhostDog99

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.6GHz -- GTX 780 TI 1410/2000 -- 13356*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1411907

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-46Ghz-1410780TIcard1.jpg.html


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The EX1*
> 
> *'Update'*
> 
> The_EX1 -i7 4770k @ 4.8 - GTX 780 @ 1346 / 7712 - 11421 - 26-12-2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1398366
> 
> Broke down and flashed a new BIOS. Sorry to update so quickly.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.6GHz -- GTX 780 TI 1410/2000 -- 13356*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1411907
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-46Ghz-1410780TIcard1.jpg.html












Gotta find those 5 points to take third place.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gotta find those 5 points to take third place.


here you go mate 14 points just for you lol









upted the memory just a tad and we got it

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.6GHz -- GTX 780 TI 1410/2015 -- 13370*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1414179

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-46Ghz-1410780TIcard1-1.jpg.html


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX780 Ti C 1398/1951 --- 13407 --- 27/12/13
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2026817


----------



## Jpmboy

Gotta love Futuremark... check this result


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX780 Ti C 1398/1951 --- 13407 --- 27/12/13
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2026817


Nice score mate
You kicked me outta the top 3 before it was even up dated lol


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Gotta love Futuremark... check this result


Lol ya there are a lot of hackers in the hall of fame this week


----------



## The EX1

These 780 Ti Classifieds you two are using are wrecking shop. Props!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> Nice score mate
> You kicked me outta the top 3 before it was even up dated lol


eh - only until you get your primary rig running.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> eh - only until you get your primary rig running.


Yup one week to go till I'm back home with my baybe lol


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX780 Ti C 1398/1951 --- 13407 --- 27/12/13
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2026817


wow. good job, Jp.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> wow. good job, Jp.


Thanks!









If i can figure out how to stop these 116s every time i up the memory...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImJJames*
> 
> Forceman a quick question, I am sure you know Nvidia LOD modifications are undetected by firestrike and gives them valid results. On the other hand tess modification with AMD is detected, why not allow tess modification to give a even playing field? Its allowed in 3dmark11 thread and HWBOT rules.


And allowed here (all tweaks allowed)


----------



## mcg75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> And allowed here (all tweaks allowed)


What's amusing is LOD can be set just as easily on amd cards as well. Hell, hwbot even has a tool to make it simple for amd owners to do it.

Both sides have using that trick long before ocaholic's story came around. Compared to tess off, it has very little impact on scoring and that's why it's allowed.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> And allowed here (all tweaks allowed)


What is Nvidia LOD modifications ?


----------



## mcg75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> What is Nvidia/AMD LOD modifications ?


Fixed that for you.









LOD - Level of detail. Image quality goes down and score goes slightly up.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mcg75*
> 
> Fixed that for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOD - Level of detail. Image quality goes down and score goes slightly up.


if it's allowed how do I do it get my score up a little bit


----------



## mcg75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> if it's allowed how do I do it get my score up a little bit


I'm not really sure. When I saw the ocaholic story, I looked into it some and that's when I found the gain was not worth the effort.

Only the most hardcore bencher would put the effort in. The rest of us it's just time wasted.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mcg75*
> 
> I'm not really sure. When I saw the ocaholic story, I looked into it some and that's when I found the gain was not worth the effort.
> 
> Only the most hardcore bencher would put the effort in. The rest of us it's just time wasted.


thanks for the info mate


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If i can figure out how to stop these 116s every time i up the memory...


i feel you're pain, i hate those 116's anything over 1.4 volts bsod 116


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> i feel you're pain, i hate those 116's anything over 1.4 volts bsod 116


I can go up do 1.425v but one I do 1.45 boom I get the 116


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> I can go up do 1.425v but one I do 1.45 boom I get the 116


yeah i got a couple runs in @ 1.425v anything more though and crash


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Titan can take more volts than the Classified 780 ti?









Must be because of the LLC thing built into the Classified. I don't use the mod and I can go further without getting bsod 19 or 116.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Titan can take more volts than the Classified 780 ti?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Must be because of the LLC thing built into the Classified. I don't use the mod and I can go further without getting bsod 19 or 116.


im not sure about the LLC enabled already for the classy but i dont have a DMM so..........

some screen shots i took with load and without load and HWinfo monitoring voltage

voltage @ 1.325 but during load 1.295v


voltage @ 1.325 but idle @ 1.318v


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Thought I read someone with the Classified used a mutlimeter and noticed the voltage went up under load?


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thought I read someone with the Classified used a mutlimeter and noticed the voltage went up under load?


yeah i read that also but im not sure .... i need one of those probe it's to check my voltage

well i just got done checking voltage with dmm on the back of the card and when i set the voltage to 1.325v using 2.0 tool during load voltage went up to 1.375v reading from the DMM


----------



## Jpmboy

TiCvoltage.xls 8k .xls file


http://www.overclock.net/t/1411500/official-evga-classified-owners-club/5590#post_21461428


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> TiCvoltage.xls 8k .xls file
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1411500/official-evga-classified-owners-club/5590#post_21461428


i learned a lesson dont trust hardware monitors


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> Lol ya there are a lot of hackers in the hall of fame this week


Not really hackers, futuremark systeminfo. It sometimes sees 2 or 3 card multi gpu systems as single gpu. It's why I don't look at the futuremark HOF to see what the top scores are, they aren't all legit, as well as legit scores not showing up in there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mcg75*
> 
> What's amusing is LOD can be set just as easily on amd cards as well. Hell, hwbot even has a tool to make it simple for amd owners to do it.
> 
> Both sides have using that trick long before ocaholic's story came around. Compared to tess off, it has very little impact on scoring and that's why it's allowed.


It is quite a bit newer for AMD, nvidia was exclusive to LOD for years before any options for it became available to AMD.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> here you go mate 14 points just for you lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> upted the memory just a tad and we got it
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.6GHz -- GTX 780 TI 1410/2015 -- 13370*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1414179
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-46Ghz-1410780TIcard1-1.jpg.html











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX780 Ti C 1398/1951 --- 13407 --- 27/12/13
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2026817
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> i learned a lesson dont trust hardware monitors











Hopefully not on that 780 Ti C


----------



## szeged

testing out the new cpu in firestrike vs the 4770k, first run here with the gpu set to stock settings









http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1419417 time to get to work for some real results







also gonna try to get the 4930k to 5.2 or so, see if i can get up to 19k physics score.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> testing out the new cpu in firestrike vs the 4770k, first run here with the gpu set to stock settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1419417 time to get to work for some real results
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also gonna try to get the 4930k to 5.2 or so, see if i can get up to 19k physics score.


Nice Physics, looks promising already!


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Nice Physics, looks promising already!


thanks







hoping for atleast 19k out of it, gonna start work on it tonight, all windows open and fans pulling air in at each window to make my place freeeeezzzzeeeee tonight


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hoping for atleast 19k out of it, gonna start work on it tonight, all windows open and fans pulling air in at each window to make my place freeeeezzzzeeeee tonight


lolz i had my rig outside the other night benching when it was 30° F i was freezing but got some good bench runs in


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lolz i had my rig outside the other night benching when it was 30° F i was freezing but got some good bench runs in


Get a 50ft Ethernet cable and get that run validated!


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Get a 50ft Ethernet cable and get that run validated!


i got it right here http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2001779


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> testing out the new cpu in firestrike vs the 4770k, first run here with the gpu set to stock settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1419417 time to get to work for some real results
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also gonna try to get the 4930k to 5.2 or so, see if i can get up to 19k physics score.


uh oh, looks like i'm gonna have to get a 4930K? Are there any specific lots or... to look for?


----------



## MunneY

I'd like to see 4930k vs 3930k results... same everything.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> I'd like to see 4930k vs 3930k results... same everything.


from the scores I have seen so far a 4930k @ 5GHz = 3930k @ 5.2GHz


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> uh oh, looks like i'm gonna have to get a 4930K? Are there any specific lots or... to look for?


you're safe for now, I killed my psu last night trying to break 14k lol.

Here's where I had to stop after it died since the only other psi I have atm can't handle this rig

http://i.imgur.com/o4PvWf0.jpg

Phone is being stupid amd not posting pics, bit there's the link to the run before the psu went nuclear.


----------



## ssiperko

New Entry
OCN Name - ssiperko CPU i7 4770k @ 4.5 - GPU R9 290 Speed @ 1235/1575 - Score 11206 20/12/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1334085

Is this what you're looking for?

SS


----------



## szeged

k got to steal the gf's rig for a sec so i can post that score i was trying to break and killed my psu >.>

Szeged --- i7 4930k @ 4.9ghz --- gtx 780ti classified @ 1437/2125 --- score 13949 --- 12/28/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1420887

will try to break 14k again on monday.


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> you're safe for now, I killed my psu last night trying to break 14k lol.
> 
> Here's where I had to stop after it died since the only other psi I have atm can't handle this rig
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/o4PvWf0.jpg
> 
> Phone is being stupid amd not posting pics, bit there's the link to the run before the psu went nuclear.


No wonder the PSU went, it thought the 4930k was trying to hit 175ghz in that pic!

Was it a quiet death or a gunshot blast? I blew up a PSU at the first grand champion series in Toronto, a couple of the guys there in the benching section really jumped


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> No wonder the PSU went, it thought the 4930k was trying to hit 175ghz in that pic!
> 
> Was it a quiet death or a gunshot blast? I blew up a PSU at the first grand champion series in Toronto, a couple of the guys there in the benching section really jumped


lmao i just noticed that cpuz was spazzing out, yep i think i have a golden 4930k









was actually at 4.9ghz and 2400 ram.

it was a loud pop, i almost had a heart attack thinking i blew something on the gpu or mobo.


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> lmao i just noticed that cpuz was spazzing out, yep i think i have a golden 4930k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> was actually at 4.9ghz and 2400 ram.
> 
> it was a loud pop, i almost had a heart attack thinking i blew something on the gpu or mobo.


My first blown PSU was a Coolermaster 650w, haven't had one since then because it was a 650W & the kill-a-watt still showed a max 430W pull from the wall when it blew. CM has gotten better since then, but still, it blew putting out barely more than 1/2 it's rated power.

That one really did make me jump, it was at my old place & that neighborhood did have a gunfight going on about once a week. Sounding like it was in the house freaked me out pretty good


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> My first blown PSU was a Coolermaster 650w, haven't had one since then because it was a 650W & the kill-a-watt still showed a max 430W pull from the wall when it blew. CM has gotten better since then, but still, it blew putting out barely more than 1/2 it's rated power.
> 
> That one really did make me jump, it was at my old place & that neighborhood did have a gunfight going on about once a week. Sounding like it was in the house freaked me out pretty good


lol


----------



## SDhydro

Sdhydro --- 2600k @ 5.1ghz --- gtx 780 1424/1674 --- score 11204 --- 12/27/2013

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1420515


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> My first blown PSU was a Coolermaster 650w, haven't had one since then because it was a 650W & the kill-a-watt still showed a max 430W pull from the wall when it blew. CM has gotten better since then, but still, it blew putting out barely more than 1/2 it's rated power.
> 
> That one really did make me jump, it was at my old place & that neighborhood did have a gunfight going on about once a week. Sounding like it was in the house freaked me out pretty good


Rofl









New 1000w p2 will be here Monday, let's see of I can blow that up too lol


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> it was a loud pop, i almost had a heart attack thinking i blew something on the gpu or mobo.


when I got my seasonic replaced the first time (had a regulator fault), the replacement blew its fuse as I plugged it back in from meddling with other stuff, right in front of my face, got pretty annoyed at that point as I knew what it had just did to itself...


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> New Entry
> OCN Name - ssiperko CPU i7 4770k @ 4.5 - GPU R9 290 Speed @ 1235/1575 - Score 11206 20/12/2013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1334085
> 
> Is this what you're looking for?
> 
> SS












No user name on screenshot (or visible on 3DMark result).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> k got to steal the gf's rig for a sec so i can post that score i was trying to break and killed my psu >.>
> 
> Szeged --- i7 4930k @ 4.9ghz --- gtx 780ti classified @ 1437/2125 --- score 13949 --- 12/28/2013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1420887
> 
> will try to break 14k again on monday.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> Sdhydro --- 2600k @ 5.1ghz --- gtx 780 1424/1674 --- score 11204 --- 12/27/2013
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1420515
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> you're safe for now, I killed my psu last night trying to break 14k lol.
> Here's where I had to stop after it died since the only other psi I have atm can't handle this rig
> http://i.imgur.com/o4PvWf0.jpg
> Phone is being stupid amd not posting pics, bit there's the link to the run before the psu went nuclear.


Not sure if you noticed how borked your cpuZ readings are. That''s a hellofa memory OC!









What's with that?

nvm.

My first ST1500 went off like a firecracker!

But get use to the sound of the audio chip clicking on with the REBE... i still have not!


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Not sure if you noticed how borked your cpuZ readings are. That''s a hellofa memory OC!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's with that?
> 
> nvm.
> 
> My first ST1500 went off like a firecracker!
> 
> But get use to the sound of the audio chip clicking on with the REBE... i still have not!


I just noticed the cpus being broken today lol it should say 4.9 with a bus of x100 lol

Yeah the memory on this card tops out at about 8550 lol I wish I could get the core to 1500 but it seems 1476 is its max on these bios and volts.


----------



## cssorkinman

I had a foxconn A7DA-S 3.0 motherboard that died while running an x4 965 at stock speeds. It was in my htpc , when it blew, it sounded like someone had shot a .22 in the living room.
I was shocked that it could have that violent of an end. Luckily it didn't take anything else with it.
Something in the area of the cpu socket was the culprit,do VRM's die loudly?


----------



## ssiperko

New Entry
OCN Name - ssiperko CPU i7 4770k @ 4.9 - GPU R9 290 Speed @ 1250/1700 - Score 11569 28/12/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1428347

Is this what you're looking for?

Edited for a better score. ***NOTE --- the word pad is wrong related to core and memory speeds .......... I was running many different settings and didn't change that when I got this score.***









SS


----------



## Clockster

*Clockster -- 4770K @ Stock -- GTX 780Ti @ 1130/1850-- 11 516 -- December 29 2013*



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2048076

Now to start clocking properly


----------



## Chronic1

'Update'

Chronic1 - i7 920 @ 4.65ghz - 780ti ref. @ 1372 / 3902 - 12166
(29/12/2013)



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1434467


----------



## GhostDog99

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.8GHz -- GTX 780 TI Classified 1425/2100 -- 13655*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1434814

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-48Ghz-13655780TI.jpg.html


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> New Entry
> OCN Name - ssiperko CPU i7 4770k @ 4.9 - GPU R9 290 Speed @ 1250/1700 - Score 11569 28/12/2013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1428347
> 
> Is this what you're looking for?
> 
> Edited for a better score. ***NOTE --- the word pad is wrong related to core and memory speeds .......... I was running many different settings and didn't change that when I got this score.***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS












Nice memory overclock - my card barely gets above 1500.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clockster*
> 
> *Clockster -- 4770K @ Stock -- GTX 780Ti @ 1130/1850-- 11 516 -- December 29 2013*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2048076
> 
> Now to start clocking properly












Gotta overclock that 4770K.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chronic1*
> 
> 'Update'
> 
> Chronic1 - i7 920 @ 4.65ghz - 780ti ref. @ 1372 / 3902 - 12166
> (29/12/2013)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1434467












No user name in screenshot or 3DMark.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 4.8GHz -- GTX 780 TI Classified 1425/2100 -- 13655*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1434814
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-48Ghz-13655780TI.jpg.html












That 4930K IPC advantage is barely keeping strong island in front of you.


----------



## Chronic1

'New Entry'
Chronic1 - i7 920 @ 4.65ghz - 780ti ref. @ 1372 / 3899 - 12166
(30/12/2013)


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1434467


----------



## M3TAl

Wish there were more submissions with lower end cards. We need scores to compare to and compete against also







. Or is there another thread for us slow pokes? I'll throw this in for the heck of it.

I'm 7th of all the scores with 7870 XT and FX-8350's so I must be doing okay







.

M3TAl - FX-8350 @ 4.84 GHz - 7870 XT @ 1210 / 1500 - 6123 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2056662


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chronic1*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> Chronic1 - i7 920 @ 4.65ghz - 780ti ref. @ 1372 / 3899 - 12166
> (30/12/2013)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1434467











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> Wish there were more submissions with lower end cards. We need scores to compare to and compete against also
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Or is there another thread for us slow pokes? I'll throw this in for the heck of it.
> 
> I'm 7th of all the scores with 7870 XT and FX-8350's so I must be doing okay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> M3TAl - FX-8350 @ 4.84 GHz - 7870 XT @ 1210 / 1500 - 6123 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2056662
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Too much work to manage so many cards once you drop it down to mid-range.


----------



## Clockster

Clockster -- 4770K @ 4.4Ghz -- GTX 780Ti @ 1140/1900-- 11 836 -- December 30 2013



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2057221


----------



## Tugrul512bit

'New Entry'

Tugrul512bit - FX8150 @ 4.24GHz - HD7870 @ 1270MHz / 1525 MHz - 5807Points - (12/30/2013)

Link: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1421702


----------



## lilchronic

here's a run i did with my new 3770k that i dont like because i cant get my ram @ 2400Mhz







lolz
..... not a submission yet, got to oc my gpu higher just showing off my lame 3770k









http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2064600


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> here's a run i did with my new 3770k that i dont like because i cant get my ram @ 2400Mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lolz
> ..... not a submission yet, got to oc my gpu higher just showing off my lame 3770k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2064600


4770k and VI hero time?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clockster*
> 
> Clockster -- 4770K @ 4.4Ghz -- GTX 780Ti @ 1140/1900-- 11 836 -- December 30 2013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2057221











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tugrul512bit*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Tugrul512bit - FX8150 @ 4.24GHz - HD7870 @ 1270MHz / 1525 MHz - 5807Points - (12/30/2013)
> 
> Link: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1421702
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Not currently taking 7870 results, but thanks for posting it for comparison.


----------



## mcg75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> 4770k and VI hero time?


Not when he sees these results.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/1430315/fs/1442169

Clockster - 4.4 ghz 4770k and 780 Ti @ 1195 mhz and 7600 mhz - 11561 total score - 13630 gpu score
Mine - 4.5 ghz 4770k and 780 Ti @ 1200 mhz and 7400 mhz - 11071 total score and 12725 gpu score

Only real difference I can see is he's got a MSI board and I've got the Vi Hero.

I've racked my brain for days trying to figure out why my scores are so much lower than everyone else. I've come up with nothing.


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mcg75*
> 
> Not when he sees these results.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/1430315/fs/1442169
> 
> Clockster - 4.4 ghz 4770k and 780 Ti @ 1195 mhz and 7600 mhz - 11561 total score - 13630 gpu score
> Mine - 4.5 ghz 4770k and 780 Ti @ 1200 mhz and 7400 mhz - 11071 total score and 12725 gpu score
> 
> Only real difference I can see is he's got a MSI board and I've got the Vi Hero.
> 
> I've racked my brain for days trying to figure out why my scores are so much lower than everyone else. I've come up with nothing.


weird lol, the hero got my 4770k to 5.2ghz with under 1.3v no delid, idk what would cause that lol


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> 4770k and VI hero time?


yeah bout that time lol

you really want me to get the VI hero huh. lolz

M6G or VI hero ???? hmmmmm


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> yeah bout that time lol
> 
> you really want me to get the VI hero huh. lolz


its an amazing board







i loved it when i had one, if i ever do a z87 system again ill gladly pick another one up.


----------



## Forceman

Anyone good with Google Spreadsheet? I'm fooling with some charts, and I'm having trouble doing what I want to do, customization-wise.

1. Is there any way to have different columns in a column chart be different colors? So the AMD ones are red and the Nvidia ones are green?
2. Is there any way to put the numerical value of the column at the top of the column? (I know you can do that in Excel).
3. If I make a chart, is there any way to include data from a different series in the legend? For example, if I wanted the legend to show the name of the card and also the number or percentage of cards that represented (updated dynamically)? So the blue wedge would show as GTX Titan (13) or GTX Titan (22%)?


----------



## vlps5122

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mcg75*
> 
> Not when he sees these results.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/1430315/fs/1442169
> 
> Clockster - 4.4 ghz 4770k and 780 Ti @ 1195 mhz and 7600 mhz - 11561 total score - 13630 gpu score
> Mine - 4.5 ghz 4770k and 780 Ti @ 1200 mhz and 7400 mhz - 11071 total score and 12725 gpu score
> 
> Only real difference I can see is he's got a MSI board and I've got the Vi Hero.
> 
> I've racked my brain for days trying to figure out why my scores are so much lower than everyone else. I've come up with nothing.


close processes running in the background, nvidia control panel setting set to single display performance, high performance texture quality, and for power management prefer maximum performance, also turn v sync off. then go to change resolution in nvidia control panel and set the color depth to the lowest setting. re-run 3dmark with those changes see if it helps.

edit: its only a graphics issue not a physics issue so ignore the closing of processes, but make all of those nvidia control panel changes and try.


----------



## szeged

got another run in without blowing something up this time

Szeged --- i7 4930k @ 4.9ghz --- gtx 780ti classy @ 1435/2125 --- score 13962 --- 12/31/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1443334

Keep getting shut downs on skyn3t bios @ 1.45v, gotta find out whats causing that because i wanna push this card harder.


----------



## mcg75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vlps5122*
> 
> close processes running in the background, nvidia control panel setting set to single display performance, high performance texture quality, and for power management prefer maximum performance, also turn v sync off. then go to change resolution in nvidia control panel and set the color depth to the lowest setting. re-run 3dmark with those changes see if it helps.
> 
> edit: its only a graphics issue not a physics issue so ignore the closing of processes, but make all of those nvidia control panel changes and try.


The only thing I've never tried is the color depth. All the rest I've tried and they do bring a few points but not very much.

I even researched and did the LOD trick last night to see if that was it. All that got me was a blurry screen and an extra 75 points. Not worth the effort at all.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> got another run in without blowing something up this time
> 
> Szeged --- i7 4930k @ 4.9ghz --- gtx 780ti classy @ 1435/2125 --- score 13962 --- 12/31/2013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1443334
> 
> Keep getting shut downs on skyn3t bios @ 1.45v, gotta find out whats causing that because i wanna push this card harder.


----------



## lilchronic

'new entry'

lilchronic - 3770k @ 5Ghz - 780TI classy @ 1450Mhz / 2001 - 13243
- Date (31/12/2013)
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2073505


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> 'new entry'
> 
> lilchronic - 3770k @ 5Ghz - 780TI classy @ 1450Mhz / 2001 - 13243
> - Date (31/12/2013)
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2073505
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












You already had a 780Ti entry, so I updated it.


----------



## Nittygritty

Update.

All the ones









Nittygritty --- i7 3770k @ 4.9ghz --- GTX 780 classy @ 1320/1902 --- score 11111 --- 3/01/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2096450


----------



## Nittygritty

Sorry Forceman, Scratch that last one. Having some fun today









Update

Nittygritty---i7 3770K @ 4.9GHz---GTX 780 Classy @ 1333/1921---Score 11201---03/01/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2096595


----------



## strong island 1

'UPDATE'

strong island 1 - 4930k @ 4.8ghz - 780 TI Classy @ 1424mhz / 8600mhz - 13902
- Date 1/3/14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1461479


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> 'UPDATE'
> 
> strong island 1 - 4930k @ 4.8ghz - 780 TI Classy @ 1424mhz / 8600mhz - 13902
> - Date 1/3/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1461479


really nice score mate


----------



## DeanWonAgain

DeanWonAgain - Intel core I5 4670K at 4.4 - GTX 780ti - 10423 - Date 1/3/14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1446882


----------



## rdr09

update: rdr09 --- i7 [email protected] 4.9 Ghz ---- 290 ; 1320 / 1620 ---- 11301 ---- 3/1/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2072325


----------



## agarabaghi

i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz ---- 7970 ; 1030 / 1650 ---- 7553 ---- 1/3/2013



How is my score?


----------



## Wickedtt

New Entry (Changed CPU's) -11251p-- X5650 @ 4.620Ghz-- 780 Lightning 1346/1802--Wickedtt--01/04/14

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2112278


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> Sorry Forceman, Scratch that last one. Having some fun today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Update
> 
> Nittygritty---i7 3770K @ 4.9GHz---GTX 780 Classy @ 1333/1921---Score 11201---03/01/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2096595
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> 'UPDATE'
> 
> strong island 1 - 4930k @ 4.8ghz - 780 TI Classy @ 1424mhz / 8600mhz - 13902
> - Date 1/3/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1461479
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeanWonAgain*
> 
> DeanWonAgain - Intel core I5 4670K at 4.4 - GTX 780ti - 10423 - Date 1/3/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1446882
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












What speed was the card running for that one?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> update: rdr09 --- i7 [email protected] 4.9 Ghz ---- 290 ; 1320 / 1620 ---- 11301 ---- 3/1/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2072325
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *agarabaghi*
> 
> i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz ---- 7970 ; 1030 / 1650 ---- 7553 ---- 1/3/2013
> 
> 
> 
> How is my score?












Good enough for third place, but doesn't meet the submission requirements.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> New Entry (Changed CPU's) -11251p-- X5650 @ 4.620Ghz-- 780 Lightning 1346/1802--Wickedtt--01/04/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2112278
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## agarabaghi

UPDATED - i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz ---- 7970 ; 1030 / 1650 ---- 7553 ---- 1/3/2013



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1475631

How is my score?
Am I valid now?


----------



## M3TAl

You're missing some things in the pic. Read the requirements in the OP.


----------



## agarabaghi

UPDATED - i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz ---- 7970 ; 1030 / 1650 ---- 7553 ---- 1/3/2013





http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1475631

How is my score?
Am I valid now?


----------



## Zenophobe

'New Entry'

Zenophobe - 4770K @ 3.5/3.9T - 290X @ 1150 / 1400 - Score: 10144
- Date (01/05/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2118500

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/545/jz5v.png/

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *agarabaghi*
> 
> UPDATED - i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz ---- 7970 ; 1030 / 1650 ---- 7553 ---- 1/3/2013
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1475631
> 
> How is my score?
> Am I valid now?


Look at the pictures that you are posting vs what everyone else is...


----------



## lilchronic

UPDATE
lilchronic - 3770k [email protected] 5Ghz - 780TI classy @ 1450Mhz /2001Mhz - 13364
- Date (06/01/2014)
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2129569


#1 gpu score


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> UPDATE
> lilchronic - 3770k [email protected] 5Ghz - 780TI classy @ 1450Mhz /2001Mhz - 13364
> - Date (06/01/2014)
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2129569
> 
> 
> #1 gpu score


----------



## szeged

nice run







gonna try to get my card to not give me constant shut downs tonight


----------



## Paul17041993

ok so I got a bit bored waiting for libraries to download and decided to do something silly with my temporary card...

(silly) New Entry

Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @ stock (3.6-4.2GHz) - 6450 @ 625/600 - 332
- 7/01/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1487503



edit; missed the link for whatever silly reason


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *agarabaghi*
> 
> UPDATED - i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz ---- 7970 ; 1030 / 1650 ---- 7553 ---- 1/3/2013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1475631
> 
> How is my score?
> Am I valid now?












You are still posting the wrong image of 3DMark (need the details screen) but I'll accept it based off the link.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zenophobe*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Zenophobe - 4770K @ 3.5/3.9T - 290X @ 1150 / 1400 - Score: 10144
> - Date (01/05/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2118500
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/545/jz5v.png/
> 
> Uploaded with ImageShack.us











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> UPDATE
> lilchronic - 3770k [email protected] 5Ghz - 780TI classy @ 1450Mhz /2001Mhz - 13364
> - Date (06/01/2014)
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2129569
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #1 gpu score












Looks like all the same speeds - what changed?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> ok so I got a bit bored waiting for libraries to download and decided to do something silly with my temporary card...
> 
> (silly) New Entry
> 
> Paul17041993 - FX-8150 @ stock (3.6-4.2GHz) - 6450 @ 625/600 - 332
> - 7/01/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1487503
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit; missed the link for whatever silly reason


Makes me want to run it on my file server with the HD5450 in it.


----------



## Durvelle27

Durvelle27 - FX-8350 @ 5.2GHz - GTX 780 @ 1330 / 1804 - 9811
- Date (07/01/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489964


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durvelle27*
> 
> Durvelle27 - FX-8350 @ 5.2GHz - GTX 780 @ 1330 / 1804 - 9811
> - Date (07/01/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489964


You really need a screenshot, but your username is in the 3DMark link, we need more AMD CPU results, and I'm feeling generous, so.


----------



## Durvelle27

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You really need a screenshot, but your username is in the 3DMark link, we need more AMD CPU results, and I'm feeling generous, so.


Thx


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are still posting the wrong image of 3DMark (need the details screen) but I'll accept it based off the link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Looks like all the same speeds - what changed?*
> Makes me want to run it on my file server with the HD5450 in it.


new mem 2800Mhz but same gpu clocks just raised my power target all they way up cause i noticed it was throttling @ 1.425v @ 1450Mhz with a 185%PT

before when i ran the test @ 1.4v 1450Mhz and 185%PT didnt throttle also my card was a lot colder on the original run

i was trying to adjust PT to voltage before to see if it helped with the shutdowns/116 but it was no help just limited my score a little


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> UPDATE
> lilchronic - 3770k [email protected] 5Ghz - 780TI classy @ 1450Mhz /2001Mhz - 13364
> - Date (06/01/2014)
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2129569
> 
> 
> #1 gpu score


Lovely!


----------



## noxon

Much more fun without power limit









'New Entry'

noxon - 3770K @ 5100 - 660Ti @ 1502 / 1944 - 7507 - 12/01/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1512857


----------



## mcg75

New Entry

mcg75 - 4770k @ 4.7 and 780 Ti Classy @ 1346 / 8000 mhz

12714 score

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2188473


----------



## Zenophobe

'UPDATE'

Zenophobe - i7-4770K @ 3.5/3.9 - Gigabyte 290x WF @ 1189 / 1546 - 10599
- Date (01/13/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1536463

https://imageshack.com/i/0ede7np


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mcg75*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> mcg75 - 4770k @ 4.7 and 780 Ti Classy @ 1346 / 8000 mhz
> 
> 12714 score
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2188473
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zenophobe*
> 
> 'UPDATE'
> 
> Zenophobe - i7-4770K @ 3.5/3.9 - Gigabyte 290x WF @ 1189 / 1546 - 10599
> - Date (01/13/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1536463
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> https://imageshack.com/i/0ede7np












Gotta get going on that CPU overclock.


----------



## askala2

New Entry

askala2 - i7-3930k @ 4.7 - 780 Ti Classy @ 1365 / 8000 mhz

- Date (01/14/2014)

12992 score

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1519562


----------



## Nittygritty

Update.

Got me a new Motherboard and CPU, I think the CPU has a bit more to go too, 4.6GHz @ 1.264V









Nittygritty---i7 4930K @4.6GHz---GTX 780 @ 1333/1902---11388---14/01/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2206419


----------



## Zenophobe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gotta get going on that CPU overclock.


Waiting on my h220


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *askala2*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> askala2 - i7-3930k @ 4.7 - 780 Ti Classy @ 1365 / 8000 mhz
> 
> - Date (01/14/2014)
> 
> 12992 score
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1519562
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Need screenshot with OCN username.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> Update.
> 
> Got me a new Motherboard and CPU, I think the CPU has a bit more to go too, 4.6GHz @ 1.264V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nittygritty---i7 4930K @4.6GHz---GTX 780 @ 1333/1902---11388---14/01/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2206419
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## askala2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need screenshot with OCN username.


why me rejected?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *askala2*
> 
> why me rejected?


No OCN username in the screenshot or 3DMark page.


----------



## askala2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> No OCN username in the screenshot or 3DMark page.


ok~~here~we go..

New Entry

askala2 - i7-3930k @ 4.7 - 780 Ti Classy @ 1365 / 8000 mhz

- Date (01/14/2014)

12992 score

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1519562


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *askala2*
> 
> ok~~here~we go..
> 
> New Entry
> 
> askala2 - i7-3930k @ 4.7 - 780 Ti Classy @ 1365 / 8000 mhz
> 
> - Date (01/14/2014)
> 
> 12992 score
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1519562
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## askala2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*


thank you very much


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Got my shiny new RIVE Ran this bench first bench ive done in 3 weeks

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2229847

Should of scored much higher



LooooL


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Got my shiny new RIVE Ran this bench first bench ive done in 3 weeks
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2229847
> 
> Should of scored much higher
> 
> 
> 
> LooooL


nice max turbo clock in the FM system report!









what is that... 2.1quadrillion Hz? A googleHz?


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nice max turbo clock in the FM system report!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what is that... 2.1quadrillion Hz? A googleHz?


Giggle Hertz LoooooooL


----------



## M3TAl

Guess it's 2.1 PHz(petahertz) but gigglehertz sounds better.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Giggle Hertz LoooooooL












..pentadecahertz


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Got my shiny new RIVE Ran this bench first bench ive done in 3 weeks
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2229847
> 
> Should of scored much higher
> 
> 
> 
> LooooL


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durvelle27*
> 
> Durvelle27 - FX-8350 @ 5.2GHz - GTX 780 @ 1330 / 1804 - 9811
> - Date (07/01/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489964


I had something similar with CPU-Z: http://i.imgur.com/s8SWjhK.png

All that with less than 1.5v


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I had something similar with CPU-Z: http://i.imgur.com/s8SWjhK.png
> 
> All that with less than 1.5v


Thats a really good cpu-z









Never had that error


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Thats a really good cpu-z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never had that error


I know right?

Too bad it wouldn't validate


----------



## M3TAl

My CPU-Z has done that multiple times when pushing for really high OC's for benches. Never took a screenshot though.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> My CPU-Z has done that multiple times when pushing for really high OC's for benches. Never took a screenshot though.


Oh i wasn't trying for a high oc, this was in my 4.4Ghz summer profile, closed CPU-Z, then re-opened and all good, anyways, not gonna keep going with this.....don't wanna de-rail


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Got my shiny new RIVE Ran this bench first bench ive done in 3 weeks
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2229847
> 
> Should of scored much higher
> 
> 
> 
> LooooL


----------



## strong island 1

This is not an entry because it doesn't beat my old score because I am using my backup 4770k while I rebuild my 4930k build. I finally did a 1450 core firestrike run. the overall score is low but it's15759 graphics score.

1450 core - 8200mhz memory



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2246563

1463 core - 8400mhz memory - 15881 gpu score.





http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1568042


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Update: Sgt Bilko, FX-8350 @ 5.05Ghz, XFX DD R9 290 1200/1350

Date: 20/1/2014

Score: 9282/ Graphics Score: 12096

Link: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2256856

Screencap:



My Physics is lower than i expected, i can probably get it a little higher but that can wait for some cooler weather


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Update: Sgt Bilko, FX-8350 @ 5.05Ghz, XFX DD R9 290 1200/1350
> 
> Date: 20/1/2014
> 
> Score: 9282/ Graphics Score: 12096
> 
> Link: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2256856
> 
> Screencap:
> 
> 
> 
> My Physics is lower than i expected, i can probably get it a little higher but that can wait for some cooler weather


indeed. my thuban at 4GHz gets the same amount of physics in this bench.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> indeed. my thuban at 4GHz gets the same amount of physics in this bench.


I know what you mean, this is the same clock and the same settings here: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1441733

Over 1k Physics lower.......it's got me stumped but im downloading the stand alone 3DMark now and i'll tinker with it throughout the week........


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*


Is that a yank bird or a ozzy one . Looks like what we get overhere ...., Tawny Frogmouth bird . Silent and deadly like owl .

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> indeed. my thuban at 4GHz gets the same amount of physics in this bench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I know what you mean, this is the same clock and the same settings here: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1441733
> 
> Over 1k Physics lower.......it's got me stumped but im downloading the stand alone 3DMark now and i'll tinker with it throughout the week........
Click to expand...

Hey fellas watsa happen eh ?


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I know what you mean, this is the same clock and the same settings here: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1441733
> 
> Over 1k Physics lower.......it's got me stumped but im downloading the stand alone 3DMark now and i'll tinker with it throughout the week........


now, that's what a 8300 should be getting.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Is that a yank bird or a ozzy one . Looks like what we get overhere ...., Tawny Frogmouth bird . Silent and deadly like owl .
> Hey fellas watsa happen eh ?


waiting for a driver update that might increase our scores.


----------



## Durvelle27

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I know what you mean, this is the same clock and the same settings here: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1441733
> 
> Over 1k Physics lower.......it's got me stumped but im downloading the stand alone 3DMark now and i'll tinker with it throughout the week........


My physics score

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489964


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> waiting for a driver update that might increase our scores.


You mean a super stable one .









Thats 33% of my issue with amd vga . Not stable enough for the mega clocks ive run on my 290 . Highest to date is [email protected]@1.51v . And thats with the video cutting in and out when benching but completeing . Dont have that with green things , if its not stable hard crashes instead . LoooL


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durvelle27*
> 
> My physics score
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489964


I know what yours is, you've told me a few times now.









That wasn't what i asked, i was trying to figure out why it would drop over 1k points on the same settings.


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I know what yours is, you've told me a few times now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn't what i asked, i was trying to figure out why it would drop over 1k points on the same settings.


Try tightening up your ram timings maybe ? But i doubt that would give you 1k


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> Try tightening up your ram timings maybe ? But i doubt that would give you 1k


See this is the strange thing, the clocks are settings are the same and i normally hit 9.7-9.8k score but now i'm only hitting 8.6k for some reason.

Thats what has me stumped........Windows is probably sapping it for some stupid thing.


----------



## Durvelle27

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I know what yours is, you've told me a few times now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn't what i asked, i was trying to figure out why it would drop over 1k points on the same settings.


Try ocing the RAM

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/906839

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489723


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durvelle27*
> 
> Try ocing the RAM
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/906839
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489723


I'll give it a go but i'm not sure how much higher than 2400Mhz i can go with it, i'll tinker throughout the week and post some results on the weekend, cracking 10k is a tall order but i'll give it a shot.


----------



## Durvelle27

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I'll give it a go but i'm not sure how much higher than 2400Mhz i can go with it, i'll tinker throughout the week and post some results on the weekend, cracking 10k is a tall order but i'll give it a shot.


7970 run was 1866MHz 9-10-9-28
780 was 2400MHz 11-13-13-30


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> You mean a super stable one .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats 33% of my issue with amd vga . Not stable enough for the mega clocks ive run on my 290 . Highest to date is [email protected]@1.51v . And thats with the video cutting in and out when benching but completeing . Dont have that with green things , if its not stable hard crashes instead . LoooL


whoa, 1.5v. mine is 1320/1620 in this bench using original bios and +200 with Trixx and it ends up 1.41v highest i've seen using GPUZ. any higher - it blackscreens. 13.11.

edit: btw, i am talking about this kind of update from drivers . . .

same oc different driver . . .

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4519473

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/5059839


----------



## Zenophobe

'UPDATE' Zenophobe - i7-4770K @ 4.6 - Gigabyte 290x WF @ 1189 / 1546 - 10811 - Date (01/20/2014) http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1579253

https://imageshack.com/i/na4g46p

'UPDATE' Zenophobe - i7-4770K @ 4.6 - Gigabyte 290x WF @ 1189 / 1546 - 10879 - Date (01/20/2014) http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2263131


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - - 4770k @ 4.7Ghz - - 780TI classy @ 1411 / 2001Mhz - - 1/21/14

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2263079


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durvelle27*
> 
> 7970 run was 1866MHz 9-10-9-28
> 780 was 2400MHz 11-13-13-30


So with these clocks: http://valid.canardpc.com/2h9567

I'm getting this score: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2263583

Thats still not right.


----------



## M3TAl

My physics is anywhere from 9300 to 9800 at 5.04 GHz and 8-8-8 1T 1792 MHz on the memory. Don't know what's up with your score.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M3TAl*
> 
> My physics is anywhere from 9300 to 9800 at 5.04 GHz and 8-8-8 1T 1792 MHz on the memory. Don't know what's up with your score.


Neither do i as i should be getting at least 9800 with these clocks, i have before: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1531853

Physics Score: 9796

It's just weird.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Update: Sgt Bilko, FX-8350 @ 5.05Ghz, XFX DD R9 290 1200/1350
> 
> Date: 20/1/2014
> 
> Score: 9282/ Graphics Score: 12096
> 
> Link: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2256856
> 
> Screencap:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My Physics is lower than i expected, i can probably get it a little higher but that can wait for some cooler weather












What happened to your 290X?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zenophobe*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 'UPDATE' Zenophobe - i7-4770K @ 4.6 - Gigabyte 290x WF @ 1189 / 1546 - 10811 - Date (01/20/2014) http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1579253
> 
> https://imageshack.com/i/na4g46p
> 
> 
> 'UPDATE' Zenophobe - i7-4770K @ 4.6 - Gigabyte 290x WF @ 1189 / 1546 - 10879 - Date (01/20/2014) http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2263131
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Why did you have two scores posted, was there some difference I didn't see? Besides the second one being higher?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - - 4770k @ 4.7Ghz - - 780TI classy @ 1411 / 2001Mhz - - 1/21/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2263079
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Slightly lower GPU core clock speed this time. I think I had 1450 for the old score.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What happened to your 290X?


Thanks









It started artifacting at stock settings......sad to see it go but loving the 290's


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What happened to your 290X?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why did you have two scores posted, was there some difference I didn't see? Besides the second one being higher?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Slightly lower GPU core clock speed this time. I think I had 1450 for the old score*.


yeah its weird i cant get clock's as high as i could with my 3770k and oc formula but my gpu score is higher ?


----------



## Durvelle27

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> So with these clocks: http://valid.canardpc.com/2h9567
> 
> I'm getting this score: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2263583
> 
> Thats still not right.


Definitely something wrong

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489786

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489723


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durvelle27*
> 
> Definitely something wrong
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489786
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1489723


Yup, i'm still trying to figure out what though........the Physics test starts out at 30-31 fps then starts jumping up and down all over the place and then at the end it finishes on 30-31 fps again.

Normally when i run it it never fluctuates that much, it hold at a specific fps and stays there throughout the test..........it's making me think that something is unstable (unlikely), I don't have enough power to the CPU (again unlikely) or this is a driver issue for me (Most Likely).

I'll roll back to 13.11 or something tomorrow and see if that helps it out.


----------



## Nittygritty

Update

Nittygritty--i7 4930k @ 4760MHz--GTX 780 @1333/1902--Score 11507--23/01/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2281056


----------



## cam51037

cam51037--i7 2600k @ 4.6GHz--R9 290 @ 1125/1375--9941

Page: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2289812

Validation Image: http://i.imgur.com/mQkeULX.jpg

Hopefully I can figure out R9 overclocking better soon, and get this score over 10k.


----------



## SoloCamo

Update

SoloCamo - FX-9590 @ 4.7ghz (stock) - Sapphire R9 290x @ 1185 / 1475 - 9166 - 24/01/2014


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I've no doubt you can go higher than me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the 9590 should be able to hit 5.2Ghz pretty easy and your 290x looks like a better clocker than mine was so you've got a good chance there


Beat that initial score but now see you have a fast 290 and are running 5ghz on the 8350... thats my next goal I guess









Only changes from my last lower score is that I'm now running 16gb (2x 8gb) of DDR3 2400mhz G.Skill Trident-X @ 2400mhz 10-13-13-28-1T vs my old 8gb of G.Skill Sniper 1866 @ 1866 9-10-9-28-1T

Dropped core clock to 1185 and got a stable overclock on the memory to 1475... Seemed to make quite a difference considering i'm still at the stock 4.7ghz of the 9590


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nittygritty*
> 
> Update
> 
> Nittygritty--i7 4930k @ 4760MHz--GTX 780 @1333/1902--Score 11507--23/01/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2281056
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cam51037*
> 
> cam51037--i7 2600k @ 4.6GHz--R9 290 @ 1125/1375--9941
> 
> Page: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2289812
> 
> Validation Image: http://i.imgur.com/mQkeULX.jpg
> 
> Hopefully I can figure out R9 overclocking better soon, and get this score over 10k.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Update
> 
> SoloCamo - FX-9590 @ 4.7ghz (stock) - Sapphire R9 290x @ 1185 / 1475 - 9166 - 24/01/2014
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beat that initial score but now see you have a fast 290 and are running 5ghz on the 8350... thats my next goal I guess
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only changes from my last lower score is that I'm now running 16gb (2x 8gb) of DDR3 2400mhz G.Skill Trident-X @ 2400mhz 10-13-13-28-1T vs my old 8gb of G.Skill Sniper 1866 @ 1866 9-10-9-28-1T
> 
> Dropped core clock to 1185 and got a stable overclock on the memory to 1475... Seemed to make quite a difference considering i'm still at the stock 4.7ghz of the 9590


----------



## SDhydro

Update

sdhydro - I7 2600k @ 5.4ghz - Asus gtx 780 dc2 @ 1542 / 3348 --- 11826 1/25/14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1604953


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> Update
> 
> sdhydro - I7 2600k @ 5.4ghz - Asus gtx 780 dc2 @ 1542 / 3348 --- 11826 1/25/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1604953
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## yawa

Figured I'd drop this here to say I at least tried with pre-HSA Kaveri.

Kaveri 4.5 Ghz

290X 1051/1308

Score: 7516
Graphics: 11454
Physics: 5077
Combined:2630


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Figured I'd drop this here to say I at least tried with pre-HSA Kaveri.
> 
> Kaveri 4.5 Ghz
> 
> 290X 1051/1308
> 
> Score: 7516
> Graphics: 11454
> Physics: 5077
> Combined:2630


I'm somewhat dissapointed with that Physics score tbh.......i thought the kaveri chips would be at least equal to the FX ones.

Then again, as you say, pre-HSA









Nice score nonetheless


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Figured I'd drop this here to say I at least tried with pre-HSA Kaveri.
> 
> Kaveri 4.5 Ghz
> 
> 290X 1051/1308
> 
> Score: 7516
> Graphics: 11454
> Physics: 5077
> Combined:2630
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm somewhat dissapointed with that Physics score tbh.......i thought the kaveri chips would be at least equal to the FX ones.
> 
> Then again, as you say, pre-HSA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice score nonetheless
Click to expand...

If you compare them to 4 core FX's the physics score is close from what I've seen. Kaveri seems to have an advantage over my 6800k however in physics scores, taking about 400mhz or so more clockspeed to make up the difference. Just from my very limited comparison.


----------



## yawa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> I'm somewhat dissapointed with that Physics score tbh.......i thought the kaveri chips would be at least equal to the FX ones.
> 
> Then again, as you say, pre-HSA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice score nonetheless


Yeah keep in mind there are no HSA drivers available yet, and while 3D Mark may not allow the x86 cores to delegate Physics and FP to the iGPU yet (or ever) a lot of games and other benches will down the road. That is why Kaveri is a recommended option by AMD even if you intend to run something as powerful as a 290X with it.

Personally I'm shocked using nothing but the x86 cores that I broke 5000 considering lack of L3 cache and the such.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Yeah keep in mind there are no HSA drivers available yet, and while 3D Mark may not allow the x86 cores to delegate Physics and FP to the iGPU yet (or ever) a lot of games and other benches will down the road. That is why Kaveri is a recommended option by AMD even if you intend to run something as powerful as a 290X with it.
> 
> Personally I'm shocked using nothing but the x86 cores that I broke 5000 considering lack of L3 cache and the such.


I was considering going Kaveri but I'm happy with my 8350 for the moment, i'm planning to build a new rig for my sis based around it so i might have a bit of a tinker with it then


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Figured I'd drop this here to say I at least tried with pre-HSA Kaveri.
> 
> Kaveri 4.5 Ghz
> 
> 290X 1051/1308
> 
> Score: 7516
> Graphics: 11454
> Physics: 5077
> Combined:2630


If you wanted to submit that for the chart (which would be nice) you need to have your OCN username in the screenshot or in the 3DMark validation.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Yeah keep in mind there are no HSA drivers available yet, and while 3D Mark may not allow the x86 cores to delegate Physics and FP to the iGPU yet (or ever) a lot of games and other benches will down the road. That is why Kaveri is a recommended option by AMD even if you intend to run something as powerful as a 290X with it.
> 
> Personally I'm shocked using nothing but the x86 cores that I broke 5000 considering lack of L3 cache and the such.


yea AMD are edging away from classic x86-64, HSA is the kicker and the standard cpu cores are just meant to be efficient more then powerful, though at 4.5GHz and 5k points that's still notably better then my FX-8150 per-core, really excited for when HSA will start to come more mainstream simply for the fact you have at least 500GFLOPS of power in a "cpu" you can use, though I'm wondering what forms of opteron processors will come...


----------



## mxthunder

'new entry'

mxthunder - 2500k @ 5300 - GTX780Ti @ 1371 / 1935 - 11828
- Date (25/01/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2304240


----------



## cam51037

Well I got my 290 over 10k!

cam51037--i7 2600k @ 4.6GHz--R9 290 @ 1150/1400--10185

3DMark Page: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2304632

Validation Proof: 

Any clocks higher than this get a lower score, oh well I'm happy with 10.1k.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cam51037*
> 
> Well I got my 290 over 10k!
> 
> cam51037--i7 2600k @ 4.6GHz--R9 290 @ 1150/1400--10185
> 
> 3DMark Page: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2304632
> 
> Validation Proof:
> 
> 
> Any clocks higher than this get a lower score, oh well I'm happy with 10.1k.


hows your cooling? it doesn't throttle does it when you OC more? though it could just be the error correction thing jumping in from unstable clocks...


----------



## cam51037

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> hows your cooling? it doesn't throttle does it when you OC more? though it could just be the error correction thing jumping in from unstable clocks...


Don't think it throttles, could quite possible be unstable clock error correction though, I saw a few artifacts in higher runs but thought nothing of them.

Cooling is stock, card doesn't go above 65C in these runs and VRMs are below 60C.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cam51037*
> 
> Don't think it throttles, could quite possible be unstable clock error correction though, I saw a few artifacts in higher runs but thought nothing of them.
> 
> Cooling is stock, card doesn't go above 65C in these runs and VRMs are below 60C.


yea you possibly just need more voltage, though would possibly need better cooling then stock to get much further really, so unless you're interested in watercooling I think you're good where you are...


----------



## Jpmboy

might as well post this air-cooled result:
jpmbpy -- [email protected] --- GTX780 Ti [email protected] 1332/1822 --- 12774

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2310989

(water in a week or so...







)


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Like how it says Kingpin Classified as the description in 3dmark haha!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Like how it says Kingpin Classified as the description in 3dmark haha!


waiting to see the little "circle R" mark next to K|NGP|N soon.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> waiting to see the little "circle R" mark next to K|NGP|N soon.


®


----------



## SDhydro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mxthunder*
> 
> 'new entry'
> 
> mxthunder - 2500k @ 5300 - GTX780Ti @ 1371 / 1935 - 11828
> - Date (25/01/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2304240


Nice score. You beat my 2600k at 5.4ghz and 780 at 1542. Just goes to show the power of the ti along with good memory clocks. My elpida memory doesn't do me any favors. Nice job


----------



## GhostDog99

I will add this it wont gain me a spot but it is a little better

*GhostDog99 -- 4930k @ 4.8GHz -- GTX 780 TI Classified 1425/2150 -- 13793*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1468829

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-4930k-GTX780TI13793.jpg.html


----------



## Farih

Farih - 2600k @ 4900 - 270x @ 1360 / 1550 - 6638

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1558489

Rank 1 !


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Farih*
> 
> Farih - 2600k @ 4900 - 270x @ 1360 / 1550 - 6638
> 
> Rank 1 !


out of all the 270Xs though









still, pretty great clocks you have on that card regardless.


----------



## Farih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> out of all the 270Xs though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> still, pretty great clocks you have on that card regardless.


Well duh, it can hardly beat a 290x or 780ti no matter how high you clock it.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Farih*
> 
> Well duh, it can hardly beat a 290x or 780ti no matter how high you clock it.


but you can still try


----------



## Farih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> but you can still try


I would like to








I hope to get a new card soon and see if i can get this one higher.
Chance to get permanent damage will be rather high though, 1360mhz was allready at 1.35V


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Not an update:



*http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2315362*

Looks like even average Titans are beasts with some voltage!


----------



## zGunBLADEz

7970 @ 1400/2000
GS 11065
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2318249


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> 7970 @ 1400/2000
> GS 11065
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2318249


Thats one hell of a 7970 you got there


----------



## marc0053

marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.0GHz -- GTX 780 Ti Kingpin -- 1269MHz/3815MHz -- score=12457
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2318731


update:
re-ran with k-boost on:
marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.0GHz -- GTX 780 Ti Kingpin -- 1269MHz/3815MHz -- score=12498
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2318798


----------



## Forceman

Sorry for the delay in updating, went away for the weekend.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mxthunder*
> 
> 'new entry'
> 
> mxthunder - 2500k @ 5300 - GTX780Ti @ 1371 / 1935 - 11828
> - Date (25/01/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2304240
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cam51037*
> 
> Well I got my 290 over 10k!
> 
> cam51037--i7 2600k @ 4.6GHz--R9 290 @ 1150/1400--10185
> 
> 3DMark Page: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2304632
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Validation Proof:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any clocks higher than this get a lower score, oh well I'm happy with 10.1k.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> might as well post this air-cooled result:
> jpmbpy -- [email protected] --- GTX780 Ti [email protected] 1332/1822 --- 12774
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2310989
> 
> (water in a week or so...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


I didn't update it, since it is lower than your existing score.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> I will add this it wont gain me a spot but it is a little better
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 4930k @ 4.8GHz -- GTX 780 TI Classified 1425/2150 -- 13793*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1468829
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-4930k-GTX780TI13793.jpg.html











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Farih*
> 
> Farih - 2600k @ 4900 - 270x @ 1360 / 1550 - 6638
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1558489
> 
> Rank 1 !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Not doing 270X's, but nice score nonetheless.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> 7970 @ 1400/2000
> GS 11065
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2318249












Need a screenshot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.0GHz -- GTX 780 Ti Kingpin -- 1269MHz/3815MHz -- score=12457
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2318731
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> update:
> re-ran with k-boost on:
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.0GHz -- GTX 780 Ti Kingpin -- 1269MHz/3815MHz -- score=12498
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2318798












I used the K-boost scores.


----------



## WebTourist

WebTourist - 3770k @ 4.9 - GTX780Ti Classified @ 1435/ 8150 - Score: 13551 - - Date (18/01/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1562263


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Sorry for the delay in updating, went away for the weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I didn't update it, since it is lower than your existing score*.


*Different GPU and CPU*

but it'll be water cooled in a few days...


----------



## Jpmboy

Forceman, how about this... delete my Titan score (tho I still have em) and add this to the chart:

jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX 780 Kingpin ---- 1371/1859 --- 13115 (Air cold







stock volts)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1628844


----------



## cam51037

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Forceman, how about this... delete my Titan score (tho I still have em) and add this to the chart:
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX 780 Kingpin ---- 1371/1859 --- 13115 (Air cold
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stock volts)


Did you do that run outside? I see a minimum of 19C on your GPU and -4C on the CPU. *Share your secrets!!!*


----------



## Jpmboy

freaking cold here... just opened the window in my home office!


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WebTourist*
> 
> WebTourist - 3770k @ 4.9 - GTX780Ti Classified @ 1435/ 8150 - Score: 13551 - - Date (18/01/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1562263
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Nice score.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Forceman, how about this... delete my Titan score (tho I still have em) and add this to the chart:
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX 780 Kingpin ---- 1371/1859 --- 13115 (Air cold
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stock volts)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1628844


I have this one (below) listed for you in the 780 Ti category. You want to remove it and put the new one?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX780 Ti C 1398/1951 --- 13407 --- 27/12/13
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2026817


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cam51037*
> 
> Did you do that run outside? I see a minimum of 19C on your GPU and -4C on the CPU. *Share your secrets!!!*


I get that in winter a lot, and I'm in AU


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice score.
> I have this one (below) listed for you in the 780 Ti category. You want to remove it and put the new one?


Ti Classified and Ti Classified Kingpin. If those are considered the same cards, I withdraw 13115.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Forceman, how about this... delete my Titan score (tho I still have em) and add this to the chart:
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX 780 Kingpin ---- 1371/1859 --- 13115 (Air cold
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stock volts)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1628844


Very nice buddy!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Very nice buddy!


Thx MrTS. Figure once you get busy, we'll be chasing your scores!









Hey - anyway, do you like/see promise with your KPE?


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Thx MrTS. Figure once you get busy, we'll be chasing your scores!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey - anyway, do you like/see promise with your KPE?


this is my KPE at Stock volts and stock LN2 Bios

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/linix2.jpg.html


----------



## GhostDog99

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1476/1975 -- 13838*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1635923

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-3930k-GTX780TI13838.jpg.html


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1476/1975 -- 13838*
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1635923
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-3930k-GTX780TI13838.jpg.html


Yo 'dog... which bios are you using. the new LT bios?


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Yo 'dog... which bios are you using. the new LT bios?


Ya the new bios that strong added in the classy forum


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Ti Classified and Ti Classified Kingpin. If those are considered the same cards, I withdraw 13115.


I've got all the 780 Ti cards in one category, not enough to break them out further.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1476/1975 -- 13838*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1635923
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-3930k-GTX780TI13838.jpg.html












You need to bump the BCLK a percent or two and take 2nd place.


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 780 Ti --- 13948 (1463/2025)
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2349130


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 780 Ti --- 13948 (1463/2025)
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2349130
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Strong move to third overall.


----------



## GhostDog99

*number 2







*

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5.2GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1476 / 2025 -- 13984*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1643876


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Getting closer!









I hope to pull away further when I get going with my card.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Getting closer!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope to pull away further when I get going with my card.


yup second place coming for first

cant wait too see what your card can do mate


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *number 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5.2GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1476 / 2025 -- 13984*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1643876
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


can't let that happen, can I.


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> can't let that happen, can I.


lol get to benching mate









and do some Fire Strike Extreme

I think you can get a better score than what you have there right now

my GPU score is higher than Tooshort

but his CPU score is out of my CPUs retch


----------



## SoloCamo

We need atleast one FX rig with a single gpu to pass 10k here...









Durvelle27 FX-8350 @ 5.2 GTX 780 1330/1804 *9811* 12537 7/1/2014

Sgt Bilko FX-8350 @ 5.05 R9 290 1200/1350 *9282* 12096 20/01/14

SoloCamo FX-9590 @ 4.7 R9 290X 1185/1475 *9166* 12710 24/01/2014

Sgt Bilko FX 8350 @ 4.9 R9 290X 1170/1430 *9011* 12186 16/11/2013

Someone step up their game here


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> We need atleast one FX rig with a single gpu to pass 10k here...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Durvelle27 FX-8350 @ 5.2 GTX 780 1330/1804 *9811* 12537 7/1/2014
> 
> Sgt Bilko FX-8350 @ 5.05 R9 290 1200/1350 *9282* 12096 20/01/14
> 
> SoloCamo FX-9590 @ 4.7 R9 290X 1185/1475 *9166* 12710 24/01/2014
> 
> Sgt Bilko FX 8350 @ 4.9 R9 290X 1170/1430 *9011* 12186 16/11/2013
> 
> Someone step up their game here


I'm working on it.....I've been messing around with Crossfire benches though

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2354996

Thats the fastest AMD CPU based Dual GPU score recorded on 3DMark atm........


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *number 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5.2GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1476 / 2025 -- 13984*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1643876
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Those Kingpins are shaking up the standings.


----------



## SDhydro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those Kingpins are shaking up the standings.


They sure are. Im barely hanging in there at the 30th spot right now with my gtx 780. Sure it wont be for long though...


----------



## Banedox

*New Entry*

banedox - Intel Xeon X5660 @ 4.19ghz - EVGA GTX 780 TI Classified @ 1460 / 1925 - 13075 - 01/31/2014


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> We need atleast one FX rig with a single gpu to pass 10k here...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Durvelle27 FX-8350 @ 5.2 GTX 780 1330/1804 *9811* 12537 7/1/2014
> 
> Sgt Bilko FX-8350 @ 5.05 R9 290 1200/1350 *9282* 12096 20/01/14
> 
> SoloCamo FX-9590 @ 4.7 R9 290X 1185/1475 *9166* 12710 24/01/2014
> 
> Sgt Bilko FX 8350 @ 4.9 R9 290X 1170/1430 *9011* 12186 16/11/2013
> 
> Someone step up their game here


I might get a 290X tomorrow and see how hard I can push everything without a proper water loop, might drain my closed-loop and fill it with distilled too if I can get a bottle and some silver...


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Banedox*
> 
> *New Entry*
> 
> banedox - Intel Xeon X5660 @ 4.19ghz - EVGA GTX 780 TI Classified @ 1460 / 1925 - 13075 - 01/31/2014
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












No 3DMark link and no username in screenshot.


----------



## Wickedtt

Wickedtt-11268p- Intel [email protected] 4.7Ghz- 780 GTX Lightning 1346/1802mhz 2/2/14

I forgot to post it when i did it a few weeks ago but im going to try for 4.8ghz when i get my 360 Rad


----------



## coolhandluke41

coolhandluke41 -- 4770K @4.4GHz







-- GTX 780 Classsy KPE @1411/1976MHz -- 12,856
will get the CPU/RAM up to speed on the next one ,this is just to get on board
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2365579


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wickedtt-11268p- Intel [email protected] 4.7Ghz- 780 GTX Lightning 1346/1802mhz 2/2/14
> 
> I forgot to post it when i did it a few weeks ago but im going to try for 4.8ghz when i get my 360 Rad











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coolhandluke41*
> 
> coolhandluke41 -- 4770K @4.4GHz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- GTX 780 Classsy KPE @1411/1976MHz -- 12,856
> will get the CPU/RAM up to speed on the next one ,this is just to get on board
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2365579
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## coolhandluke41

coolhandluke41 -- 4770K @4.7GHz -- GTX 780 Classsy KPE @1463/1984MHz -- 13,381--02/03/2014
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2369903


My apology Forceman


----------



## marc0053

marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.0GHz - gtx 780 ti KPE - score =13426
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2373603


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coolhandluke41*
> 
> coolhandluke41 -- 4770K @4.7GHz -- GTX 780 Classsy KPE @1463/1984MHz -- 13,381--02/03/2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2369903
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My apology Forceman












No problem. I started putting KPE on the Kingpin cards.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.0GHz - gtx 780 ti KPE - score =13426
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2373603
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












You were missing the username, but your desktop was similar enough to your previous entry I took it.


----------



## GhostDog99

*GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5.1GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1476 / 2050 -- 14012*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1661862

http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-3930k-GTX780TI14012.jpg.html


----------



## Paul17041993

NEW ENTRY

Paul17041993 - [email protected] (stock) 3.6-4.2GHz - [email protected] 1050/1350 - 7685 (11,260 graphics)
- 5/02/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1663473



was likely throttling too, but I'm going to wait till it gets colder before doing any serious overclocking...

edit; forgot the link...


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 3930k @ 5.1GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1476 / 2050 -- 14012*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1661862
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://s213.photobucket.com/user/mhkushi/media/3DMark-3930k-GTX780TI14012.jpg.html












I have to look up the time measurement thing every time, I always forget which is which.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> NEW ENTRY
> 
> Paul17041993 - [email protected] (stock) 3.6-4.2GHz - [email protected] 1050/1350 - 7685 (11,260 graphics)
> - 5/02/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1663473
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> was likely throttling too, but I'm going to wait till it gets colder before doing any serious overclocking...
> 
> edit; forgot the link...












Gotta get that CPU overclocked.

Also, I'll be on vacation for the next week, so no updates until next Wednesday at the earliest.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Gotta get that CPU overclocked.
> 
> Also, I'll be on vacation for the next week, so no updates until next Wednesday at the earliest.


yea, though I'm not sure why the physics is so low, it was ~8k on my 7970, so maby I have the same problem @Sgt Bilko had...
(13.12 drivers fyi)


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have to look up the time measurement thing every time, I always forget which is which.


I thought time measurement was only a problem on windows 8


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> I thought time measurement was only a problem on windows 8


It is, and only time inaccurate is a problem, that's the part I can't ever remember.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> I thought time measurement was only a problem on windows 8


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> It is, and only time inaccurate is a problem, that's the part I can't ever remember.


though windows 8/8.1 is supported by futuremark with the latest futuremark systeminfo versions, whether or not its still easily hackable is another question...


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> though windows 8/8.1 is supported by futuremark with the latest futuremark systeminfo versions, whether or not its still easily hackable is another question...


I don't know I was just say it is something with windows 8
And I'm using windows 7


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> yea, though I'm not sure why the physics is so low, it was ~8k on my 7970, so maby I have the same problem @Sgt Bilko had...
> (13.12 drivers fyi)


EDIT: Update

Sgt Bilko, FX-8350 @ 5.1Ghz, XFX DD R9 290 1200/1500

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1663793



On a side note, i tried 1250/1500 just after this run (http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1664017) and i got a better Physics score with the same clocks (more in line with what it should be) but a lower Graphics score..........This is just weird








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> yea, though I'm not sure why the physics is so low, it was ~8k on my 7970, so maby I have the same problem @Sgt Bilko had...
> (13.12 drivers fyi)


I'm still trying to figure it out myself actually, i'm using the 14.1 beta driver atm but if you see above it seemed to be fine for some reason (even though the GPU clocks went backwards).

Only thing we really have in common besides a 290/x is the CVF........Mobo limitation maybe?


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> yea, though I'm not sure why the physics is so low, it was ~8k on my 7970, so maby I have the same problem @Sgt Bilko had...
> (13.12 drivers fyi)


physics score come's from the CPU


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> -snip-


it could be related to being on stock clocks, so the HT links and NB are only on stock settings, but I wouldn't think that said components could affect the physics that much, must be something funky with how the physics test is run...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> physics score come's from the CPU


currently yes, don't think they will ever use openCL. They should really, at least make a 3rd test for AI or something...


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> EDIT: Update
> 
> Sgt Bilko, FX-8350 @ 5.1Ghz, XFX DD R9 290 1200/1500
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1663793
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a side note, i tried 1250/1500 just after this run (http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1664017) and i got a better Physics score with the same clocks (more in line with what it should be) but a lower Graphics score..........This is just weird
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still trying to figure it out myself actually, i'm using the 14.1 beta driver atm but if you see above it seemed to be fine for some reason (even though the GPU clocks went backwards).
> 
> Only thing we really have in common besides a 290/x is the CVF........Mobo limitation maybe?


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> physics score come's from the CPU


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*


Forceman, you've updated my 290x score opposed to my 290 score









290x score was 9011
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> physics score come's from the CPU


I know, and thats why it's so weird, my CPU/Ram etc were all the same......only thing i changed was my GPU Clocks and that resulted in a Physics score which i should be seeing but a lower Graphics score even though the clocks were higher...


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Forceman, you've updated my 290x score opposed to my 290 score


Whoops, thanks. Fixed.


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Whoops, thanks. Fixed.


No probs, cheers dude


----------



## Jodiuh

13000 GPU score is on target for a 1200 Mhz 780 Ti, right?


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jodiuh*
> 
> 13000 GPU score is on target for a 1200 Mhz 780 Ti, right?


with a good CPU and RAM I would think so, these cards need quite the juice behind them to be kept fed, I think that i5 in your sig would be fast enough...


----------



## Durvelle27

Durvelle27 - i7-4770 @ 4.152GHz - GTX 780 @ 1330/ 1801 - 10,990
- Date (06/02/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1673294


----------



## Mydog

Not to bad for that low CPU clock

Mydog - i7-3960X @ 4.7 GHz - GTX 780 TI Classified @ 1500/ 2036 - 14,072
- Date (07/02/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1678645


----------



## askala2

update

askala2 - i7-4930k @ 4.8 - 780 Ti Classy @ 1359 / 8100 mhz

- Date (02/08/2014)

13129score

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1608649


----------



## yawa

Total aside here but I had to try today. Placed a fan behind the socket on my Kaveri set up. 4.6Ghz on the chip, and 1182/1337 on the 290X

Best score I ever got.

Score: 7966
Graphics: 12592
Physics: 5231
Combined: 2682

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2413009


----------



## marc0053

marc0053-i7 3970x @ 5.27GHz - GTX 780 ti Kinpin @ 1515 MHz / 4010 MHz -- score= 14225 -- Feb 9, 2014
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2414705


----------



## Mr-Mechraven

"New Entry"

Mr-Mechraven - i7 4770K @ 4.50Ghz EVGA GTX 780 FTW Core @ 1254Mhz Memory 1745Mhz SCORE = 10617 ( gpu 12057 cpu 12842 )

09/02/2014

Using second BIOS Flashed to Skyn3t's latest version. Originally the core was 980 Mhz with memory 1502 Mhz so i think i have pushed this card about as hard as it will go, not bad considering









http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2418273


----------



## Mr-Mechraven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Mechraven*
> 
> Can i be added
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr-Mechraven i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz - HD7970 = Score = *8031* --- 08/10/13
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1358058?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite what you see the score is for a 7970 not a 280X lol 3DMark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit : second screenshot added showing correct gpu, i think 3dmark is working now lol.


Was also wondering why my score previously has been removed from 7970 list ???


----------



## mxthunder

'update'

mxthunder - 3770k @ 5000 - GTX780Ti @ 1356 / 1888 - 12343
- Date (25/01/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1696558


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durvelle27*
> 
> Durvelle27 - i7-4770 @ 4.152GHz - GTX 780 @ 1330/ 1801 - 10,990
> - Date (06/02/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1673294












I took it as an update since the user name was on the 3DMark link, but in the future include a screenshot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Not to bad for that low CPU clock
> 
> Mydog - i7-3960X @ 4.7 GHz - GTX 780 TI Classified @ 1500/ 2036 - 14,072
> - Date (07/02/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1678645












I've been lenient with updates, but I'm going to have to insist on a full screenshot for the new top score.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *askala2*
> 
> update
> 
> askala2 - i7-4930k @ 4.8 - 780 Ti Classy @ 1359 / 8100 mhz
> 
> - Date (02/08/2014)
> 
> 13129score
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1608649
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












I'll take it for an update, but need a username on the screenshot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Total aside here but I had to try today. Placed a fan behind the socket on my Kaveri set up. 4.6Ghz on the chip, and 1182/1337 on the 290X
> 
> Best score I ever got.
> 
> Score: 7966
> Graphics: 12592
> Physics: 5231
> Combined: 2682
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2413009
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053-i7 3970x @ 5.27GHz - GTX 780 ti Kinpin @ 1515 MHz / 4010 MHz -- score= 14225 -- Feb 9, 2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2414705












Same, no username.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Mechraven*
> 
> "New Entry"
> 
> Mr-Mechraven - i7 4770K @ 4.50Ghz EVGA GTX 780 FTW Core @ 1254Mhz Memory 1745Mhz SCORE = 10617 ( gpu 12057 cpu 12842 )
> 
> 09/02/2014
> 
> Using second BIOS Flashed to Skyn3t's latest version. Originally the core was 980 Mhz with memory 1502 Mhz so i think i have pushed this card about as hard as it will go, not bad considering
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2418273
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Mechraven*
> 
> Was also wondering why my score previously has been removed from 7970 list ???


Not sure, do you have a link to the post?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mxthunder*
> 
> 'update'
> 
> mxthunder - 3770k @ 5000 - GTX780Ti @ 1356 / 1888 - 12343
> - Date (25/01/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1696558
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Not to bad for that low CPU clock
> 
> Mydog - i7-3960X @ 4.7 GHz - GTX 780 TI Classified @ 1500/ 2036 - 14,072
> - Date (07/02/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1678645


Congrats Mydog! Excellent run ....


----------



## Mr-Mechraven

Forceman - The original HD7970 run i did was on page 7 of this thread.









http://www.overclock.net/t/1406832/single-gpu-firestrike-top-30/120_20


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Mechraven*
> 
> Forceman - The original HD7970 run i did was on page 7 of this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1406832/single-gpu-firestrike-top-30/120_20


Not sure what happened, but I put the score back in.


----------



## marc0053

marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.25GHz - GTX 780 ti Kingpin - 1515MHz/ 4010MHz - score = 14221
February 15, 2014
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2459720


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.25GHz - GTX 780 ti Kingpin - 1515MHz/ 4010MHz - score = 14221
> February 15, 2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2459720
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.25GHz - GTX 780 ti Kingpin - 1515MHz/ 4010MHz - score = 14221
> February 15, 2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2459720


whoa - how much juice you giving that KPE? CPUz has no idea what's going on...


----------



## marc0053

marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5,315GHz - GTX 780 ti Kingpin - 1529MHz - 4016MHz - score = 14340
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1725358

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> whoa - how much juice you giving that KPE? CPUz has no idea what's going on...


classy voltage tool was set at 1.425V for each of these runs.
I tried 1.45V in 3dmark 11 but it didn't improve core clocks.


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.25GHz - GTX 780 ti Kingpin - 1515MHz/ 4010MHz - score = 14221
> February 15, 2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2459720


Nice! Your gpu score is not that far apart from Strong's gpu score on Ln2.
Not sure why. But, Congrats!


----------



## mxthunder

'update'

mxthunder - 3770k @ 5000 - GTX780Ti @ 1366 / 1938 - 12507
- Date (17/02/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2480993


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.25GHz - GTX 780 ti Kingpin - 1515MHz/ 4010MHz - score = 14221
> February 15, 2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2459720


Sorry Marc









I got 10 C inside with two big windows open, GPU idles at 10 C (Stock) before adding OC.

Mydog - i7 3960x @ 5.1GHz - GTX 780 ti Classified - 1519MHz/ 4014MHz - score = 14302

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1738521


----------



## marc0053

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Sorry Marc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got 10 C inside with two big windows open, GPU idles at 10 C (Stock) before adding OC.
> 
> Mydog - i7 3960x @ 5.1GHz - GTX 780 ti Classified - 1519MHz/ 4014MHz - score = 14302
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1738521


Great score Mydog!!
That's an awesome score you got there








Playing with the outside cold is real fun.
I guess my latest score on post 990 hasn't been update








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5,315GHz - GTX 780 ti Kingpin - 1529MHz - 4016MHz - score = 14340
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1725358
> 
> classy voltage tool was set at 1.425V for each of these runs.
> I tried 1.45V in 3dmark 11 but it didn't improve core clocks


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> Great score Mydog!!
> That's an awesome score you got there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Playing with the outside cold is real fun.
> I guess my latest score on post 990 hasn't been update


Damn I didn't see that one









So you got me still, great score
















OK, back to the drawing board


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

BURN!









Nice scores guys!


----------



## Mydog

Now I really hope you don't have a backup score to kill this one with.









Mydog - i7 3960x @ 5.205GHz - GTX 780 ti Classified - 1519MHz/ 4028MHz - score = 14374

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1738790


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Double BURN!









Any triples?


----------



## marc0053

Hahaha good job








I won't be benchmarking for a little while now and no I don't have anymore surprise scores hidden anywhere








Congratz once again!


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> Hahaha good job
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I won't be benchmarking for a little while now and no I don't have anymore surprise scores hidden anywhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Congratz once again!


Thanks









I know you'll be back to beat me with that killer 780 Ti KPE you got


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Double BURN!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any triples?


...plus a 3000w microwave w/ those chaps







...congrats Mydog and Marc0053


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mxthunder*
> 
> 'update'
> 
> mxthunder - 3770k @ 5000 - GTX780Ti @ 1366 / 1938 - 12507
> - Date (17/02/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2480993
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5,315GHz - GTX 780 ti Kingpin - 1529MHz - 4016MHz - score = 14340
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1725358
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classy voltage tool was set at 1.425V for each of these runs.
> I tried 1.45V in 3dmark 11 but it didn't improve core clocks.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Now I really hope you don't have a backup score to kill this one with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mydog - i7 3960x @ 5.205GHz - GTX 780 ti Classified - 1519MHz/ 4028MHz - score = 14374
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1738790
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












You guys are killing it with those Kingpins and your cold weather.


----------



## Yungbenny911

Yungbenny911 - i7 3770k @ 4.9GHz - GTX 770 - 1424MHz - 2028MHz - score = 8533

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1756290


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Nice! Your gpu score is not that far apart from Strong's gpu score on Ln2.
> Not sure why. But, Congrats!


Not to sound mean but it's not even close, they are over 2000 points apart. I broke 18000 gpu score. I should finally enter my submission

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1734651



strong island 1 - 4930k @ 4.8ghz - GTX780Ti KINGPIN @ 1855core / 7200mem - 15868
- Date (23/02/2014)


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1734651
> GTX780Ti KINGPIN @ *1855core / 7200mem*


uh, you mean 1765/1750...?


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> uh, you mean 1765/1750...?


Only if you believe futuremark, & they are wrong on the clocks more than 50% of the time.

Great score strong, #3 in the world for firestrike, you know you're doing it right when 8 pack & kingpin are the only ones ahead of you!


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Only if you believe futuremark, & they are wrong on the clocks more than 50% of the time.
> 
> Great score strong, #3 in the world for firestrike, you know you're doing it right when 8 pack & kingpin are the only ones ahead of you!


confuses me as its in record territory, the details on the page seemed too close to be wrong and there's also no picture or GPU-Z of said clocks either, so I could only assume hes either correct or made a typo...


----------



## FtW 420

You can see some of his work here http://www.overclock.net/t/188400/overclock-net-hwbot-team/1450_50#post_21839847

Valley & hwbot heaven at 1800mhz + so firestrike too isn't a stretch, & 18k gpu score is pretty insane!


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> Yungbenny911 - i7 3770k @ 4.9GHz - GTX 770 - 1424MHz - 2028MHz - score = 8533
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1756290
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












I merged the GTX 770 and GTX 680 pages, since there were only 2 of each.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> Not to sound mean but it's not even close, they are over 2000 points apart. I broke 18000 gpu score. I should finally enter my submission
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1734651
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> strong island 1 - 4930k @ 4.8ghz - GTX780Ti KINGPIN @ 1855core / 7200mem - 15868
> - Date (23/02/2014)












I like how the screenshot says "45% of results are lower than your score". Oh, is that all?


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> uh, you mean 1765/1750...?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Only if you believe futuremark, & they are wrong on the clocks more than 50% of the time.
> 
> Great score strong, #3 in the world for firestrike, you know you're doing it right when 8 pack & kingpin are the only ones ahead of you!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> You can see some of his work here http://www.overclock.net/t/188400/overclock-net-hwbot-team/1450_50#post_21839847
> 
> Valley & hwbot heaven at 1800mhz + so firestrike too isn't a stretch, & 18k gpu score is pretty insane!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I merged the GTX 770 and GTX 680 pages, since there were only 2 of each.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like how the screenshot says "45% of results are lower than your score". Oh, is that all?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paul17041993*
> 
> confuses me as its in record territory, the details on the page seemed too close to be wrong and there's also no picture or GPU-Z of said clocks either, so I could only assume hes either correct or made a typo...


Thanks guys. I have all my screenshots saved that shows the core clock but I am at work now. I posted them all that night in the kingpin club. I definitely hit 1855core. I did so many runs and this was my highest score. I was so excited that night that I mixed up my screenshots a little bit.

This run was from last weekend. My new scores this weekend were a second kingpin i tested and it doesn't seem as fast as the first so I was hitting 1800 in valley. if my first one can do 1850 in firestrike it could probably do even better in valley. I wanted to know which was faster to match up with a cpu pot. I usually get better clocks in valley then firestrike.


----------



## strong island 1

here is a screenshot showing the 1855 run but this was at stock memory. i got another run in with about 250more on the memory to get the score i posted. I put 7200mem because I am not positive about the mem speed. I would have no problme using this score instead but that first score is definitely mine.


----------



## yknot

Not going to trouble Strong, Marc or Mydog but worth a post.........

yknot ..........3960X 5.4 (Phase change).....EK watercooled EVGA 780Ti Classified 1455 / 2150 Score 14188.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2307203


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> Not going to trouble Strong, Marc or Mydog but worth a post.........
> 
> yknot ..........3960X 5.4 (Phase change).....EK watercooled EVGA 780Ti Classified 1455 / 2150 Score 14188.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2307203


that's an awesome score. not easy to break 14k. That's also an insane memory overclock. 8.6ghz. I want to try a non kingpin ti on ln2 so badly to see how they perform and if the mem can still oc that good.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> Not going to trouble Strong, Marc or Mydog but worth a post.........
> 
> yknot ..........3960X 5.4 (Phase change).....EK watercooled EVGA 780Ti Classified 1455 / 2150 Score 14188.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2307203


Really nice score, but needs a screenshot/username to be charted.


----------



## yknot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Really nice score, but needs a screenshot/username to be charted.


Sorry about the screen but my user "yknot" on the first line, is that not enough............?

I assume by screen you mean a full screen capture on the rig being benched?

After work I'll try again


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> Sorry about the screen but my user "yknot" on the first line, is that not enough............?
> 
> I assume by screen you mean a full screen capture on the rig being benched?
> 
> After work I'll try again


Hwbot style screen, the score window with the username (text file) at least for this thread, better with cpu-z main & memory tabs & a gpu-z window.


----------



## yknot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Hwbot style screen, the score window with the username (text file) at least for this thread, better with cpu-z main & memory tabs & a gpu-z window.


Thanx..........got it.


----------



## yknot

yknot ..........3960X 5.4 (Phase change).....EK watercooled EVGA 780Ti Classified 1455 / 2150 Score 14188.



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2307203








.....







.........


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> Not to sound mean but it's not even close, they are over 2000 points apart. I broke 18000 gpu score. I should finally enter my submission
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1734651
> 
> 
> 
> strong island 1 - 4930k @ 4.8ghz - GTX780Ti KINGPIN @ 1855core / 7200mem - 15868
> - Date (23/02/2014)


that is... some sort of unworldly stuff there... good lord!

EDIT...

After looking at the HOF... How did a guy with a 4770k and a 780 beat TI's with 6 cores.


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> After looking at the HOF... How did a guy with a 4770k and a 780 beat TI's with 6 cores.


render calls can only be in the one thread, so if the cores were clocked hard enough that's quite possible...


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> that is... some sort of unworldly stuff there... good lord!
> 
> EDIT...
> 
> After looking at the HOF... How did a guy with a 4770k and a 780 beat TI's with 6 cores.


Bugged scores in the HOF, hwbot is better to see actual results. The 4770k with 780 wasn't actually beating the Ti's with 6 cores.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> Bugged scores in the HOF, hwbot is better to see actual results. The 4770k with 780 wasn't actually beating the Ti's with 6 cores.


Thats what I figured... As soon as I hunt down my phase change or get my LD-V10 R I will be coming on with my 780 LOL.


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> that is... some sort of unworldly stuff there... good lord!
> 
> EDIT...
> 
> After looking at the HOF... How did a guy with a 4770k and a 780 beat TI's with 6 cores.


ya it was the best night of overclocking I ever had. I never had so much fun. I'm still thinking about it over a week later. I can't wait until this weekend my cpu pot should be here.


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Thats what I figured... As soon as I hunt down my phase change or get my LD-V10 R I will be coming on with my 780 LOL.


It's tough to keep up with the Ti's using a 780, I've been trying...


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> yknot ..........3960X 5.4 (Phase change).....EK watercooled EVGA 780Ti Classified 1455 / 2150 Score 14188.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2307203
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .........


----------



## error-id10t

Just cause I cracked 13K which made me happy.

error-id10t - 4770K @ 4700MHz - 780 TI Classy @ 1398 / 1975 - 13025 - 27/02/14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1784885


----------



## PedroC1999

Hey Guys,

Thanks Forceman for the great work your doing!

Im personally downloading Firestrike now, hope to get some benches of my CPU @ 5Ghz with my GPU @ 1200/1800


----------



## pharma57

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> ya it was the best night of overclocking I ever had. I never had so much fun. I'm still thinking about it over a week later. I can't wait until this weekend my cpu pot should be here.


Congrats on the really fantastic sessions and HOF scores!







It's been some time coming but you are definitely in "elite overclocking" company. Look forward to your future HOF scores and seeing your "dust start to drift in their faces".


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *error-id10t*
> 
> Just cause I cracked 13K which made me happy.
> 
> error-id10t - 4770K @ 4700MHz - 780 TI Classy @ 1398 / 1975 - 13025 - 27/02/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1784885
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## marc0053

marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.3GHz - GTX 780 Ti Kingpin - 1515MHz / 4016MHz - 14450 - February 28, 2014
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1789835


----------



## PINKTULIPS7

I am having low 3DMARK Score!!!!


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.3GHz - GTX 780 Ti Kingpin - 1515MHz / 4016MHz - 14450 - February 28, 2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1789835


I knew you'd be back with a killer score








My 3960X can't match your 3970X


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.3GHz - GTX 780 Ti Kingpin - 1515MHz / 4016MHz - 14450 - February 28, 2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1789835


wow, amazing score. are you using the looser timing bios to get 8000mhz on the memory or is that with the xoc bios?


----------



## marc0053

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> I knew you'd be back with a killer score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 3960X can't match your 3970X


Thanks Mydog but your just 75 points away from my score and I think your video card has more potential than my kingpin.
Winter weather is almost over in my area so I doubt I can get much better than this.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> wow, amazing score. are you using the looser timing bios to get 8000mhz on the memory or is that with the xoc bios?


I'm using Skyn3t's latest version 5 bios with no boost and loose timings.
I think valley scores would improve even more if there was another bios with looser timings than this one.
I did see small improvements in 3mark, valley and haven using the loose timing bios.
Looking forward to see some more LN2 results when you get your cpu pot


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Damn you marc, you make me spend more money!


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> Thanks Mydog but your just 75 points away from my score and I think your video card has more potential than my kingpin.
> Winter weather is almost over in my area so I doubt I can get much better than this.


Winter seem to be over here to, been +4-5 C here the last three weeks.








And forecast has no subzero temps in sight.


----------



## Chronic1

Chronic1 - i7 3770K @ 4.95Ghz - 780ti ref. Nvidia @ 1376 / 1875 - 12419
- Date (28/02/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2559339


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> marc0053 - i7 3970x @ 5.3GHz - GTX 780 Ti Kingpin - 1515MHz / 4016MHz - 14450 - February 28, 2014
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1789835
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chronic1*
> 
> Chronic1 - i7 3770K @ 4.95Ghz - 780ti ref. Nvidia @ 1376 / 1875 - 12419
> - Date (28/02/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2559339
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## mxthunder

'update'

mxthunder - 3770k @ 5000 - GTX780Ti @ 1376 / 1943 - 12635
- Date (1/03/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2573486


----------



## PINKTULIPS7




----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mxthunder*
> 
> 'update'
> 
> mxthunder - 3770k @ 5000 - GTX780Ti @ 1376 / 1943 - 12635
> - Date (1/03/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2573486
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PINKTULIPS7*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












You need to follow the submission guidelines in the first post.


----------



## SDhydro

SDhydro - 2600k @ 5,4ghz - GTX780Ti KPE @ 1751 / 3726 - 14595

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1810103


----------



## Yungbenny911

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> SDhydro - 2600k @ 5,4ghz - GTX780Ti KPE @ 1751 / 3726 - 14595
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1810103


OH... My.... Word.... :O. That is Amazing!!!







. I can't wait to get my hands on Ln2 in future







. My OC on my 770 looks pitiful compared to yours lol. Mine is cooled with a Corsair H55 in push-pull though









*Yungbenny911 - i7 3770k @ 4.9GHz - MSI Gaming GTX 770 - 1476MHz - 1978MHz - score = 8664*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1810204


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> SDhydro - 2600k @ 5,4ghz - GTX780Ti KPE @ 1751 / 3726 - 14595
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1810103


imagine that with a sb-e or ib-e


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> SDhydro - 2600k @ 5,4ghz - GTX780Ti KPE @ 1751 / 3726 - 14595
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1810103











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> OH... My.... Word.... :O. That is Amazing!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I can't wait to get my hands on Ln2 in future
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . My OC on my 770 looks pitiful compared to yours lol. Mine is cooled with a Corsair H55 in push-pull though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Yungbenny911 - i7 3770k @ 4.9GHz - MSI Gaming GTX 770 - 1476MHz - 1978MHz - score = 8664*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1810204
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Delete please


----------



## Blue Dragon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> *UPDATE PLEASE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> HOMECINEMA-PC [email protected]@2428 CF WB R9 [email protected]@1500 *18636* Tess ON
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1835921


it is suppose to be for a single GPU, not crossfire. sweet score though


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blue Dragon*
> 
> it is suppose to be for a single GPU, not crossfire. sweet score though


LOOOOOOOL









Wrong thread


----------



## GhostDog99

GhostDog99 -- 4930K @ 5.6GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1815 / 7100 -- Score 15543

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1834264


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> GhostDog99 -- 4930K @ 5.6GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1815 / 7100 -- Score 15543
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1834264


Dear... Lord


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> GhostDog99 -- 4930K @ 5.6GHz -- GTX 780 TI KPE 1815 / 7100 -- Score 15543
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1834264
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Yikes. Surprised that CPU speed didn't put you into first.


----------



## pharma57

Amazing clocks and score GhostDog99!









It's really fun to see back and forth competition with the Classifieds.


----------



## GhostDog99

Thanks guys
I have a Better score but will still be in 2 place
15729 or so


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yikes. Surprised that CPU speed didn't put you into first.


That was my first words to him...

Just for reference... The top 3 scores are faster than stock 780s in SLI and a stock 3930k LOL


----------



## taem

Taem -- 4670k @ 4.7 -- Powercolor PCS+ R9 290 1200 core, 1500 mem -- score 10362


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1740273

Durn it I never make these threads early enough to earn a temporary place in the charts.


----------



## SDhydro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> Thanks guys
> I have a Better score but will still be in 2 place
> 15729 or so


Where the pics at


----------



## GhostDog99

*GhostDog99 -- 4930k @ 5.6GHz -- GTX 780 Ti KPE 1815 / 7200 -- Score 15729*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1834952


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *taem*
> 
> Taem -- 4670k @ 4.7 -- Powercolor PCS+ R9 290 1200 core, 1500 mem -- score 10362
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1740273
> 
> Durn it I never make these threads early enough to earn a temporary place in the charts.












You need a full screenshot with your OCN username visible, or the OCN username in the 3DMark link.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 4930k @ 5.6GHz -- GTX 780 Ti KPE 1815 / 7200 -- Score 15729*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1834952
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## yknot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *GhostDog99*
> 
> *GhostDog99 -- 4930k @ 5.6GHz -- GTX 780 Ti KPE 1815 / 7200 -- Score 15729*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1834952
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
Click to expand...

Great score there Ghostdog99.

It seems that from reading the first page that Firestrike likes the graphics ram to clock well. I don't want to start an "E-peen" trail but some high core clocks do not get in the top five because their ram is not breaking the 2k value...........

OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS MORE TO IT THAN THAT BUT..........................


----------



## GhostDog99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> Great score there Ghostdog99.
> 
> It seems that from reading the first page that Firestrike likes the graphics ram to clock well. I don't want to start an "E-peen" trail but some high core clocks do not get in the top five because their ram is not breaking the 2k value...........
> 
> OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS MORE TO IT THAN THAT BUT..........................


No ther is not really more than that you are 100% right
To get in the top 5 you will need to find a way to get a good OC on the memory
Or someway to get a really really high core clock like 1950 - 2000


----------



## Kold

New Entry
Kold - 4770K @ 4.6GHz - 780 Ti Classified @ 1385/7800 - 12735 - 03/08/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1830380

EDIT:

Just wanted to note something interesting I noticed. For the longest time, I have always just used the single cable with two 6+2 pin connectors to cut down on cable management issues(Corsair AX760). I recently upgraded to some Corsair Metallic Grey Sleeved cables and decided to use two separate 6+2 pin connectors.

It has boosted my score around 100-125 points at all clock speeds.

EDIT 2:

Oops forgot to post the picture!


----------



## Paul17041993

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kold*
> 
> New Entry
> Kold - 4770K @ 4.6GHz - 780 Ti Classified @ 1385/7800 - 12735 - 03/08/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1830380
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Just wanted to note something interesting I noticed. For the longest time, I have always just used the single cable with two 6+2 pin connectors to cut down on cable management issues(Corsair AX760). I recently upgraded to some Corsair Metallic Grey Sleeved cables and decided to use two separate 6+2 pin connectors.
> 
> It has boosted my score around 100-125 points at all clock speeds.
> 
> EDIT 2:
> 
> Oops forgot to post the picture!


regulation throttle/instability, you essentially were creating additional vdroop by using only one cable.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kold*
> 
> New Entry
> Kold - 4770K @ 4.6GHz - 780 Ti Classified @ 1385/7800 - 12735 - 03/08/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1830380
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Just wanted to note something interesting I noticed. For the longest time, I have always just used the single cable with two 6+2 pin connectors to cut down on cable management issues(Corsair AX760). I recently upgraded to some Corsair Metallic Grey Sleeved cables and decided to use two separate 6+2 pin connectors.
> 
> It has boosted my score around 100-125 points at all clock speeds.
> 
> EDIT 2:
> 
> Oops forgot to post the picture!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Man, you guys are hitting some crazy memory clocks.


----------



## Kold

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Man, you guys are hitting some crazy memory clocks.


That score was with skyn3t boost disabled bios and voltage around 1.3v. With stock voltage on the stock ln2 bios, stable for me is only 1270mhz.

Edit: And I just saw you said memory lol. 7800 has no issues, but 8000 has green artifacts everywhere. I haven't even bothered to see how far it can go past 7800 but before 8000.


----------



## h2spartan

Can anyone tell me what a stock clocked with turbo enabled 4930k should be getting in firestrike for the physics score?


----------



## Jpmboy

Update please.
jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX780Ti Kingpin --- 1502/3878 -- 14075
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2675561


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Update please.
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTX780Ti Kingpin --- 1502/3878 -- 14075
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2675561
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Silent Scone

Here is my EVGA Reference 780Ti score

CPU 4960 @ 4.8Ghz

780Ti @ 1356/1900

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2665983?

Note: I have read the rules unfortunately this run was done for another forum. I do not have a screenshot unfortunately! The Futuremark username does however match my OCN name


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Here is my EVGA Reference 780Ti score
> 
> CPU 4960 @ 4.8Ghz
> 
> 780Ti @ 1356/1900
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2665983?
> 
> Note: I have read the rules unfortunately this run was done for another forum. I do not have a screenshot unfortunately! The Futuremark username does however match my OCN name












I'll take it.


----------



## yknot

Hope this is within the rules............

yknot..........4930 @ 5300.......EVGA 780Ti Classified..........1480 / 2125.....Score 14511

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2802824


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> Hope this is within the rules............
> 
> yknot..........4930 @ 5300.......EVGA 780Ti Classified..........1480 / 2125.....Score 14511
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2802824


Do you have any pics of your setup?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> Hope this is within the rules............
> 
> yknot..........4930 @ 5300.......EVGA 780Ti Classified..........1480 / 2125.....Score 14511
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2802824
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## yknot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Do you have any pics of your setup?


I'll post a pic if you want but it's not very pretty........I'm using a Dimastech bench and chiller (badly lagged) with a Phase unit strapped on as well.









Aesthetics is not a good word to me.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> I'll post a pic if you want but it's not very pretty........I'm using a Dimastech bench and chiller (badly lagged) with a Phase unit strapped on as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aesthetics is not a good word to me.


Hahahaha I understand that. If I dont mind my setup, then it looks like a bomb went off. I was asking cause I see you use a Phase. I'm getting ready to get me one When HW-E launches, so I'm always curious as to how people like them, have them setup... etc


----------



## yknot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> I'll post a pic if you want but it's not very pretty........I'm using a Dimastech bench and chiller (badly lagged) with a Phase unit strapped on as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aesthetics is not a good word to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hahahaha I understand that. If I dont mind my setup, then it looks like a bomb went off. I was asking cause I see you use a Phase. I'm getting ready to get me one When HW-E launches, so I'm always curious as to how people like them, have them setup... etc
Click to expand...

I'm very happy with my Phase Change. It's a unit made for me by a well known builder (not sure if I'm allowed to publish his name). I think it's a good one because it can maintain -40C+ for the two to three hours of benching I do. It's not in the same class as LN2 or a cascade of course but it has not let me down for over two years now ....................cue evaporator meltdown as I publish this







.

Obviously mbd preparation, and space for the Phase unit are an issue in a small room but I manage OK.


----------



## treome

I need to get to 10 000 graphics score! So close...


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yknot*
> 
> I'm very happy with my Phase Change. It's a unit made for me by a well known builder (not sure if I'm allowed to publish his name). I think it's a good one because it can maintain -40C+ for the two to three hours of benching I do. It's not in the same class as LN2 or a cascade of course but it has not let me down for over two years now ....................cue evaporator meltdown as I publish this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Obviously mbd preparation, and space for the Phase unit are an issue in a small room but I manage OK.


I'm actually getting a LD Coolilng PC-V10 Reverse case with it built in there. I dont think there are any issues with saying who made it as long as you aren't promoting them.


----------



## treome

I would like to be added to the list but I'm not sure if I qualify.

treome - 4770k @ 4.6 --- [email protected] 1230 / 1820 --- score 8871
- Date (08/04/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2833904


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *treome*
> 
> I would like to be added to the list but I'm not sure if I qualify.
> 
> treome - 4770k @ 4.6 --- [email protected] 1230 / 1820 --- score 8871
> - Date (08/04/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2833904
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## treome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*


Updated--

treome - 4770k @ 4.6 --- [email protected] 1230 / 1975 --- score 9025
- Date (09/04/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2842045


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *treome*
> 
> Updated--
> 
> treome - 4770k @ 4.6 --- [email protected] 1230 / 1975 --- score 9025
> - Date (09/04/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2842045
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## kirk007

New entry

kirk007 --- 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- 780Ti Classified HC @ 1461/2110 --- Score 13565 --- Date 04/10/14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1995191


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kirk007*
> 
> New entry
> 
> kirk007 --- 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- 780Ti Classified HC @ 1461/2110 --- Score 13565 --- Date 04/10/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1995191
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## bond32

Need an update on mine.

bond32 --- 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- R9 290X @ 1270/1615 --- Score 12016 --- Date 05/08/14

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3028227?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bond32*
> 
> Need an update on mine.
> 
> bond32 --- 4770k @ 4.8ghz --- R9 290X @ 1270/1615 --- Score 12016 --- Date 05/08/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3028227?


----------



## vuldin

New Entry

vuldin - i7-4790 @ 3.6GHz - R9290X @ 1100MHz / 1350MHz - 9851 - 26/05/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2194055



This my first attempt at getting some benchmark scores, so I'll likely be updating this in the near future once I've done more testing. All I've done is increased the GPU voltage, then the GPU clock from the stock 1050MHz to 1100MHz (this card is the Asus DirectCU II OC which comes overclocked). What's interesting is that I received lower scores when I tried increasing the GPU memory clock.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vuldin*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> vuldin - i7-4790 @ 3.6GHz - R9290X @ 1100MHz / 1350MHz - 9851 - 26/05/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2194055
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This my first attempt at getting some benchmark scores, so I'll likely be updating this in the near future once I've done more testing. All I've done is increased the GPU voltage, then the GPU clock from the stock 1050MHz to 1100MHz (this card is the Asus DirectCU II OC which comes overclocked). What's interesting is that I received lower scores when I tried increasing the GPU memory clock.












You may need to increase the core voltage a touch with the higher memory overclocks. Otherwise you can get errors that the error correction has to correct, which causes lower scores.


----------



## vuldin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You may need to increase the core voltage a touch with the higher memory overclocks. Otherwise you can get errors that the error correction has to correct, which causes lower scores.


Thanks for the tip! I'll post with updates once I get some better scores.


----------



## vuldin

I've made some changes to my build (replaced the motherboard), installed the latest 14.6 beta drivers, and may have improved my overclocking a little focusing on both GPU core and memory. My scores are much better now at 10106 / 11950.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3165778

This shouldn't update my current score though, as the 14.6 beta drivers aren't approved drivers for this benchmark according to 3dmark. I just thought I'd post to say that it's likely the new drivers which are giving me better performance.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vuldin*
> 
> I've made some changes to my build (replaced the motherboard), installed the latest 14.6 beta drivers, and may have improved my overclocking a little focusing on both GPU core and memory. My scores are much better now at 10106 / 11950.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3165778
> 
> This shouldn't update my current score though, as the 14.6 beta drivers aren't approved drivers for this benchmark according to 3dmark. I just thought I'd post to say that it's likely the new drivers which are giving me better performance.


Non-approved drivers are acceptable, as long as there aren't any other validation issues.


----------



## vuldin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Non-approved drivers are acceptable, as long as there aren't any other validation issues.


Ahh that's good to know. I'll do more testing then and see if I can get an improvement that will actually move me up in the list from my previous score


----------



## blackRott9

My CPU ruins my overall score and I did manage to break 10k GPU. If need to make adjustments, let me know, and I will make them. This is with Cat 14.6, which is not approved.

blackRott9 --- FX-6300 @ 4.9GHz --- HD 7970 @ 1290|1700 --- Score 7892 --- Date 05/31/14

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3167044


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blackRott9*
> 
> My CPU ruins my overall score and I did manage to break 10k GPU. If need to make adjustments, let me know, and I will make them. This is with Cat 14.6, which is not approved.
> 
> blackRott9 --- FX-6300 @ 4.9GHz --- HD 7970 @ 1290|1700 --- Score 7892 --- Date 05/31/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3167044


your graphics score is very close to a stock reference 290. nice.


----------



## blackRott9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> your graphics score is very close to a stock reference 290. nice.


When I ran the bench I posted the card was @ +50% power limit, 1.287 voltage and 1290|1700.

I did an edit on the BIOS for my ref 7970 with VBE7.0.0.7b. I increased power from 217 to 300, I opened up the CCC's OC limits to 1300|1700, I increased possible power limit from +20% to +50% and I set its default voltage to 1.237. That's good for a 1230|1630 24/7 OC. With Trixx, if I increase its voltage to 1.287, I can now get the card to hit 1290|1700. I may be able to get more out the card with the edited BIOS and I've not pushed it harder yet. I'm in an experimentation stage. I don't know if it matters, but I do not use Aero with Win 7.


----------



## bond32

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blackRott9*
> 
> When I ran the bench I posted the card was @ +50% power limit, 1.287 voltage and 1290|1700.
> 
> I did an edit on the BIOS for my ref 7970 with VBE7.0.0.7b. I increased power from 217 to 300, I opened up the CCC's OC limits to 1300|1700, I increased possible power limit from +20% to +50% and I set its default voltage to 1.237. That's good for a 1230|1630 24/7 OC. With Trixx, if I increase its voltage to 1.287, I can now get the card to hit 1290|1700. I may be able to get more out the card with the edited BIOS and I've not pushed it harder yet. I'm in an experimentation stage. I don't know if it matters, but I do not use Aero with Win 7.


Agreed, you got a solid card. Nice work!


----------



## blackRott9

Thanks, guys









I've decided I'm not going to raise the voltage in the BIOS any higher than 1.237 (It was 1.175). That's fine for 1230|1630 from the CCC. When I want to run it at higher clocks, I'll use Trixx.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blackRott9*
> 
> My CPU ruins my overall score and I did manage to break 10k GPU. If need to make adjustments, let me know, and I will make them. This is with Cat 14.6, which is not approved.
> 
> blackRott9 --- FX-6300 @ 4.9GHz --- HD 7970 @ 1290|1700 --- Score 7892 --- Date 05/31/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3167044
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## nickolp1974

Didn't take a screenie when i did this but the important bits are there

Score 13410
Gfx 14925
Phyx 18216
Comb. 6218

Gpu 1410/2000 (h2o)
Cpu 4860mhz (h2o)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1713727


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nickolp*
> 
> Didn't take a screenie when i did this but the important bits are there
> 
> Score 13410
> Gfx 14925
> Phyx 18216
> Comb. 6218
> 
> Gpu 1410/2000 (h2o)
> Cpu 4860mhz (h2o)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1713727












I'll take it since your name is on the 3DMark link page, but try to get a screenshot next time.


----------



## bond32

Any chance I could get an update on my single card R9 290X?

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2221757

It was when 14.6 drivers were released, don't have a screen shot. Card was at 1280/1625, cpu was at 4.9 everything else should be the same as my previous score. I'll be recording my results from now on much better however I now have 3 290's... Wanted to snag that single card spot.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bond32*
> 
> Any chance I could get an update on my single card R9 290X?
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2221757
> 
> It was when 14.6 drivers were released, don't have a screen shot. Card was at 1280/1625, cpu was at 4.9 everything else should be the same as my previous score. I'll be recording my results from now on much better however I now have 3 290's... Wanted to snag that single card spot.


----------



## carlhil2

carlhil2 - i7 4930k @4.5GHz - Asus GTX Titan - 1311MHz - 1752 MHz - score=12152 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3323146


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> carlhil2 - i7 4930k @4.5GHz - Asus GTX Titan - 1311MHz - 1752 MHz - score=12152 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3323146












Screenshots people.


----------



## carlhil2

carlhil2 - i7 4930k @4.5GHz - Asus GTX Titan - 1327MHz - 1752 MHz - score=12236 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2309861


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> carlhil2 - i7 4930k @4.5GHz - Asus GTX Titan - 1327MHz - 1752 MHz - score=12236 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2309861
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]


----------



## Bride

'New Entry'

Bride - 4770K @ 4500 - GTX760 @ 1241 / 3004 - 5957 - 19 / 06 / 2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2314072


----------



## thek90

Here's mine, so close to 10000
i5 [email protected] XSPC raystorm, Asus R9 290x XSPC Razor (Elipda) 1100 core, 1250 mem, Asrock Z87 oc formula, 8gb Vengeance 1600mhz


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Bride - 4770K @ 4500 - GTX760 @ 1241 / 3004 - 5957 - 19 / 06 / 2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2314072
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Sorry, we're not taking GTX 760 scores.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thek90*
> 
> Here's mine, so close to 10000
> i5 [email protected] XSPC raystorm, Asus R9 290x XSPC Razor (Elipda) 1100 core, 1250 mem, Asrock Z87 oc formula, 8gb Vengeance 1600mhz
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Try pushing the CPU a notch, and the GPU memory, and you'll be able to break 10000.


----------



## thek90

Yeah I just pushed my cpu to 4.4 but my card is a really bad overclocker (elipda). The most I can push the mom clock is 10mhz and unless I dramatically in crease the voltage an 100mhz boost on the core clock is the most I can do.


----------



## steadly2004

new entry

steadly2004- 4930k @ 4.3 - 290x @ 1215/1500 - Score 11920
6-20-14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2318209


----------



## Decade

New entry

Decade - I5-4670K @ 4.4 - Asus R9 290 @ 1089/1350 - 9513
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2322618


Card won't overclock much higher, Geild Icy Vision2 cures the thermal issues at least.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *steadly2004*
> 
> new entry
> 
> steadly2004- 4930k @ 4.3 - 290x @ 1215/1500 - Score 11920
> 6-20-14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2318209












Include a screenshot next time, please.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Decade*
> 
> New entry
> 
> Decade - I5-4670K @ 4.4 - Asus R9 290 @ 1089/1350 - 9513
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2322618
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Card won't overclock much higher, Geild Icy Vision2 cures the thermal issues at least.


----------



## steadly2004

UPDATE

OCN Name - CPU @ Clock speed - GPU @ core speed / memory speed - Score
- Date (DD/MM/YYYYY)

steadly2004- 4930k @4.6 [email protected]/1500 Score 12049


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *steadly2004*
> 
> UPDATE
> 
> OCN Name - CPU @ Clock speed - GPU @ core speed / memory speed - Score
> - Date (DD/MM/YYYYY)
> 
> steadly2004- 4930k @4.6 [email protected]/1500 Score 12049
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












No 3DMark link.


----------



## Kimir

Never posted here, shame on me! (it doesn't help to have multiple thread for the same thing tbh)

Kimir --- [email protected] --- 780Ti [email protected]/2000Mhz --- 13750
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2326095


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Never posted here, shame on me! (it doesn't help to have multiple thread for the same thing tbh)
> 
> Kimir --- [email protected] --- 780Ti [email protected]/2000Mhz --- 13750
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2326095
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Never posted here, shame on me! (it doesn't help to have multiple thread for the same thing tbh)


The reson for that is OCN history. These threads depend on people to start and look after them. The person that started the Firestrike Top 30 thread only accepted multi - GPUs, leaving it to someone else to fill the gap for single GPU scores. Maybe not the ideal, but just the way it worked out at the time.


----------



## yawa

Haven't benched much with my set up recently, and considering I'm like the only one running a highend card with an APU on these boards, that's a crime.

Here is my most recent Firestrike Score. Cpu at 4.5Ghz GPU at 1200/1319. Driver 14.6 Beta.

Overall: 7822
Graphics: 12531
Physics: 5239
Combined: 2541



**Got her a bit higher

CPU still at 4.5Ghz. GPU sitting at 1213/1327. 14.6 Beta

Overall: 7926
Graphics: 12763
Physics: 5245
Overall: 2578


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Haven't benched much with my set up recently, and considering I'm like the only one running a highend card with an APU on these boards, that's a crime.
> 
> Here is my most recent Firestrike Score. Cpu at 4.5Ghz GPU at 1200/1319. Driver 14.6 Beta.
> 
> Overall: 7822
> Graphics: 12531
> Physics: 5239
> Combined: 2541
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> **Got her a bit higher
> 
> CPU still at 4.5Ghz. GPU sitting at 1213/1327. 14.6 Beta
> 
> Overall: 7926
> Graphics: 12763
> Physics: 5245
> Overall: 2578
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












You win the award for biggest split between overall score and graphics score though.


----------



## yawa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You win the award for biggest split between overall score and graphics score though.


Yay! I knew my 7850k could win something!


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

*UPDATE*
HOMECINEMA-PC 3970x @[email protected] 780ti Classy @1394[email protected] *13409*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2350114


----------



## jakku

*'New Entry'*

jakku - i52500k @ 4.7 - 770gtx @ 1398 / 2001 - score 8065
- Date (26/06/2014)



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2352034


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HOMECINEMA-PC*
> 
> *UPDATE*
> HOMECINEMA-PC 3970x @[email protected] 780ti Classy @[email protected] *13409*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2350114












Got tired of the 290 eh? I'll put it in as a new entry.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jakku*
> 
> *'New Entry'*
> 
> jakku - i52500k @ 4.7 - 770gtx @ 1398 / 2001 - score 8065
> - Date (26/06/2014)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2352034


----------



## HOMECINEMA-PC

Nope .








Playin with these green things for awhile . Its like clockin a 760 Hawk LoooooL


----------



## yawa

K now that I'm running something a little different, figured I'd drop this here.

i7 4790k at 4.6Ghz. Ram at 2400Mhz. 290X at 1219 Mhz Core 1313 Mhz Memory.

Firestrike Score be.

Graphics: 13245
Physics: 12703
Combined: 3990
Overall: 10695


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> K now that I'm running something a little different, figured I'd drop this here.
> 
> i7 4790k at 4.6Ghz. Ram at 2400Mhz. 290X at 1219 Mhz Core 1313 Mhz Memory.
> 
> Firestrike Score be.
> 
> Graphics: 13245
> Physics: 12703
> Combined: 3990
> Overall: 10695
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Big jump


----------



## yawa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big jump


Thanks. Microcenter's unreal sale was good to me this weekend.

Also, wasn't happy with that Combined score.

So I fixed it.

i7 4790k at 4.7Ghz. 290X at 1230Mhz and Memory at 1327Mhz. Ram at 2400Mhz.

Graphics: 13312
Physics: 12954
Combined: 4912
Overall: 11327


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. Microcenter's unreal sale was good to me this weekend.
> 
> Also, wasn't happy with that Combined score.
> 
> So I fixed it.
> 
> i7 4790k at 4.7Ghz. 290X at 1230Mhz and Memory at 1327Mhz. Ram at 2400Mhz.
> 
> Graphics: 13312
> Physics: 12954
> Combined: 4912
> Overall: 11327


----------



## MunneY

Just a mild update from a few months back i thought i posted.

MunneY - 3930k @ 4.8 - gtx 780Ti @ 1376 / 1750 - score 12222

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2070807

more coming as ive finally gotten my 4930k under the phase

EDIT: Ill upload a picture tomorrow.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Just a mild update from a few months back i thought i posted.
> 
> MunneY - 3930k @ 4.8 - gtx 780Ti @ 1376 / 1750 - score 12222
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2070807
> 
> more coming as ive finally gotten my 4930k under the phase
> 
> EDIT: Ill upload a picture tomorrow.


----------



## WebTourist

Web Tourist - 3960x @ 5.1 - 780TI classified @ 1480/ 2050 - 14384
- Date 1/7/2014



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2374216


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WebTourist*
> 
> Web Tourist - 3960x @ 5.1 - 780TI classified @ 1480/ 2050 - 14384
> - Date 1/7/2014
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2374216












Nice jump.


----------



## DFroN

Could I add my lowly 10080 to the board?









New entry

Daffron - 4670k @ 4.8Ghz- GTX 780 @ 1241/6956 - 10080 - 04/07/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2392021


----------



## Gualichu04

Is my 3dmark firestrike score normal with one gpu? 3dmark


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Daffron*
> 
> Could I add my lowly 10080 to the board?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New entry
> 
> Daffron - 4670k @ 4.8Ghz- GTX 780 @ 1241/6956 - 10080 - 04/07/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2392021
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gualichu04*
> 
> Is my 3dmark firestrike score normal with one gpu? 3dmark


I don't know about the overall score, but the graphics score looks about right for stock clocks.


----------



## waltercaorle

new entry....

waltercaorle - [email protected] - [email protected]/7000 - 9956 - 29/06/2014



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2365022


----------



## jellybeans69

New entry
Testing my new rig , might as well add me (driver used 14.6 Beta)
Jellybeans69 - [email protected] - [email protected]/1630 - 8234 - 07/06/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3481502


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> New entry
> Testing my new rig , might as well add me (driver used 14.6 Beta)
> Jellybeans69 - [email protected] - [email protected]/1630 - 8234 - 07/06/2014
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3481502


----------



## yawa

Here it is. The absolute furthest I was able to push my card at +200MV. Anymore and I will need to find a way to get more voltage. Luckily my Temps are really low, so I should be able to go further. Who knows, maybe all the way to 1300Mhz. At some point before then though I'll have to rebench this whole thing at 4.7Ghz to see if I can break 12000 on the Overall score.

Anyways...

i7-4790k at 4.5GHZ
R9 290X at 1245MHZ/1500MHZ 14.6 CCC Beta

Graphics: 13912
Physics: 12424
Combined: 5231
Overall: 11750


----------



## error-id10t

error-id10t -- 4790K @ 4.9 -- 780 TI Classified @ 1398 / 1925 -- SCORE: 13160

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2432721


----------



## Kimir

Damn, that 4790K is doing good in physics!


----------



## Oggodatank

New Entry

Oggodatank - i7 4820K @ 5.0 - GTX 780Ti Classified - 1398 / 2000 - Overall 13038 / Graphics 15251 - 7/14/14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2439161


----------



## Forceman

I'm currently moving, so it'll be a while until I can get the spreadsheet updated. I'll catch up as soon as I can though.


----------



## yawa

Eh we'll keep posting.

So far this is the only bench with no relevant increase since I went from Trixx to Afterburner.

Still, for the sake of being complete, I'll post it anyway.

Yawa -- 290X 1283/1479 +300mv - 4790k @ 4.7Ghz - 8GB GSkill Ares @ 2400Mhz 10-12-12-31 1T

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2457553

Score: 11604
Graphics: 13617
Physics: 12838
Combined: 5152


----------



## djbauer

NEW ENTRY

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2451492



djbauer - i5 4670K @ 4.3 - GTX 770 4Gb @ 1,231 / 1,985 - 7700
- 16/07/2014


----------



## gqneon

'New Entry'

gqneon - 4770K @ 4.8GHz - 780ti KPE @ 1515 / 7700 - 13505
- 07/27/2014



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3651999?


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gqneon*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> gqneon - 4770K @ 4.8GHz - 780ti KPE @ 1515 / 7700 - 13505
> - 07/27/2014
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3651999?


Monster clock there bud! I'm assuming thats on DIC/LN2?

EDIT:

After looking at the temps it doesn't look that way. you got 1500core on water?!


----------



## Kimir

Yeah, that's watercooled but he uses a water chiller if I'm not wrong. I'm gonna have to try to do 1500Mhz+ as well when temp get down. I will need more power for SLI tho.
Winter is coming and so is the new 1600w EVGA (by that time they probably will have the P2 or T2 available as well).

That's a nice job indeed btw!


----------



## bigblock990

'New Entry'

Bigblock990 - 4770k @4.5ghz - 780 ti @ 1372 / 1850 - 12230
- 7/31/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2527009


----------



## gqneon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Monster clock there bud! I'm assuming thats on DIC/LN2?
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> After looking at the temps it doesn't look that way. you got 1500core on water?!


Nah just custom water loop! I had my chiller in line on those runs, but my other card might be better I just haven't tested it yet!


----------



## Silent Scone

Squeezing what I can out of my best Titan Black

Silent Scone - [email protected] 4.810 - EVGA Titan Black Hydro Copper @ 1342 / 2100 - 13102
(12/08/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3771650?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Here it is. The absolute furthest I was able to push my card at +200MV. Anymore and I will need to find a way to get more voltage. Luckily my Temps are really low, so I should be able to go further. Who knows, maybe all the way to 1300Mhz. At some point before then though I'll have to rebench this whole thing at 4.7Ghz to see if I can break 12000 on the Overall score.
> 
> Anyways...
> 
> i7-4790k at 4.5GHZ
> R9 290X at 1245MHZ/1500MHZ 14.6 CCC Beta
> 
> Graphics: 13912
> Physics: 12424
> Combined: 5231
> Overall: 11750
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *error-id10t*
> 
> error-id10t -- 4790K @ 4.9 -- 780 TI Classified @ 1398 / 1925 -- SCORE: 13160
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2432721
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oggodatank*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Oggodatank - i7 4820K @ 5.0 - GTX 780Ti Classified - 1398 / 2000 - Overall 13038 / Graphics 15251 - 7/14/14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2439161
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djbauer*
> 
> NEW ENTRY
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2451492
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> djbauer - i5 4670K @ 4.3 - GTX 770 4Gb @ 1,231 / 1,985 - 7700
> - 16/07/2014












Dead link

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gqneon*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> gqneon - 4770K @ 4.8GHz - 780ti KPE @ 1515 / 7700 - 13505
> - 07/27/2014
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3651999?











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigblock990*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Bigblock990 - 4770k @4.5ghz - 780 ti @ 1372 / 1850 - 12230
> - 7/31/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2527009
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Squeezing what I can out of my best Titan Black
> 
> Silent Scone - [email protected] 4.810 - EVGA Titan Black Hydro Copper @ 1342 / 2100 - 13102
> (12/08/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3771650?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Forceman

Moving sucks. Finally back up on the net and got this updated. If I messed any of those up, let me know.


----------



## bigblock990

'Update'

Bigblock990 - 4770k @4.8ghz - 780 ti @ 1372 / 1950 - 12642
- 8/17/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2608719


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigblock990*
> 
> 'Update'
> 
> Bigblock990 - 4770k @4.8ghz - 780 ti @ 1372 / 1950 - 12642
> - 8/17/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2608719
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Patje1989

'New Entry'

Hello overclockers

Patje1989 - 3770K @ 5.0GHz - GTX 780 KP Ti @ 1432/3850 - 13138 - 22-8-14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2622906


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - 4790k - @ 5Ghz - 780Ti KP @ 1450Mhz / 1851Mhz - score: 13345
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3861248


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Patje1989*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Hello overclockers
> 
> Patje1989 - 3770K @ 5.0GHz - GTX 780 KP Ti @ 1432/3850 - 13138 - 22-8-14
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2622906
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - 4790k - @ 5Ghz - 780Ti KP @ 1450Mhz / 1851Mhz - score: 13345
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3861248
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## whyscotty

WHYSCOTTY - [email protected] 5.0 - TITAN @ 1319/1895 - SCORE 12539

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2656324

https://imageshack.com/i/knv850O7p


----------



## MunneY

when will the 5960x's start showing up :-D


----------



## Kimir

Soon, and it will crush everyone score, like you can see on Hwbot.


----------



## Silent Scone

Stilll testing











Silent Scone - [email protected] 4.74 - Titan [email protected] 1322/2100 - SCORE 13311

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3951290?


----------



## Forceman

Okay, got my system off the moving truck and back in action, hopefully just in time for some GTX 980 scores.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *whyscotty*
> 
> WHYSCOTTY - [email protected] 5.0 - TITAN @ 1319/1895 - SCORE 12539
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2656324
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> https://imageshack.com/i/knv850O7p











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Stilll testing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Silent Scone - [email protected] 4.74 - Titan [email protected] 1322/2100 - SCORE 13311
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3951290?


----------



## MunneY

Just a small update... Nothing really to see here.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4062221

MunneY- [email protected] 4.75ghz - GTX 780 Ti Classy @ 1346/2000 - SCORE 13244


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Just a small update... Nothing really to see here.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4062221
> 
> MunneY- [email protected] 4.75ghz - GTX 780 Ti Classy @ 1346/2000 - SCORE 13244
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Guess I'll need to make some new pages, and make some room at the top of the boards, for the 980 and 970.

Edit: Got it.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 3DMark result is hidden/private.
> 
> Guess I'll need to make some new pages, and make some room at the top of the boards, for the 980 and 970.


Whats up with 3dm hiding them by default now? I fixed it btw.

yeah..... Unless somethign crazy happens and 2 980 classys land in my lap... I'm probably gonna be done for the year!


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Whats up with 3dm hiding them by default now? I fixed it btw.
> 
> yeah..... Unless somethign crazy happens and 2 980 classys land in my lap... I'm probably gonna be done for the year!


Got it. I think that's the first Haswell-E submission. That physics score is insane.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Got it. I think that's the first Haswell-E submission. That physics score is insane.


Yes it is... Its ridiculous... now to get the Ti's to cooperate!


----------



## whyscotty

WHYSCOTTY - [email protected] - [email protected]/2053 - SCORE 13681

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2779595

https://imageshack.com/i/ipWOIvA6j


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *whyscotty*
> 
> WHYSCOTTY - [email protected] - [email protected]/2053 - SCORE 13681
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2779595
> 
> https://imageshack.com/i/ipWOIvA6j


*starts slow clap*

So it begins.


----------



## whyscotty

Sorry

[email protected] - [email protected]/2103

WHYSCOTTY - [email protected] - [email protected]/2103 - SCORE 13929

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2779806

https://imageshack.com/i/p869X6s6j


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *whyscotty*
> 
> Sorry
> 
> [email protected] - [email protected]/2103
> 
> WHYSCOTTY - [email protected] - [email protected]/2103 - SCORE 13929
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2779806
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> https://imageshack.com/i/p869X6s6j


Well hello there, Mr Maxwell. Way to make a statement right out the door. I'm going to roll with the card not recognized error from Futuremark - that's a heck of a score.


----------



## ElectroGeek007

ElectroGeek007 - 3930K @ 4.5 GHz - GTX 970 @ 1290(1491 boost)/1900 - 10953 - 9-21-2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4106836

The boost that PrecisionX showed during benchmarking is higher than what GPU-Z shows in the screenshot, I'm not sure why.



Spoiler: Screenshot


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ElectroGeek007*
> 
> ElectroGeek007 - 3930K @ 4.5 GHz - GTX 970 @ 1290(1491 boost)/1900 - 10953 - 9-21-2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4106836
> 
> The boost that PrecisionX showed during benchmarking is higher than what GPU-Z shows in the screenshot, I'm not sure why.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Screenshot


----------



## djuplift

*CPU: Intel Core i7-3770K @4.6 Ghz
GPU: 1X EVGA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Dual Classified w/ EVGA ACX Cooler
OS: Win 7 64-bit
Driver: NVidia Geforce 340.52 Driver

3Dmark Score: 11155
Graphics Score: 12977
Physics Score: 12239
Combined Score: 5104
Results URL:* FIRE STRIKE


----------



## Silent Scone

These things are on another level.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4110193?

Silent Scone--- 5960X @ 4.75 --- 980GTX @ 1512(boost)/1970 --- Score 14516


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> These things are on another level.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4110193?
> 
> Silent Scone--- 5960X @ 4.75 --- 980GTX @ 1512(boost)/1970 --- Score 14516


Very nice score, imagine a nice bios with voltage/power unlocked...the possibilities...


----------



## Silent Scone

Someone mentioned that Vince has been quoted saying the next KPE (whatever that may be based on) is going to knock the socks off everything. But like you say, pretty obvious going from reference results!

Voltage there was hitting 1.25v pretty often.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Someone mentioned that Vince has been quoted saying the next KPE (whatever that may be based on) is going to knock the socks off everything. But like you say, pretty obvious going from reference results!
> 
> Voltage there was hitting 1.25v pretty often.


He already broke 2100mhz


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> He already broke 2100mhz


On reference lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> On reference lol.


come on classified...!


----------



## Silent Scone

I'd rather bench with it but whatever floats your boat








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> _come on_ classified...!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I'd rather bench with it but whatever floats your boat


That's what I was planning.. but rumors are that a 980 kingpin is under development. Can't complain about the tri-sli KPs I'm currently running. Let's see what develops.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> That's what I was planning.. but rumors are that a 980 kingpin is under development. Can't complain about the tri-sli KPs I'm currently running. Let's see what develops.


if they drop a KPE at 649 I'm probably gonna have to bite... I wont be able to take it LOL.


----------



## Silent Scone

I can't see it being much over that dude. I'll end up getting one lol. If that's the case anyway. Ordered another pair of these and water blocks for now


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I can't see it being much over that dude. I'll end up getting one lol. If that's the case anyway. Ordered another pair of these and water blocks for now


whad u have those titan blacks for a few weeks? I think you have THE "affliction".









just don't tell me you get this ship for free.


----------



## Silent Scone

Lol I wish!

Yeh couple months or so.

I certainly do have that, yes lol.


----------



## DeathAngel74

New Entry- Sept. 21, 2014 9:25 AM

DeathAngel74 [email protected]/3.4MaxTurbo GTX 750 1420/1712 Score: 3840 Graphics:4245 Physx:6477 Combined:1652

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2795341



UPDATE:
GTX 750 1435/1716/1497
www.3dmark.com/3dm/4117368


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djuplift*
> 
> *CPU: Intel Core i7-3770K @4.6 Ghz
> GPU: 1X EVGA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Dual Classified w/ EVGA ACX Cooler
> OS: Win 7 64-bit
> Driver: NVidia Geforce 340.52 Driver
> 
> 3Dmark Score: 11155
> Graphics Score: 12977
> Physics Score: 12239
> Combined Score: 5104
> Results URL:* FIRE STRIKE
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> These things are on another level.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4110193?
> 
> Silent Scone--- 5960X @ 4.75 --- 980GTX @ 1512(boost)/1970 --- Score 14516
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












You've got to find a little more in there and take 3rd.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> New Entry- Sept. 21, 2014 9:25 AM
> 
> DeathAngel74 [email protected]/3.4MaxTurbo GTX 750 1420/1712 Score: 3840 Graphics:4245 Physx:6477 Combined:1652
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2795341
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UPDATE:
> GTX 750 1435/1716/1497
> www.3dmark.com/3dm/4117368


Thanks for the entry, but we don't have room on the chart for the GTX 750.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You've got to find a little more in there and take 3rd


It's disturbing how easy that is going to be


----------



## bigblock990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> It's disturbing how easy that is going to be


Holy crap, that 980 is killin it!


----------



## SDhydro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> These things are on another level.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4110193?
> 
> Silent Scone--- 5960X @ 4.75 --- 980GTX @ 1512(boost)/1970 --- Score 14516


Ohh so close to knocking me outta the top 3 spot







like forceman said. Common guys I got the only 2600k cpu on the list and been #3 spot for too long. I need some pushing to upgrade.

show me what theses 980s can do!


----------



## Sammyboy83

New Entry

Sammyboy83 --- 3970X @ 5 --- r9 290 @ 1280/1700 --- Score 11905

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2809974


----------



## SLOPOKE

Meh I could only make it to 93'rd place.


----------



## Silent Scone

Thought I'd come back and beat it by a ball hair. There is going to be plenty more left in the tank







(Cocked up the validation GPU shot though. Nature called







. Can see clocks though)

No doubt I'll be back when the other two arrive, or when they go under. Scary to think this all very crude still at the moment. With some system / GBIOS tweaks it's only going to get better. Also have 4.86 bench stable now.

Silent Scone--- 5960 @ 4.75 --- 980GTX @ 1497/2053--- Score 14615

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4139456?


----------



## Clockdisaster

damn, so many guys with 780's. Now really need to start saving money to change my 560 ti. Gonna get 980 i think , however i aint sure if 970 wont be too similar to 980.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sammyboy83*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Sammyboy83 --- 3970X @ 5 --- r9 290 @ 1280/1700 --- Score 11905
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2809974
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Thought I'd come back and beat it by a ball hair. There is going to be plenty more left in the tank
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Cocked up the validation GPU shot though. Nature called
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Can see clocks though)
> 
> No doubt I'll be back when the other two arrive, or when they go under. Scary to think this all very crude still at the moment. With some system / GBIOS tweaks it's only going to get better. Also have 4.86 bench stable now.
> 
> Silent Scone--- 5960 @ 4.75 --- 980GTX @ 1497/2053--- Score 14615
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4139456?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!













Can't wait to see what kind of scores these cards put up when/if the voltage and power limits get unlocked.


----------



## Janes360

CASE Corsair AIR 540
I 7 2600K 4,9 Ghz and Corsair H110
Gtx 780Ti Gigabyte OC boost 1277mhz voltage 1.187 DDR5 7000mhz
8 Gb ram 2400 MHz
MB ASUS P8 z 68 V PRO
PSU 850W Corsair TX modular
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2753366
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2752815
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11IXjVAT82Y


----------



## kx11

Kx11 --- 5930k @ 4.2ghz --- PNY 980 GTX --- P13287



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4182729?

all on air

edit : 3dmark is reporting my CPU as 5960x ?! lolz ok i'll accept that


----------



## vilius572

vilius572 - - - 3770 @4.2ghz - - - GTX780ti KPE 1383mhz/1975mhz - - - 12412

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4115565


----------



## MunneY

Clocks boys and girls... Clocks! They help everyone out!

Good runs


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kx11*
> 
> Kx11 --- 5930k @ 4.2ghz --- PNY 980 GTX --- P13287
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4182729?
> 
> all on air
> 
> edit : 3dmark is reporting my CPU as 5960x ?! lolz ok i'll accept that












No clockspeeds.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vilius572*
> 
> vilius572 - - - 3770 @4.2ghz - - - GTX780ti KPE - - - 12412
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4115565












No clockspeeds.


----------



## vilius572

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No clockspeeds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No clockspeeds.


fixed


----------



## kx11

ah didn't know that


----------



## Agent Smith1984

Won't make top 30, but pretty darn impressive for a 1090t and a 280x...

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4206302

1090T x6 @ 4160, Asus 280x @ 1260/1800


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vilius572*
> 
> vilius572 - - - 3770 @4.2ghz - - - GTX780ti KPE 1383mhz/1975mhz - - - 12412
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4115565


----------



## The EX1

Update

The_EX1 --- 4770k @ 4.8 --- GTX 780 @ 1411 /2002 --- Score 11836

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2869484


----------



## Offler

New Entry
Offler --- Phenom II x6 1090t @ 3900 --- R9-290x @ 1180 / 1615 --- Score 10199 --- 01/10/2014

Link:
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4223472

Screenshot:


Complete Info:

CPU: Phenom II x6 1090t
Core 3900MHz
NB: 2800MHz
HT: 2600MHz

Ram: 4x 2Gb Adata XPG 2.0 @ 1600MHz 7-7-7-18 CR 1
Chips: Elpida Hyper MNH

Stable: Yes

GPU: R9-290x
Manufacturer: Sapphire
Cooler: Modded Reference Stock (Lapped, with Arctic Silver 5 thermal paste)
Core: 1180MHz
VRam: 1615Mhz
VDDC: +200
Power: +50%
Fan speed: Locked on 90%

Artifacts: No

OS: Win 7 Ult x64 (Fully patched)
Driver: Catalyst 14.9 WHQL
OC tool: Sapphire TriXX
After driver installation was used "Reset to factory defaults". System was left idle until .net updated all CCC related assembleys.

Scores:
Total: 10199
Graphics 13103
Physics: 8381
Combined: 4365


----------



## MunneY

What you guys know about that Sandy Dual core!

MunneY --- Pentium G860 @ 2.992ghz --- R9-290 @ 1100 / 1250 --- Score 6408

http://3dmark.com/3dm/4260258

BTW, this is a joke!

my physics FPS 8.77 LOL


----------



## Silent Scone

8.77!!!

You couldn't make that up. I would of said anything from 2000-3000 if I had to guess lol

Edit: Oh duh, sorry it's early here







FPS.

Wow I was bang on with that estimate. How sad


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> 8.77!!!
> 
> You couldn't make that up. I would of said anything from 2000-3000 if I had to guess lol
> 
> Edit: Oh duh, sorry it's early here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FPS.
> 
> Wow I was bang on with that estimate. How sad


It's almost exactly 1/10th my 5960x score lol


----------



## chino1974

3930K 4.6Ghz, 16Gb Dominator Platinum 2133, EVGA GTX980 SC

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4302308


----------



## Sammyboy83

Sammyboy83 - 3970X @ 5ghz - msi 980 gaming @ 1610/2065 - 14466 - 06/10/2014

New entry

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2914362


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sammyboy83*
> 
> Sammyboy83 - 3970X @ 5ghz - msi 980 gaming @ 1610/2065 - 14466 - 06/10/2014
> 
> New entry
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2914362


Killer score... Make sure that you have CPU-Z windows open as well!


----------



## Sammyboy83

I'll do it next time.


----------



## devilhead

hmm, after last score post, my 290X looks like piece....








http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2953079


----------



## vilius572

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *devilhead*
> 
> hmm, after last score post, my 290X looks like piece....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2953079


Get three 980's


----------



## rv8000

New Entry

rv8000 --- 4670k @ 3.8 --- Gigabyte 970 G1 @ 1587/2052 --- Score 10838

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2953386



Now if I wasn't too lazy to finally stabilize a cpu oc







. Hopefully theres more left in the tank, haven't seen a single artifact yet card only seems to blackscreen when there are issues *scratches head*


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The EX1*
> 
> Update
> 
> The_EX1 --- 4770k @ 4.8 --- GTX 780 @ 1411 /2002 --- Score 11836
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2869484
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Offler*
> 
> New Entry
> Offler --- Phenom II x6 1090t @ 3900 --- R9-290x @ 1180 / 1615 --- Score 10199 --- 01/10/2014
> 
> Link:
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4223472
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Screenshot:
> 
> 
> Complete Info:
> 
> CPU: Phenom II x6 1090t
> Core 3900MHz
> NB: 2800MHz
> HT: 2600MHz
> 
> Ram: 4x 2Gb Adata XPG 2.0 @ 1600MHz 7-7-7-18 CR 1
> Chips: Elpida Hyper MNH
> 
> Stable: Yes
> 
> GPU: R9-290x
> Manufacturer: Sapphire
> Cooler: Modded Reference Stock (Lapped, with Arctic Silver 5 thermal paste)
> Core: 1180MHz
> VRam: 1615Mhz
> VDDC: +200
> Power: +50%
> Fan speed: Locked on 90%
> 
> Artifacts: No
> 
> OS: Win 7 Ult x64 (Fully patched)
> Driver: Catalyst 14.9 WHQL
> OC tool: Sapphire TriXX
> After driver installation was used "Reset to factory defaults". System was left idle until .net updated all CCC related assembleys.
> 
> Scores:
> Total: 10199
> Graphics 13103
> Physics: 8381
> Combined: 4365












CPU is holding you back there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chino1974*
> 
> 3930K 4.6Ghz, 16Gb Dominator Platinum 2133, EVGA GTX980 SC
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4302308












No screenshot
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sammyboy83*
> 
> Sammyboy83 - 3970X @ 5ghz - msi 980 gaming @ 1610/2065 - 14466 - 06/10/2014
> 
> New entry
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2914362
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Impressive graphics score
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> rv8000 --- 4670k @ 3.8 --- Gigabyte 970 G1 @ 1587/2052 --- Score 10838
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2953386
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now if I wasn't too lazy to finally stabilize a cpu oc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Hopefully theres more left in the tank, haven't seen a single artifact yet card only seems to blackscreen when there are issues *scratches head*












Sorry for the long delay in updating, new job is kicking my butt.


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Update
> 
> SoloCamo - FX-9590 @ 4.7ghz (stock) - Sapphire R9 290x @ 1185 / 1475 - 9166 - 24/01/2014
> 
> 
> Beat that initial score but now see you have a fast 290 and are running 5ghz on the 8350... thats my next goal I guess
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only changes from my last lower score is that I'm now running 16gb (2x 8gb) of DDR3 2400mhz G.Skill Trident-X @ 2400mhz 10-13-13-28-1T vs my old 8gb of G.Skill Sniper 1866 @ 1866 9-10-9-28-1T
> 
> Dropped core clock to 1185 and got a stable overclock on the memory to 1475... Seemed to make quite a difference considering i'm still at the stock 4.7ghz of the 9590


Update for me...(went from a fx-9590 to a i7 4790k)

SoloCamo - i7 4790k @ stock - Sapphire R9 290x @ 1170 / 1550 - 10932 - 11/10/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4336759?



Edit: turbo boost enabled for the above run - still stock settings on cpu otherwise - memory is at 2400mhz cas 10 if anyone cared

Also, is it possible to leave my prior fx-9590 score up (see my quote) as reference to owners of both cpus? System is essentially identical aside from the mobo / cpu swap


----------



## marc0053

Minor update before winter








marc0053 i7 5960x @ 4.8GHz - GTX 780 Ti Kingpin - 1450MHz - 2025Mhz - Score = 14642
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4391138


----------



## Silent Scone

Don't have a screenshot for this one unfortunately and was done back when when it was on air, but will post anyway regardless of scoreboard

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2842018

Silent Scone --- 5960 @ 4.86GHz --- 980 GTX @ (1406 base)1580/2080 --- 15103


----------



## josephimports

'New Entry'

josephimports - 4770K @ 4.8 - AMD R9 290 @ 1200 / 1500 = 11387
- 18/10/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4420953

Physics score = 13128
Graphics score = 13272
Combined score = 5031


----------



## BTK

'New Entry'

BTK - 3770K @ 3.9 Ghz(Stock) - AMD Radeon 7970 @ 1050 / 1500 (Stock) = 7294

Physics score = 10394
Graphics score= 8301
Combined score =3095

18/10/014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4422232?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Update for me...(went from a fx-9590 to a i7 4790k)
> 
> SoloCamo - i7 4790k @ stock - Sapphire R9 290x @ 1170 / 1550 - 10932 - 11/10/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4336759?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: turbo boost enabled for the above run - still stock settings on cpu otherwise - memory is at 2400mhz cas 10 if anyone cared
> 
> Also, is it possible to leave my prior fx-9590 score up (see my quote) as reference to owners of both cpus? System is essentially identical aside from the mobo / cpu swap












I left the old score there also.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[CyGnus]*
> 
> [CyGnus] --- 4770K @ 4.6GHz --- R9 280X @ 1235/1800 --- 9788
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4327998












I posted it on the HD7970 page.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> Minor update before winter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> marc0053 i7 5960x @ 4.8GHz - GTX 780 Ti Kingpin - 1450MHz - 2025Mhz - Score = 14642
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4391138
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Don't have a screenshot for this one unfortunately and was done back when when it was on air, but will post anyway regardless of scoreboard
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2842018
> 
> Silent Scone --- 5960 @ 4.86GHz --- 980 GTX @ (1406 base)1580/2080 --- 15103


I didn't post it without the screenshot since it would have put you in third.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *josephimports*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> josephimports - 4770K @ 4.8 - AMD R9 290 @ 1200 / 1500 = 11387
> - 18/10/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4420953
> 
> Physics score = 13128
> Graphics score = 13272
> Combined score = 5031
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BTK*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> BTK - 3770K @ 3.9 Ghz(Stock) - AMD Radeon 7970 @ 1050 / 1500 (Stock) = 7294
> 
> Physics score = 10394
> Graphics score= 8301
> Combined score =3095
> 
> 18/10/014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4422232?












I posted it without the screenshot as a kind of reference (all stock) score.


----------



## Silent Scone

@Forceman I'm already in third









Edit: Oh, no I'm not. balls.

Meh I still win.


----------



## [CyGnus]

Update:

[CyGnus] --- 4770K @ 4.8GHz --- R9 280X @ 1250/1850 --- 10043

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4427417


----------



## Joa3d43

...new entry









*Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.7 giggles -- 1x 780 Ti Classified @ 1492 / 2023 -- SCORE *14946*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4344711


----------



## Silent Scone

"hrrrrrrrrrrr"









So close









Super high graphics score for the clocks used


----------



## SDhydro

new entry..... cpu and gpu watercooled

Sdhydro -- 2600k @ 4.8 -- 1x gtx980 @ 1600 / 2049 -- SCORE 13822

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3032001


----------



## RKDxpress

New entry RKDxpress i7 4770k @ 4.5 GTX 980 @ 1614/1952 FS score 13605 graphics 16232 20/10/2014 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3031362


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RKDxpress*
> 
> New entry RKDxpress i7 4770k @ 4.5 GTX 980 @ 1614/1952 FS score 13605 graphics 16232 20/10/2014 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3031362


Hey there nice score!

Hit "Print Screen" button and then paste in paint to get a screenshot. Much easier and cleaner looking than a camera pic of your screen.


----------



## Russ369

New entry Russ369 i5 4690k @ 4.4ghz GTX 970 @ 1521/1800 FS score 10738 graphics 13361 21/10/2014

No validation link, just wanted to share anyway


----------



## dilla69

New entry: dilla69 - i7 2600K @ 4,5GHz - GTX 980 @ 1550 / 4111 - 13231 - 22/10/2014

Graphics score: 16162, GPU power limit reached.









http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4457003


----------



## MunneY

Why all of the sudden are we comparing GPU's scores?

Did I miss something?


----------



## dilla69

I guess since there's a graphics score tab within the sheets.


----------



## Russ369

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Why all of the sudden are we comparing GPU's scores?
> 
> Did I miss something?


My guess is cuz some people have those unreasonably priced LG2011 CPU's that don't weigh that much into gaming performance, so comparing Graphics scores is more adequate of graphic performance than looking at the overall score... just spit ballin here jerry


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dilla69*
> 
> I guess since there's a graphics score tab within the sheets.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Russ369*
> 
> My guess is cuz some people have those unreasonably priced LG2011 CPU's that don't weigh that much into gaming performance, so comparing Graphics scores is more adequate of graphic performance than looking at the overall score... just spit ballin here jerry


Yeah.. but this is an overall benchmark... I mean if you are using the exact same setup, I can understand it.

Oh... and I promise you, the 6 and 8 core chips, DO in fact make a difference.


----------



## Russ369

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Yeah.. but this is an overall benchmark... I mean if you are using the exact same setup, I can understand it.
> 
> Oh... and I promise you, the 6 and 8 core chips, DO in fact make a difference.


List me the games that 6/8 cores make a significant difference in performance, i'll wait.

If you are a graphics designer/music composer, I can understand, otherwise its strictly e-peen.


----------



## dilla69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Yeah.. but this is an overall benchmark... I mean if you are using the exact same setup, I can understand it.
> 
> Oh... and I promise you, the 6 and 8 core chips, DO in fact make a difference.


Okay, in other words: Is there anything that speaks against posting graphics scores *next to* the overall scores? I mean these are an addition, not a replacement.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Russ369*
> 
> List me the games that 6/8 cores make a significant difference in performance, i'll wait.
> 
> If you are a graphics designer/music composer, I can understand, otherwise its strictly e-peen.


Any game that uses cores, can provide a BETTER gaming experience with the extra cores. Period.

Since Everyone here loves linus... Here is a video from today, explaining it.


----------



## Russ369

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Any game that uses cores, can provide a BETTER gaming experience with the extra cores. Period.
> 
> Since Everyone here loves linus... Here is a video from today, explaining it.


That video proves my point, it's better for multitasking and doing other stuff, in terms of sheer gaming performance, it isn't worth the money, 6fps difference (when he should have overclocked that 4690 in his test, I'm sure it would have closed the gap on the fps) for a cpu that is almost 3 times more expensive... No thanks


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Russ369*
> 
> That video proves my point, it's better for multitasking and doing other stuff, in terms of sheer gaming performance, it isn't worth the money, 6fps difference (when he should have overclocked that 4690 in his test, I'm sure it would have closed the gap on the fps) for a cpu that is almost 3 times more expensive... No thanks


I guess you missed the part about dropping frames and providing better visuals...

I understand not everyone needs 8 cores, but to say it isn't better, is not true.

Also, this Benchmark is not only for GPUs, but CPUs as well, hence the CPU/PHYSICS test.


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dilla69*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Yeah.. but this is an overall benchmark... I mean if you are using the exact same setup, I can understand it.
> 
> Oh... and I promise you, the 6 and 8 core chips, DO in fact make a difference.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, in other words: Is there anything that speaks against posting graphics scores *next to* the overall scores? I mean these are an addition, not a replacement.
Click to expand...

Up to the OP whether they get into the spreadsheet.

This is a benchmarking thread, and 6/8 cores are useful for getting better results. Don't see how games are relevant to this particular thread.. going off the rails?


----------



## SDhydro

New Entry

Sdhydro --- 2600k @ 4.8 --- GTX980 @ 1648 /4104 --- Score 14033

and since we seem to be posting graphics score.....Graphics Score 17k

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3044270


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Sdhydro --- 2600k @ 4.8 --- GTX980 @ 1648 /4104 --- Score 14033
> 
> and since we seem to be posting graphics score.....Graphics Score 17k
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3044270


Dem 980s man.

Monster score there bud. You'd be working us over with a -E CPU :-D

GG!


----------



## [CyGnus]

Very good card 1650 for the GPU is no joke for a air cooled card impressive


----------



## SDhydro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[CyGnus]*
> 
> Very good card 1650 for the GPU is no joke for a air cooled card impressive


Card is water cooled using an old switchtech apogee gt cpu block mounted to the gpu


----------



## [CyGnus]

Nice keep up the good work and bring us even better scores







maybe you could post a pic of the system?


----------



## Silent Scone

lol! 14K with a 2600K

You da' man!


----------



## dilla69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> I guess you missed the part about dropping frames and providing better visuals...
> 
> I understand not everyone needs 8 cores, but to say it isn't better, is not true.
> 
> Also, this Benchmark is not only for GPUs, but CPUs as well, hence the CPU/PHYSICS test.


The sttuers accured due to the freaking background tasks that nobody executes while he runs a benchmark.







Liuns stated that a core i7 4770k delivers about the same gaming performance while no demaning tasks are running in the background.


----------



## Kimir

Are you saying that nobody's "twitching" ,heh?


----------



## dilla69

That's not THAT demanding.


----------



## [CyGnus]

Bottom line is the 5960X is the better CPU if it is worth it over a 4770K? No it is not but if I had the money i sure would have one even if it is only 1% better in overall FPS experience.


----------



## Silent Scone

Whatever floats your boat but 23k+ Physics score gets my wallet rumbling


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Whatever floats your boat but 23k+ Physics score gets my wallet rumbling


...did you have to mention wallet







, what with 980 Cl due, never mind big-die Maxwell out 'early' next year


----------



## Silent Scone

I hear dat.


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I hear dat.


...I suppose being in the computer biz I can find some good reasons for the purchase; but the other day, I was talking with a business contact in France I have known for years...when I told him about the costs of owning multiple sets of 4x GPUs he quipped emphatically > 'that's more expensive than a mistress'








...not really, I suppose, but point taken...


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Whatever floats your boat but 23k+ Physics score gets my wallet rumbling


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> ...did you have to mention wallet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , what with 980 Cl due, never mind big-die Maxwell out 'early' next year


With the delays put on by the classy's I've about decided to just hold off til big maxwell. I don't wanna dump 1400 now and then probably 2200+ in 4 months.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[CyGnus]*
> 
> Update:
> 
> [CyGnus] --- 4770K @ 4.8GHz --- R9 280X @ 1250/1850 --- 10043
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4427417












Tesselation modified.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> ...new entry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.7 giggles -- 1x 780 Ti Classified @ 1492 / 2023 -- SCORE *14946*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4344711
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> new entry..... cpu and gpu watercooled
> 
> Sdhydro -- 2600k @ 4.8 -- 1x gtx980 @ 1600 / 2049 -- SCORE 13822
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3032001
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RKDxpress*
> 
> New entry RKDxpress i7 4770k @ 4.5 GTX 980 @ 1614/1952 FS score 13605 graphics 16232 20/10/2014 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3031362
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dilla69*
> 
> New entry: dilla69 - i7 2600K @ 4,5GHz - GTX 980 @ 1550 / 4111 - 13231 - 22/10/2014
> 
> Graphics score: 16162, GPU power limit reached.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4457003
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Why all of the sudden are we comparing GPU's scores?
> 
> Did I miss something?


I just put it on the spreadsheet as a spot of additional information. The main tab is still sorted by overall score, but I thought it was interesting to see how the different cards stack up on the graphics score.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Sdhydro --- 2600k @ 4.8 --- GTX980 @ 1648 /4104 --- Score 14033
> 
> and since we seem to be posting graphics score.....Graphics Score 17k
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3044270
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












That SB is holding you back, you need to crank it back to 5.4 like your GTX 780 Ti score.


----------



## SDhydro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tesselation modified.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just put it on the spreadsheet as a spot of additional information. The main tab is still sorted by overall score, but I thought it was interesting to see how the different cards stack up on the graphics score.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That SB is holding you back, you need to crank it back to 5.4 like your GTX 780 Ti score.


Yeah tell me bout it! Need dryice to get the 2600k to 5.4ghz. Pretty amazing the gtx980 under water is able to match the graphics score i reached with the gtx780ti under ln2. Looking forward to some more subzero fun in the future.


----------



## [CyGnus]

Forceman sorry did not see the part of tess enabled on this one since the FS U its allowed


----------



## dilla69

update: dilla69 - i7 2600K @ 4.9GHz - GTX 980 @ 1560 / 2098 - 13820 - 29/10/2014

graphics score: 16656 - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3099025


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dilla69*
> 
> update: dilla69 - i7 2600K @ 4.9GHz - GTX 980 @ 1560 / 2098 - 13820 - 29/10/2014
> 
> graphics score: 16656 - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3099025


----------



## Mydog

Mydog - 5960X @ 5.1 GHz - GTX 980 @ 1585 / 2005 - 15144

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3125936


----------



## Fiveby5

*Fiveby5 - Intel i7 5820k @ 4.5ghz - EVGA GTX 970 SC @ 1,250 / 1,850 - 11,238 - 10/31/14*



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3120236

Not sure why Precision shows the core clock so much higher than Futuremark's own report does, I stuck with the verified results numbers to be safe.


----------



## dhenzjhen

Here's mine









http://hwbot.org/submission/2665031_dhenzjhen_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_980_17071_marks


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Mydog - 5960X @ 5.1 GHz - GTX 980 @ 1585 / 2005 - 15144
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3125936
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fiveby5*
> 
> *Fiveby5 - Intel i7 5820k @ 4.5ghz - EVGA GTX 970 SC @ 1,250 / 1,850 - 11,238 - 10/31/14*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3120236
> 
> Not sure why Precision shows the core clock so much higher than Futuremark's own report does, I stuck with the verified results numbers to be safe.












Futuremark doesn't take the boost into account, your score is on-par with other cards running 1450+.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dhenzjhen*
> 
> Here's mine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/2665031_dhenzjhen_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_980_17071_marks












Nice score, but doesn't meet the submission requirements.


----------



## Fiveby5

This card has serious legs on it, I've yet to see a single artifact or indication the card is straining to meet the ever rising demands I'm placing on it. I'm really impressed, seems all the work I put into designing custom air flow hardware is finally paying off.









Clocks using the boosted speed per Forceman's post.

*Updated Score:*
===========================================================================

Fiveby5 - Intel i7 5820k @ 4.5ghz - EVGA GTX 970 SC @ 1500 / 3,750 - 11,362 - 12,808 - 11/4/14



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4608450


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX980 Strix (stock air) 1386/1837 -- 14495
07/11/14

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3182134


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Mydog - 5960X @ 5.1 GHz - GTX 980 @ 1585 / 2005 - 15144
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3125936


expected higher at 5.1, think I clocked 15100 at 4.7. Similar GPU clocks


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> expected higher at 5.1, think I clocked 15100 at 4.7. Similar GPU clocks


CPU clock doesn't contribute so much on single GPU in FS, plays a bigger part on multi-GPU


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> CPU clock doesn't contribute so much on single GPU in FS, plays a bigger part on multi-GPU


except for physics and combined score....








Ultra is a bit different tho, cpu, let alone clocks, doesn't matter all that much.


----------



## Jpmboy

update (was just putzin' at 4.5GHz)

jpmboy --- [email protected] -- GTX980 Stix (yeah, still on air) --- 1518/8100 --- 14795

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3198896

stock bios / stock voltage.


----------



## Silent Scone

Pretty savvy for stock!


----------



## Jpmboy

eh, a little better:



I have aid64 open and porting sensor data to the external DPF. This is interesting.. using adaptive/dynamic voltage and clocks... during tests #1 and 2, the CPU core is IDLE and the cache is maxed. 3 and 4 run the cpu core also (as suspected). I didn't realize that tests 1 an 2 were hammering the cpu cache that much...

*edit:*

jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTx 980 Classified (air cooled) -- 1585/2039 -- 15010

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3222189
13/11/14


----------



## SDhydro

update
Sdhydro --- 2600k @ 4.8 --- GTX980 @ 1658 /4320 --- Score 14355
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3239724


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fiveby5*
> 
> This card has serious legs on it, I've yet to see a single artifact or indication the card is straining to meet the ever rising demands I'm placing on it. I'm really impressed, seems all the work I put into designing custom air flow hardware is finally paying off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clocks using the boosted speed per Forceman's post.
> 
> *Updated Score:*
> ===========================================================================
> 
> Fiveby5 - Intel i7 5820k @ 4.5ghz - EVGA GTX 970 SC @ 1500 / 3,750 - 11,362 - 12,808 - 11/4/14
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4608450











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> eh, a little better:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have aid64 open and porting sensor data to the external DPF. This is interesting.. using adaptive/dynamic voltage and clocks... during tests #1 and 2, the CPU core is IDLE and the cache is maxed. 3 and 4 run the cpu core also (as suspected). I didn't realize that tests 1 an 2 were hammering the cpu cache that much...
> 
> *edit:*
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] --- GTx 980 Classified (air cooled) -- 1585/2039 -- 15010
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3222189
> 13/11/14











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> update
> Sdhydro --- 2600k @ 4.8 --- GTX980 @ 1658 /4320 --- Score 14355
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3239724
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Crazy memory speeds on those cards


----------



## dhenzjhen

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4748162


----------



## SDhydro

update

Sdhydro --- 2600k @ 5.4(dryice) --- GTX980 @ 2044 /4329(ln2)--- Score 16445
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3261733


----------



## cssorkinman

cssorkinman 4790k @ 4.4 ghz turbo MSI 290X lightning 1202/1598 - score 11273 11/18/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4764197?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## WebTourist

WebTourist - GTX 980 Classified @1702/2150 under water - Intel Core i7-3960X @5.0
Score 15203 Graphics Score 17248 Physics Score 17802

*http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3256290*


----------



## SDhydro

[email protected] 5.4(dry ice)----asus strix 980----2068/2181(ln2) 16524
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3269143


----------



## RKDxpress

Update RKDxpress, 4770k at 4.7 ghz, Refrence gigabyte 980, 1628/2027, Score 14179, 11/19/2014 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4767259? 
Thanks again RKD.


----------



## shar00750

my zotac gtx 970 omega 1519/1983 with i7-4790k 5ghz:http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3221303


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 980 Strix -- 1550/2090 --- 15211 (air)
nov 20, 2014 (date is also in the validation







)


----------



## Maintenance Bot

Maintenance [email protected] 980 HOF--1550/1953--13762 air
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3276853


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dhenzjhen*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4748162
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


What's the actual GPU clock speed? GPU-z and 3DMark shows 1858, which is normally wrong, but the sensor, which is usually right, only reads 1227.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> cssorkinman 4790k @ 4.4 ghz turbo MSI 290X lightning 1202/1598 - score 11273 11/18/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4764197?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WebTourist*
> 
> WebTourist - GTX 980 Classified @1702/2150 under water - Intel Core i7-3960X @5.0
> Score 15203 Graphics Score 17248 Physics Score 17802
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3256290*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> [email protected] 5.4(dry ice)----asus strix 980----2068/2181(ln2) 16524
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3269143
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RKDxpress*
> 
> Update RKDxpress, 4770k at 4.7 ghz, Refrence gigabyte 980, 1628/2027, Score 14179, 11/19/2014 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4767259?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks again RKD.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shar00750*
> 
> my zotac gtx 970 omega with i7-4790k 5ghz:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3221303
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


What are the clock speeds?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 980 Strix -- 1550/2090 --- 15211 (air)
> nov 20, 2014 (date is also in the validation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












If only there was a validation link.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maintenance Bot*
> 
> Maintenance [email protected] 980 HOF--1550/1953--13762 air
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3276853
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## dhenzjhen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dhenzjhen*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4748162
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's the actual GPU clock speed? GPU-z and 3DMark shows 1858, which is normally wrong, but the sensor, which is usually right, only reads 1227.
Click to expand...

1995/2020


----------



## carlhil2

[email protected] 980 Classified--1600 boost/1907--14711-stock bios/cooling 
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3287731


----------



## MunneY

having a lil fun.. i think its hilarious this pentium benches the same as the amd 8000s

MunneY -- G3258 @ 4.4ghz -- R9 290x Lightning @ 1250/1650 -- 9035

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4789397



i know im missing cpu-z sorry, feel free not to count it


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> having a lil fun.. i think its hilarious this pentium benches the same as the amd 8000s
> 
> MunneY -- G3258 @ 4.4ghz -- R9 290x Lightning @ 1250/1650 -- 9035
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4789397
> 
> 
> 
> i know im missing cpu-z sorry, feel free not to count it


Physics score has a ways to go to match the 8000's







.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Physics score has a ways to go to match the 8000's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


yupppp. just funny cause its soooooooooo gimped lol. like 15fps in the physics test!


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Physics score has a ways to go to match the 8000's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> yupppp. just funny cause its soooooooooo gimped lol. like 15fps in the physics test!
Click to expand...

Intentional or otherwise, the combined score is where this bench really handicaps the Vishera 8 cores.

It expresses itself really well in this comparison:

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/2873251/fs/1151742

I should run the combined test with one core per module shut down to see how the benchmark reacts to it, might be interesting.

EDIT: Motherboard won't let me disable one core per module but I ran it basically as a 4300 and came up with this : http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/3303080/fs/3303047

Shutting down 50 % of the cpu only resulted in a about a 14 % reduction in the combined score.

EDIT part DEUX :
cssorkinman FX-8350 MSI 290X lightning 1219/1649 score 9734

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3306012


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## strong island 1

"new entry"

strong island 1 - 5960x @ 4.75ghz - 980 Strix @ 2040 / 2053 - 17632
- Date (11/24/2014)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4810395


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> "new entry"
> 
> strong island 1 - 5960x @ 4.75ghz - 980 Strix @ 2040 / 2053 - 17632
> - Date (11/24/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4810395


Awesome! New #1.


----------



## SDhydro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> "new entry"
> 
> strong island 1 - 5960x @ 4.75ghz - 980 Strix @ 2040 / 2053 - 17632
> - Date (11/24/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4810395


Nice run Strong island







Seems like your trying to accomplish a lot during your cold runs. Heard about the valley 106fps run too. Maybe try and focus on fewer things instead of trying to accomplish good scores in a bunch a benches. at once. For me cpu on dry ice is easy vid card benching but for ln2 on cpu and gpu that's more difficult. Add in the fact your trying different motherboard/cpu combos too and Im already worn out just thinking bout it lol. All im trying to say is try to eat that elephant one bite at a time and not all at once.
Oh and I also got to enjoy first place single card in firestrike, fs extreme, and fs ultra for a few days before loosing first place to you in firestrike. Still rockin the #1 graphics score for single card, for now at least till you get things dialed in.


----------



## strong island 1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SDhydro*
> 
> Nice run Strong island
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like your trying to accomplish a lot during your cold runs. Heard about the valley 106fps run too. Maybe try and focus on fewer things instead of trying to accomplish good scores in a bunch a benches. at once. For me cpu on dry ice is easy vid card benching but for ln2 on cpu and gpu that's more difficult. Add in the fact your trying different motherboard/cpu combos too and Im already worn out just thinking bout it lol. All im trying to say is try to eat that elephant one bite at a time and not all at once.
> Oh and I also got to enjoy first place single card in firestrike, fs extreme, and fs ultra for a few days before loosing first place to you in firestrike. Still rockin the #1 graphics score for single card, for now at least till you get things dialed in.


ya I here ya, thanks for the advice. I ordered 180L and it cost me a lot so whenever I do that I try to get multiple parts to bench to try and get a lot of scores. It didn't work this time but I always give each setup a full day of concentration.


----------



## RKDxpress

Update: RKDxpress, 4770k @ 4.7ghz, Reference Gigabyte GTX 980 @ 1615/2042, Score 14264, 11/25/2014. http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3314796 

RKD.


----------



## dhenzjhen

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3328945


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> [email protected] 980 Classified--1600 boost/1907--14711-stock bios/cooling
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3287731











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> having a lil fun.. i think its hilarious this pentium benches the same as the amd 8000s
> 
> MunneY -- G3258 @ 4.4ghz -- R9 290x Lightning @ 1250/1650 -- 9035
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4789397
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i know im missing cpu-z sorry, feel free not to count it











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> "new entry"
> 
> strong island 1 - 5960x @ 4.75ghz - 980 Strix @ 2040 / 2053 - 17632
> - Date (11/24/2014)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4810395
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RKDxpress*
> 
> Update: RKDxpress, 4770k @ 4.7ghz, Reference Gigabyte GTX 980 @ 1615/2042, Score 14264, 11/25/2014. http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3314796
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RKD.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dhenzjhen*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3328945
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## alancsalt

Do I detect a cross thread medal contest?









Chunky!


----------



## marc0053

Some cold ambient fun.
Skyn3t's modded bios rev 6 seems buggy when reporting clocks (should be in the low 1500s)

marc_0053 - i7 5960x @ 4.9GHz - GTX 780 Ti Kingpin - 1726MHz - 7800 MHz - score = 15197
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4873639


----------



## marc0053

Just bought a ASUS gtx 980 Strix. Didn't see much additional performance with universal water block vs stock air cooler. Currently using the normal unlocked bios posted by shammy in the kingping cooling thread.

marc_0053 - i7 5960x @ 4.7GHz - ASUS GTX 980 Strix - 1646MHz - 2128.5 MHz - score = 16396
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3378607


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> Some cold ambient fun.
> Skyn3t's modded bios rev 6 seems buggy when reporting clocks (should be in the low 1500s)
> 
> marc_0053 - i7 5960x @ 4.9GHz - GTX 780 Ti Kingpin - 1726MHz - 7800 MHz - score = 15197
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4873639
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> Just bought a ASUS gtx 980 Strix. Didn't see much additional performance with universal water block vs stock air cooler. Currently using the normal unlocked bios posted by shammy in the kingping cooling thread.
> 
> marc_0053 - i7 5960x @ 4.7GHz - ASUS GTX 980 Strix - 1646MHz - 2128.5 MHz - score = 16396
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3378607
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Sorry for the slow updates, new job is killing my free time.


----------



## Pikaru

PikaruNinja - i7 5960X @ 4.5ghz - 980 Classified 1571/2000 - 14863

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5020278?


----------



## jasonsansone

New Entry
jasonsansone - 4790K @ 4.5 GHz - 980 Classified @ 1644.9 / 8320 - 13934 - 12/12/2014


----------



## shar00750

shar00750 - i7 [email protected] - zotac gtx970 [email protected] 1519/1983=11986 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3221303


----------



## GrimDoctor

New Entry
GrimDoctor -- i4770k @ 4.2GHz -- GTX 970 @ 1463MHz/2000 -- 10896 -- December 14th 2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3465461



Did I submit this right?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pikaru*
> 
> PikaruNinja - i7 5960X @ 4.5ghz - 980 Classified 1571/2000 - 14863
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5020278?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasonsansone*
> 
> New Entry
> jasonsansone - 4790K @ 4.5 GHz - 980 Classified @ 1644.9 / 8320 - 13934 - 12/12/2014
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












No 3DMark link.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shar00750*
> 
> shar00750 - i7 [email protected] - zotac gtx970 [email protected] 1519/1983=11986 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3221303
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GrimDoctor*
> 
> New Entry
> GrimDoctor -- i4770k @ 4.2GHz -- GTX 970 @ 1463MHz/2000 -- 10896 -- December 14th 2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3465461
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I submit this right?












Yep, just fine. Why is GPU Tweak showing 1400 for the GPU speed though?


----------



## GrimDoctor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Yep, just fine. Why is GPU Tweak showing 1400 for the GPU speed though?


Not sure to be honest, first time using it. Looking on Asus forums it's just the maximum value for the slider. The graphed window in GPU Tweak shows the higher figures pretty much bang on with HWiNFO though there are sometimes some sensor delays from what I can see. GPU Tweak looks to be very basic compared to other software. I want to try different software but I wonder about conflicts. Uninstalling one or the other might work but then I might lose the ability to customise the fan tuning without flashing...not sure.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GrimDoctor*
> 
> Not sure to be honest, first time using it. Looking on Asus forums it's just the maximum value for the slider. The graphed window in GPU Tweak shows the higher figures pretty much bang on with HWiNFO though there are sometimes some sensor delays from what I can see. GPU Tweak looks to be very basic compared to other software. I want to try different software but I wonder about conflicts. Uninstalling one or the other might work but then I might lose the ability to customise the fan tuning without flashing...not sure.


Yeah, I forgot that you still get boost on top of that value. Been with AMD for too long this cycle.


----------



## porky

CN Name - CPU @ Clock speed - GPU @ core speed / memory speed - Score
- Date (DD/MM/YYYYY)

CPU = 4970K @ 4.8ghz
GPU = GTX 980 @ 1500mhz (boost) stock memory.
Score : 13632

Date: 17/12/14

Untitled.jpg 613k .jpg file


----------



## SDhydro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *porky*
> 
> CN Name - CPU @ Clock speed - GPU @ core speed / memory speed - Score
> - Date (DD/MM/YYYYY)
> 
> CPU = 4970K @ 4.8ghz
> GPU = GTX 980 @ 1500mhz (boost) stock memory.
> Score : 13632
> 
> Date: 17/12/14
> 
> Untitled.jpg 613k .jpg file


----------



## Silent Scone

Seems low graphics wise but we'll put that down to the memory! Not seen anyone on a reference board without hard mods beat my 16800 gfx, sure there is one out there though







.

In the process of building a system purely for benching, got sick of naffing around with my own system


----------



## strong island 1

strong island 1 -- 5960x - 5.0ghz -- 980 Strix - 2040mhz core, 8600mhz mem -- Score 18423



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3480511


----------



## Joa3d43

...new 1x980 Cl entry









*Joa3d43* -- 5960X / 4750 / DDR 3250 -- 1x 980 Classified 1755 / 2175 -- *SCORE 16827*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5101305


----------



## GrimDoctor

I noticed there's a 3DMark on Steam on sale at the moment:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/223850

They have this one and another app called 3DMark11 but that one isn't on sale. It also says the one linked above is newer.
Is the one on sale the right one to get for the benchmarking threads on OCN?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GrimDoctor*
> 
> I noticed there's a 3DMark on Steam on sale at the moment:
> http://store.steampowered.com/app/223850
> 
> They have this one and another app called 3DMark11 but that one isn't on sale. It also says the one linked above is newer.
> Is the one on sale the right one to get for the benchmarking threads on OCN?


Both, but this thread is for 3dmark


----------



## GrimDoctor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Both, but this thread is for 3dmark


Thank you. Might get the sale one then for now


----------



## Aluc13

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3512098

OCN Name: Aluc13 - I7 [email protected] 3.6MHZ - GTX [email protected] 1504Mhz / 4005mhz - Score 11259
- Date (20/12/2014


----------



## devilhead

Tested my 290X with new omega drivers, but looks that older is better for me








omega: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3516868 1370/1725 290X 5960X 5ghz Score: 13819
14.9 : http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3049351 1370/1725 290X 5960X 4.9ghz Score: 13901


----------



## GrimDoctor

Update

GrimDoctor -- i4770k @ 4.5GHz -- GTX 970 @ 1563MHz/2000 -- 11567 -- December 22nd 2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3522902



Slowly improving


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *porky*
> 
> CN Name - CPU @ Clock speed - GPU @ core speed / memory speed - Score
> - Date (DD/MM/YYYYY)
> 
> CPU = 4970K @ 4.8ghz
> GPU = GTX 980 @ 1500mhz (boost) stock memory.
> Score : 13632
> 
> Date: 17/12/14
> 
> Untitled.jpg 613k .jpg file












No clock speeds in screenshot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strong island 1*
> 
> strong island 1 -- 5960x - 5.0ghz -- 980 Strix - 2040mhz core, 8600mhz mem -- Score 18423
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3480511











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> ...new 1x980 Cl entry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Joa3d43* -- 5960X / 4750 / DDR 3250 -- 1x 980 Classified 1755 / 2175 -- *SCORE 16827*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5101305
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aluc13*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3512098
> 
> OCN Name: Aluc13 - I7 [email protected] 3.6MHZ - GTX [email protected] 1504Mhz / 4005mhz - Score 11259
> - Date (20/12/2014
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Need better screenshot
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GrimDoctor*
> 
> Update
> 
> GrimDoctor -- i4770k @ 4.5GHz -- GTX 970 @ 1563MHz/2000 -- 11567 -- December 22nd 2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3522902
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slowly improving












A little surprising how much better the GTX 980 scores at similar clock speeds. But maybe it's only surprising to me.


----------



## GrimDoctor

Update

GrimDoctor -- i4770k @ 4.5GHz -- GTX 970 @ 1573MHz/2073 -- 11751 -- December 23rd 2014

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3537241



Sorry to upload another one so soon but I think I've hit my 24/7 stable air limit now and I may not be bothering with water for a while


----------



## MunneY

Just a little FYI.

On sale for $5 on Steam

http://store.steampowered.com/app/223850/


----------



## GrimDoctor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Just a little FYI.
> 
> On sale for $5 on Steam
> 
> http://store.steampowered.com/app/223850/


I saw that...2 days after I bought it







Can't complain though I still got a sale price


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GrimDoctor*
> 
> Update
> 
> GrimDoctor -- i4770k @ 4.5GHz -- GTX 970 @ 1573MHz/2073 -- 11751 -- December 23rd 2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3537241
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to upload another one so soon but I think I've hit my 24/7 stable air limit now and I may not be bothering with water for a while


----------



## caliking420

caliking420 -- 4790k @ 4.6ghz -- gtx 970 1414core/+195mem. so i think thats 3695mem

10745 validated


i noticed i im at the bottom of the list for the 970s, but its fine i don't want to push it to far until i get it under water.

I also have a 2nd 970 that im letting my brother use (in place of his 760). so probably sometime tonight ill run it again with the 970s in sli, and see how it works out


----------



## Digitalist

A question:

As Futuremark hasn't approved Nvidia's 347.09 WQHL driver yet, results obtained with that driver are still showing "Graphics driver is not approved," I assume results obtained using that driver are not being accepted currently?

Assuming that's the case, will we be able to submit screenshots of a score once the driver has been approved (i.e. the settings windows will not be from the time the run was done)?


----------



## alancsalt

Only Futuremark itself is concerned about "unapproved" drivers. HWbot doesn't worry about it. Don't know of a thread here that worries about it either. Futuremark can take a week or two to catch up to the latest whql.

While a lot of ppl use Futuremark's benches, not a lot of us respect their beta driver excluding records list...... AFAIK.

You can submit "Driver not approved" results here.....


----------



## GrimDoctor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Only Futuremark itself is concerned about "unapproved" drivers. HWbot doesn't worry about it. Don't know of a thread here that worries about it either. Futuremark can take a week or two to catch up to the latest whql.
> 
> While a lot of ppl use Futuremark's benches, not a lot of us respect their beta driver excluding records list...... AFAIK.
> 
> You can submit "Driver not approved" results here.....


Damn, I've been sitting on some higher scores because I thought they weren't valid. Thanks for the info


----------



## Digitalist

New Entry

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5258723

Digitalist - i5 4690k @ 4.8ghz - GTX 980 @ 1418mhz / 7800mhz - 13013
- Date (27/12/2014)



Worth noting that the card is a Zotac GTX AMP! Extreme edition with boost clock set to 1520mhz and voltages not adjusted. In use card actually boosts to 1556.7mhz / 1.212v (despite not having voltages adjusted).

Also worth noting, this is the 3rd fastest Firestrike score with the 4690k and a single GPU that doesn't show an "FPS too high to be valid" error (i.e. only including valid and unapproved driver results).


----------



## MunneY

YAY! I'm finally back at it.

MunneY -- Intel i7-5960x @4.375Ghz -- EVGA GTX 980 Ref @ 1502/2052 -- 14273

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5295568?


----------



## Preim

New Entry

Preim - Intel Core i7 4790k @ Stock - Gigabyte G1 GTX 980 @ 1519.5 / 2008.8 - 13507
- 30/12/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5296088



Might oc my cpu later tonight


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> YAY! I'm finally back at it.
> 
> MunneY -- Intel i7-5960x @4.375Ghz -- EVGA GTX 980 Ref @ 1502/2052 -- 14273
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5295568?


Hey MunneY > nice new toys !







...good to see


----------



## Preim

Update

Preim - Intel Core i7 4790k @ 4.7GHz - Gigabyte G1 GTX 980 @ 1519.5 / 2018.3 - 13909
- 30/12/2014

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5297663

Ever so slightly higher mem clock and OC'd cpu. Really makes me want to break 14k. Also thought I should show im running the new whql driver.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caliking420*
> 
> caliking420 -- 4790k @ 4.6ghz -- gtx 970 1414core/+195mem. so i think thats 3695mem
> 
> 10745 validated
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i noticed i im at the bottom of the list for the 970s, but its fine i don't want to push it to far until i get it under water.
> 
> I also have a 2nd 970 that im letting my brother use (in place of his 760). so probably sometime tonight ill run it again with the 970s in sli, and see how it works out












You need speed/user verification in your screenshot (like the posts below yours).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalist*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5258723
> 
> Digitalist - i5 4690k @ 4.8ghz - GTX 980 @ 1418mhz / 7800mhz - 13013
> - Date (27/12/2014)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Worth noting that the card is a Zotac GTX AMP! Extreme edition with boost clock set to 1520mhz and voltages not adjusted. In use card actually boosts to 1556.7mhz / 1.212v (despite not having voltages adjusted).
> 
> Also worth noting, this is the 3rd fastest Firestrike score with the 4690k and a single GPU that doesn't show an "FPS too high to be valid" error (i.e. only including valid and unapproved driver results).












Use the boost clock in your submission (the 1556) not the listed speeds.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> YAY! I'm finally back at it.
> 
> MunneY -- Intel i7-5960x @4.375Ghz -- EVGA GTX 980 Ref @ 1502/2052 -- 14273
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5295568?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Preim*
> 
> Update
> 
> Preim - Intel Core i7 4790k @ 4.7GHz - Gigabyte G1 GTX 980 @ 1519.5 / 2018.3 - 13909
> - 30/12/2014
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5297663
> 
> Ever so slightly higher mem clock and OC'd cpu. Really makes me want to break 14k. Also thought I should show im running the new whql driver.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Preim

I confused you with the double entry, latest score needs cpu changing!


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Preim*
> 
> I confused you with the double entry, latest score needs cpu changing!


Yeah, I saw that you had two entries, but didn't notice the CPU speed change. Fixed.


----------



## Xoriam

Xoriam --- Xeon X5660 @ 4,4ghz --- Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 Gaming @ 1592/7650 --- 11555
1/1/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5315148


----------



## jasonsansone

jasonsansone --- 4790K @ 4.5ghz --- EVGA GTX 980 Classified @ 1607/8700 --- 14344 Overall / 17546 Graphics 1/1/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5327361


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasonsansone*
> 
> jasonsansone --- 4790K @ 4.5ghz --- EVGA GTX 980 Classified @ 1607/8700 --- 14344 Overall / 17546 Graphics 1/1/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5327361


Nice score, can I ask what kind of cooling you were running on the 980?


----------



## jasonsansone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Nice score, can I ask what kind of cooling you were running on the 980?


Corsair H55 on a NZXT Krafen G10 bracket. Water but an AIO, not a full cover EK block.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasonsansone*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Nice score, can I ask what kind of cooling you were running on the 980?
> 
> 
> 
> Corsair H55 on a NZXT Krafen G10 bracket. Water but an AIO, not a full cover EK block.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Xoriam --- Xeon X5660 @ 4,4ghz --- Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 Gaming @ 1592/7650 --- 11555
> 1/1/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5315148
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasonsansone*
> 
> jasonsansone --- 4790K @ 4.5ghz --- EVGA GTX 980 Classified @ 1607/8700 --- 14344 Overall / 17546 Graphics 1/1/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5327361
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## dieanotherday

Guys i got my [email protected] and msi gtx 980 gamer at +200mhz.

i can get boost clocks up to 1490mhz in unigine with TDP capping at 80% and temp at 70C

for 3dmark i cap out my TDP and i can't get past 1300mhz.

As a result my 3dmark score stays at 10900 regardless of overclock. Is there some way I can make it go higher?

Please help?


----------



## marc0053

-24.5C outside
marc0053 i7 5960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 980 Strix 1775MHz - 8812MHz Score = 17073
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3717780


----------



## Preim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> -24.5C outside
> marc0053 i7 5960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 980 Strix 1775MHz - 8812MHz Score = 17073
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3717780


----------



## jazzam

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5421564

jazzam --- 3570K @ 5.0ghz --- ASUS 290 (flashed to 290x) @ 1220/6000 --- 10987 Overall / 13690 Graphics / 9368 Physics


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> -24.5C outside
> marc0053 i7 5960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 980 Strix 1775MHz - 8812MHz Score = 17073
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3717780
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jazzam*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5421564
> 
> jazzam --- 3570K @ 5.0ghz --- ASUS 290 (flashed to 290x) @ 1220/6000 --- 10987 Overall / 13690 Graphics / 9368 Physics
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Been a while since we've had any AMD postings - they need to come out with some new cards, stat.


----------



## Vici0us

4770K @ 4.4GHz, R9 290 @ 1142 / 1500
Score - 10904
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5362133


----------



## generalkayoss

After seeing some of the 970 results in this thread, does this seem a little low, or is it just my high expectations?

i5 4670k stock

Gigabyte GTX 970 - core/1314MHz, boost/1542MHz, memory/1851MHz, stock voltage, stock bios

Score - 9612

Graphics - 12769

Physics - 6317

Combined - 4640

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5448284


----------



## marc0053

Small update with -20C outside temp - Antifreeze/Isopropyl Alcohol/distilled water mixture.
marc0053 i7 5960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 980 Strix 1791MHz - 9000MHz Score = 17620
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3785408


----------



## Jpmboy

not quite as cold here









jpmboy --- [email protected] -- GTX 980 Strix 1630/8468 --- 16242 jan 13, 2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3789688

Forceman - the strix is a non-reference PCB... re: "CLS".


----------



## cssorkinman

cssorkinman 4790k 4.4ghz 290X 1205 core 1649 memory - 12121 3dmarks

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5522947?


----------



## mirzet1976

mirzet1976 --- FX8320 @5.1ghz --- R9 290 1290/1600 --- score 10313

graphics - 13784

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5541408


----------



## MunneY

MunneY --- 4790k @4.9ghz --- GTX 980 1502/2052 --- score 13402

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5558213


----------



## lester007

lester007 --- 4930k @4.8Ghz --- GTX 970 1651/1976 --- score 12229
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3863351


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vici0us*
> 
> 4770K @ 4.4GHz, R9 290 @ 1142 / 1500
> Score - 10904
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5362133
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *generalkayoss*
> 
> After seeing some of the 970 results in this thread, does this seem a little low, or is it just my high expectations?
> 
> i5 4670k stock
> 
> Gigabyte GTX 970 - core/1314MHz, boost/1542MHz, memory/1851MHz, stock voltage, stock bios
> 
> Score - 9612
> 
> Graphics - 12769
> 
> Physics - 6317
> 
> Combined - 4640
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5448284
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












That does seem a little low, compared to the other cards on the list. The stock 4670K may account for most of the difference though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> Small update with -20C outside temp - Antifreeze/Isopropyl Alcohol/distilled water mixture.
> marc0053 i7 5960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX 980 Strix 1791MHz - 9000MHz Score = 17620
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3785408
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not quite as cold here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jpmboy --- [email protected] -- GTX 980 Strix 1630/8468 --- 16242 jan 13, 2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3789688
> 
> Forceman - the strix is a non-reference PCB... re: "CLS".












I'll start marking them as Strix
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> cssorkinman 4790k 4.4ghz 290X 1205 core 1649 memory - 12121 3dmarks
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5522947?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












That's a really good memory speed for that card.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mirzet1976*
> 
> mirzet1976 --- FX8320 @5.1ghz --- R9 290 1290/1600 --- score 10313
> 
> graphics - 13784
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5541408
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> MunneY --- 4790k @4.9ghz --- GTX 980 1502/2052 --- score 13402
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5558213
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


It's lower than your existing score, so I didn't change/add it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lester007*
> 
> lester007 --- 4930k @4.8Ghz --- GTX 970 1651/1976 --- score 12229
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3863351
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> [/CENTER]
> 
> It's lower than your existing score, so I didn't change/add it.


Different CPU :-D


----------



## Vici0us

Update: Managed to squeeze a tiny bit more out of my main R9 290.
i7-4770K @ 4.4GHz / Gigabyte R9 290 @ 1143 | 1500 / Crucial Sport XT 4X4GB XT @ 1866mhz
Score- 10934
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5603034


----------



## carlhil2

[email protected] 980 Classified--1630 boost/2003--16886-graphics score-.-stock bios/cooling 
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5629342


----------



## Silent Scone

Ohhhhh snap.

(Reference card) http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2842018

(not a submission)


----------



## Agent Smith1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Ohhhhh snap.
> 
> (Reference card) http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2842018
> 
> (not a submission)


Redonkulous for a single card submission!!!


----------



## Agent Smith1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vici0us*
> 
> Update: Managed to squeeze a tiny bit more out of my main R9 290.
> i7-4770K @ 4.4GHz / Gigabyte R9 290 @ 1143 | 1500 / Crucial Sport XT 4X4GB XT @ 1866mhz
> Score- 10934
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5603034


This one makes me feel pretty good though....

X6 @ 4.2
290 @ 1150/1500
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3654067

Look at that physics and combined score on a 5 year old CPU!!!
Looks very i5 devil's canyon-ish to me









(Not a submission) I never submitt!! BAHAHAHA


----------



## Vici0us

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agent Smith1984*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Vici0us*
> 
> Update: Managed to squeeze a tiny bit more out of my main R9 290.
> i7-4770K @ 4.4GHz / Gigabyte R9 290 @ 1143 | 1500 / Crucial Sport XT 4X4GB XT @ 1866mhz
> Score- 10934
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5603034
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one makes me feel pretty good though....
> 
> X6 @ 4.2
> 290 @ 1150/1500
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3654067
> 
> Look at that physics and combined score on a 5 year old CPU!!!
> Looks very i5 devil's canyon-ish to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Not a submission) I never submitt!! BAHAHAHA
Click to expand...

Looks really good for Phenom II X6. I just don't get how so much lower physics score, gets that outcome of combined score..?


----------



## Agent Smith1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vici0us*
> 
> Looks really good for Phenom II X6. I just don't get how so much lower physics score, gets that outcome of combined score..?


Because it has 6 true cores, which apparently does much better than the modules on the fx series I guess? I5 shows similar results also.


----------



## Vici0us

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agent Smith1984*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Vici0us*
> 
> Looks really good for Phenom II X6. I just don't get how so much lower physics score, gets that outcome of combined score..?
> 
> 
> 
> Because it has 6 true cores, which apparently does much better than the modules on the fx series I guess? I5 shows similar results also.
Click to expand...

Well, that's pretty impressive specially for its age.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agent Smith1984*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Vici0us*
> 
> Update: Managed to squeeze a tiny bit more out of my main R9 290.
> i7-4770K @ 4.4GHz / Gigabyte R9 290 @ 1143 | 1500 / Crucial Sport XT 4X4GB XT @ 1866mhz
> Score- 10934
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5603034
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one makes me feel pretty good though....
> 
> X6 @ 4.2
> 290 @ 1150/1500
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3654067
> 
> Look at that physics and combined score on a 5 year old CPU!!!
> Looks very i5 devil's canyon-ish to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Not a submission) I never submitt!! BAHAHAHA
Click to expand...

Aww c'mon Smith, put the screws to that X6.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Agent Smith1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Aww c'mon Smith, put the screws to that X6.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Damn, you got a nice one there buddy!!

I can probably stick my case out the front door when it's cold out and run some stuff around 4.4-4.5, but I need about 1.6v+ to do it, lol


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agent Smith1984*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Aww c'mon Smith, put the screws to that X6.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damn, you got a nice one there buddy!!
> 
> I can probably stick my case out the front door when it's cold out and run some stuff around 4.4-4.5, but I need about 1.6v+ to do it, lol
Click to expand...

It's about as good as they come for water cooling, non LLC board so load voltages are around1.45 volts. One of these days I'll get around to pairing it with a decent card, then try to top out the chip. ( I think it may be able to do 4.8 on firestrike -educated guess)


----------



## Agent Smith1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> It's about as good as they come for water cooling, non LLC board so load voltages are around1.45 volts. One of these days I'll get around to pairing it with a decent card, then try to top out the chip. ( I think it may be able to do 4.8 on firestrike -educated guess)


Really surprised you haven't done a series of tests comparing the 6 core thuban at 4.6 to the 8 core vishera at 4.6









What's crazy is; a 4.6+GHz capable thuban ended up getting binned as a quad core









That thing would really be impressive with a 290 or 970, and some overclocking.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agent Smith1984*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> It's about as good as they come for water cooling, non LLC board so load voltages are around1.45 volts. One of these days I'll get around to pairing it with a decent card, then try to top out the chip. ( I think it may be able to do 4.8 on firestrike -educated guess)
> 
> 
> 
> Really surprised you haven't done a series of tests comparing the 6 core thuban at 4.6 to the 8 core vishera at 4.6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's crazy is; a 4.6+GHz capable thuban ended up getting binned as a quad core
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That thing would really be impressive with a 290 or 970, and some overclocking.
Click to expand...

I may get around to it sometime, I have 2 960Ts that are nearly identical in capabilities but they have been relegated to my second tier boards (790FX gd-70 and 990fx extreme3), but I've got some more boards coming and they may find a home on either a GD 80 or 990fx ud5 , then they will have a chance to do big things. It annoys me that the CHV-Z's I have don't support core unlocking with the bio's they have, or I would use one of them instead. These are exceptional thuban/zosma's whereas the garden variety Vishera will pull 5 ghz + with the same board and cooling , but a comparison might be fun.


----------



## MiePx4

New Entry

MiePx4 - i7 4790K @4.5GHz - GTX 970 @ 1340 / 2005 - 11690
- 27.01.2015
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5687363


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vici0us*
> 
> Update: Managed to squeeze a tiny bit more out of my main R9 290.
> i7-4770K @ 4.4GHz / Gigabyte R9 290 @ 1143 | 1500 / Crucial Sport XT 4X4GB XT @ 1866mhz
> Score- 10934
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5603034
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> [email protected] 980 Classified--1630 boost/2003--16886-graphics score-.-stock bios/cooling
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5629342












Next time post the full screenshot please.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MiePx4*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> MiePx4 - i7 4790K @4.5GHz - GTX 970 @ 1340 / 2005 - 11690
> - 27.01.2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5687363
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Seems like there should be some more headroom on the core overclock.


----------



## MiePx4

No way getting it any higher without modding the BIOS again.

Update

MiePx4 - i7 4790K @4.7GHz - GTX 970 @ 1350 / 2090 - 12037
- 05.02.2015


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5790672


----------



## Mydog

New GPU, Changed from Gigabyte GTX 980 G1 Windforce ro EVGA GTX 980 Classified










Mydog - 5960X @ 5 GHz - GTX 980 [email protected] 1630 / 2160 - 15952

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3992856


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> New GPU, Changed from Gigabyte GTX 980 G1 Windforce ro EVGA GTX 980 Classified
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mydog - 5960X @ 5 GHz - GTX 980 [email protected] 1630 / 2160 - 15952
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3992856


You have those 8 cores SCREAMING., great score by the way...


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> You have those 8 cores SCREAMING., great score by the way...


Thanks








The 8-cores are barely humming at 5 GHz, they start screaming at 5.2 GHz and above on this SS









Got 70L of LN2 here now so I'm tuning in for some more subzero fun


----------



## TheBaron

New Entry
TheBaron - 5960X @ 4.8GHz - GTX 980 Strix @ 1740 / 2153 - 16466



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5794641


----------



## Silent Scone

Awesome score







All these juiced cards making the reference scores seem futile


----------



## TheBaron

Thanks, next I'm gonna try Strix with my SS


----------



## GrimDoctor

New Entry

GrimDoctor -- i4770k @ 4.5GHz -- GTX 980 @ 1500/2000MHz -- 13551 -- February 7th 2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4007109



Still some work ahead to get a higher score, but it is stable so it's start


----------



## Mydog

Update

Mydog - 5960X @ 5.1 GHz - GTX 980 [email protected] 1667 / 2174 - 16196

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4102873


----------



## tiosss

tiosss/i7 [email protected]/gtx msi [email protected]/8100=17509 top 4 ???


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MiePx4*
> 
> No way getting it any higher without modding the BIOS again.
> 
> Update
> 
> MiePx4 - i7 4790K @4.7GHz - GTX 970 @ 1350 / 2090 - 12037
> - 05.02.2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5790672











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> New Entry
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 4.8GHz - GTX 980 Strix @ 1740 / 2153 - 16466
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5794641


Is that watercooled?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GrimDoctor*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> GrimDoctor -- i4770k @ 4.5GHz -- GTX 980 @ 1500/2000MHz -- 13551 -- February 7th 2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4007109
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still some work ahead to get a higher score, but it is stable so it's start











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Update
> 
> Mydog - 5960X @ 5.1 GHz - GTX 980 [email protected] 1667 / 2174 - 16196
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4102873
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiosss*
> 
> tiosss/i7 [email protected]/gtx msi [email protected]/8100=17509 top 4 ???












Need 3DMark link.


----------



## TheBaron

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that watercooled?


Yes, and this also. Old VapoChill LS couldn`t keep the Strix cold









TheBaron - 5960X @ 4.9GHz - GTX 980 Strix @ 1754 / 2153 - 16500



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5918772


----------



## Wickedtt

Wickedtt - CPU 3820 @ 4.8ghz - XFX 290 1235/1600 - P11655
- 02/18/15

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5955248


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiosss*
> 
> tiosss/i7 [email protected]/gtx msi [email protected]/8100=17509 top 4 ???


Don't believe it.


----------



## criminal

criminal - i7 4930K @ 4.5 GHz - GTX 980 - 1479 MHz - 2007 MHz - Score = 14153



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5971635?


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agent Smith1984*
> 
> This one makes me feel pretty good though....
> 
> X6 @ 4.2
> 290 @ 1150/1500
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3654067
> 
> Look at that physics and combined score on a 5 year old CPU!!!
> Looks very i5 devil's canyon-ish to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Not a submission) I never submitt!! BAHAHAHA


My 5 year old CPU has that topped

16,643 Physics









http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4121611


----------



## Agent Smith1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> My 5 year old CPU has that topped
> 
> 16,643 Physics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4121611


Well, with 12 threads I suppose it does! lol


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agent Smith1984*
> 
> Well, with 12 threads I suppose it does! lol


Lol yA, and the best thing? theyre about $90 on eBay







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agent Smith1984*
> 
> Well, with 12 threads I suppose it does! lol


They're only $100 on eBay too. That's what I payed


----------



## Gadgeteer

small guys in action )))


----------



## Mydog

Another
Update

Mydog - 5960X @ 5.1 GHz - GTX 980 [email protected] 1692 / 2173 - 16304

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4137318


----------



## Bigm

New Entry

Bigm - 3570k @ 4.2 - GTX 970 @ 1480 / 2000 - 10618
- 21/02/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5991680



Just got my new card today after ditching my crappy EVGA. Zotac AMP Extreme. Haven't done much toying with it yet.


----------



## Kimir

Kimir --- 4930K @ 4.8Ghz --- 980 KPE 1555/2100Mhz --- 15591
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4142529


----------



## Silent Scone

Tidy score







Wasn't aware these were available yet.


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Tidy score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't aware these were available yet.


Pre-order started shipping last week and got it Friday. So I'm playing a little with it on Air, but it already shows its limit.
I need a waterblock.


----------



## Silent Scone

what voltage? 1.3v on air should be good for flash runs









Tempted but I really don't need one lol.


----------



## Kimir

Hop hop, ninja update before I'm even added to the list with that 980 KPE score.

New Entry

Kimir --- 4930K @ 4.8Ghz --- 980 KPE 1605/2100Mhz --- 15672 --- 24/02/15

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6022063


lol, I put this on the bot, I watched the surrounding scores and... oh my, I'm beating some guys on LN2 and haswell-e, what the hell?!


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 980 KP -- 16481

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4159962
2/24/2015


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 980 KP -- 16481
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4159962


Nice score there..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Nice score there..


thanks. I hope there's more performance out of the card. second one inbound.
very pleased with the cooling by the EK uni block!


----------



## Jpmboy

update. (sorry)

jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 980 KP (asus bios) --- 16800

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4167788


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> update. (sorry)
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 980 KP (asus bios) --- 16800
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4167788


1750/8500? WOW.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> 1750/8500? WOW.


my kingpin is being reported as an ASUS card.


----------



## Kimir

Firestrike
Kimir --- 4930K @ 4.8Ghz --- 980 KPE @ 1624/2100Mhz, 1.4v on Air --- 15812
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6041535


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Firestrike
> Kimir --- 4930K @ 4.8Ghz --- 980 KPE @ 1624/2100Mhz, 1.4v on Air --- 15812
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6041535


wow! that's an incredible AIR run !!


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> Thanks, next I'm gonna try Strix with my SS


I did it!









Finally broke 14k on my lowly 4 core i7!


















http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4176915



Actually have one better than this too but I didn't screen shot it.

SS


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> update. (sorry)
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 980 KP (asus bios) --- 16800
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4167788


Can you post it please ...... I'd like to give it shot.

SS


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> wow! that's an incredible AIR run !!


Thanks, 16000 is on sight, I'll probably reach it on water.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Thanks, 16000 is on sight, I'll probably reach it on water.


no doubt. Seems that keeping the core ~ 30C helps a lot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> Can you post it please ...... I'd like to give it shot.
> 
> SS


sure... erm. post what?


----------



## Silent Scone

Sadly the same scaling isn't had above 30 and beyond. Least no where near the same as Kepler! I saw no real benefit on reference cards going to water, beyond high 20s, low 30s anyway.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no doubt. Seems that keeping the core ~ 30C helps a lot.
> sure... erm. post what?


I think they are referring to the Asus/Strix bios.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I think they are referring to the Asus/Strix bios.


yeah - that's pretty risky busniess...


----------



## Silent Scone

lol!


----------



## Vici0us

Single R9 290 Run: i7 4770K @ 4.4GHz | R9 290 @ 1172 / 1475 | Score: 11005
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4189783


----------



## Forceman

Sorry for the slow updates, I really need to get a laptop or something to take on the road.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> Yes, and this also. Old VapoChill LS couldn`t keep the Strix cold
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 4.9GHz - GTX 980 Strix @ 1754 / 2153 - 16500
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5918772











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> Wickedtt - CPU 3820 @ 4.8ghz - XFX 290 1235/1600 - P11655
> - 02/18/15
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5955248
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> criminal - i7 4930K @ 4.5 GHz - GTX 980 - 1479 MHz - 2007 MHz - Score = 14153
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5971635?











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Another
> Update
> 
> Mydog - 5960X @ 5.1 GHz - GTX 980 [email protected] 1692 / 2173 - 16304
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4137318
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bigm*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Bigm - 3570k @ 4.2 - GTX 970 @ 1480 / 2000 - 10618
> - 21/02/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5991680
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just got my new card today after ditching my crappy EVGA. Zotac AMP Extreme. Haven't done much toying with it yet.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Hop hop, ninja update before I'm even added to the list with that 980 KPE score.
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Kimir --- 4930K @ 4.8Ghz --- 980 KPE 1605/2100Mhz --- 15672 --- 24/02/15
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6022063
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol, I put this on the bot, I watched the surrounding scores and... oh my, I'm beating some guys on LN2 and haswell-e, what the hell?!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> update. (sorry)
> 
> jpmboy -- [email protected] -- GTX 980 KP (asus bios) --- 16800
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4167788












I wasn't sure about the clock speeds - tried to take them off Afterburner, but make sure I got them correct.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Firestrike
> Kimir --- 4930K @ 4.8Ghz --- 980 KPE @ 1624/2100Mhz, 1.4v on Air --- 15812
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6041535
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> I did it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finally broke 14k on my lowly 4 core i7!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS












I need the 3DMark link.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vici0us*
> 
> Single R9 290 Run: i7 4770K @ 4.4GHz | R9 290 @ 1172 / 1475 | Score: 11005
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4189783
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> I did it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finally broke 14k on my lowly 4 core i7!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> I did it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finally broke 14k on my lowly 4 core i7!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4176915
> 
> 
> 
> Actually have one better than this too but I didn't screen shot it.
> 
> SS


I added the link!

SS


----------



## lester007

lester007 --- 4930k @4.9Ghz --- GTX 970 1626/2008 --- score 12350
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4214005
update


----------



## Jpmboy

sorry Forceman, I'm still figuring this card out...

jpmboy --- [email protected] -- -GTX980 KPE -- 16924 (1785/8514)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4213354


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> I added the link!
> 
> SS












What's your memory speed? If you post any updates, try to follow the format in the first post so I can get the speeds right.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lester007*
> 
> lester007 --- 4930k @4.9Ghz --- GTX 970 1626/2008 --- score 12350
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4214005
> update
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> sorry Forceman, I'm still figuring this card out...
> 
> jpmboy --- [email protected] -- -GTX980 KPE -- 16924 (1785/8514)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4213354












No problem


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's your memory speed? If you post any updates, try to follow the format in the first post so I can get the speeds right.


System memory was set at 2133MHz 9-10-10-24-1T .... GPU was 4104 as shown on the GPU-Z in the screenshot.

Thanks for the time put in making us feel we've accomplished sumthin!!!!









SS


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> System memory was set at 2133MHz 9-10-10-24-1T .... GPU was 4104 as shown on the GPU-Z in the screenshot.
> Thanks for the time put in making us feel we've accomplished sumthin!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS


he means the GPU clocks


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> System memory was set at 2133MHz 9-10-10-24-1T .... GPU was 4104 as shown on the GPU-Z in the screenshot.
> 
> Thanks for the time put in making us feel we've accomplished sumthin!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS


Yeah nothing like a false sense of achievement







. But we love it


----------



## Jpmboy

Can't believe I've made the only 980 kingpin submission. WTH?


----------



## Kimir

Haven't I?
Seems like I did, on air still but I did. ssiperko did too


----------



## mus1mus

First Entry:

mus1mus --- [email protected] -- -MSI Ref r9-290 --

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6239257


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Haven't I?
> Seems like I did, on air still but I did. ssiperko did too


opps - my bad. Yes, I (now) recall your benchrun! Nice!


----------



## Joa3d43

...new single GPU entry; initial test runs

*Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.6 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1537 / 2006 -- SCORE *20095*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6321872


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Nice scores Joa3d43!


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice scores Joa3d43!


...tx much mate, but credit goes to card designers...still early days, (software indicated) voltage for the above was max at 1.237v , temps at peak in the mid 30s only on 'regular' water-cooling...a lot more speed in that card once Bios opened up > never mind custom PCBs


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> First Entry:
> 
> mus1mus --- [email protected] -- -MSI Ref r9-290 --
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6239257
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> ...new single GPU entry; initial test runs
> 
> *Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.6 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1537 / 2006 -- SCORE *20095*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6321872
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












I accepted it because it's the first Titan X score (and wow, what a score), but make sure to follow the submission guidelines for the screenshot.


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I accepted it because it's the first Titan X score (and wow, what a score), but make sure to follow the submission guidelines for the screenshot.


Tx Forceman - I normally pay more attention but at the time was fighting with a nasty Trojan.Gen.2. flipping up a gazillion windows (on an older bench-only drive w / o virus protection, I know to blame myself...normally don't download on that one but was searching for a Java version for HWBot Prime, and voila







) .

Anyways, here is the HWBot link and I can pull more info down and post here if you like http://hwbot.org/submission/2802285_


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> First Entry:
> 
> mus1mus --- [email protected] -- -MSI Ref r9-290 --
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6239257
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
Click to expand...

Thanks.


----------



## lilchronic

Lilchronic - 5820k @ 4.5Ghz - GTX 680 @1267Mhz / 1800Mhz - 7996
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6356921


----------



## Preim

Preim - 4790k @ 4.8Ghz - GTX 980 @1554Mhz / 2005Mhz - 14068 - 03/29/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6420146

Managed a little bit more this time around, back up to 30!


----------



## KuuFA

KuuFA - 3770k @ 4.8 - Titan - X @ 1501 / 4000 - 16581 - 3/26/15

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4457916



Need to get my 5.0/ memory timings for benching down.


----------



## Preim

Couldn't help myself, had to keep going..

Preim - 4790k @ 4.8Ghz - GTX 980 @1581Mhz / 2018Mhz - 14401 - 03/29/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6424161


----------



## Mydog

Mydog -- 5960X @ 5 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1506 / 2006 -- SCORE 20117

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4451203


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Mydog -- 5960X @ 5 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1506 / 2006 -- SCORE 20117
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4451203


Very nice


----------



## Joa3d43

.....well, might as well give 'MyDog' s.th. to chew on' ( ha ha)







; though I'm running CPU still on water at 4.7G...sub-0 soon









update please *Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.7 -- 1x Titan X 1557 / 2006 -- *SCORE 20375*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6435010


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> .....well, might as well give 'MyDog' s.th. to chew on' ( ha ha)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ; though I'm running CPU still on water at 4.7G...sub-0 soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> update please *Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.7 -- 1x Titan X 1557 / 2006 -- *SCORE 20375*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6435010


lol i was guna say when i responded mydogs post that you should have a response to that score pretty soon. Guess i was right lolz


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lol i was guna say when i responded mydogs post that you should have a response to that score pretty soon. Guess i was right lolz


I knew he had, saw the score in HOF









Need to get Win 8 up and running here


----------



## lilchronic

why not windows 10


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> why not windows 10


I don't think you'll get the extra boost in points with it yet


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lol i was guna say when i responded mydogs post that you should have a response to that score pretty soon. Guess i was right lolz


...really not like that; had run and saved earlier, then off to a funeral thing...then uploaded afterwards ...but in any event, I hope to have some time for sub-0 later to build up the backup folder...but just an all-around dreary day though (weather wise also)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> I don't think you'll get the extra boost in points with it yet


...I don't think that 8.1 is slower / faster than 8 in FS/FSE/FSU, depending on what else you're running in that OS ...some 'stripped' Win 10 are looking good but there still updating a heck of a lot (got a copy). I use Win 8 as 8.1 is on an 'old school HD w/ spinning platter, even w/ SSD as cache it's just not the same....how I managed to do computing over the years w / o SSD as boot drive is beyond me


----------



## opt33

Opt33 -- 4790K @ 5.0 -- 1x Titan X 1537 / 2006 -- SCORE 18353



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6436854


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> Lilchronic - 5820k @ 4.5Ghz - GTX 680 @1267Mhz / 1800Mhz - 7996
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6356921
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












I stopped posting GTX 680/HD 7970 scores, sorry.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KuuFA*
> 
> KuuFA - 3770k @ 4.8 - Titan - X @ 1501 / 4000 - 16581 - 3/26/15
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/results
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need to get my 5.0/ memory timings for benching down.












Need the 3DMark link for your run, not the generic results page.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Preim*
> 
> Couldn't help myself, had to keep going..
> 
> Preim - 4790k @ 4.8Ghz - GTX 980 @1581Mhz / 2018Mhz - 14401 - 03/29/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6424161











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> Mydog -- 5960X @ 5 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1506 / 2006 -- SCORE 20117
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4451203













Amazing that these cards are doubling the Titan scores.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> .....well, might as well give 'MyDog' s.th. to chew on' ( ha ha)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ; though I'm running CPU still on water at 4.7G...sub-0 soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> update please *Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.7 -- 1x Titan X 1557 / 2006 -- *SCORE 20375*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6435010
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *opt33*
> 
> Opt33 -- 4790K @ 5.0 -- 1x Titan X 1537 / 2006 -- SCORE 18353
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6436854


----------



## KuuFA

Oops fixed thanks forceman!


----------



## V3teran

[email protected]@ 1590mhz \ 2003 score 19120
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4473057


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KuuFA*
> 
> KuuFA - 3770k @ 4.8 - Titan - X @ 1501 / 4000 - 16581 - 3/26/15
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4457916
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need to get my 5.0/ memory timings for benching down.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *V3teran*
> 
> [email protected]@ 1590mhz \ 2003 score 19120
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4473057
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!













Why are these all ending up with the same memory clock.


----------



## V3teran

I have no idea, maybe its a flaw in the software monitoring because the card is new. Maybe an update or 2 down the road things will change.


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> .....well, might as well give 'MyDog' s.th. to chew on' ( ha ha)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ; though I'm running CPU still on water at 4.7G...sub-0 soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> update please *Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.7 -- 1x Titan X 1557 / 2006 -- *SCORE 20375*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6435010
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


All chewed out







, just hooked my chiller in the GPU-loop today and this is first run with water temp at 8 C

Mydog -- 5960X @ 5 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1534 / 2055 -- SCORE 20521

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4495280


----------



## Preim

gratz! Awaiting sub-zero, i want to see what these cards can do


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> All chewed out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , just hooked my chiller in the GPU-loop today and this is first run with water temp at 8 C
> 
> Mydog -- 5960X @ 5 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1534 / 2055 -- SCORE 20521
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4495280


...nice ! I'm resting Titan X over Eastern and next week; just moved all the uni-blocks to the 980s Cl


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> ...nice ! I'm resting Titan X over Eastern and next week; just moved all the uni-blocks to the 980s Cl


Using full-cover blocks here but they where out of back plates







, picking up my second Titan X tomorrow


----------



## Mydog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> .....well, might as well give 'MyDog' s.th. to chew on' ( ha ha)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ; though I'm running CPU still on water at 4.7G...sub-0 soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> update please *Joa3d43* -- 5960X @ 4.7 -- 1x Titan X 1557 / 2006 -- *SCORE 20375*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6435010
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


new driver(350.12) and bios(been through 15+ now







)

Mydog -- 5960X @ 5.1 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1542 / 2055 -- SCORE 20825

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4587210


----------



## Joa3d43

Update please ...first run of Titan X in two weeks (beauty sleep !); I like those new drivers









*Joa3d43* -- 5960X / 5.1G -- 1x Titan X 1557 / 2020 -- *20891*


----------



## Forceman

Sorry for the delay in updating this - work is blocking OCN for some reason and I haven't had time at home.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mydog*
> 
> All chewed out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , just hooked my chiller in the GPU-loop today and this is first run with water temp at 8 C
> 
> Mydog -- 5960X @ 5 GHz -- 1x Titan X 1534 / 2055 -- SCORE 20521
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4495280
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!













Briefly
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Joa3d43*
> 
> Update please ...first run of Titan X in two weeks (beauty sleep !); I like those new drivers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Joa3d43* -- 5960X / 5.1G -- 1x Titan X 1557 / 2020 -- *20891*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Pulled the 3DMark link off your screenshot.


----------



## Joa3d43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Sorry for the delay in updating this - work is blocking OCN for some reason and I haven't had time at home.
> -snip-
> Pulled the 3DMark link off your screenshot.


...tx...sorry - was 4 am... but at least I remembered the OCN name / date notepad this time


----------



## Jpmboy

jpmboy --- [email protected] --- GTX Titan X 1542/2052 --- 20500

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4685795


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> jpmboy --- [email protected] --- GTX Titan X 1542/2052 --- 20500
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4685795


----------



## jordan1794

New Entry
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6809525?

jordan1794 - i7 4790K @4.8 GHz - EVGA GTX 980 SC w/ ACX 2.0 @ 1519 / 2103 - 14032
- Date (30/04/2015)


I think my VRAM is what makes my card, if I leave the GPU clock on stock I can achieve 8.5 Ghz+ without artifacts or crashing.


----------



## spacin9

New entry

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6932359?

spacin9 -- 5820K @ 4.75 Ghz -- Titan X @ 1533 Mhz / 8400 Mhz -- 19,571


----------



## mus1mus

Update:

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6950378

AMD FX 8320E at 5.18Ghz

R9-290 at 1225 / 1725

Score - 10359


----------



## Forceman

Sorry, I've been crazy busy, I'll get these updates in Sunday or Monday.


----------



## mus1mus

No worries @Forceman









Update 1.1:

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4854291

AMD FX 8320E at 5.2Ghz

R9-290 at 1221 / 1717

Score - 10535


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jordan1794*
> 
> New Entry
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6809525?
> 
> jordan1794 - i7 4790K @4.8 GHz - EVGA GTX 980 SC w/ ACX 2.0 @ 1519 / 2103 - 14032
> - Date (30/04/2015)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think my VRAM is what makes my card, if I leave the GPU clock on stock I can achieve 8.5 Ghz+ without artifacts or crashing.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spacin9*
> 
> New entry
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6932359?
> 
> spacin9 -- 5820K @ 4.75 Ghz -- Titan X @ 1533 Mhz / 8400 Mhz -- 19,571
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> No worries @Forceman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Update 1.1:
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4854291
> 
> AMD FX 8320E at 5.2Ghz
> 
> R9-290 at 1221 / 1717
> 
> Score - 10535
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## MerkageTurk

hey is my score okay?


----------



## Kimir

Finally hit 16K!

Kimir --- 4930K @ 4.6Ghz --- 980 KPE @ 1630/2100Mhz --- 16015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5072379

Now, FSU...


----------



## lever2stacks

I have a higher score but I didn't get a screen shot.

Lever2stackS - 4790k @ 4.9 - evga gtx 980 sc @ 1608 / 2053 - 14295 - 6/12/2015


----------



## glnn_23

glnn_23 - E5-1680v3 @ 4.6Ghz - GTX TitanX 1548 / 1990 - *19866* - 06/15/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7338841


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Finally hit 16K!
> 
> Kimir --- 4930K @ 4.6Ghz --- 980 KPE @ 1630/2100Mhz --- 16015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5072379
> 
> Now, FSU...











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lever2stacks*
> 
> I have a higher score but I didn't get a screen shot.
> 
> Lever2stackS - 4790k @ 4.9 - evga gtx 980 sc @ 1608 / 2053 - 14295 - 6/12/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Need a 3DMark link.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> glnn_23 - E5-1680v3 @ 4.6Ghz - GTX TitanX 1548 / 1990 - *19866* - 06/15/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7338841
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## lever2stacks

whoops sorry I thought I had it on there.

Lever2stackS - 4790k @ 4.9 - evga gtx 980 sc @ 1608 / 2053 - 14295 - 6/12/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7310812


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lever2stacks*
> 
> whoops sorry I thought I had it on there.
> 
> Lever2stackS - 4790k @ 4.9 - evga gtx 980 sc @ 1608 / 2053 - 14295 - 6/12/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7310812
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## ski-bum

NEW ENTRY
ski-bum --- [email protected] --- EVGA 980ti SC ACX2.2 @ 1431 / 3602 --- 16076 ---- 06/21/2015


3dMark URL


----------



## mus1mus

New Entry:

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7468305

AMD FX 8370E at 5.217Ghz

GTX 780 at 1405/ 1752

Score - 10426


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ski-bum*
> 
> NEW ENTRY
> ski-bum --- [email protected] --- EVGA 980ti SC ACX2.2 @ 1431 / 3602 --- 16076 ---- 06/21/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3dMark URL











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> New Entry:
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7468305
> 
> AMD FX 8370E at 5.217Ghz
> 
> GTX 780 at 1405/ 1752
> 
> Score - 10426
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## sparklingwigles

Sparklingwigles - I5 4670K @4.5ghz - gtx980Ti @ 1495 / 2247 - 15643
07/01/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7582614


----------



## DreamTheatrics

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7594454

DreamTheatrics - Intel i7 3770k @ 4.6Ghz - EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC w/EK-FC Block @ 1548 / 3981 - 16775
- (02/07/2015) (today)



I need a CPU upgrade. My graphics score is almost 22k, but it's the physics and combined that kill me.


----------



## ski-bum

UPDATE
ski-bum --- i7 4930K @ 4.5 --- GTX 980ti SC --- 1524/3600 --- 16444 --- 07/02/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5284556

I had a fan tach problem with my other 980ti which had an ASIC of 60.8 so I RMA'd it and received a card with an ASIC of 77.6. My 3D Mark went from 16076 to 16444 with the ACX cooler.


----------



## cstkl1

cstkl1 --- i7 4790K @ 4.7 --- GTX Titan X --- 1508/4000 --- *17953* (7/2/2015)



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7600305?


----------



## HeinrichHimmler

NEW ENTRY

HeinrichHimmler --- [email protected] --- Gigabyte 980ti G1 @ 1544 / 4016 --- 17866 ----
02/207/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5285921


----------



## Offler

How do you do there squire? I also am not of Minehead being born but I in your Peterborough Lincolnshire was given birth to. But am staying in Peterborough Lincolnshire house all time during vor, due to jolly old running sores, and vos unable to go in the streets or to go visit football matches or go to Nuremburg. Ha ha. Am retired vindow cleaner and pacifist, without doing war crimes. Oh...and am glad England vin Vorld Cup. Bobby Charlton. Martin Peters. And eating I am lots of chips and fish and hole in the toads and Dundee cakes on Piccadilly Line, don't you know old chap, vot! And I vos head of Gestapo for ten years. Ah! Five years! Nein! No! Oh. Was NOT head of Gestapo AT ALL! I was not, I make joke!


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sparklingwigles*
> 
> Sparklingwigles - I5 4670K @4.5ghz - gtx980Ti @ 1495 / 2247 - 15643
> 07/01/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7582614
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DreamTheatrics*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7594454
> 
> DreamTheatrics - Intel i7 3770k @ 4.6Ghz - EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC w/EK-FC Block @ 1548 / 3981 - 16775
> - (02/07/2015) (today)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I need a CPU upgrade. My graphics score is almost 22k, but it's the physics and combined that kill me.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ski-bum*
> 
> UPDATE
> ski-bum --- i7 4930K @ 4.5 --- GTX 980ti SC --- 1524/3600 --- 16444 --- 07/02/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5284556
> 
> I had a fan tach problem with my other 980ti which had an ASIC of 60.8 so I RMA'd it and received a card with an ASIC of 77.6. My 3D Mark went from 16076 to 16444 with the ACX cooler.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> cstkl1 --- i7 4790K @ 4.7 --- GTX Titan X --- 1508/4000 --- *17953* (7/2/2015)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7600305?











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeinrichHimmler*
> 
> NEW ENTRY
> 
> HeinrichHimmler --- [email protected] --- Gigabyte 980ti G1 @ 1544 / 4016 --- 17866 ----
> 02/207/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5285921
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## stahlhart

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5295211

stahlhart --- [email protected] --- MSI GTX 980ti Gaming 6G @ 1507 / 4002 --- 18012 ----
03/07/2015


----------



## mus1mus

New Entry:
Late post.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5230732

i7-5930K @ 4.8GHz

GTX 980TI at 1522/2048

Score - 19021


----------



## Forceman

New Entry

Forceman --- i7 4790K @ 4.8 --- Zotac GTX 980 Ti @ 1490/1928 --- 17041

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7651396


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stahlhart*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5295211
> 
> stahlhart --- [email protected] --- MSI GTX 980ti Gaming 6G @ 1507 / 4002 --- 18012 ----
> 03/07/2015











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> New Entry:
> Late post.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5230732
> 
> i7-5930K @ 4.8GHz
> 
> GTX 980TI at 1522/2048
> 
> Score - 19021
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Forceman --- i7 4790K @ 4.8 --- Zotac GTX 980 Ti @ 1490/1928 --- 17041
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7651396
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Forceman --- i7 4790K @ 4.8 --- Zotac GTX 980 Ti @ 1490/1928 --- 17041
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7651396


Stock Voltage?

Pretty good clocker huh?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Stock Voltage?
> 
> Pretty good clocker huh?


Yeah, just got it installed today. Need to do some more tweaking, and look into modding the BIOS. Core temps are great with the EK block, but is there anyway to monitor VRM temps on a reference card?


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Stock Voltage?
> 
> Pretty good clocker huh?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, just got it installed today. Need to do some more tweaking.
Click to expand...

I'm gonna try how far I can go without adding Vs. Might trick the driver for lower TDPs.

Good luck on your new toy!.
Missed your edit.

BIOS mod ftw. I have a ref card too. And no way to monitor it's VRM. I reckon they're not too hot anyway.

On a reference cooler, touching the back of the card, no heat buildup so far. But I am playing with it on a 15C ambient. lol


----------



## ALT F4

Any trick to avoid SystemInfo glitching out?

Just spent the past hour restarting, punching in settings, all to have 3dmark freeze up, crash, or not load.

I'm on 8.1 64bit, geforce 353.38 hotfix drivers with a fresh install of 3DMark. I'm trying to exclude nvidia drivers out of the equation but with random crashes at desktop in the previous drivers I don't know what to think.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ALT F4*
> 
> Any trick to avoid SystemInfo glitching out?
> 
> Just spent the past hour restarting, punching in settings, all to have 3dmark freeze up, crash, or not load.
> 
> I'm on 8.1 64bit, geforce 353.38 hotfix drivers with a fresh install of 3DMark. I'm trying to exclude nvidia drivers out of the equation but with random crashes at desktop in the previous drivers I don't know what to think.


Always a PITA to reboot your PC after a Driver crash. That's been happening on me all the while. Unfortunately, we can't do anything about it.

Also, lower your OC a bit or use a custom bios to increase the power limit.


----------



## ALT F4

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Always a PITA to reboot your PC after a Driver crash. That's been happening on me all the while. Unfortunately, we can't do anything about it.
> 
> Also, lower your OC a bit or use a custom bios to increase the power limit.










I was hoping this wasn't a thing.

I know sometimes after driver crash it is a pain to even get OC settings to kick in sometimes but the 3dmark systeminfo freezing on fresh reboots is really annoying. Guess I'll wait until next time and give 3Dmark a fresh install to rule that out. Hopefully Nvidia will have another hotfix driver ready since many of us have gone through half a dozen with the same issues.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ALT F4*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was hoping this wasn't a thing.
> 
> I know sometimes after driver crash it is a pain to even get OC settings to kick in sometimes but the *3dmark systeminfo freezing on fresh reboots is really annoying*. Guess I'll wait until next time and give 3Dmark a fresh install to rule that out. Hopefully Nvidia will have another hotfix driver ready since many of us have gone through half a dozen with the same issues.


Have you updated your OS?

DirectX, etc.. might be missing.

Anyway, 353.38 has no TDRs as they say. I'm checking it out myself.


----------



## DreamTheatrics

I'm still on 353.30 with my 980 Ti. I feel like I'm the only person not getting TDR's. When I bought my card I reformatted Windows and installed the drivers like that and haven't had a single issue.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DreamTheatrics*
> 
> I'm still on 353.30 with my 980 Ti. I feel like I'm the only person not getting TDR's. When I bought my card I reformatted Windows and installed the drivers like that and haven't had a single issue.


It happens when you push an OC.


----------



## DreamTheatrics

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> It happens when you push an OC.


Yeah I've gotten them from that MANY times from unstable OC's (1600 is not going to happen







I'll just stick with 1560), but I hear people saying that they are getting them in chrome or on the desktop or "3dmark systeminfo freezing on fresh reboots" and I'm saying I've never gotten one that wasn't caused by an unstable OC.


----------



## ALT F4

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DreamTheatrics*
> 
> Yeah I've gotten them from that MANY times from unstable OC's (1600 is not going to happen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll just stick with 1560), but I hear people saying that they are getting them in chrome or on the desktop or "3dmark systeminfo freezing on fresh reboots" and I'm saying I've never gotten one that wasn't caused by an unstable OC.


Problem is the recent drivers that actually have cause those chrome/firefox, random tdr, and other issues. This is why I was asking if anyone else has had systeminfo freeze on fresh reboots. Felt it's more appropriate to ask here than in a driver thread.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DreamTheatrics*
> 
> Yeah I've gotten them from that MANY times from unstable OC's (1600 is not going to happen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll just stick with 1560), but I hear people saying that they are getting them in chrome or on the desktop or "3dmark systeminfo freezing on fresh reboots" and I'm saying I've never gotten one that wasn't caused by an unstable OC.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ALT F4*
> 
> Problem is the recent drivers that actually have cause those chrome/firefox, random tdr, and other issues. This is why I was asking if anyone else has had systeminfo freeze on fresh reboots. Felt it's more appropriate to ask here than in a driver thread.


Same here. Didn't experience any issues other than OC related. But I gotta say, these 2 (recommended) drivers available for the 980TI were just crap.

I have a feeling they did their Voodoo to cap these cards. Imma try 350.12 for the Titan-X









@ALT F4
Try this:

Apologies for crashing your thread @Forceman


----------



## ALT F4

Found some info on the 3DMark site about the issues with upgrading to 8.1 and systeminfo. Tried their steps but not much improvement. After dozens of reboots and reproduction attempts I found a small trick that helped.

Not sure if this is what people on 8.1 are currently doing or have done, but I'm not punching in any overclocks until 3Dmark closes the GUI to fire up the benchmarks and that is when I click apply on precision x and the classified controller.

For whatever reason, this works almost flawlessly while clicking apply beforehand constantly leads to systeminfo freezing and freezing the PC along with it and no TDR's ( I had to test stock settings also to rule out that my "unstable overclock" may be crashing systeminfo









So my options seem really limited, clear some space for a dual boot windows 7 benchmarking partition or rolling back to 347 nvidia drivers and older bios where I didn't encounter this issue with 3dmark. Will work through the steps as time allows. If anyone else on 8.1 is doing something like this to benchmark please let me know.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ALT F4*
> 
> Found some info on the 3DMark site about the issues with upgrading to 8.1 and systeminfo. Tried their steps but not much improvement. After dozens of reboots and reproduction attempts I found a small trick that helped.
> 
> Not sure if this is what people on 8.1 are currently doing or have done, but I'm not punching in any overclocks until 3Dmark closes the GUI to fire up the benchmarks and that is when I click apply on precision x and the classified controller.
> 
> For whatever reason, this works almost flawlessly while clicking apply beforehand constantly leads to systeminfo freezing and freezing the PC along with it and no TDR's ( I had to test stock settings also to rule out that my "unstable overclock" may be crashing systeminfo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So my options seem really limited, clear some space for a dual boot windows 7 benchmarking partition or rolling back to 347 nvidia drivers and older bios where I didn't encounter this issue with 3dmark. Will work through the steps as time allows. If anyone else on 8.1 is doing something like this to benchmark please let me know.


My only issue at the moment is Firestrike scoring my Physics less than my stock CPU OC. And yes, Direct3D 11 causing my 290 to black out and back on the duration of the test with no Driver crash or anything. Just the display going in and out while the test continues to run fine. So maybe something got FUBAR on my Windows Install.

Pointing DirectX11 as the cause since Passmark tests goe fine till 3D11 test.

Going back to Windows 7 and check.


----------



## yawa

Well 15.7 Beta made quite a difference in my Scores. I'm pretty sure I could take the top spot for 290X user's with more voltage (without using the tess cheat no less).

yawa - 4790k @ 4.5 Ghz - 290X @ 1225 / 1402 - 11306 - (07/19/2015)

Also...

Graphics Score : 14191
Physics Score : 12500
Combined Score: 4239

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7816706?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> Well 15.7 Beta made quite a difference in my Scores. I'm pretty sure I could take the top spot for 290X user's with more voltage (without using the tess cheat no less).
> 
> yawa - 4790k @ 4.5 Ghz - 290X @ 1225 / 1402 - 11306 - (07/19/2015)
> 
> Also...
> 
> Graphics Score : 14191
> Physics Score : 12500
> Combined Score: 4239
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7816706?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Your total score actually went down.


----------



## yawa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your total score actually went down.


Oh I'm aware (I got a dud 4790K, so I try to keep it lower now) but my GPU score is up quite a bit (at a lower clock). Which is all I care about really.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quick run, I'm getting in the mood for 3D benching again so might be more to come, didn't expect to submit so forgot memory tab - no trouble if not valid, Forceman

Silent Scone--- i7 5960X at 4.7 GHz --- TITAN X at 1302 MHz (base) / 2020MHz --- 19707

21/07/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7843762?


----------



## yawa

So I was told that I should point out, that I am using absolutely No Tess mods here (Real men don't bench with Tess mods : | ), since there is a way to mask some of them.

15.7 really did add some points to the graphics score for 290X users.

Newest bench...

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5505932

yawa--- i7 4790k at 4.6 GHz --- 290X 1264/1530 --- 11468

GPU Score: 14714
Physics Score: 13011
Combined: 4049


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Quick run, I'm getting in the mood for 3D benching again so might be more to come, didn't expect to submit so forgot memory tab - no trouble if not valid, Forceman
> 
> Silent Scone--- i7 5960X at 4.7 GHz --- TITAN X at 1302 MHz (base) / 2020MHz --- 19707
> 
> 21/07/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7843762?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












What's the boost clock on that run? 1602?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yawa*
> 
> So I was told that I should point out, that I am using absolutely No Tess mods here (Real men don't bench with Tess mods : | ), since there is a way to mask some of them.
> 
> 15.7 really did add some points to the graphics score for 290X users.
> 
> Newest bench...
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5505932
> 
> yawa--- i7 4790k at 4.6 GHz --- 290X 1264/1530 --- 11468
> 
> GPU Score: 14714
> Physics Score: 13011
> Combined: 4049
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












If I remembered what it took to get 1250 out of my card, I'd try another run with the newer drivers. I think I needed Asus GPU Tweak and +200mV.


----------



## Silent Scone

Around 1550 IIRC, I've actually beaten it by about 1,500 points but will update another time.

Having dreadful scaling problems on 353.38 and .49. Not sure if it's a Futuremark bug or the drivers, or my system. Never ever had an issue with SLI scaling before in Firestrike, it seems to be bottling out with a hard limit of 147 frames per second, both GT1 and GT2 seem to hit that and stop. It's not a frame cap, least not one I know to be active. Need to contact Futuremark, doesn't make any sense at all.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Around 1550 IIRC, I've actually beaten it by about 1,500 points but will update another time.
> 
> Having dreadful scaling problems on 353.38 and .49. Not sure if it's a Futuremark bug or the drivers, or my system. Never ever had an issue with SLI scaling before in Firestrike, it seems to be bottling out with a hard limit of 147 frames per second, both GT1 and GT2 seem to hit that and stop. It's not a frame cap, least not one I know to be active. Need to contact Futuremark, doesn't make any sense at all.


Dare I suggest a CPU Bottleneck.


----------



## iateab

Pretty shocking and disappointing that the mods would allow the name HeimlichHimmler on the leaderboard.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Dare I suggest a CPU Bottleneck.


Doubtful, I've tried changing the detail and the run stays the same @ 4.8.

Tomb Raider @ 1080p nets me 350 FPS LOL

[EDIT] http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7878831? That's my 1.28v run, will validate it another time though Forceman, cheers


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Doubtful, I've tried changing the detail and the run stays the same @ 4.8.
> 
> Tomb Raider @ 1080p nets me 350 FPS LOL


Okay. It is a bit too soon for a 5960X to be a bottleneck, I just jumped the gun.


----------



## Silent Scone

It's one of the most odd things I've seen. Even lowering the resolution to 720p the framerate will cap at 147 lol. Don't have the energy to format reinstall. May as well wait till WIN10


----------



## yawa

I feel like my combined score is super low. I swear I turned off power saving on my 4790k. Blagh...

It's been awhile since I benched seriously, so it's entirely possible I'm missing a crucial and basic step. Nonetheless, I think I'm gonna go Windows 10 this weekend, as I'm due for a clean reinstall.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> It's one of the most odd things I've seen. Even lowering the resolution to 720p the framerate will cap at 147 lol. Don't have the energy to format reinstall. May as well wait till WIN10


Are you running Gsync..?
Just a hunch from some wild google searches, but try a non Gsync monitor if you have one.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Are you running Gsync..?
> Just a hunch from some wild google searches, but try a non Gsync monitor if you have one.


Lol no Phillips 4k VA. It's honestly really strange. I go away tomorrow so don't really fancy reinstalling W81 at the moment. I'll send FM a ticket today, something is physically locking down the standard test to 147fps. You might be partially correct though as I think maybe 3Dmark is seeing a refresh cap that isn't there


----------



## marc0053

marc_0053 - i7 5960x @ 4.9 ghz - GTX Titan X - 1543MHz / 2050 MHz - Score = 20,859

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8037482?


----------



## fyzzz

New Entry

fyzzz - 4690k @ 4.9 ghz - R9 290 @ 1190/ 1750 - 11705 - 04/08/2015 No tess tweak,390x bios with tighter timings.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8046405?


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> fyzzz - 4690k @ 4.9 ghz - R9 290 @ 1190/ 1750 - 11705 - 04/08/2015 No tess tweak,390x bios with tighter timings.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8046405?


Hey @fyzzznoticed the improvement? Just broke 11K using that BIOS with an all AMD system. On much lower clocks.

Pretty good score mate.


----------



## fyzzz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Update to the CPU:
> 
> Hey @fyzzznoticed the improvement? Just broke 11K using that BIOS with an all AMD system. On much lower clocks.
> 
> Pretty good score mate.


The 390x bios gave a nice boost. Nice to break 11k on an all AMD system. Will probably update my score once i get my watercooling stuff, still on air. I also want to reach 10k physics score. I wonder if i can reach 12k score on my system.
EDIT: sorry if i write weird sometimes English is not my native language


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> The 390x bios gave a nice boost. Nice to break 11k on an all AMD system. Will probably update my score once i get my watercooling stuff, still on air. I also want to reach 10k physics score. I wonder if i can reach 12k score on my system.


Yeah. It does improve things a bit. Cooler temps now?

Mine won't break 25C with this BIOS.









Your system might benefit from a faster RAM. And Cache to improve the Physics score. Though I wouldn't worry about that too much.







Combined gives the total bigger boost than anything else in FS.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5607835

Edit: that's a lazy RAM you have there (no offense). That must be holding you back.


----------



## fyzzz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Yeah. It does improve things a bit. Cooler temps now?
> 
> Mine won't break 25C with this BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your system might benefit from a faster RAM. And Cache to improve the Physics score. Though I wouldn't worry about that too much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Combined gives the total bigger boost than anything else in FS.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5607835


25c wow that's low, mine goes up to 80 and sometimes 90c, air ftw!







. Wow 5,5 GHz that's a nice clock! What clocks did you have on your 290?


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> 25c wow that's low, mine goes up to 80 and sometimes 90c, air ftw!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Wow 5,5 GHz that's a nice clock! What clocks did you have on your 290?


1222/1720 IIRC. Thus can't get my entry at the moment. Forget to take a screenshot.









On water, I am pretty sure you will get more out of that card.









Water at 17C btw.







(anyway, much of the hijacking)

Sorry @Forceman


----------



## Jpmboy

after a brief play in CODAW, curoius to see what the 1440P/144Hz game clocks on this thing could do. Not bad:

jpmboy --- [email protected] --- GTX980TiKP --- 19990

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5627298


----------



## krezo

Krezo --- [email protected] GHz --- MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming @ 1502/2000 --- GPU score 21486 --- Overall 16630





http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8071254


----------



## marc0053

update:
marc_0053 - i7 5960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX Titan X - 1562 MHz / 2050 MHz - Score = 20930
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5653692


----------



## Starbomba

Here is my submission:

New Entry
Starbomba - Xeon X5650 @ 4.1 GHz - GTX 780 Classy @ 1370 / 1800 - 11320

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5333884


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> fyzzz - 4690k @ 4.9 ghz - R9 290 @ 1190/ 1750 - 11705 - 04/08/2015 No tess tweak,390x bios with tighter timings.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8046405?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> after a brief play in CODAW, curoius to see what the 1440P/144Hz game clocks on this thing could do. Not bad:
> 
> jpmboy --- [email protected] --- GTX980TiKP --- 19990
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5627298












Took the speeds from the screenshot, hope they are right.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *krezo*
> 
> Krezo --- [email protected] GHz --- MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming @ 1502/2000 --- GPU score 21486 --- Overall 16630
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8071254












I took it since we don't have many 980 Ti scores, but need a screenshot next time.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> update:
> marc_0053 - i7 5960x @ 4.9 GHz - GTX Titan X - 1562 MHz / 2050 MHz - Score = 20930
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5653692
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbomba*
> 
> Here is my submission:
> 
> New Entry
> Starbomba - Xeon X5650 @ 4.1 GHz - GTX 780 Classy @ 1370 / 1800 - 11320
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5333884












Need screenshot/speed validation.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Never entered here. A 3770K @ 4.5 ain't the physics powerhouse of a 5960X, but respectable graphics score. GPU-Z gets the clocks wrong on this MSI 980 Ti unless it's running during the test. The AB graph shows the correct numbers.

GnarlyCharlie- i7-3770K @ 4.5 -- 980 Ti @ 1510/7604-- Score: 16263 - Graphics 21232 - Date: 08/08/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8112811


----------



## krezo

*Update*

Krezo --- [email protected] GHz --- MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming @ 1502/2000 --- GPU score 21537--- Overall 16687
- 9/08/2015


----------



## Kimir

Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.8Ghz --- GTX 980 KPE @ 1640/2100 --- 16836



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5705143


----------



## 7uly1

7uly1 - i7-5960X @ 5.0 -- GTX Titan X @ 1570 / 2120-- Score: 21382 - Graphics 23860 - Date: 08/16/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5622111


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7uly1*
> 
> 7uly1 - i7-5960X @ 5.0 -- GTX Titan X @ 1570 / 2120-- Score: 21382 - Graphics 23860 - Date: 08/16/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5622111
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Very impressive! Just took a quick look at your albums, What were the eventual clocks through that run on the TX? (Also 4.8 cache is fairly astounding regardless of SS)


----------



## fyzzz

Update

fyzzz - i5 4690k @ 4.9 - R9 290 @ 1240 / 1750 - 12097 - 16/08/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8214970?


----------



## 7uly1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Very impressive! Just took a quick look at your albums, What were the eventual clocks through that run on the TX? (Also 4.8 cache is fairly astounding regardless of SS)


Tx... Cyclops 1.281 Bios with EK WB. Boost 1570Mhz clocks


----------



## waltercaorle

new entry

waltercaorle - i7 4790k @ 4.8 ghz - gtx970 @ 1609 / 2018 - 12209 - 16/08/2015



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5735360


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - - 5820k @ 4.5Ghz - - GTX Titan x @ 1521Mhz / 2028Mhz - - 19033

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8250568


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Never entered here. A 3770K @ 4.5 ain't the physics powerhouse of a 5960X, but respectable graphics score. GPU-Z gets the clocks wrong on this MSI 980 Ti unless it's running during the test. The AB graph shows the correct numbers.
> 
> GnarlyCharlie- i7-3770K @ 4.5 -- 980 Ti @ 1510/7604-- Score: 16263 - Graphics 21232 - Date: 08/08/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8112811
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Looks like you might have some room for more memory overclocking, most 980 Tis seem to hit around 2000.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *krezo*
> 
> *Update*
> 
> Krezo --- [email protected] GHz --- MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming @ 1502/2000 --- GPU score 21537--- Overall 16687
> - 9/08/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












No 3DMark link
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.8Ghz --- GTX 980 KPE @ 1640/2100 --- 16836
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5705143











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7uly1*
> 
> 7uly1 - i7-5960X @ 5.0 -- GTX Titan X @ 1570 / 2120-- Score: 21382 - Graphics 23860 - Date: 08/16/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5622111
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Update
> 
> fyzzz - i5 4690k @ 4.9 - R9 290 @ 1240 / 1750 - 12097 - 16/08/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8214970?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *waltercaorle*
> 
> new entry
> 
> waltercaorle - i7 4790k @ 4.8 ghz - gtx970 @ 1609 / 2018 - 12209 - 16/08/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5735360











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - - 5820k @ 4.5Ghz - - GTX Titan x @ 1521Mhz / 2028Mhz - - 19033
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8250568


----------



## Sgt Bilko

Sgt Bilko---FX-9590 @ 5.3Ghz---XFX DD R9 390x @ 1200/1700 (Stock Air)---10744



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5766796

Not sure if you want to lump this in with the 290x results or start a new one for the 390/x cards


----------



## mus1mus

Nice score sarge!


----------



## octiny

OCTINY --- 5960x @ 4.5Ghz --- GTX Titan X @ 1478/2010 (Air) --- 19307 --- 8/22/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5795452



Not bad for an ITX build!


----------



## kfxsti

kfxsti --- Intel Core i7-4720HQ @ 3.496 --- GTX 980m @ 1126/2506 (Air) ---8148 --- 8/25/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5820544



Lost a good deal of performance with this beta driver







lol will wipe and get my 10k back . just showing what the single GPU mobile can kinda do.


----------



## fyzzz

Isn't the 290 list in wrong order? The lowest score is at the top and the highest are at the bottom.


----------



## DannyDK

Im in a hurry so i have proberly not done this correct, but only have about 2 minuttes. I have a link to my score:

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8387274


----------



## looniam

[email protected] Classy 1510/1959---16301 (21511 graphics)---8/30/15



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8391704

DMM was actually 1.220







- temps hit 57c


----------



## barsh90

barsh90 --- i7 4790k @ 4.8GHz ---gigabyte 980 gtx TI gaming [email protected] 1567/2153 --- 17,518 ( *22,580 GRAPHICS*) --- august 31 2015



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5865795


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> [email protected] Classy 1510/1959---16301 (21511 graphics)---8/30/15
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8391704
> 
> DMM was actually 1.220
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - temps hit 57c


update(?)
[email protected] Classy 1515/1978---16353 (21627 graphics)---9/10/15



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5952020


----------



## Kimir

Seems like there is a little issue on my entry, it's with 5960X @ 4.8Ghz and not like my older score with 4930K @ 4.6Ghz. Also missing the link to the post (being this one: #1536)


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgt Bilko*
> 
> Sgt Bilko---FX-9590 @ 5.3Ghz---XFX DD R9 390x @ 1200/1700 (Stock Air)---10744
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5766796
> 
> Not sure if you want to lump this in with the 290x results or start a new one for the 390/x cards












I just put it with the 290s since there probably won't be many scores.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *octiny*
> 
> OCTINY --- 5960x @ 4.5Ghz --- GTX Titan X @ 1478/2010 (Air) --- 19307 --- 8/22/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5795452
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not bad for an ITX build!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kfxsti*
> 
> kfxsti --- Intel Core i7-4720HQ @ 3.496 --- GTX 980m @ 1126/2506 (Air) ---8148 --- 8/25/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5820544
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lost a good deal of performance with this beta driver
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol will wipe and get my 10k back . just showing what the single GPU mobile can kinda do.












I listed it, interesting to see what the mobile chip can do.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DannyDK*
> 
> Im in a hurry so i have proberly not done this correct, but only have about 2 minuttes. I have a link to my score:
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8387274












Need to follow the submission rules.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *barsh90*
> 
> barsh90 --- i7 4790k @ 4.8GHz ---gigabyte 980 gtx TI gaming [email protected] 1567/2153 --- 17,518 ( *22,580 GRAPHICS*) --- august 31 2015
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5865795












Nice memory clocks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> update(?)
> [email protected] Classy 1515/1978---16353 (21627 graphics)---9/10/15
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5952020



















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Seems like there is a little issue on my entry, it's with 5960X @ 4.8Ghz and not like my older score with 4930K @ 4.6Ghz. Also missing the link to the post (being this one: #1536)


Fixed, thanks.


----------



## DR4G00N

DR4G00N -- X5650 @ 4.2GHz -- 780 TI Windforce OC @ 1345/2025 (AIO water) -- 12154 (13848 Graphics) -- 9/12/15
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5968829



I need to buy another one of these beasts.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> [email protected] Classy 1510/1959---16301 (21511 graphics)---8/30/15
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8391704
> 
> DMM was actually 1.220
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - temps hit 57c
> 
> 
> 
> update(?)
> [email protected] Classy 1515/1978---16353 (21627 graphics)---9/10/15
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5952020
Click to expand...

*UPDATE*

looniam [email protected] CLS 1525/1965---16519 (21782 graphics) --- 9/14/2015


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5976857

yay.#30! . . .for now


----------



## crazycrave

crazycrave- Xeon X5660 @3.9Ghz turbo 4.3Ghz -290x 1051/1350 ..(overclocked 30Mhz) 10978 (12573 Graphics) 8/27/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5829224


----------



## one80

one80 - 5960X @ 4.2 - GTX Titan X @ 1460 / 1940 - *18783*
- 15/09/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8577885

Nothing breathtaking compared to some scores here, but not too bad for air...


----------



## DR4G00N

DR4G00N -- X5650 @ 4.2GHz -- GTX 780 Ti @ 1505MHz Core/ 1750MHz Mem, 1.25V (AIO Water) -- *12319*
-- 9/28/2015
Really pushing this gpu to the limit!









http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6097890


----------



## magnek

magnek -- 4930K @ 4.5GHz -- MSI 980 Ti Gaming 6G @ 1588MHz core/2001MHz mem (fullcover block) -- *18383 (21973 graphics)* -- 10/02/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6130974



Soooooooooo close to 22k graphics


----------



## bluedevil

bluedevil-- 5820K @ 4.6GHz -- EVGA 980 Ti SC ACX 2.0+ @ 1340MHz core/1753MHz mem -- 17238 (19499 graphics) -- 10/03/2015



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8777707

Finally broke 17k.


----------



## bluedevil

Ahem?


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluedevil*
> 
> bluedevil-- 5820K @ 4.6GHz -- EVGA 980 Ti SC ACX 2.0+ @ 1340MHz core/1753MHz mem -- 17238 (19499 graphics) -- 10/03/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8777707
> 
> Finally broke 17k.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluedevil*
> 
> Ahem?


OP waits for you to push eet.







18K should be your target.


----------



## alcaponedu69

ALL Stock cpu only in turbo mode

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8566493


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> *UPDATE*
> 
> looniam [email protected] CLS 1525/1965---16519 (21782 graphics) --- 9/14/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5976857
> 
> yay.#30! . . .for now











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crazycrave*
> 
> crazycrave- Xeon X5660 @3.9Ghz turbo 4.3Ghz -290x 1051/1350 ..(overclocked 30Mhz) 10978 (12573 Graphics) 8/27/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5829224











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one80*
> 
> one80 - 5960X @ 4.2 - GTX Titan X @ 1460 / 1940 - *18783*
> - 15/09/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8577885
> 
> Nothing breathtaking compared to some scores here, but not too bad for air...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> DR4G00N -- X5650 @ 4.2GHz -- GTX 780 Ti @ 1505MHz Core/ 1750MHz Mem, 1.25V (AIO Water) -- *12319*
> -- 9/28/2015
> Really pushing this gpu to the limit!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6097890
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> magnek -- 4930K @ 4.5GHz -- MSI 980 Ti Gaming 6G @ 1588MHz core/2001MHz mem (fullcover block) -- *18383 (21973 graphics)* -- 10/02/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6130974
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soooooooooo close to 22k graphics












Funny how so many 980 Tis end up at 2000 on the memory.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluedevil*
> 
> bluedevil-- 5820K @ 4.6GHz -- EVGA 980 Ti SC ACX 2.0+ @ 1340MHz core/1753MHz mem -- 17238 (19499 graphics) -- 10/03/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8777707
> 
> Finally broke 17k.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluedevil*
> 
> Ahem?


Sorry, couldn't update it on my mobile, and then it dropped off the bottom of my subscription page.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alcaponedu69*
> 
> ALL Stock cpu only in turbo mode
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8566493












Need to follow the submission guidelines.


----------



## cheesewood

New Entry

Cheesewood - i7 4790k @ 4.9Ghz - ASUS Stric OC GTX 980Ti @ 1275Mhz core (1376Mhz boost) / 2025Mhz Memory Clock - 17320
- (10/3/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6129705


----------



## bluedevil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> OP waits for you to push eet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 18K should be your target.


DONE! 18K!

bluedevil-- 5820K @ 4.7GHz -- EVGA 980 Ti SC ACX 2.0+ @ 1513MHz core/1753MHz mem -- 18007 (20621 graphics) -- 10/08/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6173533


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluedevil*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> OP waits for you to push eet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 18K should be your target.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DONE! 18K!
> 
> bluedevil-- 5820K @ 4.7GHz -- EVGA 980 Ti SC ACX 2.0+ @ 1513MHz core/1753MHz mem -- 18007 (20621 graphics) -- 10/08/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6173533
Click to expand...

Way to go.









Just wondering though, how's memory OC on that card? Most guys by far can achieve 2000 MHz on the VRAM.


----------



## bluedevil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Way to go.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just wondering though, how's memory OC on that card? Most guys by far can achieve 2000 MHz on the VRAM.


Haven't even touched it.







Should I?


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluedevil*
> 
> Haven't even touched it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should I?


Maybe


----------



## bluedevil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Maybe


I be creepin.....

bluedevil-- 5820K @ 4.7GHz -- EVGA 980 Ti SC ACX 2.0+ @ 1513MHz core/1950MHz mem -- 18134 (20899 graphics) -- 10/08/2015



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8839598?


----------



## Vellinious

Vellinious -- 5820k @ 4.7 -- EVGA GTX 970 FTW @ 1620 / 1998 -- 12674 (14434 graphics) -- 10/12/2015



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6091937


----------



## fyzzz

New Card! Will be put under water soon.

fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- Gigabyte 980 ti @ 1491.9 / 2052 -- 16431 (21543 graphics) -- 16/10/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6234593


----------



## ssiperko

New Entry
ssiperko - 5690x @ 4.7 - 980Ti @ 1601 / 4200 - 19912 (22362 graphics) - (10/19/2015)



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6257500

SS


----------



## Xevi

Xevi -- 4790k @ 4.5 -- Gigabyte G1 980 Ti @ 1491.9 / 2004 -- 17125 (21990 graphics)



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6067290


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cheesewood*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Cheesewood - i7 4790k @ 4.9Ghz - ASUS Stric OC GTX 980Ti @ 1275Mhz core (1376Mhz boost) / 2025Mhz Memory Clock - 17320
> - (10/3/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6129705
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluedevil*
> 
> I be creepin.....
> 
> bluedevil-- 5820K @ 4.7GHz -- EVGA 980 Ti SC ACX 2.0+ @ 1513MHz core/1950MHz mem -- 18134 (20899 graphics) -- 10/08/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8839598?



















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Vellinious -- 5820k @ 4.7 -- EVGA GTX 970 FTW @ 1620 / 1998 -- 12674 (14434 graphics) -- 10/12/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6091937











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> New Card! Will be put under water soon.
> 
> fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- Gigabyte 980 ti @ 1491.9 / 2052 -- 16431 (21543 graphics) -- 16/10/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6234593
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> New Entry
> ssiperko - 5690x @ 4.7 - 980Ti @ 1601 / 4200 - 19912 (22362 graphics) - (10/19/2015)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6257500
> 
> SS











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> Xevi -- 4790k @ 4.5 -- Gigabyte G1 980 Ti @ 1491.9 / 2004 -- 17125 (21990 graphics)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6067290


----------



## ssiperko

Hells Bells -- #2 980Ti ..... whoop whoop ....









SS


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> Hells Bells -- #2 980Ti ..... whoop whoop ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS


nice clocks. Though I am inclined to think your score may be borked!

At those clocks, both on CPU and GPU, you should've overtaken the other 980TI which was clocked lower in all aspects.

Maybe moar runs.

Just my two cents.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> nice clocks. Though I am inclined to think your score may be borked!
> 
> At those clocks, both on CPU and GPU, you should've overtaken the other 980TI which was clocked lower in all aspects.
> 
> Maybe moar runs.
> 
> Just my two cents.


I do agree but ........

I've made many passes and that is my best run. Even with my SLI 980 KPE's I wasn't that great at high clocks. I think my system needs other tweaks to really shine but I just don't know what they are. I think I need to focus on a minimal OS and work from there. :dunno:

SS


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

FWIW, I was running my cache OC @ 4.4, doing OK but something didn't feel right. Reduced it to 4.0, left the voltage the same, and gained 400 points on the next run of FSU. I've tweaked it back to 4.2 now, and that seems to be a happy place - 4.6 core/4.2 cache.


----------



## cheng94

'New Entry'

cheng94 - i7 5820k @ 4.624 ghz - GTX 980 Ti @ 1,287 mhz / 1,903 mhz - 18238
- Date (21/10/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6275163


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> I do agree but ........
> 
> I've made many passes and that is my best run. Even with my SLI 980 KPE's I wasn't that great at high clocks. I think my system needs other tweaks to really shine but I just don't know what they are. I think I need to focus on a minimal OS and work from there. :dunno:
> 
> SS


Might wanna verify if you are perfcapped at those clocks.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Might wanna verify if you are perfcapped at those clocks.


With GPU-Z?

SS


----------



## mus1mus

Something like that. Yes. Frequency not static or at least stays most of the time to your defined value is a clue.









Try a lower freq, like 1500/2000 and check the score if you can't have monitoring ON.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Might wanna verify if you are perfcapped at those clocks.


I don't see it.

See below!

SS


----------



## mus1mus

Ohh, pushheet! You are very near jpmboy's!

Could be just driver difference.







And optimisation. Memory, most likely making him ahead. How's your Cache?

Yep, as I was thinking: just picked this btw.
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6285229/fs/5092837


----------



## Wolfsbora

Quick question, when asking for core speed in the entry post, are we to put what is listed on the Fire Strike page? Or the OC that we are running?


----------



## gqneon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wolfsbora*
> 
> Quick question, when asking for core speed in the entry post, are we to put what is listed on the Fire Strike page? Or the OC that we are running?


The actual OC you are running.


----------



## Wolfsbora

New Entry
Wolfsbora - 3770K @ 4.5 - 980 Ti Classified @ 1516 / 1903 - 16007
- Date (10/22/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6285777

Thanks, @gqneon! +1


----------



## SabbathHB

New entry
SabbathHB - AMD 1100T @ 4.0ghz - R9 280X @ 1235/1655 - 8070
Test Date 2/2/2015
Today's Date 10/22/2015

I hold the Fire Strike record for the 1100T/R9 280X single GPU class. It's nothing amazing, but it's mine and it gets me on this list at least for now!









http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3970038



Edit: AND I'll be the only 280X on the list too!
Plus I forgot the scores:

Graphics Score
9501

Physics Score
8526

Combined Score
3652


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Ohh, pushheet! You are very near jpmboy's!
> 
> Could be just driver difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And optimisation. Memory, most likely making him ahead. How's your Cache?
> 
> Yep, as I was thinking: just picked this btw.
> http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6285229/fs/5092837


Wow ..... IF I could get my CPU up thar it appears I could break 20k. I have a feeling that when I can get my room temps into the teens I'll be able to run 4.8/4.5 and 1625/4300 hopefully.
Trying to get my system memory fast at 3000 now and I really should do a clean OS install and kill all the crap from it I don't need.

I may try some different drivers tonight along with 8.1 passes and see how that pans out.









My cache was 43 on that pass. I can run it at 45 and in Aidia64 FPU stress it's maxes out at 84c which I don't care for but I don't really stress it doing my normal stuff anyway.

I'm doing so much tweaking it's silly.









SS


----------



## mus1mus

Remember 3000MHz will need to be done on 125 strap. So your CPU speed will be a bit different. And 3200 will be your target at strap 100.

3200C15/16 is your target so is 3000C14/15. The lower the latency, the better. 3200 seemed to be sweeter and easier.


----------



## muhd86

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6311722

CPU-Z VALIDATOR

*
muhd86 p-18248 - i7 5820k @ 4.7ghz - Evga Gtx 980 ti 1252/2003 Mhz - 32 Gb @ 2800Mhz*


----------



## ssiperko

*Updated Entry
ssiperko - 5690x @ 4.7 - 980Ti @ 1595 / 4275 - 20062 (22379 graphics) - (10/26/2015)*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9049273?



SS


----------



## Chilipants

Not sure if Ive done this right, its gone 3am here and my son and I were bored with tanks so we had a crack at this to introduce him to o/c
anyway here it is.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6332392


----------



## Evil-Mobo

Updated benchmark in post # 1603


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Remember 3000MHz will need to be done on 125 strap. So your CPU speed will be a bit different. And 3200 will be your target at strap 100.
> 
> 3200C15/16 is your target so is 3000C14/15. The lower the latency, the better. 3200 seemed to be sweeter and easier.


Got some new ram last night and 3000 worked perfectly straight away.
Going to look for a J513 chip today.

SS


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *barsh90*
> 
> barsh90 --- i7 4790k @ 4.8GHz ---gigabyte 980 gtx TI gaming [email protected] 1567/2153 --- 17,518 ( *22,580 GRAPHICS*) --- august 31 2015
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5865795


That's a nice score.

Are you on air?









SS


----------



## cookiesowns

Man you guys with nice 980Ti's. I can only muster 1560-1570 on my KPE.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cookiesowns*
> 
> Man you guys with nice 980Ti's. I can only muster 1560-1570 on my KPE.


Wouldn't get too upset. One of my TITAN X can barely manage 1400 core where as the other can do 1570 with 1.2v.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cookiesowns*
> 
> Man you guys with nice 980Ti's. I can only muster 1560-1570 on my KPE.


You're only able to get to 1570 on a KPE? Is it under water?


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> Got some new ram last night and 3000 worked perfectly straight away.
> Going to look for a J513 chip today.
> 
> SS


Nice. Which kit?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cookiesowns*
> 
> Man you guys with nice 980Ti's. I can only muster 1560-1570 on my KPE.


Did you pay top dollar price for one? Retarn it. Maybe?


----------



## Evil-Mobo

'New Entry'
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6374012

11/01/15: i7 6700K @ 4.6/GTX 980Ti HOF @ 1505 Core/1935 Memory

Thanks


----------



## Wickedtt

'New Entry'

Wickedtt - Xeon X5660 @ 4.7ghz - R9 290x Lightning 1175/1675 (On Air) - 12209p - 10/29/15 woot top two r9 290x.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9040597


----------



## fyzzz

I found a update for my 290

fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- AMD R9 [email protected] 1260 /1740 -- 12296 (15191 graphics) -- 10/10/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6192783


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Nice. Which kit?


RipJaws 4
4x8 15/15/15/35

Scored a J518 - playing with it now.

SS


----------



## devilhead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Evil-Mobo*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9095849?
> 
> 10/30/2015: i7 6700K @ 4.6/GTX 980Ti HOF @ 1501 Core/3829 Memory
> 
> Thanks


push that HOF harder








here is mine on stock 1.2v, maybe later will try too overclock core more and post some score http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5901563


----------



## Evil-Mobo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *devilhead*
> 
> push that HOF harder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here is mine on stock 1.2v, maybe later will try too overclock core more and post some score http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5901563


I will once it goes under water brother


----------



## fyzzz

Update

fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1520 /2088 -- 16618 (21936 graphics) -- 01/11/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6370188


Still tweaking and trying some things, so another update may come later. Soo close to 22k gpu score.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Update
> 
> fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1520 /2088 -- 16618 (21936 graphics) -- 01/11/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6370188
> 
> 
> Still tweaking and trying some things, so another update may come later. Soo close to 22k gpu score.


that's about 32% faster than your 290.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> RipJaws 4
> 4x8 15/15/15/35
> 
> Scored a J518 - playing with it now.
> 
> SS


How's the J?









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Update
> 
> fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1520 /2088 -- 16618 (21936 graphics) -- 01/11/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6370188
> 
> 
> Still tweaking and trying some things, so another update may come later. Soo close to 22k gpu score.
> 
> 
> 
> that's about 32% faster than your 290.
Click to expand...

It would sit around average of the max FPS of the 290. Pretty stout card.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> How's the J?


Better....... need the cool nights now. Should hit 4.9 and 45 once I get it.

SS


----------



## bigblock990

'New Entry'

Bigblock990 - 4770k @ 4.8 - Titan X @ 1498/7310 - 17345 - 11/1/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6372028


----------



## Forceman

With heartfelt thanks to Google for updating the spreadsheet without telling me, thereby killing the formulas I used to compile the combined scores. Excellent use on an hour figuring out how to reconstruct them.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cheng94*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> cheng94 - i7 5820k @ 4.624 ghz - GTX 980 Ti @ 1,287 mhz / 1,903 mhz - 18238
> - Date (21/10/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6275163












Need screenshot, or at least accurate speeds
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wolfsbora*
> 
> New Entry
> Wolfsbora - 3770K @ 4.5 - 980 Ti Classified @ 1516 / 1903 - 16007
> - Date (10/22/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6285777
> 
> Thanks, @gqneon! +1












Need screenshot
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SabbathHB*
> 
> New entry
> SabbathHB - AMD 1100T @ 4.0ghz - R9 280X @ 1235/1655 - 8070
> Test Date 2/2/2015
> Today's Date 10/22/2015
> 
> I hold the Fire Strike record for the 1100T/R9 280X single GPU class. It's nothing amazing, but it's mine and it gets me on this list at least for now!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3970038
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: AND I'll be the only 280X on the list too!
> Plus I forgot the scores:
> 
> Graphics Score
> 9501
> 
> Physics Score
> 8526
> 
> Combined Score
> 3652












Sorry, not recording 280X scores.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *muhd86*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6311722
> 
> CPU-Z VALIDATOR
> 
> *
> muhd86 p-18248 - i7 5820k @ 4.7ghz - Evga Gtx 980 ti 1252/2003 Mhz - 32 Gb @ 2800Mhz*












Need screenshot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> *Updated Entry
> ssiperko - 5690x @ 4.7 - 980Ti @ 1595 / 4275 - 20062 (22379 graphics) - (10/26/2015)*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9049273?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS












Nice score
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chilipants*
> 
> Not sure if Ive done this right, its gone 3am here and my son and I were bored with tanks so we had a crack at this to introduce him to o/c
> anyway here it is.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6332392
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Evil-Mobo*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6374012
> 
> 11/01/15: i7 6700K @ 4.6/GTX 980Ti HOF @ 1505 Core/1935 Memory
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Wickedtt - Xeon X5660 @ 4.7ghz - R9 290x Lightning 1175/1675 (On Air) - 12209p - 10/29/15 woot top two r9 290x.
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9040597
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Update
> 
> fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1520 /2088 -- 16618 (21936 graphics) -- 01/11/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6370188
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still tweaking and trying some things, so another update may come later. Soo close to 22k gpu score.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigblock990*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Bigblock990 - 4770k @ 4.8 - Titan X @ 1498/7310 - 17345 - 11/1/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6372028
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> With heartfelt thanks to Google for updating the spreadsheet without telling me, thereby killing the formulas I used to compile the combined scores. Excellent use on an hour figuring out how to reconstruct them.


Frustrating isn't it. No notification or warning and, bang, changed. This has happened many times already. Whether data entry or even just the way URLs work. If there is a log of changes or an update page explaining, I'd like to know.


----------



## Wolfsbora

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Frustrating isn't it. No notification or warning and, bang, changed. This has happened many times already. Whether data entry or even just the way URLs work. If there is a log of changes or an update page explaining, I'd like to know.


Google doesn't seem to care to be professional about its update deployments. On a similar note, I have my phone service through their Project Fi with a Nexus 6 and I STILL haven't received the Marshmallow update a month after they said they'd have it rolled out to Nexus owners.

So yeah, if it is Google based, don't expect the courtesy of a notification prior to an update.







I'd have lost my job years ago if I pulled the unprofessionalism that they follow.


----------



## Donaneves

Donaneves - 3770K @ 4.6 - GTX 980 TI KPE @ 1550/8444 - 18200

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9189149


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Donaneves*
> 
> Donaneves - 3770K @ 4.6 - GTX 980 TI KPE @ 1550/8444 - 18200
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9189149


Beastly graphics score.









SS


----------



## michael-ocn

*New Entry*
michael-ocn --- 5820k @4.4 --- 980ti ftw @1467/3855 --- 17920 --- November 8th 2015



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9198337

This is with an evga 980ti ftw running a game stable (till proven otherwise) overclock.


----------



## cookiesowns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> You're only able to get to 1570 on a KPE? Is it under water?


Under water XOC bios. So it's not too bad. 79.2% and 75.4%

Never tried pushing for max clocks on LN2 non XOC since clock for clock XOC bios can net at least close to 100 points if not more in 3D mark


----------



## Wickedtt

Update- Wickedtt - Xeon [email protected] 4.7ghz- 290x Lightning 1175/1725 - 12286p - 11/10/15 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9224329


----------



## fyzzz

The 290 keeps on delivering!

Update
fyzzz-- 4690k @ 5.0 -- R9 290 1265/1750 -- 12384 (15319 graphics) -- 11/11/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6456169


Edited post because i managed to squeeze out more points

Whoops i see that i made a mistake. But the memory was clocked at 1866 mhz 10-11-10-1.


----------



## Wickedtt

What kind of 290 do you have my XFX Black edition could only get 1235/1550 topped out and that was only pushing 13900.


----------



## fyzzz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> What kind of 290 do you have my XFX Black edition could only get 1235/1550 topped out and that was only pushing 13900.


I have the normal double dissipation. Got very lucky with this card. I bought it when they were on sale here in may, got it for 270€. I think the memory helps alot on this card. It has hynix bfr instead of the normal hynix afr. It can clock high on the memory and can manage tight timings. Then i've also put in hours of testing modded 390 bioses, which my card responded well to and all of that probably adds up and the result is this crazy performance.


----------



## Bride

'New Entry'

Bride - i7 4720HQ @ 3.5 - GTX 965 M @ 1059 / 1353 - 5306 - 12/11/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6461156


----------



## Wickedtt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> I have the normal double dissipation. Got very lucky with this card. I bought it when they were on sale here in may, got it for 270€. I think the memory helps alot on this card. It has hynix bfr instead of the normal hynix afr. It can clock high on the memory and can manage tight timings. Then i've also put in hours of testing modded 390 bioses, which my card responded well to and all of that probably adds up and the result is this crazy performance.


I would say so haha. Yeah i had the Graphics score crown on the 290 till your beast of a card came along! But awesome non the less.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> I would say so haha. Yeah i had the Graphics score crown on the 290 till your beast of a card came along! But awesome non the less.


More peeps will be joining the 15K graphics score club on a single 290 soon.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> I would say so haha. Yeah i had the Graphics score crown on the 290 till your beast of a card came along! But awesome non the less.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> More peeps will be joining the 15K graphics score club on a single 290 soon.


Almost 2 years later and I'm still in the top 5.









SS


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> Almost 2 years later and I'm still in the top 5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS


On the 290?

Don't worry, you'll be in sixth as soon as I post mine.









Here's a teaser of the things to come.
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6475202

Looking at the chart, it's fascinating to see how the platform and drivers mature.

With BIOS mods, the chart will be rewritten. fun times for those who hold their cards till now.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> On the 290?
> 
> Don't worry, you'll be in sixth as soon as I post mine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a teaser of the things to come.
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6475202
> 
> Looking at the chart, it's fascinating to see how the platform and drivers mature.
> 
> With BIOS mods, the chart will be rewritten. fun times for those who hold their cards till now.


No worries. No longer have a 290. Have at it. If it takes 2 years to pass me I'm already a winner.









Besides........

Being the #1 980Ti will do for now.









SS


----------



## mus1mus

It sure is.









Any updates?

donaneves need a better CPU for that TI. I wonder what body part was sold for that kind of a silicon


----------



## Vellinious

5820k @ 4.8 -- GTX 970 FTW @ 1620 / 2148 -- 12959 -- 11/14/2015

I can't quite hit that 15k graphics score mark. I've tried everything I could.... I'll break 13k overall eventually though.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6486538


----------



## 113802

x79 build, Xeon 2673 v2 @ 4.56Ghz
GTX 980 Ti Core: 1,250 MHz Memory: 2,003 MHz

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6338465

z170 build: Core i7 6700k @ 4.8Ghz
GTX 980 Ti Core: 1,250 MHz Memory: 2,003 MHz

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6446194


----------



## paskowitz

I assume results with "Time measuring inaccurate" are not eligible?

Also what of results from a previous date? IE Did the run months ago, but didn't take a screenshot with GPU/CPU-Z, AF, etc.

Run in question.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> It sure is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any updates?
> 
> donaneves need a better CPU for that TI. I wonder what body part was sold for that kind of a silicon


Hasn't been cold enough here yet.
Been busy binning stuff.

Yeah, that's a beast. I was thrilled with mine but now I'm a sinner full of jealously.

SS


----------



## Recipe7

Recipe7 --- i7 5820K @ 4.5 --- EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid @ 1540/2049 --- 18545 --- 11/14/15


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Recipe7*
> 
> Recipe7 --- i7 5820K @ 4.5 --- EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid @ 1540/2049 --- 18545 --- 11/14/15


Holy crap... your rig has a lot of fans!


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Recipe7*
> 
> Recipe7 --- i7 5820K @ 4.5 --- EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid @ 1540/2049 --- 18545 --- 11/14/15


Nizzzzzzzzze!!!!!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> Holy crap... your rig has a lot of fans!












Try 20 some day!









SS


----------



## Recipe7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> Holy crap... your rig has a lot of fans!


Yes it does. Couldn't even find spots for 2 of the fans as you can see... just threw them in some spots that worked, hehe.


----------



## PureBlackFire

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8834494


----------



## prostreetcamaro

prostreetcamaro

i7 5820k @ 4.7

PNY 980 ti @ 1500/1903

18719

15/11/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6494675


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prostreetcamaro*
> 
> prostreetcamaro
> 
> i7 5820k @ 4.7
> 
> PNY 980 ti @ 1500/1903
> 
> 18719
> 
> 11/15/15
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6494675


See the requirement on the OP. You'll rejected as is.

SS


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> See the requirement on the OP. You'll rejected as is.
> 
> SS


What should I do in my situation?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> I assume results with "Time measuring inaccurate" are not eligible?
> 
> Also what of results from a previous date? IE Did the run months ago, but didn't take a screenshot with GPU/CPU-Z, AF, etc.
> 
> Run in question.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> What should I do in my situation?


Run it again and take a screen shot.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Update...

*MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 [email protected] -- TITAN-X @1600MHz /8612MHz -- 20783:*


*
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6500458*


----------



## paskowitz

New Entry

paskowitz - 4790K @ 5.1Ghz - EVGA GTX 980 Ti Classified @ 1545 / 8000 - 17747
- Date (11/17/2015)



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9310522

I've done everything in my power to try to get rid of the inaccurate time measuring results, but for the life of me I can't seem to make it go away. I've tried, no overlays, CPU settings in BIOS, closing all background applications, no skipping the demo... nothing works. I understand if this invalidates my attempt.


----------



## mus1mus

I believe the CPU ain't that stable. But do you notice something being skipped on the duration of the run?


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> I believe the CPU ain't that stable. But do you notice something being skipped on the duration of the run?


It does it at stock clocks as well.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> It does it at stock clocks as well.


Bad install maybe. Or borked OS.


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Bad install maybe. Or borked OS.


That is about the only thing I have not tried. Not really worth reinstalling the OS though. I could try reinstalling FS.

On a separate note, I noticed that a lot of the top scores with my CPU/GPU combo have lower core clocks and higher memory clocks. My core is pushed to the absolute limit but I just kinda left my memory clock at 8K. Does FS rely heavily on memory clock?


----------



## mus1mus

There are some gains but nothing dramatic on the nVidia side.


----------



## looniam

thought i saw similar while cruising the lighting club thread:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1573073/msi-gtx-980-ti-lightning-owners-club/250_50#post_24605358

no?

just for giggles try HPET?

win10 sneak in an update?


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> There are some gains but nothing dramatic on the nVidia side.


Do artifacts reduce your score? I saw one blue flicker in my run.


----------



## J!NX

Thanks for making this thread. I really am impressed with the build quality PNY has put into this GPU. So far stable overclocks 24/7.

'New Entry'

J!NX - i7-3770k @ 4.5GHz - PNY GeForce GTX 980ti @ 1220MHz / 1903MHz - 15679
- Date (11/17/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6513661


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> Do artifacts reduce your score? I saw one blue flicker in my run.


It does to a point. But not that big.

Most benchers live with it.


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *J!NX*
> 
> Thanks for making this thread. I really am impressed with the build quality PNY has put into this GPU. So far stable overclocks 24/7.
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> J!NX - i7-3770k @ 4.5GHz - PNY GeForce GTX 980ti @ 1220MHz / 1903MHz - 15679
> - Date (11/17/2015)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6513661


I'm no OP but you need to rewrite your details as well as the screenshots.

Refer to the OP for SS requirements.

Your clock should be observed in GPU-Z monitoring. For some reason, GPU Boost affects your final clocks.


----------



## J!NX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> I'm no OP but you need to rewrite your details as well as the screenshots.
> 
> Refer to the OP for SS requirements.
> 
> Your clock should be observed in GPU-Z monitoring. For some reason, GPU Boost affects your final clocks.


Any suggestions as to what I should re-write besides the clock speed on the GPU? I reviewed the OP and I seem to have followed instructions as detailed as possible.


----------



## J!NX

Ok here's another shot at it.

'New Entry'

J!NX - i7-3770k @ 4.5GHz - PNY GeForce GTX 980ti @ 1422MHz / 1903MHz - 15680
- Date (11/17/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6514013


----------



## Forceman

Super annoying how multi-quote no longer changes the button so you can't tell if you clicked it or not. Let me know if I missed your submission.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Donaneves*
> 
> Donaneves - 3770K @ 4.6 - GTX 980 TI KPE @ 1550/8444 - 18200
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9189149
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












I'm wondering why that graphics score is so much higher than other cards with similar clockspeeds, like ssiperko's.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *michael-ocn*
> 
> *New Entry*
> michael-ocn --- 5820k @4.4 --- 980ti ftw @1467/3855 --- 17920 --- November 8th 2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9198337
> 
> This is with an evga 980ti ftw running a game stable (till proven otherwise) overclock.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> Update- Wickedtt - Xeon [email protected] 4.7ghz- 290x Lightning 1175/1725 - 12286p - 11/10/15 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9224329
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> The 290 keeps on delivering!
> 
> Update
> fyzzz-- 4690k @ 5.0 -- R9 290 1265/1750 -- 12384 (15319 graphics) -- 11/11/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6456169
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edited post because i managed to squeeze out more points
> 
> Whoops i see that i made a mistake. But the memory was clocked at 1866 mhz 10-11-10-1.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Bride - i7 4720HQ @ 3.5 - GTX 965 M @ 1059 / 1353 - 5306 - 12/11/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6461156
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Not taking scores from all cards.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> 5820k @ 4.8 -- GTX 970 FTW @ 1620 / 2148 -- 12959 -- 11/14/2015
> 
> I can't quite hit that 15k graphics score mark. I've tried everything I could.... I'll break 13k overall eventually though.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6486538
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> x79 build, Xeon 2673 v2 @ 4.56Ghz
> GTX 980 Ti Core: 1,250 MHz Memory: 2,003 MHz
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6338465
> 
> z170 build: Core i7 6700k @ 4.8Ghz
> GTX 980 Ti Core: 1,250 MHz Memory: 2,003 MHz
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6446194












Need screenshots
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Recipe7*
> 
> Recipe7 --- i7 5820K @ 4.5 --- EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid @ 1540/2049 --- 18545 --- 11/14/15
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Need 3DMark link
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PureBlackFire*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/8834494












Need clockspeeds
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prostreetcamaro*
> 
> prostreetcamaro
> 
> i7 5820k @ 4.7
> 
> PNY 980 ti @ 1500/1903
> 
> 18719
> 
> 15/11/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6494675












Need screenshot
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Update...
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 [email protected] -- TITAN-X @1600MHz /8612MHz -- 20783:*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6500458*











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> paskowitz - 4790K @ 5.1Ghz - EVGA GTX 980 Ti Classified @ 1545 / 8000 - 17747
> - Date (11/17/2015)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9310522
> 
> I've done everything in my power to try to get rid of the inaccurate time measuring results, but for the life of me I can't seem to make it go away. I've tried, no overlays, CPU settings in BIOS, closing all background applications, no skipping the demo... nothing works. I understand if this invalidates my attempt.












Can't remember which OS it is that time measurement matters for, so I took it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *J!NX*
> 
> Ok here's another shot at it.
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> J!NX - i7-3770k @ 4.5GHz - PNY GeForce GTX 980ti @ 1422MHz / 1903MHz - 15680
> - Date (11/17/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6514013
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## J!NX

Here's a better update.

'*Update*'

J!NX - i7-3770k @ 4.5GHz - PNY GeForce GTX 980ti @ 1452MHz / 1903MHz - 15786
- Date (11/17/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9321172


----------



## Recipe7

Sorry, forgot the link!

Recipe7 --- i7 5820K @ 4.5 --- EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid @ 1540/2049 --- 18545 --- 11/14/15

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6488486


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't remember which OS it is that time measurement matters for, so I took it.


Awesome! Top 30! If I figure it out and get a valid run that is lower (or higher) I will post an update.


----------



## waltercaorle

new entry

waltercaorle - i7 4790k @ 4.9 ghz - Fury Pro @ 1180 / 570 - 14395 - 18/11/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6519657


----------



## mus1mus

Nothing special. But remarkable.

New Entry:

mus1mus

Intel i7-4790K @ 4900
AMD R9 290 @ 1340/1625

13221

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6524838


----------



## prostreetcamaro

ProStreetCamaro - 5820K @ 4.7 - PNY 980ti @ 1500/8012 - 18848

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6526290


----------



## Tugrul512bit

My r7 240 gets 1250-1300 points on graphics.


----------



## J!NX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tugrul512bit*
> 
> My r7 240 gets 1250-1300 points on graphics.


Ok?


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Nothing special. But remarkable.
> 
> New Entry:
> 
> mus1mus
> 
> Intel i7-4790K @ 4900
> AMD R9 290 @ 1340/1625
> 
> 13221
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6524838
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6563139
> 
> Intel i7-4790K @ 5000
> AMD R9 290 @ 1347/1663
> 
> 13385
> Graphics Score: 15710


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Recipe7*
> 
> Sorry, forgot the link!
> 
> Recipe7 --- i7 5820K @ 4.5 --- EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid @ 1540/2049 --- 18545 --- 11/14/15
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6488486
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *waltercaorle*
> 
> new entry
> 
> waltercaorle - i7 4790k @ 4.9 ghz - Fury Pro @ 1180 / 570 - 14395 - 18/11/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6519657
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prostreetcamaro*
> 
> ProStreetCamaro - 5820K @ 4.7 - PNY 980ti @ 1500/8012 - 18848
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6526290
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> mus1mus
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6563139
> 
> Intel i7-4790K @ 5000
> AMD R9 290 @ 1347/1663
> 
> 13385
> Graphics Score: 15710
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












What voltage and cooling was that?


----------



## mus1mus

1.4ish under load. On sub-20C water. Nothing too extreme.

Just a product of modding the BIOS.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> 1.4ish under load. On sub-20C water. Nothing too extreme.
> 
> Just a product of modding the BIOS.


Are you using a chiller? Or, is it just that cold in your pc room? lol


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Are you using a chiller? Or, is it just that cold in your pc room? lol


The building AC is just a wall beside me. So yeah.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> The building AC is just a wall beside me. So yeah.


Well...those are some serious clocks for a Hawaii based GPU. Nice scores, man.


----------



## mus1mus

Thanks man. Prolly got lucky with this Elpida Mem card. Hynix cards should be doing this with the 390X bios mods. Elpidas need some more TLC.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Thanks man. Prolly got lucky with this Elpida Mem card. Hynix cards should be doing this with the 390X bios mods. Elpidas need some more TLC.


It took some coaxing on my 970s, but I finally got the Elipda ramped up. I did a single card run last night with the memory at 2176. I was pretty stoked. Still couldn't break the 15k mark graphics score mark, but....eh. It is what it is.


----------



## mus1mus

Insane clocks.









Voltage limited eh?


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Insane clocks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voltage limited eh?


Not really. I'm running at 1.275v....supposed to be able to go up to 1.312v, but...I don't see any gains by going that high. I'm either at the limits of this specific silicon, or it's limited at the VRM and won't allow me to go any higher in voltage. I might try a hardware mod at some point down the road to get some more voltage to the core, but.....gonna wait til I'm ready to buy GPUs again before I do that. Would be my first hardware mod.....


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Not really. I'm running at 1.275v....supposed to be able to go up to 1.312v, but...I don't see any gains by going that high. I'm either at the limits of this specific silicon, or it's limited at the VRM and won't allow me to go any higher in voltage. I might try a hardware mod at some point down the road to get some more voltage to the core, but.....gonna wait til I'm ready to buy GPUs again before I do that. Would be my first hardware mod.....


Good plan.


----------



## fyzzz

Update

fyzzz-- I5 [email protected] 5.0 -- R9 290 1280/1660 -- 12526 (15673 graphics) -- 28/11/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6628183


----------



## fyzzz

I have another update, for my 980 ti.

fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1523/2093 -- 16676 (22046 graphics) -- 01/12/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9523725?


Finally broke into 22k gpu score







.


----------



## paskowitz

Great graphics score! V


----------



## fyzzz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> I have another update, for my 980 ti.
> 
> fyzzz-- 4690k @ 4.9 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1523/2093 -- 16676 (22046 graphics) -- 01/12/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9523725?
> 
> Finally broke into 22k gpu score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Ignore that post, i have something better. Decided to run it cooler with having a windows open, 'only' gained about 10mhz, but it was enough to bump up the gpu score by a bit.

Update

fyzzz-- i5 4690k @ 5.0 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1532/2093 -- 16794 (22125 graphics) -- 02/12/2015


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6672760


----------



## Vellinious

Do any of you notice any difference in the graphics score with your CPU clock? I don't notice any difference at all. Stock clock, benchmark clock....no difference at all for me. Not the overall...the GRAPHICS score.


----------



## Kimir

Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.8/4.4 --- GTX 980Ti HOF @ 1508/2053 -- 20119


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6679199


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Nice to see you over 20,000 Kimir...


----------



## Kimir

Thanks, that was what I ailed for.
20k for FS, 10k for FSE and 5.5k for FSU. As soon as I resolve my constant bsod and windows corruption issue I'll get back to 3DMark, rofl.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.8/4.4 --- GTX 980Ti HOF @ 1508/2053 -- 20119
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6679199


I hate you.









Now I gotta claw my way back to the #1 980Ti slot ...... thanks.









SS


----------



## Kimir

It's not like it's rly impressive. Did a try at stock, 2 more run with cpu at 4.6Ghz. Then switched to 4.8Ghz, did 20049 and second one that was less than 20k. And finally this one by rising the mem by 50Mhz. The memory has more in it I'm sure, the core however seems to already be a hit or miss at 1500.
I'll top that out again as soon as my issues are fixed.


----------



## Chargeit

How does this score look?

My ram and CPU are stock. GPU at 1441.

I was dealing with crashing drivers. I think I've got it figured out. One of my PCI-E power cords seems to be the issue. With both plugged in I wasn't even able to run the test.



*Dl'ed the demo as a stress testing tool. Normally not huge into benching.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Gpu score is inline with that clock and card.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Gpu score is inline with that clock and card.


Thanks.

I was about to pull my hair out dealing with this. Luckily I remembered that a few weeks back I moved my GPU to using two PCI-E cables figuring it wouldn't hurt. Will pull the computer out tomorrow and look at the PSU. Will also call Seasonic about it.


----------



## Eusbwoa18

New Entry

pgdeaner - 5820 @ 4080 - GTX980ti @ 1200 / 2053 - *16766*- (12/4/2015)


----------



## Kimir

Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.8Ghz --- GTX 980Ti KFA² HOF @ 1516/2178Mhz --- 20374



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6716781


----------



## cstkl1

cstkl1 --- 4790k @ 5.0Ghz --- Titan X @ 1508/2000Mhz --- 18544
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6723332


----------



## cookiesowns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.8Ghz --- GTX 980Ti KFA² HOF @ 1516/2178Mhz --- 20374
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6716781


Mmm. Is your OS clean? Physics score is a wee bit low for 4.8Ghz from my experience. I was doing 23500+ @ 4.75 with ram at 3200 C14. Great graphics score man, keep pushing!


----------



## Kimir

23200-23300 is what I always had with 4.8/4.5 or 4.8/4.4. 22600-22700 is what I get with 4.7/4.4 too, consistently.
It's not like 4.8 is super stable anyway, I'm feeding it the same voltage as it passes 1h of Aida at 4.7 here.
Mind you, all the monitor app you see here are left while doing the bench (not cpu-z and gpu-z, but aida, ohm, real temp and other malwarebytes etc).


----------



## DooRules

DooRules

6700K @ 4.8---- EVGA 980TI KPE @ 1306 / 1851----18103
12/08/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6745928


----------



## Kimir

Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.9Ghz --- GTX 980Ti KFA² HOF @ 1520/2153Mhz --- 20397



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6755698


----------



## Forceman

You guys are killing me with the multiple 20 point updates.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Update
> 
> fyzzz-- I5 [email protected] 5.0 -- R9 290 1280/1660 -- 12526 (15673 graphics) -- 28/11/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6628183
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Ignore that post, i have something better. Decided to run it cooler with having a windows open, 'only' gained about 10mhz, but it was enough to bump up the gpu score by a bit.
> 
> Update
> 
> fyzzz-- i5 4690k @ 5.0 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1532/2093 -- 16794 (22125 graphics) -- 02/12/2015
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6672760











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pgdeaner*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> pgdeaner - 5820 @ 4080 - GTX980ti @ 1200 / 2053 - *16766*- (12/4/2015)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> cstkl1 --- 4790k @ 5.0Ghz --- Titan X @ 1508/2000Mhz --- 18544
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6723332
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules
> 
> 6700K @ 4.8---- EVGA 980TI KPE @ 1306 / 1851----18103
> 12/08/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6745928
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.9Ghz --- GTX 980Ti KFA² HOF @ 1520/2153Mhz --- 20397
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6755698


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You guys are killing me with the multiple 20 point updates.


Ahah sorry about that, I guess I should just have edited my first entry since you didn't added it yet in the first place.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Kimir --- 5960X @ 4.8Ghz --- GTX 980Ti KFA² HOF @ 1516/2178Mhz --- 20374
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6716781


Stop it.









SS


----------



## Kimir

Quoted the wrong one bro. Oh wait, maybe you did not. hmm


----------



## fyzzz

Another update

fyzzz-- i5 4690k @ 5.0 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1534/2103 -- 16837 (22232 graphics) -- 11/12/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6777365

Played around with voltages in the bios and somehow i ended up with a higher score. Not too happy with this run since the combined and overall wasn't what they should be. Got higher overall and combined score in a other run, even with lower gpu score and physics score. 11-12c idle with kboost on and about 20c full load during this run







.


----------



## DooRules

'update'

DooRules - 6700K @ 4.9 - 980 ti KPE @ 1547 / 2096 - 18574
- Date (12/20/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6868072


----------



## Nafu

what was the boost you gained?


----------



## cheesewood

'UPDATE'
Cheesewood - i7-4790k @5.0ghz - GTX 980 Ti @ 1545mhz / 1975mhz - 17731
- Date (12/13/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6791983


----------



## The EX1

*New Entry*
The_EX1 - 4770k @ 4.7 - 980 Ti HOF @ 1530 / 2003 - 17242
22/12/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6842354


----------



## fyzzz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Another update
> fyzzz-- i5 4690k @ 5.0 -- GTX 980 [email protected] 1534/2103 -- 16837 (22232 graphics) -- 11/12/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6777365
> Played around with voltages in the bios and somehow i ended up with a higher score. Not too happy with this run since the combined and overall wasn't what they should be. Got higher overall and combined score in a other run, even with lower gpu score and physics score. 11-12c idle with kboost on and about 20c full load during this run
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Nope, forget that i ever posted that. I have once again a much nicer score than that. I just find ways to push this computer further and further. I have probably soon another update again







.
fyzzz -- i5 4690k @ 5.15 -- GTX 980 ti @ 1537/2103 -- 17085 (22343 graphics) -- 27/12/2015
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6956555


----------



## c0d3man

New Entry
c0d3man - i5 6600k @ 4.6 GHz - Nvidia GTX 970 @ 1540 / 7762 - Graphics Score - 13655
- 12/27/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9952598


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> 'update'
> 
> DooRules - 6700K @ 4.9 - 980 ti KPE @ 1547 / 2096 - 18574
> - Date (12/20/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6868072
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cheesewood*
> 
> 'UPDATE'
> Cheesewood - i7-4790k @5.0ghz - GTX 980 Ti @ 1545mhz / 1975mhz - 17731
> - Date (12/13/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6791983












Make sure you include a screenshot
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The EX1*
> 
> *New Entry*
> The_EX1 - 4770k @ 4.7 - 980 Ti HOF @ 1530 / 2003 - 17242
> 22/12/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6842354
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Nope, forget that i ever posted that. I have once again a much nicer score than that. I just find ways to push this computer further and further. I have probably soon another update again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> fyzzz -- i5 4690k @ 5.15 -- GTX 980 ti @ 1537/2103 -- 17085 (22343 graphics) -- 27/12/2015
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6956555
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *c0d3man*
> 
> New Entry
> c0d3man - i5 6600k @ 4.6 GHz - Nvidia GTX 970 @ 1540 / 7762 - Graphics Score - 13655
> - 12/27/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9952598












Likewise for the screenshot.


----------



## Dude970

New

dude970 - 3570K @ 5.0Ghz - GTX 970 @ 1531 / 1903 - 11043 (13721 Graphics)
20/12/2015

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9818701


----------



## Essenbe

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5138247
i7-3770K @ 5115 MHz GTX 980 16Gb DDR3 2400 @ 2400 22/12/2014


----------



## Mercennarius

R9 290X - 1051/1400 - dual socket X5690s(Stock 3.47Ghz) - Windows 10

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6849685


----------



## texas_nightowl

So, I am nowhere near challenging for the top 30







but I ran Firestrike for the first time ever on my first dedicated gpu in over 4 years. Been using integrated graphics only. Hope to do more gaming soon so I picked up an R9 380 (Gigabyte G1 Gaming 4gb).

texas_nightowl - i5 2500k @ 4.5 - R9 380 @ 990 / 1425 - 7112 - 02/01/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10067658



For a non-OC'd, sub-$200 GPU, is this score decent? For an R9 380, is it in the range I should expect?


----------



## GRABibus

*NEW ENTRY :* :

GRABibus -- 5930K @ 4,9GHz -- GTX TITAN X @ 1510MHz / 2000MHz -- 18771 -- January 3rd 2016

http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=16010303285917369813870738.png

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10075367?

I have checked my scores to compare with other comparable rigs :
My Graphics score seems normal
My Physics score seems normal

But my combined score is at least 600points to 1000points below comparable rigs.

Any idea why combined score should be below normal while Graphics and Physics scores are ok ?

Thank you.


----------



## Kimir

I'll have an higher combined by running the bench on windows 8/8.1 or 10.


----------



## mus1mus

A lot of things.

OS, OC Stability, Optimisations, etc.

Play around different stuff to get a proper idea what's holding you back.

Setting Affinity affects the scores a lot as well.

Also try to monitor your clocks during the test. To get a good idea of whatcs going on.


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> I'll have an higher combined by running the bench on windows 8/8.1 or 10.


you made some comparisons tests with various OS ?


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> A lot of things.
> 
> OS, OC Stability, Optimisations, etc.
> 
> Play around different stuff to get a proper idea what's holding you back.
> 
> Setting Affinity affects the scores a lot as well.
> 
> Also try to monitor your clocks during the test. To get a good idea of whatcs going on.


Thanks for feedback.
here I made a test at 4.9GHz which I am sure is not stable.
But when I test with my stable 4.7GHz the conclusion is the same for combined test => Lower than usual
All clocks are ok during tests.
Affinity is default.

Maybe due to OS and Motherboard....


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> you made some comparisons tests with various OS ?


I did (_I_ have SSDs with each w7, 8.1 and 10 on my bench setup) and the general rule is that for firestrike, 8.1/10 are better. For Catzilla and 3D11, w7 is better. If you are not much of a bencher but just do it to compare how your system do to others and you are just going to game in the end, don't worry too much about it.
If you can get your cache run at 4/4.2 within 1.25v and down that C16 for 2666 on the memory you could see some improvements. What ram are you using, 2666C16 seems


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> Thanks for feedback.
> here I made a test at 4.9GHz which I am sure is not stable.
> But when I test with my stable 4.7GHz the conclusion is the same for combined test => Lower than usual
> All clocks are ok during tests.
> Affinity is default.
> 
> Maybe due to OS and Motherboard....


OS most likely.

Set Windows Power Option to High Performance Mode.

Set System Properties to Maximum Performance.

Enable / Disable HPET using Command Line run as Admin and type the text below:

bcdedit /set useplatformclock true
bcdedit /set useplatformclock false

And check if that increases the scores.

Enabling 3D Performance Mode in Nvidia Control Panel also helps.

Also try Kimir's suggestions.


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> I did (_I_ have SSDs with each w7, 8.1 and 10 on my bench setup) and the general rule is that for firestrike, 8.1/10 are better. For Catzilla and 3D11, w7 is better. If you are not much of a bencher but just do it to compare how your system do to others and you are just going to game in the end, don't worry too much about it.
> If you can get your cache run at 4/4.2 within 1.25v and down that C16 for 2666 on the memory you could see some improvements. What ram are you using, 2666C16 seems


- I use G.SKILL ripjaws4 4x4GB 2800MHz CL16 XMP2.0
-System is already on performances mode....
- Windows on performances mode doesn't help.
- Increasing ram frequency to 3200MHz/CL14 doesn't help.

And i don't f.... succeed in increasing cache frequency.
Even with Vring at 1.25V and Vccin at 2,3V Cache at 4GHz doesn't boot.
Only 3.9GHz boots at Vring=1.1V.

Just to check cache effect on my score, how could i rapidly set up a stable cache frequencey around 4.2GHz (Only for the 3DMark test) ?

Thanks.


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> OS most likely.
> 
> Enable / Disable HPET using Command Line run as Admin and type the text below:
> 
> bcdedit /set useplatformclock true
> bcdedit /set useplatformclock false
> Enabling 3D Performance Mode in Nvidia Control Panel also helps.


thnaks.
but those suggestions don't help unfortunately


----------



## mus1mus

Psst. VCCIN at that level should mean early CHIP DEATH!

2.9V is all that the chip need to die instantly without any stress. Meaning, in the BIOS.

You are very near.

Trust me.


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Psst. VCCIN at that level should mean early CHIP DEATH!
> 
> 2.9V is all that the chip need to die instantly without any stress. Meaning, in the BIOS.
> 
> You are very near.
> 
> Trust me.


Vccin at 2,3V as max value for bench is "ok" (It is even not red marked in my motherboard).
It is running in fact at 1,92V (AUTO) for my 4.7GHz stable 24/7


----------



## mus1mus

Just saving you a CHIP dude.









I did run 2.1 on my previous 5930K and for some reason, it scored lower and LOWER 3DMark Physics and Combined Score with time.

I purposedly killed that shizz! 2.9 VCCIN killed it faster than a Vcore of 2.0 just to let you know.









It's also a very weird phenomenon that only 3DMark scores are affected by that Chip Degradation.


----------



## GRABibus

It should be great if Forceman could add "OS" in the list of results just to see the influence....


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Just saving you a CHIP dude.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did run 2.1 on my previous 5930K and for some reason, it scored lower and LOWER 3DMark Physics and Combined Score with time.
> 
> I purposedly killed that shizz! 2.9 VCCIN killed it faster than a Vcore of 2.0 just to let you know.


But where do you see I wrote 2.9V?








It runs at 1.92V...so it is ok ?


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> But where do you see I wrote 2.9V?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It runs at 1.92V...so it is ok ?


I was referring to 2.3 VCCIN which is very near to 2.9V. The level that killed my chip. Stay lower. 1.95 is where I am staying now.


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> I was referring to 2.3 VCCIN which is very near to 2.9V. The level that killed my chip. Stay lower. 1.95 is where I am staying now.


OK , so "AUTO" = 1.92V is "ok"


----------



## mus1mus




----------



## Rob27shred

'New Entry'
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7059232
Rob27shred - i7 6700K @ 4.5Ghz - Gigabyte Xtreme Windforce 980ti @ core, 1533 (max boost speed reached) / mem 1816, - 17531 - Date (03/01/2016)


----------



## GRABibus

*UPDATE :*

I just installed my free of Charge version of Windows 10 Professionnal.

And I got the same issue that "combined score" is lower than it should be.

So, i made 4 hours tests and finally, I found something incredible :
- In all my tests until now, CPU ratio was on "Fixed mode", means EIST disabled
- I found that if I set CPU ratio option in BIOS on "Dynamic" and if I enable EIST and Turbo boost, then, my "Combined score" gets higher => + 1200points !!!!

CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN HOW THIS CAN BE ??









STRANGE, NO ??

So, here is my new score :

GRABibus --- 5930K at 4,7GHz --- GTX TITAN X at 1500MHz/2000MHz --- 19178 --- January 4th 2016

http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=16010403201317369813873153.png

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10086684?


----------



## fyzzz

I am here again, with another update.
fyzzz -- i5 [email protected] -- GTX 980 [email protected]/2103 -- 17160 (22471 graphics) -- 04/01/2016
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7064157


----------



## ssiperko

NEW ENTRY
ssiperko - 4770k @ 4.9 - EVGA GTX980Ti Classified @ 1525/2150 - score 17623 graphics 22053 - 1/5/2016

All Air Cooled



SS


----------



## mus1mus

Y u no HE?


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Y u no HE?


What's that mean and who are you asking?

SS


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> What's that mean and who are you asking?
> 
> SS


Why is that run not on the H-E chip of yours?


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Why is that run not on the H-E chip of yours?


Oh. I don't have a block on this one yet. I found a little more in it after that run with a little mod to the bios. My CPU froze up on the physics test so I'll be back at it tomorrow night but IF I'm right I should be able to get a good bit more from the core as I was seeing around 4-5fps more in the first two graphics tests and that was at 1530. I was finally able to add some voltage after I upped the power limit to 550 so I'm going to make it 600 like my G1 here. IF it does what I think it will I be getting a block and throwing in my main system.









I did manage a 22,3xx graphics score last night at 1512 so I know it'll destroy my G1 IF I can get it up around 1550 ..... it has Sammy ram so I might give the KPE voltage tool a try to see if I can the memory up some more too.









SS


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> *UPDATE :*
> 
> I just installed my free of Charge version of Windows 10 Professionnal.
> 
> And I got the same issue that "combined score" is lower than it should be.
> 
> So, i made 4 hours tests and finally, I found something incredible :
> - In all my tests until now, CPU ratio was on "Fixed mode", means EIST disabled
> - I found that if I set CPU ratio option in BIOS on "Dynamic" and if I enable EIST and Turbo boost, then, my "Combined score" gets higher => + 1200points !!!!
> 
> CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN HOW THIS CAN BE ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> STRANGE, NO ??
> 
> So, here is my new score :
> 
> GRABibus --- 5930K at 4,7GHz --- GTX TITAN X at 1500MHz/2000MHz --- 19178 --- January 4th 2016
> 
> http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=16010403201317369813873153.png
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10086684?


hi,
I have not been added to the score list ?


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> hi,
> I have not been added to the score list ?


Patience young-ling ..... The Forceman will update when he updates .... search yer feelings feel the Forceman flow into you.
















SS


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> hi,
> I have not been added to the score list ?


Sorry, new job makes it hard to get updates done in a timely manner. I should be able to get them tomorrow or Friday.


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Sorry, new job makes it hard to get updates done in a timely manner. I should be able to get them tomorrow or Friday.


Hi,
no problem








My question was only to know in fact if you had missed or not my post.
Cheers.


----------



## ssiperko

UDATED ENTRY
ssiperko -5960x @ 5.0 - Gigigybyte GTX980Ti G1 @ 1595/2150 - score 20297 graphics 22361 - 1/7/2016
My text doc for video clocks is wrong.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10164982?



SS


----------



## GRABibus

UPDATE :

GRABibus --- 5930K at 4,9GHz --- GTX TITAN X at 1470MHz/2000MHz --- 19269 --- January 8th 2016

http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=16010810425717369813882375.png

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10180883?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> New
> 
> dude970 - 3570K @ 5.0Ghz - GTX 970 @ 1531 / 1903 - 11043 (13721 Graphics)
> 20/12/2015
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9818701
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5138247
> i7-3770K @ 5115 MHz GTX 980 16Gb DDR3 2400 @ 2400 22/12/2014
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Need GPU clock speeds
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mercennarius*
> 
> R9 290X - 1051/1400 - dual socket X5690s(Stock 3.47Ghz) - Windows 10
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6849685
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Accepted, but please follow the submission guidelines, specifically the screenshot requirement.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rob27shred*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7059232
> Rob27shred - i7 6700K @ 4.5Ghz - Gigabyte Xtreme Windforce 980ti @ core, 1533 (max boost speed reached) / mem 1816, - 17531 - Date (03/01/2016)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Should be able to get some more memory speed - most 980 Tis seem to do right around 2000.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> UDATED ENTRY
> ssiperko -5960x @ 5.0 - Gigigybyte GTX980Ti G1 @ 1595/2150 - score 20297 graphics 22361 - 1/7/2016
> My text doc for video clocks is wrong.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10164982?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> UPDATE :
> 
> GRABibus --- 5930K at 4,9GHz --- GTX TITAN X at 1470MHz/2000MHz --- 19269 --- January 8th 2016
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=16010810425717369813882375.png
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10180883?












Can you not run the max GPU clock with the max CPU clock? You had 1500 MHz with the 4.7 GHz submission.


----------



## fyzzz

Can you update mine too? I posted one 4 days ago.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> I am here again, with another update.
> fyzzz -- i5 [email protected] -- GTX 980 [email protected]/2103 -- 17160 (22471 graphics) -- 04/01/2016
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7064157
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> Can you update mine too? I posted one 4 days ago.


Missed it the first time.


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Can you not run the max GPU clock with the max CPU clock? You had 1500 MHz with the 4.7 GHz submission.


Yes I can, but first I have to reflash again my BIOS...It becomes dangerous statistically to multiply BIos flashings








I flash it to GM ultimate 1.28v for benchmarks, but for daily use, i take GM ultimate 1.23V (Stock air cooling)..
Maybe next weeek.


----------



## Rob27shred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need GPU clock speeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Accepted, but please follow the submission guidelines, specifically the screenshot requirement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should be able to get some more memory speed - most 980 Tis seem to do right around 2000.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you not run the max GPU clock with the max CPU clock? You had 1500 MHz with the 4.7 GHz submission.


Sorry I threw so many pics in because I am new to Nvidia GPUs & was not sure if what I typed was correct. With GPU Boost 2.0 & all the different clock readings in HWinfo it is a little confusing for me. Starting to get the hang of it now though.


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> NEW ENTRY
> ssiperko - 4770k @ 4.9 - EVGA GTX980Ti Classified @ 1525/2150 - score 17623 graphics 22053 - 1/5/2016
> 
> All Air Cooled
> 
> 
> 
> SS


Forceman ..... am I only limited to one entry overall? The above is a second system I have which is all air cooled.

SS


----------



## Rob27shred

Update
Rob27shred - 6700K @ 4.6 core 4.6 cache - Gigabyte Xtreme 980ti Windforce @ 1543/1818 - score 17757 - 1/9/2016
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10206167?


----------



## stubass

'New Entry'

stubass - I7-5960X @ 5375MHz - MSI 980Ti Lightning @ 1706 / 2003 - 22821
- Date (29/12/2015)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9976081



Have room to go higher but this for starters until next bench session.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Nice numbers stu!


----------



## stubass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Nice numbers stu!


thanks Bro, now just have to push higher







I know there is more in the CPU and GPU


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> thnaks.
> but those suggestions don't help unfortunately


Hi,
i am searching since some days why I get 1000pts to 2000pts less than all comparable rig to mine at combined test.

To summarize, I should be around 9500pts and i am between 7500pts and 8600pts.

I have done folliwng tests :
- Tests many NVIDIA graphic drivers => No help
- change the TITANX for another PICIE 3.0 16x slot => No help
- Tests many BIOS for the GPU card => No help
- Close all my processes during tests, increase CPU uncore clock, increase RAM clock....etc.. => No help
- Use Kboost of EVGA Precision X => No help.
- Tesst with Windows 7 and Windows 10 => They are the same whatever the OS.

But, only one thing is making results as all who have quite the same rig :
=> To set in BIOS CPU ratio mode on "Dynamic" (with EIST and turbo Boost "on").
With this, I am constantly at 9600pts.
When I set the CPU ratio on "fixed" (EIST and Turno boost are "off" of course), then I have this issue that combined score is falling down dramatically.

*QUESTION :*
Do you all have CPU ratio mode on "Fixed" ?

Second thing, I have checked GPU usage during combined test. Here it is (In red circle) :

http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=16011005050117369813885365.png

As you can see, it is not constantly at 99%....It decreases in this case until 68%.
When I don't overclock the GPU, it stays at 99% during all the tests.

So, here are all I could remark :

My combined tests is at "Normal level" when :
- I set CPU ratio mode on "Dynamic".
In this case, GPU usage is not constantly at 99%, but a fps are highers and then the combined test score is at "normal level" (9600pts)

My GPU usage is :
- Fluctuating between 98% and 65% during combiend test when it is overcloked.
- Staying at 99% when at stock.

=>if you all test with CPU ration on "Fixed" mode and have all these 9600pts or more, then I have an issue on these combined test.

Comment : in-games, GPu usage is always constant at 98% (So no issues).


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stubass*
> 
> thanks Bro, now just have to push higher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know there is more in the CPU and GPU


Make an ultra run as well, Gunslinger is feeling lonely in there.


----------



## Rob27shred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stubass*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> stubass - I7-5960X @ 5375MHz - MSI 980Ti Lightning @ 1706 / 2003 - 22821
> - Date (29/12/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9976081
> 
> 
> 
> Have room to go higher but this for starters until next bench session.


My god! Lovely run there Stu!!!







How are you cooling that beast for such a high core? I think I can push the core on my GB Xtreme a good bit further but memory is holding me back. Seems like anything over 1818 & it crashes with this stock bios. Of course I'm on all air too so that don't help my cause. Awesome run though bro!


----------



## stubass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *stubass*
> 
> thanks Bro, now just have to push higher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know there is more in the CPU and GPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make an ultra run as well, Gunslinger is feeling lonely in there.
Click to expand...

Lol, ok will do next session








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rob27shred*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *stubass*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> stubass - I7-5960X @ 5375MHz - MSI 980Ti Lightning @ 1706 / 2003 - 22821
> - Date (29/12/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9976081
> 
> 
> 
> Have room to go higher but this for starters until next bench session.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My god! Lovely run there Stu!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How are you cooling that beast for such a high core? I think I can push the core on my GB Xtreme a good bit further but memory is holding me back. Seems like anything over 1818 & it crashes with this stock bios. Of course I'm on all air too so that don't help my cause. Awesome run though bro!
Click to expand...

Thanks







I am using Ln2 cooling.. I hope you can find that nice point where you can max out your card on air


----------



## GRABibus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GRABibus*
> 
> Hi,
> i am searching since some days why I get 1000pts to 2000pts less than all comparable rig to mine at combined test.
> 
> To summarize, I should be around 9500pts and i am between 7500pts and 8600pts.
> 
> I have done folliwng tests :
> - Tests many NVIDIA graphic drivers => No help
> - change the TITANX for another PICIE 3.0 16x slot => No help
> - Tests many BIOS for the GPU card => No help
> - Close all my processes during tests, increase CPU uncore clock, increase RAM clock....etc.. => No help
> - Use Kboost of EVGA Precision X => No help.
> - Tesst with Windows 7 and Windows 10 => They are the same whatever the OS.
> 
> But, only one thing is making results as all who have quite the same rig :
> => To set in BIOS CPU ratio mode on "Dynamic" (with EIST and turbo Boost "on").
> With this, I am constantly at 9600pts.
> When I set the CPU ratio on "fixed" (EIST and Turno boost are "off" of course), then I have this issue that combined score is falling down dramatically.
> 
> *QUESTION :*
> Do you all have CPU ratio mode on "Fixed" ?
> 
> Second thing, I have checked GPU usage during combined test. Here it is (In red circle) :
> 
> http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=16011005050117369813885365.png
> 
> As you can see, it is not constantly at 99%....It decreases in this case until 68%.
> When I don't overclock the GPU, it stays at 99% during all the tests.
> 
> So, here are all I could remark :
> 
> My combined tests is at "Normal level" when :
> - I set CPU ratio mode on "Dynamic".
> In this case, GPU usage is not constantly at 99%, but a fps are highers and then the combined test score is at "normal level" (9600pts)
> 
> My GPU usage is :
> - Fluctuating between 98% and 65% during combiend test when it is overcloked.
> - Staying at 99% when at stock.
> 
> =>if you all test with CPU ration on "Fixed" mode and have all these 9600pts or more, then I have an issue on these combined test.
> 
> Comment : in-games, GPu usage is always constant at 98% (So no issues).


Thank you Kimir for your help.
Now it's solved


----------



## Rob27shred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stubass*
> 
> Lol, ok will do next session
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am using Ln2 cooling.. I hope you can find that nice point where you can max out your card on air


Thanks, I'll get there just taking it slow with this one. LOL, I figured it had to be something beyond H2O







Keep up the good work!


----------



## truehighroller1

'New Entry'

truehighroller1
- i7 2700K @ 5.144GHz
- 980ti Lightning @ 1613 / 2051
- Score: 17480 Graphics: 22640
- Date (1/15/2016)

What I was able to do tonight. Air cooling.



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10294890?

Did I break any records or anything cool>?


----------



## Kimir

On air, damn nice card.


----------



## stubass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> truehighroller1
> - i7 2700K @ 5.144GHz
> - 980ti Lightning @ 1613 / 2051
> - Score: 17480 Graphics: 22640
> - Date (1/15/2016)
> 
> What I was able to do tonight. Air cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10294890?
> 
> Did I break any records or anything cool>?


damn bro, i want that card







for air that is awesome








BTW, what voltage's?


----------



## SnakeBiteScares

'New Entry'

SnakeBiteScares
- i7 6700K @ 4.5GHz
- GTX Titan X @ 1442 / 2056
- Score: 17128 Graphics: 20752
- Date (15/01/2016)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10296623
http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/details.php?id=uvdh2
http://valid.x86.fr/vb1llw

Edit: still testing, i was able to get higher (17070) so disregard that score for now
Edit 2: Finished testing, this is the highest I could get without tweaking voltage


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stubass*
> 
> damn bro, i want that card
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> for air that is awesome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, what voltage's?


Thank you I had it at 1.369V +81mV and -137mV. I just wish it had samsung memory like the PR ones they sent out... 74% asci


----------



## stubass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *stubass*
> 
> damn bro, i want that card
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> for air that is awesome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, what voltage's?
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you I had it at 1.369V +81mV and -137mV. I just wish it had samsung memory like the PR ones they sent out... 74% asci
Click to expand...

Awesome stuff at that voltage







best OC on air that I have seen









I wish i had samsung mem too


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> truehighroller1
> - i7 2700K @ 5.144GHz
> - 980ti Lightning @ 1613 / 2051
> - Score: 17480 Graphics: 22640
> - Date (1/15/2016)
> 
> What I was able to do tonight. Air cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10294890?
> 
> Did I break any records or anything cool>?


NICE! ... also impressed with your OC's (including ram) and stretching that Sandy platform (PCI-E 2.0?)









Heck with your "ability" to pick silicon ... I should have had you pick the $1.6 Billion Power Ball tickets yesterday


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> NICE! ... also impressed with your OC's (including ram) and stretching that Sandy platform (PCI-E 2.0?)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heck with your "ability" to pick silicon ... I should have had you pick the $1.6 Billion Power Ball tickets yesterday


Lol, yeah we tried our hand at the lottery too and they just took our money go figure.

It is PCIE 2.0 under load yes. It would be PCIE 3.0 but get this, nvidia worked it into the drivers for it to not use it unless the CPU is also 100% capable of it because it was causing some issues deep down and they discovered it some how, and implemented that at the driver level to stop the issues people were having...

This MB is capable but the CPU is not. Get this, amd doesn't even realize it's a problem because when I use their GPU's, it uses PCIE 3.0 and guess what. I had multiple issues with their newer GPU's and couldn't figure out what was wrong. The whole time I think it might have been issues stemming from that. I ended up getting this card in the long run though so cheers lol.

I believe the first thing I ever overclocked was in 95 a celeron or pentium pro maybe... I remember using a lead pencil to make a trace on a CPU to get more fsb or a higher multiplier one of the two I believe. Then I remember getting a slot adapter at one point that had some nifty dip switches on it to control voltages and other things I believe, to overclock the CPU. I've always loved overclocking. God I'm getting old lol, upper thirties.

By the way this is the same CPU I reached that benchmark in my sig below with for the 5GHz club and, the same MB. I've just kept everything cool at all times.

http://valid.canardpc.com/2171804 Thu, 29 Dec 2011 22:14:25

I'm rambling, thank you!


----------



## Rob27shred

Update
Rob27shred - i7 6700k @ 4.5GHz - Gigabyte Xtreme 980ti @ 1553 / 2001 - 18030 - 1/16/2016
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7224927


----------



## Linflas

linflas-i7 4770k @ 4.5-Gigabyte G1 gaming 980ti 1557/1891--17228--1/13/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10263015?

Thanks for looking


----------



## fyzzz

'Update'

fyzzz - i5 4690k @ 5.1 Ghz - R9 290 @ 1340 / 1680 - 13150 (17/01/2016)
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7247395

Pt1 bios + mods and a whole lot of voltage


----------



## truehighroller1

" Update "

truehighroller1
- i7 2700K @ 5.144GHz
- 980ti Lightning @ 1626 / 2051
- Score: 17610 Graphics: 22601
- Date (1/17/2016)



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10344436?

Beta driver, hopefully that part don't matter here. Very cold tonight, air cooling again.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Try again







3570k @ 4.5 1.392v (!) 980ti FTW ACX


----------



## Rob27shred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> 'Update'
> 
> fyzzz - i5 4690k @ 5.1 Ghz - R9 290 @ 1340 / 1680 - 13150 (17/01/2016)
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7247395
> 
> Pt1 bios + mods and a whole lot of voltage


Wow, very nice for a 290!







I need to get a test bench setup soon so I can start playing with my 390 again.


----------



## Koniakki

Finally broke 19k. But can someone explain me why my gpu score is so low?

There's other members above who got 22k+ graphics with a bit lower clocks.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10387773


----------



## mus1mus

check if your clocks stick. I bet your card is throttling.


----------



## Koniakki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> check if your clocks stick. I bet your card is throttling.


I up the vcore and the VCCIN voltage and it seems it had a reverse effect on my OC. I was getting 19k+ with lower volts and 1.97v VCCIN.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10388647

Anyhow, I got 21800 and 21900 graphics [email protected] in two runs which seems I must be hitting some limit or something because it doesn't throttle and it seems low for such clocks. Even temps didn't break 50'C?!

I also run it at 1550/8100MHz just for check and the graphics score was 21616.

I must be missing something here.


----------



## TheBaron

New Entry.

TheBaron - 5960X @ 4900 - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1569 / 2200 - 20403










http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10384281

EDIT: Little update!

TheBaron - 5960X @ 4900 - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1616 / 2250 - 21138










http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10399523


----------



## paskowitz

Holy crap. That's crazy! ^


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> New Entry.
> 
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 4900 - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1569 / 2200 - 20403
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10384281
> 
> EDIT: Little update!
> 
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 4900 - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1616 / 2250 - 21138
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10399523


Nice! I'll be changing my sig I guess ..........................you blow









SS


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> New Entry.
> 
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 4900 - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1569 / 2200 - 20403
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10384281
> 
> EDIT: Little update!
> 
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 4900 - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1616 / 2250 - 21138
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10399523






Looks like your gpu temps were at about 15C the whole test. I can't wait to get water on this one. I can't wait to get the rest of my system updated as well.


----------



## TheBaron

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> Nice! I'll be changing my sig I guess ..........................you blow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> 
> Looks like your gpu temps were at about 15C the whole test. I can't wait to get water on this one. I can't wait to get the rest of my system updated as well.


Yes under 15, but really cold water temps and I had to push the voltage a LOT to get this far.


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> Yes under 15, but really cold water temps and I had to push the voltage a LOT to get this far.


Good job sir! I like it mind you. I just think if I could get mine that cold I would see better scores up there at around those speeds. I can't wait. I'm getting impatient.







I'm jelly


----------



## paskowitz

Ugh... why does this happen. I increase my clocks and I get a lower score... any particular Nv driver people recommend?

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/7293857/fs/6506908#


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> Ugh... why does this happen. I increase my clocks and I get a lower score... any particular Nv driver people recommend?
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/7293857/fs/6506908#


I get this on my side as well once I get to a certain point. I don't know if it's heat related, my temps were only 60C tops mind you, or if there is a power limit hard wired into the GPU some where and we're hitting that hard wired limit.

I would like to know a good reason for this as well.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> I get this on my side as well once I get to a certain point. I don't know if it's heat related, my temps were only 60C tops mind you, or if there is a power limit hard wired into the GPU some where and we're hitting that hard wired limit.
> 
> I would like to know a good reason for this as well.


Yes, there are power limits in the bios. If you go over those power limits, your card will throttle the voltage and core clocks to get it back under the power limit again.

You need to download GPUz and have it open to the sensors tab during your FS runs to see if you're hitting the "power limit perf cap".

Here, I did this up to illustrate. See the green in the 2nd to bottom line? That's "PWR" in the "Perf Cap Reason" line. That means your card has hit the power limit perf cap. Notice how the red in the top line drops down at the same time the green shows up? That's the core throttling.

To get around this, either increase the "Power Target" slider all the way to max, on whatever overclocking software you're using, and if it's still there....reduce voltage / core clock to reduce power, OR, flash to a custom bios.

There ya go!


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> I get this on my side as well once I get to a certain point. I don't know if it's heat related, my temps were only 60C tops mind you, or if there is a power limit hard wired into the GPU some where and we're hitting that hard wired limit.
> 
> I would like to know a good reason for this as well.


My temps are in the high 30c to to low 40c...

I also have the voltage locked with AB 3rd party setting. Voltage is set at 1.240. Power target is 141%... so I don't think that is the issue... I'll check GPUz though.


----------



## voidfahrenheit

will i be included in the single gpu firestrike top 30?









" New Entry "

voidfahrenheit
- i7 6700k @ 4.8Ghz
- EVGA 980 Ti Classified @ 1555Mhz
- Score: 18075 Graphics: 22242
- Date (January 20, 2016)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7278608


----------



## DooRules

DooRules 6700K @ 4.94 -- 980 ti KP @ 1548/2103 --- 18946

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7302020


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> My temps are in the high 30c to to low 40c...
> 
> I also have the voltage locked with AB 3rd party setting. Voltage is set at 1.240. Power target is 141%... so I don't think that is the issue... I'll check GPUz though.


I'm on a custom BIOS with no limits and my temps at the time were very low as well. I find it weird that I still see it too. I'd almost swear there is some calculations going on some where that say if going this fast clock wise the temp limit or power limit will be this etc. going on some where, via voltage chip maybe?



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Yes, there are power limits in the bios. If you go over those power limits, your card will throttle the voltage and core clocks to get it back under the power limit again.
> 
> You need to download GPUz and have it open to the sensors tab during your FS runs to see if you're hitting the "power limit perf cap".
> 
> Here, I did this up to illustrate. See the green in the 2nd to bottom line? That's "PWR" in the "Perf Cap Reason" line. That means your card has hit the power limit perf cap. Notice how the red in the top line drops down at the same time the green shows up? That's the core throttling.
> 
> To get around this, either increase the "Power Target" slider all the way to max, on whatever overclocking software you're using, and if it's still there....reduce voltage / core clock to reduce power, OR, flash to a custom bios.
> 
> There ya go!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






I'm on a custom BIOS with no limits though so you would think it would be a temp limit right? My temps were so low there's no way unless there is some calculations going on some where via hardware or something.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> I'm on a custom BIOS with no limits and my temps at the time were very low as well. I find it weird that I still see it too. I'd almost swear there is some calculations going on some where that say if going this fast clock wise the temp limit or power limit will be this etc. going on some where, via voltage chip maybe?
> 
> 
> I'm on a custom BIOS with no limits though so you would think it would be a temp limit right? My temps were so low there's no way unless there is some calculations going on some where via hardware or something.


There's no such thing as "no limit" bios. There's always a value in the table. Regardless of what it's set at, you only have so much power available to use from the 6 pin / 8 pin / PCIe connections....which is also controlled by settings in the bios.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> My temps are in the high 30c to to low 40c...
> 
> I also have the voltage locked with AB 3rd party setting. Voltage is set at 1.240. Power target is 141%... so I don't think that is the issue... I'll check GPUz though.


141% is a useless number, btw.

If the tables in the bios, are set at 100 watts at 100% on the power target slider (power limit), and 141 watts at 141% on the power target slider, then...it doesn't help you. BUT, set the power limit at 300 watts at 100% on the power target slider, and 303 watts at 101% on the power target slider, and viola....you have a MUCH higher power limit at 101%, than the guy who has his set at 141%. /wink

It's all in the numbers in the bios.


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> There's no such thing as "no limit" bios. There's always a value in the table. Regardless of what it's set at, you only have so much power available to use from the 6 pin / 8 pin / PCIe connections....which is also controlled by settings in the bios.


Understandable, I have two 8 pins and one 6 on my card all separate. These are my settings in my BIOS.



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Also my hidden values for trip point and base power limit are cranked up.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






I'm thinking, you know, maybe I'm just hitting my PSU limit once I start getting into the 1600 levels.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> Understandable, I have two 8 pins and one 6 on my card all separate. These are my settings in my BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also my hidden values for trip point and base power limit are cranked up.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking, you know, maybe I'm just hitting my PSU limit once I start getting into the 1600 levels.


Possible. Not sure who made that bios file, but they should be drawn and quartered for stupidity beyond reason. That, ladies and gentlemen, is a prime example of someone just throwing numbers in and not having a clue what they do.

That hurts to look at. Go here, ask Mr Dark to assist you. He'll make a bios that looks like a bios, and not like someone finger painted fail all over your card's beating heart.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1573308/nvidia-gtx-900-cards-custom-bios-upon-request


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Possible. Not sure who made that bios file, but they should be drawn and quartered for stupidity beyond reason. That, ladies and gentlemen, is a prime example of someone just throwing numbers in and not having a clue what they do.
> 
> That hurts to look at. Go here, ask Mr Dark to assist you. He'll make a bios that looks like a bios, and not like someone finger painted fail all over your card's beating heart.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1573308/nvidia-gtx-900-cards-custom-bios-upon-request


It's a direct copy of the Kingpin 980ti XOC BIOS which is on their site for their paying customers to download...

https://www.kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3820

Edit: Rewording. I kept reading it and it just came off wrong. I apologize.

You would have to go tell him he's wrong.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> It's a direct copy of the Kingpin 980ti XOC BIOS which is on their site for their paying customers to download...
> 
> https://www.kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3820
> 
> Edit: Rewording. I kept reading it and it just came off wrong. I apologize.
> 
> You would have to go tell him he's wrong.


I'm seeing there, 1,999,000 watt power limit, TDP, and 1,999,000 watts from the PCIe slot, and 8 pins. I know there are limits in place at some point to keep it from actually drawing more power than it should, but those figures are just ridiculous. Pulling more than 140 watts from a 6 pin (they're only supposed to pull 75 by spec), which is possible, isn't really something you should do..not on a continual basis. Just saying, that while that bios may be fine for someone running LN2, and doesn't care what their card performs like in the morning, hey...whatever. But, if you're going to use something for every day? I'd go ask Mr Dark for a better bios.....


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> I'm seeing there, 1,999,000 watt power limit, TDP, and 1,999,000 watts from the PCIe slot, and 8 pins. I know there are limits in place at some point to keep it from actually drawing more power than it should, but those figures are just ridiculous. Pulling more than 140 watts from a 6 pin (they're only supposed to pull 75 by spec), which is possible, isn't really something you should do..not on a continual basis. Just saying, that while that bios may be fine for someone running LN2, and doesn't care what their card performs like in the morning, hey...whatever. But, if you're going to use something for every day? I'd go ask Mr Dark for a better bios.....


It's been fine for awhile now. Thank you for your concern though.

Here's a screen cap of my temps and speeds after gaming for hours on end though.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Click original after clicking if you want a better picture detail wise.


----------



## Koniakki

*" New Entry "
*
Koniakki
- i7 5820K @ 4.75GHz
- 980ti GB Xtreme Windforce @ 1565 / 2049
- Score: 19069 Graphics: 21833
- Date (1/21/2016)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10387773


----------



## Rob27shred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> *" New Entry "
> *
> Koniakki
> - i7 5820K @ 4.75GHz
> - 980ti GB Xtreme Windforce @ 1565 / 2049
> - Score: 19069 Graphics: 21833
> - Date (1/21/2016)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10387773


Very nice score there!







Although I am surprised you did not go over 22,000 at those speeds. I have the same cards & have pushed it over 22,000 at slightly lower clocks. Your memory OC might just be hitting the point that it is starting to drag your score back down. Maybe try dropping it to an even 2,000 & see what happens.








Here is a pic & link of the FS run I went over 22,000 graphics score.


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7224961


----------



## DooRules

DooRules 6700K @ 5.046 --- 980ti KP 1550/2133---- 19124

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7316203


----------



## ssiperko

Great score!

SS


----------



## paskowitz

Wow... those are two golden pieces of silicon!


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - 5820k @4.725Ghz - GTX Titan X @ 1558Mhz / 8612Mhz - Score 19782
1/24/2016
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10438757


Here is another i did with 4.84Ghz but couldent manage to get my memory up to +800 only +700
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10439013
19462 physics score but lower overall


----------



## DooRules

DooRules -- 6700K @ 5.108 -- 980ti KP --- 1573/2174 --- 19306

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7326106



Low temps thanks to mother nature








-12' C outside pumped to rad, ghetto all the way, poor mans cooling, lol


----------



## cookiesowns

GTX 980Ti -
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules -- 6700K @ 5.108 -- 980ti KP --- 1573/2174 --- 19306
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7326106


Dem temps doe...


----------



## paskowitz

Has anyone achieved sub zero core temps using water cooling and outside air? I guess it would take -20-30c air temps and a large volume of air.. but I reckon its possible.


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> Has anyone achieved sub zero core temps using water cooling and outside air? I guess it would take -20-30c air temps and a large volume of air.. but I reckon its possible.


Short answer, it's possible if at or below -25C outside and you open your office or garage and face a box fan at your open case but it's still not going to be 100% the same as ln2. With water cooling yes more so then air, at temperatures mentioned above and enough radiators to exert the heat. That's how I beat everyone so far, at the single GPU fire strike score with my gpu. The list just isn't updated yet. Is it as effective probably not. Will it work, as I have proven, yes.


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules -- 6700K @ 5.108 -- 980ti KP --- 1573/2174 --- 19306
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7326106
> 
> 
> 
> Low temps thanks to mother nature
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -12' C outside pumped to rad, ghetto all the way, poor mans cooling, lol





Smart man. Probably the smartest on this forum honestly, besides for me lol.

















Also just for feeling the burn purposes, don't go to this section of this forum...

http://www.overclock.net/f/6/intel-motherboards

Totally useful people in that section if you know what I mean....


----------



## DooRules

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> Has anyone achieved sub zero core temps using water cooling and outside air? I guess it would take -20-30c air temps and a large volume of air.. but I reckon its possible.


I had two cores at 0" C at times. Had the gpu down to 4" C at the lowest point. Was going up to around 15' C during runs. But i was starting to worry about condensation forming. Room was cold obviously as well, heat off and rad pumping cold air and plenty of cold air leakage into the room.

Saw zero evidence of condensation but it was surely on my mind. Figured if it was to appear one of the first places would be on the glass of the reservoir, but nope. Try again tom.


----------



## stubass

It is pretty cold here today too











It is time this week to try and break past 23000 final score


----------



## TheBaron

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> Has anyone achieved sub zero core temps using water cooling and outside air? I guess it would take -20-30c air temps and a large volume of air.. but I reckon its possible.


My lowest water temps was about -13c before the radiator freezes, with outside temperature -25c


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## voidfahrenheit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> My lowest water temps was about -13c before the radiator freezes, with outside temperature -25c
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


DAMN! that's freezing!


----------



## mirzet1976

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> My lowest water temps was about -13c before the radiator freezes, with outside temperature -25c
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Nice


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> My lowest water temps was about -13c before the radiator freezes, with outside temperature -25c
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That is just awesome!


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Update,

*MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 V2 @5GHz -- TITAN-X @1596MHz -- 20902:*



*http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7333461*


----------



## Starbomba

Here is my submission. I don{t really mind if i'm crushed xD

New Entry
Starbomba - Xeon E5-2670 v1 @ 3 GHz - GTX 780 Classy @ 1351 / 1827 - 11360



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10509923


----------



## Vellinious

Vellinious - 5820k @ 4.7 - 290x @ 1314 / 1797 - 13828

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7358506


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> Forceman ..... am I only limited to one entry overall? The above is a second system I have which is all air cooled.
> 
> SS


I've just been putting one score per card.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stubass*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> stubass - I7-5960X @ 5375MHz - MSI 980Ti Lightning @ 1706 / 2003 - 22821
> - Date (29/12/2015)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9976081
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have room to go higher but this for starters until next bench session.













Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> truehighroller1
> - i7 2700K @ 5.144GHz
> - 980ti Lightning @ 1613 / 2051
> - Score: 17480 Graphics: 22640
> - Date (1/15/2016)
> 
> What I was able to do tonight. Air cooling.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10294890?
> 
> Did I break any records or anything cool>?











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SnakeBiteScares*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> SnakeBiteScares
> - i7 6700K @ 4.5GHz
> - GTX Titan X @ 1442 / 2056
> - Score: 17128 Graphics: 20752
> - Date (15/01/2016)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10296623
> http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/details.php?id=uvdh2
> http://valid.x86.fr/vb1llw
> 
> Edit: still testing, i was able to get higher (17070) so disregard that score for now
> Edit 2: Finished testing, this is the highest I could get without tweaking voltage











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rob27shred*
> 
> Update
> Rob27shred - i7 6700k @ 4.5GHz - Gigabyte Xtreme 980ti @ 1553 / 2001 - 18030 - 1/16/2016
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7224927
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linflas*
> 
> linflas-i7 4770k @ 4.5-Gigabyte G1 gaming 980ti 1557/1891--17228--1/13/2016
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10263015?
> 
> Thanks for looking











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> 'Update'
> 
> fyzzz - i5 4690k @ 5.1 Ghz - R9 290 @ 1340 / 1680 - 13150 (17/01/2016)
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7247395
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pt1 bios + mods and a whole lot of voltage











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> " Update "
> 
> truehighroller1
> - i7 2700K @ 5.144GHz
> - 980ti Lightning @ 1626 / 2051
> - Score: 17610 Graphics: 22601
> - Date (1/17/2016)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10344436?
> 
> Beta driver, hopefully that part don't matter here. Very cold tonight, air cooling again.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> Try again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3570k @ 4.5 1.392v (!) 980ti FTW ACX
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Need clock speeds.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> New Entry.
> 
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 4900 - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1569 / 2200 - 20403
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10384281
> 
> EDIT: Little update!
> 
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 4900 - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1616 / 2250 - 21138
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10399523












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *voidfahrenheit*
> 
> will i be included in the single gpu firestrike top 30?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> " New Entry "
> 
> voidfahrenheit
> - i7 6700k @ 4.8Ghz
> - EVGA 980 Ti Classified @ 1555Mhz
> - Score: 18075 Graphics: 22242
> - Date (January 20, 2016)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7278608
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> *" New Entry "
> *
> Koniakki
> - i7 5820K @ 4.75GHz
> - 980ti GB Xtreme Windforce @ 1565 / 2049
> - Score: 19069 Graphics: 21833
> - Date (1/21/2016)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10387773
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - 5820k @4.725Ghz - GTX Titan X @ 1558Mhz / 8612Mhz - Score 19782
> 1/24/2016
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10438757
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is another i did with 4.84Ghz but couldent manage to get my memory up to +800 only +700
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10439013
> 19462 physics score but lower overall











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules -- 6700K @ 5.108 -- 980ti KP --- 1573/2174 --- 19306
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7326106
> 
> 
> 
> Low temps thanks to mother nature
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -12' C outside pumped to rad, ghetto all the way, poor mans cooling, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Update,
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 V2 @5GHz -- TITAN-X @1596MHz -- 20902:*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7333461*











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbomba*
> 
> Here is my submission. I don{t really mind if i'm crushed xD
> 
> New Entry
> Starbomba - Xeon E5-2670 v1 @ 3 GHz - GTX 780 Classy @ 1351 / 1827 - 11360
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10509923











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Vellinious - 5820k @ 4.7 - 290x @ 1314 / 1797 - 13828
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7358506
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## lilchronic

@Forceman in the chart it say's my cpu is at 4.5Ghz when it was @ *4.75Ghz*


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I've just been putting one score per card.


I have three 980Ti. The 1st is WC G1 the other is a Classy on air.









SS


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> @Forceman in the chart it say's my cpu is at 4.5Ghz when it was @ *4.75Ghz*


Fixed, thanks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssiperko*
> 
> I have three 980Ti. The 1st is WC G1 the other is a Classy on air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SS


I can put them both on there if you really want, but up to now I've just been using the highest score for each category (so if someone has a regular card and upgrades to a Kingpin or something, I just use the Kingpin score).


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Fixed, thanks.
> I can put them both on there if you really want, but up to now I've just been using the highest score for each category (so if someone has a regular card and upgrades to a Kingpin or something, I just use the Kingpin score).


I understand card swaps for sure.
Your rules I'm just asking about completely different boxes!

















Guess I'll build a 2x 295x2 system









SS


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - 5820k @ 4.85Ghz - GTX Titan X @1545 / 2103 - Score:20065








2/11/16
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10716528


----------



## Starbomba

Update

Starbomba - Xeon E5-2670 v1 @ 3 GHz - GTX 780 Classy @ 1381 / 1865 - 11604

2/13/16

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10766325

P.S.: I love cold temps... it makes all my cards all crispy... I do hate that my Xeon can't be OCed though...


----------



## DJRamses

'New Entry'

DJRamses - i7 5960X @ 4750Mhz - 980Ti @ 1739 / 2126 - 21904
- 16.02.2016



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10803693


----------



## marc0053

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DJRamses*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> DJRamses - i7 5960X @ 4750Mhz - 980Ti @ 1739 / 2126 - 21904
> - 16.02.2016
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10803693


WOW amazing card!!
Is that the ASUS 20th year anniversary GTX 980 Ti gold edition gpu?


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> WOW amazing card!!
> Is that the ASUS 20th year anniversary GTX 980 Ti gold edition gpu?


Look at GPU voltage.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Look at GPU voltage.


Yeah that's a lot of voltage. I was putting 1.6v on my 780ti kingpin with cold water.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - 5820k @ 4.85Ghz - GTX Titan X @1545 / 2103 - Score:20065
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2/11/16
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10716528
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbomba*
> 
> Update
> 
> Starbomba - Xeon E5-2670 v1 @ 3 GHz - GTX 780 Classy @ 1381 / 1865 - 11604
> 
> 2/13/16
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10766325
> 
> P.S.: I love cold temps... it makes all my cards all crispy... I do hate that my Xeon can't be OCed though...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DJRamses*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> DJRamses - i7 5960X @ 4750Mhz - 980Ti @ 1739 / 2126 - 21904
> - 16.02.2016
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/10803693


----------



## Dude970

Update

Dude970 - CPU @ 5.043. - GPU @ 1541 / 2103 - 11527
- Date (24/02/2016)



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7680026


----------



## nowcontrol

*NEW ENTRY*

nowcontrol - i7-6700k @ 4900MHz + GTX 970 @ 1570/2060 - 12450 [18/02/2016]

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7597993


----------



## truehighroller1

" New Entry "

truehighroller1
- 5820k @ 4.985GHz
- 980ti Lightning @ 1626 / 2026
- Score: 19722 Graphics: 22408
- Date (2/26/2016)



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7693046


----------



## Vellinious

Update: Vellinious

- 5820k @ 4.75GHz
- XFX 8GB 290X @ 1307 / 1836
- Score: 14810 Graphics: 16829
- Date (2/26/2016)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7701597


----------



## fyzzz

'Update'

fyzzz - i5 4690k @ 5.1 Ghz - R9 290 @ 1330 / 1760 - 13395 (29/02/2016)
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7734087


----------



## Wickedtt

Wickedtt - X5660 @ 4.7ghz - GTX 980Ti Classy 1494/2000mhz - 17177p - 3.2.2016

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11032137


----------



## DooRules

DooRules--- 6700K @ 5.112--- 980ti KP @ 1613/ 2121 ---- 19774

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7788154


----------



## truehighroller1

That memory speed makes all the difference doesn't it. I like how I will be at the top end of the list score wise and I will not actually be put on the list until a bunch of people will try real hard to knock me down a few notches and post their scores and then the list gets updated and I am back down on the list again. Truly a fun experience.


----------



## animagr

*New Entry*

animagr
- i5 6600K @3500
- EVGA GTX970 SSC 2.0+ @1430/1753
- 10097
- Date (03/04/2016)

All stock settings except fan profiles set more aggressively (custom).

Is this a bad score? This is my first time benchmarking and idk what I am really doing, this was just a first system pass with everything basically stock. My parts list is in my signature.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11062100


----------



## marc0053

Got a new card to play with GTX 980 Ti Matrix

Firestrike:

marc0053 - i7 5960x @ 5.0ghz - GTX 980 Ti - 1690 MHz / 2153 MHz - Score = 21,842
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11161827?


----------



## TheBaron

Update!

TheBaron - 5960X @ 5.2 GHz - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1715 / 2250 - 22146



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11181889


----------



## romian

*New Entry

romian(The Glennfather) - 4770K @ 4.6 GHz - TITAN X @ 1520 / 4050 - 17882*



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11298878


----------



## HZCH

*New entry*

HZCH - Xeon e3-1231v3 @ 3700MHz - Asus GTX980 Strix @ 1299 (1400 boost) / 2000 - 12 563 (15653 graphics)
- 20/03/2016

I don't know what should I do to get higher, as I've only used GPU tweak and the GPU is on air. Must admit I haven't really did any research about OCing a 980 on air, though...
I also didn't touch anything on the CPU side. And I don't even know what LOD tweaking is.









http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11311647





[edit]

Please be kind with me, I mainly did submit my score so I could put a 1231v3 on the GTX980 list


----------



## ronaldoz

*New Entry*

ronaldoz - 4790K @ 4800Mhz - Sapphire R9 390 Nitro 8GB @ 1185 / 1750 - 12346
- 23/03/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11349067


----------



## Vellinious

Are there tabs for 390 / 390X, I can't see them.....


----------



## ronaldoz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Are there tabs for 390 / 390X, I can't see them.....


if you mean mine, it's the 390 (non X)


----------



## Vellinious

No, on the spreadsheet on page 1 of the post. There are tabs for the various GPUs. I'd suggest moving the 780 / 780ti tabs over, to bring the 390 / 390X tabs into view. Just a thought.


----------



## ronaldoz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> No, on the spreadsheet on page 1 of the post. There are tabs for the various GPUs. I'd suggest moving the 780 / 780ti tabs over, to bring the 390 / 390X tabs into view. Just a thought.


Ah, I see, that would be nice, can't see them either.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> Update
> 
> Dude970 - CPU @ 5.043. - GPU @ 1541 / 2103 - 11527
> - Date (24/02/2016)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7680026











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nowcontrol*
> 
> *NEW ENTRY*
> 
> nowcontrol - i7-6700k @ 4900MHz + GTX 970 @ 1570/2060 - 12450 [18/02/2016]
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7597993
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *truehighroller1*
> 
> " New Entry "
> 
> truehighroller1
> - 5820k @ 4.985GHz
> - 980ti Lightning @ 1626 / 2026
> - Score: 19722 Graphics: 22408
> - Date (2/26/2016)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7693046











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Update: Vellinious
> 
> - 5820k @ 4.75GHz
> - XFX 8GB 290X @ 1307 / 1836
> - Score: 14810 Graphics: 16829
> - Date (2/26/2016)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7701597
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fyzzz*
> 
> 'Update'
> 
> fyzzz - i5 4690k @ 5.1 Ghz - R9 290 @ 1330 / 1760 - 13395 (29/02/2016)
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7734087
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> Wickedtt - X5660 @ 4.7ghz - GTX 980Ti Classy 1494/2000mhz - 17177p - 3.2.2016
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11032137
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules--- 6700K @ 5.112--- 980ti KP @ 1613/ 2121 ---- 19774
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7788154
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *animagr*
> 
> *New Entry*
> 
> animagr
> - i5 6600K @3500
> - EVGA GTX970 SSC 2.0+ @1430/1753
> - 10097
> - Date (03/04/2016)
> 
> All stock settings except fan profiles set more aggressively (custom).
> 
> Is this a bad score? This is my first time benchmarking and idk what I am really doing, this was just a first system pass with everything basically stock. My parts list is in my signature.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11062100
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marc0053*
> 
> Got a new card to play with GTX 980 Ti Matrix
> 
> Firestrike:
> 
> marc0053 - i7 5960x @ 5.0ghz - GTX 980 Ti - 1690 MHz / 2153 MHz - Score = 21,842
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11161827?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBaron*
> 
> Update!
> 
> TheBaron - 5960X @ 5.2 GHz - 980 Ti Matrix @ 1715 / 2250 - 22146
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11181889











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *romian*
> 
> *New Entry
> 
> romian(The Glennfather) - 4770K @ 4.6 GHz - TITAN X @ 1520 / 4050 - 17882*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11298878











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HZCH*
> 
> *New entry*
> 
> HZCH - Xeon e3-1231v3 @ 3700MHz - Asus GTX980 Strix @ 1299 (1400 boost) / 2000 - 12 563 (15653 graphics)
> - 20/03/2016
> 
> I don't know what should I do to get higher, as I've only used GPU tweak and the GPU is on air. Must admit I haven't really did any research about OCing a 980 on air, though...
> I also didn't touch anything on the CPU side. And I don't even know what LOD tweaking is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11311647
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [edit]
> 
> Please be kind with me, I mainly did submit my score so I could put a 1231v3 on the GTX980 list











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ronaldoz*
> 
> *New Entry*
> 
> ronaldoz - 4790K @ 4800Mhz - Sapphire R9 390 Nitro 8GB @ 1185 / 1750 - 12346
> - 23/03/2016
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11349067
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Are there tabs for 390 / 390X, I can't see them.....


That's actually the first 390/390X score. I just added them to the 290/290X pages.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> That's actually the first 390/390X score. I just added them to the 290/290X pages.


Wow.....I would have thought someone would have posted one by now. Hmm


----------



## ronaldoz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> That's actually the first 390/390X score. I just added them to the 290/290X pages.


Thanks for checking it out! But there's is only 1 390's at 'all GPU's? And not any 390 in the 290 / 390 page. It might take some time to update all those scores I guess?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ronaldoz*
> 
> Thanks for checking it out! But there's is only 1 390's at 'all GPU's? And not any 390 in the 290 / 390 page. It might take some time to update all those scores I guess?


Not sure what you mean. There has been only one 300 series submission to date.


----------



## ronaldoz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Not sure what you mean. There has been only one 300 series submission to date.


Well, I posted a 390 score, but I don't see it at the 'All GPU' or 390's page.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ronaldoz*
> 
> Well, I posted a 390 score, but I don't see it at the 'All GPU' or 390's page.


I see it on the 290 / 390 page


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ronaldoz*
> 
> Well, I posted a 390 score, but I don't see it at the 'All GPU' or 390's page.


It's not on the All GPU tab because I only have the top 50 shown. It is on the 290/390 tab, but that tab was cut off on the embedded chart. I tweaked the tabs so you should be able to see it now.


----------



## rck1984

Nvm.


----------



## ronaldoz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> It's not on the All GPU tab because I only have the top 50 shown. It is on the 290/390 tab, but that tab was cut off on the embedded chart. I tweaked the tabs so you should be able to see it now.


Thanks for the support!


----------



## zGunBLADEz

zGunBLADEz - 4790K @ 5 GHz - 980 Ti @ 1560 / 2052 - 17872
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8008760


----------



## ronaldoz

*New Entry*

ronaldoz - 4790K @ 4700Mhz - Sapphire R9 390*X* Nitro 8GB @ 1200 / 1680 - 14768
- 27/03/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11398598?


----------



## cg4200

Hey there here is my fire strike graphics 22 469 1583 core and 2,090 MHz mem http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8179443 on Msi Z170A M7 6700k 4.945 1.47v I delided with coollaboratory liquid ultra still fine tuning looking for more almost forgot ek waterblock 980ti g1 two 360 rads


----------



## Crosshatch3D

*New Entry*

Crosshatch3D - 8350 @ 4600Mhz - EVGA 980 TI FTW 8GB @ 1190/ 1680 - 11263- 13/05/2016

My resolution is 2560 x 1600

How does my scoring look??


----------



## mus1mus

Dell?

You won't get much info here simply because you ran the app with Custom resolution most people don't run at.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I mentioned that to him in his Valley thread, running the default settings as laid out in the OP gives the best chance of comparing score for score.

Also, your clocks are very low for a premium 980Ti. You should be able to increase your core clock by 350MHz or so (ie 1540 vs 1190)


----------



## Crosshatch3D

I'm sorry, is the standard 1920 x 1080 resolution? Is that for all these benchmark threads?

My latest picture wouldn't upload, I overclocked the card to 1450 Mhz and reached a graphics score of 1900+

-Jason


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

It should pop open a browser window with a validation link after it's finished, you can just copy and paste that for quick and dirty purposes.

And yeah, just open Fire Strike, select plain Jane Fire Strike - not Extreme or Ultra - and click "Benchmark Only" I think it is - you don't need to sit through the Demo. Let it do its thing.


----------



## Crosshatch3D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> It should pop open a browser window with a validation link after it's finished, you can just copy and paste that for quick and dirty purposes.
> 
> And yeah, just open Fire Strike, select plain Jane Fire Strike - not Extreme or Ultra - and click "Benchmark Only" I think it is - you don't need to sit through the Demo. Let it do its thing.


Ok thanks, I believe i'm on the correct Fire Strike, less the resolution change. I'm really sick of the Demo, I need to just do the benchmarks from now on...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Here's a validation link of mine, similar system to what you have, GPU core clock at 1535 here.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11436512

Click around on it, the "Settings" tab just below the bar graph has "Default Settings Used" clicked. That's what the majority of scores will be run at, and using that enables users to compare apples to apples across different systems, one constant in a sea of variables. I should mention that that run was made on a 2560 x 1440 monitor, but at "Default Settings" in the program - actual monitor native resolution doesn't really matter. Run the program at defaults.

And yeah, skipping the demo is crucial to your sanity.


----------



## paskowitz

Well, looks like 3DMark is completely borked for me after the latest Nvidia driver. I launch any test and I get treated with a black program window. Nothing happens after that, it just stays hung in that state. I've tried reinstalling 3DMark... nothing. I'll roll back drivers next, but this is really strange behavior. Anyone else experiencing this?


----------



## DR4G00N

Got my 480 nice and chilly.









DR4G00N - G3258 @ 4.7GHz - EVGA GTX 480 SC @ 1010/2020/1125 1.32V - 4065 - 15/5/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8479095


----------



## Cannon19932006

Throwing in the 10k mobile FS score for funsies.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8477369

4720HQ @ 3.6GHz - GTX 980M @ 1376MHz Core, 1453MHz Mem, +62.5mV


----------



## tiosss

tiosss i7 [email protected] gtx 970 msi [email protected]

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/12076472


----------



## Forceman

Sorry fellas, somehow this thread dropped off my subscription list.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> zGunBLADEz - 4790K @ 5 GHz - 980 Ti @ 1560 / 2052 - 17872
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8008760
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ronaldoz*
> 
> *New Entry*
> 
> ronaldoz - 4790K @ 4700Mhz - Sapphire R9 390*X* Nitro 8GB @ 1200 / 1680 - 14768
> - 27/03/2016
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11398598?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cg4200*
> 
> Hey there here is my fire strike graphics 22 469 1583 core and 2,090 MHz mem http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8179443 on Msi Z170A M7 6700k 4.945 1.47v I delided with coollaboratory liquid ultra still fine tuning looking for more almost forgot ek waterblock 980ti g1 two 360 rads











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Crosshatch3D*
> 
> *New Entry*
> 
> Crosshatch3D - 8350 @ 4600Mhz - EVGA 980 TI FTW 8GB @ 1190/ 1680 - 11263- 13/05/2016
> 
> My resolution is 2560 x 1600
> 
> How does my scoring look??
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Need 3DMark link and standard settings.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiosss*
> 
> tiosss i7 [email protected] gtx 970 msi [email protected]
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/12076472
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Clockster

New Entry

Clockster - 5930K @ 4.6Ghz - Gigabyte GTX 1080 FE @ 2101 / 5468 - 20 357
- 29/05/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/12222783


----------



## mus1mus

New tech!









Still gonna hold on my hawwaiis


----------



## Recipe7

I have a feeling I will be removed from the top 50 in 1 months time


----------



## vilius572

'New entry'
vilius572 - 5930k @ 4.6Ghz - EVGA GTX 980ti Classified @ 1580Mhz / 2114Mhz - 15134
- 30/05/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8393316


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules--- 6700K @ 5.112--- 980ti KP @ 1613/ 2121 ---- 19774
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7788154


What voltage were you running here to get that clock?


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> What voltage were you running here to get that clock?


Looks like GPU'z is reporting 1.212v


----------



## DooRules

I would have been around 1.55 to 1.6 on core and around 1.65 on mem, with cold air pumping through rad.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> I would have been around 1.55 to 1.6 on core and around 1.65 on mem, with cold air pumping through rad.


I was going to mention these kingpins are never accurate with software reading voltage.








My 780Ti kingpin with both voltage switches on and 1.35v in classy tool was around 1.5v actual with DMM


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> zGunBLADEz - 4790K @ 5 GHz - 980 Ti @ 1560 / 2052 - 17872
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8008760


an Update as i sold my 980Ti and this is my last score with her
zGunBLADEz - 4790K @ 5 GHz - 980 Ti @ 1560 / 2052 - 18103
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7846324
XD


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clockster*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Clockster - 5930K @ 4.6Ghz - Gigabyte GTX 1080 FE @ 2101 / 5468 - 20 357
> - 29/05/2016
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/12222783
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vilius572*
> 
> 'New entry'
> vilius572 - 5930k @ 4.6Ghz - EVGA GTX 980ti Classified @ 1580Mhz / 2114Mhz - 15134
> - 30/05/2016
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8393316
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












That score seems strangely low for those speeds.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> an Update as i sold my 980Ti and this is my last score with her
> zGunBLADEz - 4790K @ 5 GHz - 980 Ti @ 1560 / 2052 - 18103
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7846324
> XD


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

It's a GTX 980, not a TI is why.


----------



## vilius572

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That score seems strangely low for those speeds.


I messed up. It is a 980 not 980ti. I probably wrote that because I was using 980ti at the time I posted that benchmark.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> It's a GTX 980, not a TI is why.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vilius572*
> 
> I messed up. It is a 980 not 980ti. I probably wrote that because I was using 980ti at the time I posted that benchmark.


Guess I should have caught that. Fixed.


----------



## GenoOCAU

Probably not the right place to ask, but hope someone could offer me their expertise on what is going on here.

I'm having a hard time understanding whats going on between my Gigabyte G1 980Ti (Hynix) and a friends EVGA 980Ti Classified (Samsung) when running Firestrike 1.1.

Both in the same PC, same drivers his graphics score is well beyond mine regardless how much I overclock the G1.

*Anomaly 1:* He picked up 1000 graphics score going from Bios 1 to LN2 bios > Most of the difference was made up in Test 2.

*Anomaly 2:* His card is pulling a far larger score at 1543/2078 then my card at 1595/2178.

Is the Classified LN2 bios overclocking the sub-timings of his Vram to completely trump my card in test 2? In all my years overclocking/benchmarking ive never seen such confusing results when run on the same system. He picked up nearly 10 fps on graphics test 2 alone with, from what I saw, was a flick of a bios switch.

On the G1 I'm experiencing no throttling what so ever. I'm also getting positive scaling the more I overclock.

What on earth is going on? We've run firestrike over the cards over 30 times with close with no more then +/- 0.2 fps variance which suggest something is definately skewing the results dramatically in his favor.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

^^^

The Classy with Samsung vram helps a 980 ti go clock for clock with a Titan-X.

Now the LN2 bios could have even tighter timings than the stock bios, also the stock bios, even though it says 15xx clocks in gpuz could still be throttling. For example, two cars with the same amount of horse power, but one has more torque than the other. Helps the one car to go faster.

I seen this with the GTX 680 myself way back when. Some bios' are more efficient than others too. I believe everything is normal here.


----------



## fitzy-775

Just got my gigabyte g1 gaming gtx 1080 today and bought
3DMark.


----------



## Preim

Can I make a new entry for my GTX 1080? Had a previous entry with my 980. G1 Gaming version also here.

Preim - 4790k @ 4.8GHz - GTX1080 @ 2126 / 1395 - 18340
Date (02/07/2016)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/12859394


----------



## Vellinious

Firestrike

Vellinious - 5820k @ 4.75 - 980 Ti @ 1567 / 2140 - 19430

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9076134


----------



## Nafu

hey,

Anybody can tell, how much difference does Windows 10 Create in Firestrike score over Windows 7, talking about graphics and overall. ???


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nafu*
> 
> hey,
> 
> Anybody can tell, how much difference does Windows 10 Create in Firestrike score over Windows 7, talking about graphics and overall. ???


Not very much. Going from Windows 8 to 10 was a decent jump though.


----------



## Nafu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Not very much. Going from Windows 8 to 10 was a decent jump though.


BTW i can see your signature, GTX 970 score is 3219 in Valley. what were the clocks you done on achieved on that.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nafu*
> 
> BTW i can see your signature, GTX 970 score is 3219 in Valley. what were the clocks you done on achieved on that.


1633 / 2176 I believe...or right near there, anyway. I can't recall. Was a long time ago I posted that score.


----------



## Nafu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> 1633 / 2176 I believe...or right near there, anyway. I can't recall. Was a long time ago I posted that score.


OMG, that's Huge. In Fact any number above 1600 is prestigious overclocking.

I have MSI GTX 970 Gaming, and i only went to 1498mhz boost till yet on default voltage.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nafu*
> 
> OMG, that's Huge. In Fact any number above 1600 is prestigious overclocking.
> 
> I have MSI GTX 970 Gaming, and i only went to 1498mhz boost till yet on default voltage.


1600 really isn't that hard to reach on GM204 with watercooling...relatively common, even.


----------



## Blackcurrent

My 3DMark Firestrike score with GTX 1070 Gaming X. 21k seems alright.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/12842753


----------



## Nafu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> 1600 really isn't that hard to reach on GM204 with watercooling...relatively common, even.


i am talking about Air cooling here. Water cooling is another thing. one of my colleague able to achieve 1583mhz core but with modified Bios, which can be done without any effort.

I am interseted in achieving 1600mhz on air. i don't know if my gpu can go tht far, but i do wanna try,so can you share some of your configurations if it still have saved with you.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nafu*
> 
> i am talking about Air cooling here. Water cooling is another thing. one of my colleague able to achieve 1583mhz core but with modified Bios, which can be done without any effort.
> 
> I am interseted in achieving 1600mhz on air. i don't know if my gpu can go tht far, but i do wanna try,so can you share some of your configurations if it still have saved with you.


My GPUs were both under water....I ran a lot of volts through them and kept them REALLY cool. The one card didn't like doing over 1633, so that's where I was stuck for SLI runs. The one good single card would run as high as 1676. This was with watercooled cards, 10c ambients and a lot of voltage... The way I did it, won't work for you. lol


----------



## Nafu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> My GPUs were both under water....I ran a lot of volts through them and kept them REALLY cool. The one card didn't like doing over 1633, so that's where I was stuck for SLI runs. The one good single card would run as high as 1676. This was with watercooled cards, 10c ambients and a lot of voltage... The way I did it, won't work for you. lol


of course, your cards are on extra ordinary cooling. i can only imagine how well they are overclocking under such coolest environment.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nafu*
> 
> of course, your cards are on extra ordinary cooling. i can only imagine how well they are overclocking under such coolest environment.


Exactly. You asked me for some of my saved configurations....what I used won't work for you, unless you do what I did. I can modify a bios file for you, but...it'll be up to you to get your load temps on the GPUs below 30c to make them work.


----------



## Asus11

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9085689

Asus11 - i7 6700k @ 5.0 - GTX 1080 @ 2164 /5575 - 20524
- (13/07/2016)


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fitzy-775*
> 
> Just got my gigabyte g1 gaming gtx 1080 today and bought
> 3DMark.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Need link
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Preim*
> 
> Can I make a new entry for my GTX 1080? Had a previous entry with my 980. G1 Gaming version also here.
> 
> Preim - 4790k @ 4.8GHz - GTX1080 @ 2126 / 1395 - 18340
> Date (02/07/2016)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/12859394
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Firestrike
> 
> Vellinious - 5820k @ 4.75 - 980 Ti @ 1567 / 2140 - 19430
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9076134
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackcurrent*
> 
> My 3DMark Firestrike score with GTX 1070 Gaming X. 21k seems alright.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/12842753












Need screenshot
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9085689
> 
> Asus11 - i7 6700k @ 5.0 - GTX 1080 @ 2164 /5575 - 20524
> - (13/07/2016)












Need screenshot


----------



## mr2cam

1080 @ 2100 / 10,908
5820k @ 4.7

20372
24,638 graphics
18,255 physics
9579 combined



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13372278


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 V2 @4.75GHz -- GTX 1080 @2126MHz -- 21 355:*



*http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13373064*


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need screenshot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need screenshot


need screenshot? so I need to go back in time? lol


----------



## stahlhart

Look for a file with a .result extension in your user account's 3DMark folder for the approximate date and time the benchmark was run.


----------



## alancsalt

Nearly all benchmark threads have the conditions of entry in the first post of the thread. Also, usually, how to do that. Worth checking.


----------



## The_Nephilim

'New Entry'

The_Nephilim - Intel i5 3570K @ 4.3ghz - 980GTX / 1366 / 1846 - 11765
- Date (21-7-2016)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13589770?


----------



## Vellinious

What the..... This is in Firestrike. Latest driver. Just did a DDU and clean install. Was doing the same thing with 353.62, my usual FS go to.

Frames drop into the teens within seconds of the first part of the test and then return to normal. Happens with overclocks, stock clocks....I'm at a loss.


----------



## mus1mus

Fire Strike bug.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> Fire Strike bug.


Sooo....it's not only me that's seeing this, then? Is there a workaround?


----------



## mus1mus

I think I did see this disappear on one of the motherboard BIOS I have tried., Try the latest one maybe. I believe it was 3202 on the RVE.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mus1mus*
> 
> I think I did see this disappear on one of the motherboard BIOS I have tried., Try the latest one maybe. I believe it was 3202 on the RVE.


I just updated my motherboard bios for my new CPU. Odd thing is, the Timespy stutter disappeared, but...now I have this nasty stutter at the beginning of FS. /smh


----------



## mus1mus

Does it happen as well on with the DEMO ON? I am yet to try that.

Busy benching 3DM11 lately.


----------



## Kimir

Try disabling hardware monitoring, if it's on.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Try disabling hardware monitoring, if it's on.


Did a couple runs really quick after work. Turning hardware monitoring off, seemed to make it go away. I'll do a few overclock runs tonight, see if it stays that way.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mr2cam*
> 
> 1080 @ 2100 / 10,908
> 5820k @ 4.7
> 
> 20372
> 24,638 graphics
> 18,255 physics
> 9579 combined
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13372278











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 V2 @4.75GHz -- GTX 1080 @2126MHz -- 21 355:*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13373064*












You couldn't push it that little bit more to get 25K graphics score?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> need screenshot? so I need to go back in time? lol


Only if you want the score to count.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Nephilim*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> The_Nephilim - Intel i5 3570K @ 4.3ghz - 980GTX / 1366 / 1846 - 11765
> - Date (21-7-2016)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13589770?












Need screenshot


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

I was on Time Spy and Heaven 4.0 benching sessions when I had the 1080. Fire Strike was a quick set it and forget it run. Too late now, card went back to the shop in anticipation of the new Titan-X.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was on Time Spy and Heaven 4.0 benching sessions when I had the 1080. Fire Strike was a quick set it and forget it run. Too late now, card went back to the shop in anticipation of the new Titan-X.


Well that'll get you 25K for sure.


----------



## Bride

'Update'

Bride - CPU Intel 6600K @ 4600MHz - GPU GTX950 @ 1455MHz / 2000MHz - SCORE 6218 - DATE 07/08/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9674986


----------



## ucode

Nice score Bride.


----------



## paskowitz

'New Entry'

Paskowitz - CPU 4790k @ 5.1Ghz - GPU EVGA 980 Ti Classified @ 1550 / 8100 - Score 17995
- Date 08/17/2016



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9813071


----------



## Vellinious

Vellinious - 6950X @ 4.5 - 1080 @ 2151 / 2778 - Score: 21750



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9832300


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 V2 @4.92GHz -- TITAN X Pascal @2126MHz -- 26043:*



*http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/14239919*


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 V2 @4.92GHz -- TITAN X Pascal @2126MHz -- 26043:*
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/14239919*


Holy crap that golden Xeon must be on fire!


----------



## alancsalt

MrTOOSHORT gets consistently good results over a range of hardware, so I'd say, "Great results, as usual!







"


----------



## Bride

'Update'

Bride - CPU Intel 6600K @ 4400MHz - GPU GTX950 @ 1544MHz / 2003MHz - SCORE 6646 - DATE 22/08/2016

www.3dmark.com/3dm/14306223


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Paskowitz - CPU 4790k @ 5.1Ghz - GPU EVGA 980 Ti Classified @ 1550 / 8100 - Score 17995
> - Date 08/17/2016
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9813071











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Vellinious - 6950X @ 4.5 - 1080 @ 2151 / 2778 - Score: 21750
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9832300











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 1680 V2 @4.92GHz -- TITAN X Pascal @2126MHz -- 26043:*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/14239919*


----------



## DooRules

DooRules -- 6950x @ 4.598 --- TitanX P @ 2114 --- 26494

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10105947


----------



## Vellinious

Vellinious -- 6950X @ 4.6 -- TitanXP @ 2063 / 2801

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10038148


----------



## dela

'New Entry'

dela - CPU 4790k @ 4.8Ghz - GPU TitanXP @ 2088 / 1315 - Score 22157
- Date 09/03/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10038757


----------



## Bride

'Update'

Bride - CPU Intel 6600K @ 4700MHz - GPU GTX950 @ 1544MHz / 2053MHz - SCORE 6708 - 12/09/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10138281


----------



## kx11

KX11

i7 6950x @ 4.49ghz , TitanXP---2101core---11070mem , score 25 924



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10149809


----------



## glnn_23

glnn_23 - 6950X @ 4.6 - TitanX Pascal 2126 / 1401 - Score *26 374*

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/14860385


----------



## Bride

UPDATE

Bride -- 6600K @ 4.4 -- GTX 950 @ 1569 / 2003 -- 6744


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules -- 6950x @ 4.598 --- TitanX P @ 2114 --- 26494
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10105947
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Vellinious -- 6950X @ 4.6 -- TitanXP @ 2063 / 2801
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10038148
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dela*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> dela - CPU 4790k @ 4.8Ghz - GPU TitanXP @ 2088 / 1315 - Score 22157
> - Date 09/03/2016
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10038757
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kx11*
> 
> KX11
> 
> i7 6950x @ 4.49ghz , TitanXP---2101core---11070mem , score 25 924
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10149809











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> glnn_23 - 6950X @ 4.6 - TitanX Pascal 2126 / 1401 - Score *26 374*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/14860385
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Bride

UPDATE

Bride -- 6600K @ 4.6 -- GTX 950 @ 1582 / 2053 -- 6779

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10250681


----------



## opt33

opt33....6900k @ 4.5ghz....Titan XP @ 2100/1377......25072
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10292098


----------



## DooRules

DooRules --- 6950x @ 4.597 --- Titan XP @ 2126/ 1423 --- 26951

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10312332


----------



## misoonigiri

*New Entry*

misoonigiri --- i7 6700K @ 6.725 --- GTX 980Ti @ 1530 / 8110 --- 18320
--- 07/10/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10389990


----------



## marc0053

marc_0053 - i7 6950x @ 4.7ghz - Ambient temps of 15C - Titan X Pascal - 2115MHz - 12,000MHz - Score = 27897

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/15651474


----------



## paskowitz

SOB it is really hard to break 18,000 in FS with a 4790K/980 Ti. Even with 5.1 on the cpu and 1560/8100 on the gpu, I can't crack the barrier. Is there something I am missing here? Some voodoo magic that results in a higher score?


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> SOB it is really hard to break 18,000 in FS with a 4790K/980 Ti. Even with 5.1 on the cpu and 1560/8100 on the gpu, I can't crack the barrier. Is there something I am missing here? Some voodoo magic that results in a higher score?


Control center tweaks, driver version and keeping the card really cool throughout the run. Bout all that's left, really.


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Control center tweaks, driver version and keeping the card really cool throughout the run. Bout all that's left, really.


I assume control center is just enable maximum performance? Driver, well hell if I know what the best driver is. Is there anything notably bad about the latest ones? I did have the card pretty cool. Water temp was about 20c and GPU temp was in the low 30's. If I get a cold night I might be able to go down another 10c.

What is unfortunate is I can run 1600mhz in Valley no problem at those temps, but FS insta crashes. I don't think adding more volts will help since we are Maxwell here.


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paskowitz*
> 
> I assume control center is just enable maximum performance? Driver, well hell if I know what the best driver is. Is there anything notably bad about the latest ones? I did have the card pretty cool. Water temp was about 20c and GPU temp was in the low 30's. If I get a cold night I might be able to go down another 10c.
> 
> What is unfortunate is I can run 1600mhz in Valley no problem at those temps, but FS insta crashes. I don't think adding more volts will help since we are Maxwell here.


With Maxwell, I had the best luck with 353.62 and 355.82. I haven't had a Maxwell for a few months, so I'm not sure how the new drivers are treating them, but.....worth rolling back and see what difference it makes.


----------



## stahlhart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Control center tweaks, driver version and keeping the card really cool throughout the run. Bout all that's left, really.


I think the CPU might be holding it back as well, in spite of the clock -- I just barely cleared the bar, but it looks like it was because of my physics score, as paskowitz has a higher graphics score than me.


----------



## paskowitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stahlhart*
> 
> I think the CPU might be holding it back as well, in spite of the clock -- I just barely cleared the bar, but it looks like it was because of my physics score, as paskowitz has a higher graphics score than me.


Well you've got an X99 CPU so that is to be expected. >14K CPU score is pretty good for a 4 core chip. With that said, I do think my CPU score is holding me back. If you look at zGunBLADEz's run, my GPU score is higher, but his CPU score is higher. Buuuut, in another run, I nearly match his physics score... with the same settings as my lower run! Ugh.

Now, on my 5.1Ghz overclock, I did NOT change the cache ratio. All I did was add a little voltage. Does cache ratio significantly effect FS? Maybe I would be better served by going down to 5.0 and increasing the cache ratio?


----------



## Bride

UPDATE

Bride --- G4400 @ 4.2 --- Gainward GTX 970 --- 1469 / 1853 --- 8242

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10841018


----------



## NYU87

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> UPDATE
> 
> Bride --- G4400 @ 4.2 --- Gainward GTX 970 --- 1469 / 1853 --- 8242
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10841018


Wow really nice GPU score, basically a RX480.


----------



## Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> Wow really nice GPU score, basically a RX480.


... and I am not really satisfied, I have a card with voltage locked at 1.21v and low ASIC...


----------



## NYU87

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> ... and I am not really satisfied, I have a card with voltage locked at 1.21v and low ASIC...


I'm assuming you have already tried tinkering with the BIOS.


----------



## Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> Wow really nice GPU score, basically a RX480.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> I'm assuming you have already tried tinkering with the BIOS.


yes, that's right, I already modded the BIOS, increasing the OC don't pass the Firestrike and Timespy Stress Test


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> yes, that's right, I already modded the BIOS, increasing the OC don't pass the Firestrike and Timespy Stress Test


Try driver 353.62 for Firestrike.


----------



## Derek1

New Entry

Derek1 --- i7 4820K @ 4.7--- GTX 1080 --- 2152/11610 --- 17784 --- 11/22/2016

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/16181975


----------



## kx11

just showing off my results with new setup

i7 6900 @ 4.49ghz , TitanXP---2063core---11114mem , score 24 912

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10976850


----------



## Chaoszero55

Chaoszero55 - 6700k @ 4.5 Ghz - Titan X Pascal @ +215 /+450 - 22709
- Date (12/16/2016)



http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/16721253?


----------



## CptSpig

New Entry

CptSpig - Intel i7 5930K @ 4688 - Nvidia Titan X Pascal @ 2,101 / 1,339 - 24317
01-21-2017
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11486413


----------



## devilhead

devilhead ---Intel Xeon E5-1650 [email protected] Titan XP --- 2139/1500 --- 25 540 Score
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/17172471


----------



## MoraisGT

Guys, maybe you can help out here.

I was running a few benchmarks after I got my RX 480 8GB (reference) to see the performance compared to people who had the same card.

But I am getting lower scores than people with the same card (using the same clocks), as an example, this is waht I got running Fire Strike at 1350/2200MHz:



A guy on hwbot using the exact same clocks got over 14k!

On the first test he got 9fps more, that's way too much.

I even made a fresh installation of W7 as you can see but it didn't help. I tried using the same drivers as him but it didn't make a difference.

This lack of performance is in every benchmark I made, including 3DM 11 and Vantage.

What could be wrong?

Thank's in advance


----------



## tiosss

Test with w10.


----------



## MoraisGT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiosss*
> 
> Test with w10.


I did test with a clean install of Windows 10.

Take this Vantage score as an example: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5569309

A GTX 1060 gets around 52k of graphics score. I also saw RX 480 (with the same clocks as mine) on HWbot get around the same 52k, but I'm only getting 45k, that's a massive difference!


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MoraisGT*
> 
> I did test with a clean install of Windows 10.
> 
> Take this Vantage score as an example: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5569309
> 
> A GTX 1060 gets around 52k of graphics score. I also saw RX 480 (with the same clocks as mine) on HWbot get around the same 52k, but I'm only getting 45k, that's a massive difference!


Turning Tessellation OFF for AMD cards does that and is allowed on the bot.


----------



## MoraisGT

Oh ok...

So then, we can conclude that Vantage is a little biased towards Nvidia right?

Thank's for the explanation btw


----------



## mus1mus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MoraisGT*
> 
> Oh ok...
> 
> So then, we can conclude that Vantage is a little biased towards Nvidia right?
> 
> Thank's for the explanation btw


Just try it. You'll be seeing a substantial increase with Tess Off.


----------



## Derek1

UPDATE

Derek1 --- i7 4930K @ 4.7--- GTX 1080 --- 2152/1440 --- 20039 --- 04/02/2017

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11613431


----------



## misoonigiri

*New Entry
*
misoonigiri --- i7 6700K @ 4.725 --- GTX 980Ti @ 1535 / 8182 --- 18445 --- 06/02/2017

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11623572


----------



## mus1mus

Wow!

Any reason why you have to pull the Base Clock to 105 with a K-Skylake?


----------



## misoonigiri

I was at 4700 but could not reach 4800
But it managed to do 4725 using 105 x 45


----------



## BeerCan

Just starting to overclock this card

New Entry

i7 6950x @ 4.2 -- GTX 1080 -- 2189/1251 -- 21726-- 2/5/2017
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11625516


----------



## Gunslinger.

Gunslinger i7 6950X @ 5.2 --- Titan X Pascal --- 2000/1368 --- 28046

LOD tweaked



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11750555


----------



## Hillguy

'New Entry'

Hillguy ---- 3960x @ 5.252 ---- Titan XP @ 2068/2904 ---- 24052 ---- 1/20/17



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11468409


----------



## DooRules

DooRules --- 6950x @ 4.619 --- Titan XP @ 1658 / 1476 -- 27237

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11884195


----------



## stocksux

'*NEW ENTRY*'

Stocksux - Intel Core i7 7700K @ 5.1GHz - Titan X (Pascal) @ Core Clock 2050 / Memory Bus 1451MHz - 24065
- Date (05/03/2017)


----------



## DooRules

Hey Stocksux, you will need to include the link to run from Futuremark, nice run by the way.


----------



## stocksux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> Hey Stocksux, you will need to include the link to run from Futuremark, nice run by the way.


My apologies, http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11897309


----------



## stocksux

Also to anyone who may have tips, I'm trying to crack the single gpu top 100 on the 3dmark site. The magic number is 24344 and I'm maxing out at 24065. There's only two people that aren't 2011-3 chips and they are both 7700k like me. They are using Titan xp like me. I have a higher clock and higher memory overclock on my Titan than both of them. I'm not sure what I'm missing here. Also my 7700k is at 5.1GHz. Any advice or explanation why they have scored 400-600 points higher than me?


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stocksux*
> 
> Also to anyone who may have tips, I'm trying to crack the single gpu top 100 on the 3dmark site. The magic number is 24344 and I'm maxing out at 24065. There's only two people that aren't 2011-3 chips and they are both 7700k like me. They are using Titan xp like me. I have a higher clock and higher memory overclock on my Titan than both of them. I'm not sure what I'm missing here. Also my 7700k is at 5.1GHz. Any advice or explanation why they have scored 400-600 points higher than me?


What are your ambient temps? Have you done the shunt mod? Are you water cooling? Is it winter where you live? If it is....open a window, drop the core temp as much as you can....an extra 10-15c lower on the core temp could mean an extra 100mhz and more stability.


----------



## stocksux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> What are your ambient temps? Have you done the shunt mod? Are you water cooling? Is it winter where you live? If it is....open a window, drop the core temp as much as you can....an extra 10-15c lower on the core temp could mean an extra 100mhz and more stability.


ambient is 22c, no shunt mod, 560mm 60mm thick with push/pull (GPU was at 29c for he run), its winter almost spring though


----------



## Blaze051806

1080 ti is gonna change this all up XD


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stocksux*
> 
> ambient is 22c, no shunt mod, 560mm 60mm thick with push/pull (GPU was at 29c for he run), its winter almost spring though


Are you hitting the power limit?


----------



## stocksux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Are you hitting the power limit?


Yeah I can't take the gpu any further. My temps are in the 20's through the whole firestrike run on the gpu. Core at 2075 and memory at +800. 7700k at 5.1GHz. I'm not sure what else to do. Are there any GeForce control panel settings or small software tweaks I'm missing?


----------



## Vellinious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stocksux*
> 
> Yeah I can't take the gpu any further. My temps are in the 20's through the whole firestrike run on the gpu. Core at 2075 and memory at +800. 7700k at 5.1GHz. I'm not sure what else to do. Are there any GeForce control panel settings or small software tweaks I'm missing?


Make sure in the "Manage 3D Setting" section, you have:

Multi-display / mixed-GPU acceleration: Single display performance mode
Power Management Mode: Prefer maximum performance
Texture Filtering Quality: High Performance

And make sure V-Sync is off. This is all I ever do.


----------



## stocksux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vellinious*
> 
> Make sure in the "Manage 3D Setting" section, you have:
> 
> Multi-display / mixed-GPU acceleration: Single display performance mode
> Power Management Mode: Prefer maximum performance
> Texture Filtering Quality: High Performance
> 
> And make sure V-Sync is off. This is all I ever do.


I'll check those out in the morning. Just about to go to bed. Thanks!


----------



## stocksux

'UPDATE'

Stocksux - Intel Core i7 7700K @ 5.1GHz - Titan X (Pascal) @ Core Clock 2076 / Memory Bus 1451MHz - 24256
- Date (05/03/2017)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18408090

This run was after making the changes suggested by @Vellinious. So close to top 100!


----------



## bichael

New Entry

bichael --- i7 4790 @ 4.0 --- R9 290 @ 1225/1460 --- 11926 --- Date 07/03/17
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11914064


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> UPDATE
> 
> Bride --- G4400 @ 4.2 --- Gainward GTX 970 --- 1469 / 1853 --- 8242
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10841018


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Derek1*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> Derek1 --- i7 4820K @ 4.7--- GTX 1080 --- 2152/11610 --- 17784 --- 11/22/2016
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/16181975


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chaoszero55*
> 
> Chaoszero55 - 6700k @ 4.5 Ghz - Titan X Pascal @ +215 /+450 - 22709
> - Date (12/16/2016)
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/16721253?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> CptSpig - Intel i7 5930K @ 4688 - Nvidia Titan X Pascal @ 2,101 / 1,339 - 24317
> 01-21-2017
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11486413


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *devilhead*
> 
> devilhead ---Intel Xeon E5-1650 [email protected] Titan XP --- 2139/1500 --- 25 540 Score
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/17172471


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Derek1*
> 
> UPDATE
> 
> Derek1 --- i7 4930K @ 4.7--- GTX 1080 --- 2152/1440 --- 20039 --- 04/02/2017
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11613431


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *misoonigiri*
> 
> *New Entry
> *
> misoonigiri --- i7 6700K @ 4.725 --- GTX 980Ti @ 1535 / 8182 --- 18445 --- 06/02/2017
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11623572


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BeerCan*
> 
> Just starting to overclock this card
> 
> New Entry
> 
> i7 6950x @ 4.2 -- GTX 1080 -- 2189/1251 -- 21726-- 2/5/2017
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11625516


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hillguy*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> Hillguy ---- 3960x @ 5.252 ---- Titan XP @ 2068/2904 ---- 24052 ---- 1/20/17
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11468409


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> DooRules --- 6950x @ 4.619 --- Titan XP @ 1658 / 1476 -- 27237
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11884195


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stocksux*
> 
> '*NEW ENTRY*'
> 
> Stocksux - Intel Core i7 7700K @ 5.1GHz - Titan X (Pascal) @ Core Clock 2050 / Memory Bus 1451MHz - 24065
> - Date (05/03/2017)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stocksux*
> 
> 'UPDATE'
> 
> Stocksux - Intel Core i7 7700K @ 5.1GHz - Titan X (Pascal) @ Core Clock 2076 / Memory Bus 1451MHz - 24256
> - Date (05/03/2017)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18408090
> 
> This run was after making the changes suggested by @Vellinious. So close to top 100!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bichael*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> bichael --- i7 4790 @ 4.0 --- R9 290 @ 1225/1460 --- 11926 --- Date 07/03/17
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11914064


All updated


----------



## madweazl

I dont think Brkany is a member here but we've been going at it for a couple months at the top spot now. There have been some other scores that have been suspect but this guy/gal has always seemed legit. I spent a good six hours trying to get back ahead of him/her today. My GPU seems to be a bit better but his CPU eeks out some extra grunt. Been a fun battle regardless!

I havent made a run with the prereqs for this threads official scores yet but they're typically around 35 points lower all said and done.
https://flic.kr/p/RAuw5a


----------



## cssorkinman

Cssorkinman AMD 1800X @4050mhz Fury 1080/520 15034 overall 17644 graphics score

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11953271


----------



## Beagle Box

New Entry

*Beagle Box (Tex Nomex) -
i7 6700K @ 4.89GHz - MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 1824 MHz/1400 MHz - Overall: 20761 - Graphics: 25882 - 17.03.2017
*

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11944469



Edited to include verification url, Graphics Score.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf - 5960x @ 4.7GHZ - Gigabyte 1080 Ti FE @ 1711 core / 3037 memory- 24352
- Date (11/03/2017)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18514004?


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - 5820k @4.7Ghz - 1080Ti @ 2050 / 12000 - 23101

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18643919


----------



## KedarWolf

'New Entry'

KedarWolf - 5960x @ 4.742 - Gigabyte 1080 Ti @ Core 2062 / Memory 6147 - Score 24613
- Date 21-03-2017
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18762258?

I do have a older Maxwell Titan X in my system as well as the 1080 Ti but I just use that for my second screen and dedicated PhysX, it has no bearing in my results, it stays completely downclocked during the bench and being a custom loop is a pain to take out.

Hope that does not disqualify my result. I don't think I'd take it out and run it again.


----------



## DRKSYDER

NEW ENTRY
Score 21994
Ryzen 1700 4.1mhz
Gtx 1080ti 150 MHz OC and 150 memory OC
Ddr4 3200

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12080966


----------



## rv8000

'new entry'

rv8000 - R7 1700 @3.9Ghz - 1070 @ 2126 / 9060 - 17592



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12197667

Had a better run but my results page doesn't havent it on the 3Dmark website, for who knows what reason...


----------



## NYU87

NYU87- 4930K @ 4.7GHZ - MSI GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X @ 2102/11520 - 4/08/2017

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12252926


----------



## im late

Hello All.









*New Entry*

*IM LATE* - 6950X @ 4.5 - GTX 1080Ti @ 2076 / 1536 - 26130 - Date (04/04/2017)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12214285


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Never too late, nice score!


----------



## bl4ckdot

*'New Entry'*

bl4ckdot - 4790k @ 4.7Ghz - Titan XP @ 2063 / 11048 - 22 242
- Date (07/04/2017)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12249852


----------



## Lefty23

New Entry

lefty23 - [email protected] - EVGA 1080 Ti FE @ 2100/12172 - 21821

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12186356

33k graphics score. Now all I need is one of them 8/10 core CPUs....


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lefty23*
> 
> 33k graphics score. Now all I need is one of them 8/10 core CPUs....


Haha same dude, had multiples 33k+ gs runs but I'm being hold back by my CPU







. I'm waiting for the x299


----------



## fearthisneo

New Entry

fearthisneo - 1700 X @ 3.8GHz - EVGA 1080 Ti FE @ 2063/5704 - 20419
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12258308


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

New Entry

GnarlyCharlie -- i7-7700K @ 5.0GHZ -- Titan Xp @ 2113/6426 -- 25,025 -- 5-1-2017

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/19670533


----------



## shar00750

Score with my 290x lightning 1390/1650 on dice, the cpu is 7700k 5900mhz on dice : 15662


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12535440


----------



## CptSpig

CptSpig --- i7 6950x @ 4.4GHz ---Nvidia Titan Xp @ 2,088MHz --- 26956 --- 6th May 2017
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12556999

http://s1164.photobucket.com/user/CptSpig/media/Fire Strike Chilled_zpspuz4becf.png.html


----------



## tiosss

[email protected] [email protected]/2000

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/19858213


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Cssorkinman AMD 1800X @4050mhz Fury 1080/520 15034 overall 17644 graphics score
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11953271











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> *Beagle Box (Tex Nomex) -
> i7 6700K @ 4.89GHz - MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 1824 MHz/1400 MHz - Overall: 20761 - Graphics: 25882 - 17.03.2017
> *
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11944469
> 
> 
> 
> Edited to include verification url, Graphics Score.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> lilchronic - 5820k @4.7Ghz - 1080Ti @ 2050 / 12000 - 23101
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18643919











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> 'New Entry'
> 
> KedarWolf - 5960x @ 4.742 - Gigabyte 1080 Ti @ Core 2062 / Memory 6147 - Score 24613
> - Date 21-03-2017
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18762258?
> 
> I do have a older Maxwell Titan X in my system as well as the 1080 Ti but I just use that for my second screen and dedicated PhysX, it has no bearing in my results, it stays completely downclocked during the bench and being a custom loop is a pain to take out.
> 
> Hope that does not disqualify my result. I don't think I'd take it out and run it again.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKSYDER*
> 
> NEW ENTRY
> Score 21994
> Ryzen 1700 4.1mhz
> Gtx 1080ti 150 MHz OC and 150 memory OC
> Ddr4 3200
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12080966












Need clock speeds
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> 'new entry'
> 
> rv8000 - R7 1700 @3.9Ghz - 1070 @ 2126 / 9060 - 17592
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12197667
> 
> Had a better run but my results page doesn't havent it on the 3Dmark website, for who knows what reason...











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> NYU87- 4930K @ 4.7GHZ - MSI GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X @ 2102/11520 - 4/08/2017
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12252926












Score not found.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *im late*
> 
> Hello All.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *New Entry*
> 
> *IM LATE* - 6950X @ 4.5 - GTX 1080Ti @ 2076 / 1536 - 26130 - Date (04/04/2017)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12214285











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> *'New Entry'*
> 
> bl4ckdot - 4790k @ 4.7Ghz - Titan XP @ 2063 / 11048 - 22 242
> - Date (07/04/2017)
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12249852











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lefty23*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> lefty23 - [email protected] - EVGA 1080 Ti FE @ 2100/12172 - 21821
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12186356
> 
> 33k graphics score. Now all I need is one of them 8/10 core CPUs....











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fearthisneo*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> fearthisneo - 1700 X @ 3.8GHz - EVGA 1080 Ti FE @ 2063/5704 - 20419
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12258308











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> New Entry
> 
> GnarlyCharlie -- i7-7700K @ 5.0GHZ -- Titan Xp @ 2113/6426 -- 25,025 -- 5-1-2017
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/19670533











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shar00750*
> 
> Score with my 290x lightning 1390/1650 on dice, the cpu is 7700k 5900mhz on dice : 15662
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12535440











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> CptSpig --- i7 6950x @ 4.4GHz ---Nvidia Titan Xp @ 2,088MHz --- 26956 --- 6th May 2017
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12556999
> 
> http://s1164.photobucket.com/user/CptSpig/media/Fire Strike Chilled_zpspuz4becf.png.html












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiosss*
> 
> [email protected] [email protected]/2000
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/19858213












Not doing RX 580s.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

This 580 is a fairly new AMD GPU, not an ancient Nvidia GPU...

If that's the reason you rejected it.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> This 580 is a fairly new AMD GPU, not an ancient Nvidia GPU...
> 
> If that's the reason you rejected it.


I'm familiar with the RX 580, just didn't want to make a new sheet for a mid-range card. Hopefully Vega will shake up the tables.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I'm familiar with the RX 580, just didn't want to make a new sheet for a mid-range card. Hopefully Vega will shake up the tables.


Understood.


----------



## mrgnex

'New Entry'

mrgnex - Intel i7 6700k @ 4.8 GHz - Nvidia GTX 980Ti @ 1567 MHz / 2018 MHz - 18 069
- Date (17/05/2017)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/19982109?

Just what I could squeeze out. Might try again later.


----------



## Voxer1982

##IGNORE PLEASE, RECORDED HIGHER SCORE BELOW##









voxer 1982 --I7 7700k @5.1Ghz -- KFA2 HOF 1080Ti @ 2126mhz\6055 -- 23653 -- 23/05/17

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12691777

Firestrike23653HOFTi.jpg 209k .jpg file


----------



## madweazl

New entry

madweazl - R7 1700 @ 4.1GHz - GTX 1070 @ 2152/2430 - 18076 - 26/05/2017
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12726510


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



https://flic.kr/p/Vbujf2


----------



## KedarWolf

3DMark URL says it's a Titan X but it's actually rendering on my 1080 Ti shown in GPU-Z. My Maxwell Titan X is a secondary card that for some reason shows as primary in 3DMark used only for dedicated PhysX.









KedarWolf - 5960x @ 4.742GHZ - Gigabyte 1080 Ti [email protected] 2088 / 6210 - 25194

Date 27/05/2017

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/20154997?


----------



## Voxer1982

##UPDATE##

voxer 1982 --I7 7700k @5.2Ghz -- KFA2 HOF 1080Ti @ 2139mhz\12472 -- 24022 -- 01/06/17



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12771587


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Voxer1982*
> 
> ##UPDATE##
> 
> voxer 1982 --I7 7700k @5.2Ghz -- KFA2 HOF 1080Ti @ 2139mhz\12472 -- 24022 -- 01/06/17
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12771587


Excellent. Is it game stable?


----------



## madweazl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Excellent. Is it game stable?


The likelihood of any post in here being stable is slim.


----------



## Gunslinger.

Gunslinger. -- 6950X @ 5.2GHz -- Asus Strix 1080 Ti 2365/1576 -- 29409

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12869460


----------



## Voxer1982

Yes, game stable and puts a lovely smile on my jawline. lol


----------



## Clukos

Clukos - Ryzen 1700 @ 4.1GHz - MSI 1080 Ti Gaming X @ 2101/3178 - 24368 - Date (27/07/2017)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13214328


----------



## zGunBLADEz

zGunBLADEz - Ryzen 1700 @ 4GHz - MSI 1080 Ti Founders @ 2164/6054 - 23 677 - Date (28/07/2017)
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21281850



im coming XD

lol update

zGunBLADEz - Ryzen 1800x @ 4.1GHz - MSI 1080 Ti Founders @ 2164/6132 - *24 336* - Date (09/08/2017)
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21478042


----------



## TahoeDust

TahoeDust - i7-7820x @ 5.0GHz - EVGA 1080 ti FTW3 @ 2025/6000 - 24 601 - Date (29/07/2017)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13233939


----------



## Beagle Box

Update!

*Beagle Box* (Tex Nomex) --i7 6700K @ 4.994GHz -- MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2164 MHz/1398 MHz -- Overall: *21 083* -- Graphics: 26 466 -- 16.08.2017

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13368252



*Back in the Top 30, baby!*








GPU waterblocks _do_ make a difference...


----------



## TahoeDust

Update

TahoeDust - i7-7820x @ 5.1GHz - EVGA 1080 ti FTW3 @ 2025/6000 - 25 215 - Date (16/08/2017)

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13375181


----------



## 113802

Probably won't count since AMD hasn't released official drivers.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21660190?

WannaBeOCer - 6700k @ 4.8Ghz - RX Vega 64 XTX @ 1857/1100 - 20178 - Date (19/08/2017)


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Beta drivers are fine, no problem there.

I think the time measurement thing will, though.


----------



## weyburn

So I got 18,613 score, and it says im better than 96% of all results... anyone know how realistic that is in ranking your computer?

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13466065


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *weyburn*
> 
> So I got 18,613 score, and it says im better than 96% of all results... anyone know how realistic that is in ranking your computer?
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13466065


It's best to search and compare your scores against the scores of computers with same CPU/GPU combo first to see how yours stacks up and then compare against similar/better machines, etc...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *weyburn*
> 
> So I got 18,613 score, and it says im better than 96% of all results... anyone know how realistic that is in ranking your computer?
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13466065


It won't get you into the top 50 in the rankings on the first post of this thread.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *weyburn*
> 
> So I got 18,613 score, and it says im better than 96% of all results... anyone know how realistic that is in ranking your computer?
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13466065


This means you are 96% of all scores with the same hardware i.e.: CPU and gpu.


----------



## CptSpig

'Update'

CptSpig - CPU Intel i7-6950X @ 4500MHz - GPU Titan Xp @ 2101MHz / 6458MHz - SCORE 27504 - DATE 09/04/2017 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13542383


----------



## KedarWolf

Update

KedarWolf - 5960x @ 4.7GHZ - GPU @ 2062 / 6156 - Score 24945 - Date (06/10/2017)
Using beta drivers, hope it's accepted, validation warning.









https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22526270


----------



## navjack27

'New Entry'

navjack27 - 5820k @ 4.6 - 1080ti @ 2088 / 1440 - 24053
- Date (06/10/2017)
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22527028
http://hwbot.org/submission/3671487_


----------



## 113802

'New Entry'

WannaBeOCer - Core i7 6700K @ 4.8Ghz - RX Vega 64 XTX @ 1770Mhz / 1106Mhz - 20381 - Date (10/07/2017)

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13805929


----------



## mouacyk

Entry: New
User: mouacyk
CPU: 4790K 4.7GHz
GPU: 1080 Ti 2076 / 12000
3DMark Graphics Score: 31699
3DMark Overall Score: 21 989


----------



## mafia97160

33k !!!! My FE XOC @2179/6105MHz 1.200mV 30-08-2017

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13295809


----------



## mouacyk

Entry: Update
User: mouacyk
CPU: 4790K 4.7GHz
GPU: 1080 Ti 2100 / 12,420
3DMark Graphics Score: 32,344


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf - i7 5960x @ 4.741GHz - Gigabyte 1080 Ti FE @ 2126/6264 - 26108 - (Graphics Score Alone - 32940) Date (24/10/2017)

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22867620


----------



## KedarWolf

'Update'

KedarWolf - i7 5960x @ 4.741GHz - Gigabyte 1080 Ti FE @ 2138/6264 - 26279 - (Graphics Score Alone - 33183) Date (24/10/2017)

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22869073


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> 'Update'
> 
> KedarWolf - i7 5960x @ 4.741GHz - Gigabyte 1080 Ti FE @ 2138/6264 - 26279 - (Graphics Score Alone - 33183) Date (24/10/2017)
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22869073


@Forceman My screen name is in the verification link in 3DMark. Do I need to repost it with a screenshot with my OCN name and the date it was done?

I missed that I think, so many benchmark threads, so many different rules.

And can I just post another screenshot with just my OCN name and date or does it need to be included in the original?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mafia97160*
> 
> 33k !!!! My FE XOC @2179/6105MHz 1.200mV 30-08-2017
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13295809


My graphics score is close, but you have me beat by a fair bit.

I got 33183.

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22869073


----------



## DStealth

DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5267GHz - Palit Gamerock 1080 Ti @ 2114/6264 Scok air XOC bios 1.1v - 27360
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13973532


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic 7350k @ 5.6Ghz - 780Ti @1496Mhz /1875Mhz - Score 12428
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18009551


----------



## AvengedRobix

AvengedRobix 7820X @ 4,9Ghz - 1080 @2164Mhz /1398Mhz - Score 22105


----------



## fbmowner

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23095550?

New Entry
Fbmowner - i77700k @ 5.0 - GPU @ 2075 / 5953 - 23084- Date (11/04/2017)


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 8700K @ 5.2GHz - EVGA 1080Ti SC2 - 26103

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14085027


----------



## glnn_23

glnn_23 - 7940x @ 4.8 - Galax 1080ti 2139 / 1575 - Score *28 034*

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23218027


----------



## DooRules

DooRules -- 7980EX @ 4.8 -- Titan XP -- 29859

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/14106638


----------



## CptSpig

CptSpig - CPU Intel i9-7980Xe @ 5.0 GHz - GPU Titan Xp @ 2101MHz / 1611MHz - SCORE 31164 - DATE 11/11/2017 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/14111930


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Not a submission...

Broke 34,000 gpu score with the new set up(8700k)



*https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14176913*


----------



## DooRules

Beauty of a gpu score MrTOOSHORT


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Not a submission...
> 
> Broke 34,000 gpu score with the new set up(8700k)
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14176913*


Great!!!


----------



## DStealth

These small CPU's are pushing hard...13k Combined with Stock air cooled 1080TI








https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23400977


While benching








DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5343GHz - Palit Gamerock 1080 Ti @ 2114/6400 Scok air XOC bios 1.1v - 27406
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23401381


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 8700K @ 5.2GHz - EVGA 1080Ti SC2 @ 2088 Core / 12000 Memory - 26435

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14181112


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> Beauty of a gpu score MrTOOSHORT


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Great!!!


Thanks guys!

*MrTOOSHORT -- 8700K @5.2GHz -- Titan X Pascal @2152MHz -- 27 682:*



*https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14181626*


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thanks guys!
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 8700K @5.2GHz -- Titan X Pascal @2152MHz -- 27 682:*
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14181626*


WOW, getting better and better!!!

Your score at SpyExtreme is also very nice!!!

Are you totally stable at 4133???


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Thanks.









I haven't done any stability testing extensively yet. Just set it all up last night. Preliminary results seems I have an average clocker, nothing great.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't done any stability testing extensively yet. Just set it all up last night. Preliminary results seems I have an average clocker, nothing great.


Good luck with the next one then...


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't done any stability testing extensively yet. Just set it all up last night. Preliminary results seems I have an average clocker, nothing great.


There are always better ones...but if this 5.2 run is in the same loop as your video with sub-zero cooling your CPU is awful actually. I thought mine is good until a colleague of mine took same batch as i tested 4 CPU's the fifth one he payed to delid and on a cheaper board Asrock Extreme4 he got one not even top air 5300 perfectly stable on air *** a lottery with 1.45v set in bios and Vdoop i couldn't believe and he send me XTU ~2900 with 85* max and RB2.56 ruining Prime for 12 hours in sub 80s...Could not imagine what this CPU would be capable once someone with knowledge is taking hands on it...








Anyway great GPU score you have wishing you luck with the next one m8


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Did someone say GPU Score?







Yeah, it's on water - but not chilled water or LN2.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*MrTOOSHORT -- 8700K @5.3GHz -- TITAN X Pascal @2152MHz -- 28 010:*



*https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14241510*


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> *MrTOOSHORT -- 8700K @5.3GHz -- TITAN X Pascal @2152MHz -- 28 010:*
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14241510*


Impressive ! Good job dude.








May I ask how did you cool the Titan during the test ?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Thanks.









PC outside in -5'C weather.


----------



## DStealth

Canadian chiller









Edit: You should know your card better but most Pascals paired with GDDR5 are having reduced performance while using non 25Mhz increments i.e. 675/700/725/750 etc...


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Thanks @DStealth

another update...

*MrTOOSHORT -- 8700K @5.3GHz -- TITAN X Pascal @2152MHz -- 28 208:*


*
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14243929*


----------



## DStealth

This Titan is advancing...








DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5360GHz - Palit Gamerock 1080 Ti @ 2114/6400 Stock air XOC bios 1.1v - 27542
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14246443


Edit: OMG this Palit cooler is spinning well







) tried the MrTOOSHORT cooling ...thou in my country is +5*C but helped








DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5360GHz - Palit Gamerock 1080 Ti @ 2114/6400 Stock air XOC bios 1.1v - 27651
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23554491


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Looking good!


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Looking good!


Thanks
Don't get it three runs three different best GPU/Physics and combined...If all happened at one run should exceed 28k total score








https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/14246821/fs/14246688/fs/14246602


----------



## WebTourist

WebTourist - GTX 1070Ti @2152/2479 - Intel Core i7-8700K @5100 DDR4 3000 - Score 21517

Graphics Score 24522
Physics Score 22528
Combined Score 10833

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14221434


----------



## mafia97160

news score graphic 33 415 point 2200 mhz core !!!

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14321659

https://youtu.be/yykYLuW3-cM


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 8700K @ 5.3GHz | 1080 Ti SC2 @ 2097 | 6055 - Fire Strike: 26480

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14338069


----------



## DStealth

DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5460GHz - Palit Gamerock 1080 Ti @ 2126/6400 Stock air XOC bios 1.1v - 27824
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14363325


----------



## Gunslinger.

Gunslinger - 7900X @ 5.5GHz - 1080 Ti Strix OC @ 2379/1625 - Score: 28405 - Date 10/12/2017

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/14379124


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunslinger.*
> 
> Gunslinger - 7900X @ 5.5GHz - 1080 Ti Strix OC @ 2379 - Score: 17068
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/14379124


Almost beat my graphics score!


----------



## DStealth

A new milestone








DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5510GHz Predator EK360 :BOW: - Palit Gamerock 1080 Ti @ 2126/6375 Stock air XOC bios 1.1v - 28036
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23871969


----------



## bl4ckdot

What temps did you get DStealth ?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

inching up...

*MrTOOSHORT -- 8700k @5.4GHz -- TITAN X Pascal @2152MHz -- 28 480:*



*https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14383630*


----------



## lilchronic

lilchronic - - 8700k @ 5.4Ghz - - 1080Ti @ 2154Mhz / 6280Mhz - - 27419
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23885172


----------



## The EX1

My Titan Xp is the CE edition so it reports differently. Not sure if that matters?

New Entry
The_EX1 - 6950X @ 4.4GHz | Titan Xp (CE?) @ 2000 | 1620 - Fire Strike: 26169



https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14390309


----------



## DStealth

DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5510GHz Predator EK360 :BOW: - MSI EKX1080 Ti @ 2152/6250 XOC bios 1.2v - *28160*
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24217333


----------



## AvengedRobix

FireStrike
AvengedRobix --- 7820X @ 5Ghz --- [email protected] 2138Mhz / 1652Mhz --- 26266

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14629549


----------



## Offler

Just curious, ther are no FuryXes in the list?

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/14640540/fs/14640424/fs/12415999

I might add entry just for the reference.


----------



## idahosurge

Please add me to Fire Strike

New Entry

idahosurge --- 7820X @ 4.6Ghz --- GTX 1080 Ti @ 1607Mhz / 11.2Ghz --- 24213

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24460861


----------



## truehighroller1

'New Entry'

truehighroller1 - [email protected] 4.6GHz - 1080 Ti Lightning @ 2063 / 1603 - 23944
- Date (1/14/2018)

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24622549?


----------



## DStealth

Something is obviously not right with your result with this card...seems fine for 1080 non-TI but way off from 1080ti scores. Even on stock should exceed 30k GPU score and ~24k Overall with [email protected]
Here's mine 1080Ti[email protected] [email protected] ~34k GPU score
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14562017


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Something is obviously not right with your result with this card...seems fine for 1080 non-TI but way off from 1080ti scores. Even on stock should exceed 30k GPU score and ~24k Overall with [email protected]
> Here's mine [email protected] [email protected] ~34k GPU score
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14562017






*Yours*
_____
# of cards
1
SLI / CrossFire
Off
Memory
11,264 MB
Core clock
*2,215 MHz*
Memory bus clock
1,553 MHz

Processor

Processor
Intel Core i7-8700K Processor
Reported stock core clock
3,696 MHz
Maximum turbo core clock
*5,581 MHz*
Physical / logical processors
1 / 12
# of cores
6

*Mine*

# of cards
1
SLI / CrossFire
Off
Memory
11,264 MB
Core clock
*2,063 MHz*
Memory bus clock
1,630 MHz
Driver version
23.21.13.9065
Driver status
FM Approved

Processor

Processor
Intel Core i7-5820K Processor
Reported stock core clock
3,300 MHz
Maximum turbo core clock
*4,598 MHz*
Physical / logical processors
1 / 12
# of cores
6

Key differences in bold and underlined. Plus The BIOS on the GPU is the default one which limits itself at a certain point because of power usage etc. obviously not temp though because it was cold last night lol.

The LN2 bios sucks because the tables in it are so lose that the scores are lower then stock so I just said heck with it and used the default BIOS for my suicide runs last night.

Looks like you have a modded BIOS on your GPU based on your core clocks on it or + LN2? Plus your CPU looks like it might have been under LN2 based on those speeds. It makes sense to me. I could have probably had a better run a little but, I was cold and this was towards the end of my four and a half hour run in the cold lol.

I also noticed that your driver version is different so that could play into it perhaps a little, maybe. I'll do some normal runs real quick and check my scores compared to these last night.

Plus your physics score is way higher. Maybe my CPU is holding the card back a little?

New run with slower memory

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24619194?

Seems legit.. I think it's a combo of things you have going on letting you score higher then me to be honest.

Your CPU has more beef then mine after looking into it so I was right about that as well plus those speeds!!

http://hwbench.com/cpus/intel-core-i7-8700k-vs-intel-core-i7-5820k


----------



## DStealth

Don't get me wrong my result is way higher...I had 1080 and 1080ti's
On a couple of platforms here's a run with 5820k and 1080ti very similar to yours
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/12830703
26k GPU is 1080 territory with this CPU not Ti... especially these clock speeds you're running


----------



## truehighroller1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Don't get me wrong my result is way higher...I had 1080 and 1080ti's
> On a couple of platforms here's a run with 5820k and 1080ti very similar to yours
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/12830703
> 26k GPU is 1080 territory with this CPU not Ti... especially these clock speeds you're running


No worries, I'm stumped as well. I looked to make sure it is running at PCIE x16 3.0 and it is.. I'm not running to many pcie lanes or anything like that. Is the BIOS on that 1080ti unlocked TDP wise?

Well, I'm a moron. I figured it out .

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24622239?

GSYNC.
Even though it was saying it wasn't on in the firestrike results, it was on. I gave you rep for this man.


----------



## DStealth

Not my best GPU score, but good overall run
DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5610GHz - MSI EKX1080 Ti @ 2190/12580 XOC bios 1.15v - 28343
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14707064


My best...
DStealth - i7 8700k @ 5620GHz - MSI EKX1080 Ti @ 2202/12580 XOC bios 1.175v - 28686
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24673879


----------



## Gunslinger.

Gunslinger - 7980XE @ 5.6GHz - 1080 Ti KPE @ 2505 - Score: 35122

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/14747266


----------



## truehighroller1

'New Entry'

truehighroller1 - 7900X @ 5GHz - 1080ti Lightning @ 2063 / 1603 - 25270
- Date (1/21/2018)

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24740699?



*Nothing special just good old fashioned overclocking with air and water.*


----------



## Bride

'Update'

Bride - i7 7700k @ 4.8GHz - Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming @ 1506 / 3505 - 17579

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24761182


----------



## AvengedRobix

AvengedRobix - 7820X @ 5,1GHz - 1080ti FTW3 Elite @ 2215 / 1661 - 26852

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14778783


----------



## Voxer1982

Voxer1982 - 7820X @5.1Ghz - 1080Ti KFA2 Hall of Fame '8 Pack limited Edition' @2152 \ 1566 - 26452

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14827113


----------



## mouacyk

How the hack are 1080tis now hitting 34k?


----------



## AvengedRobix

mouacyk said:


> How the hack are 1080tis now hitting 34k?


No hack.. simply the new driver... 500/600 pt of boost


----------



## mouacyk

AvengedRobix said:


> No hack.. simply the new driver... 500/600 pt of boost


Alright, time to put XOC BIOS back on and bench that 2175/12600 profile again. It was hitting nearly 33K before.


----------



## AvengedRobix

mouacyk said:


> Alright, time to put XOC BIOS back on and bench that 2175/12600 profile again. It was hitting nearly 33K before.


me whit XOC =)


----------



## mouacyk

AvengedRobix said:


> me whit XOC =)


I'm more amazed at the number of sensors.


----------



## AvengedRobix

mouacyk said:


> I'm more amazed at the number of sensors.


EVGA Ftw3 elite ?


----------



## HoneyBadger84

I'm baaaaaaaack & she's ready to be stock4lyfe & still beat my R9 295x2 like it was a toy:

"NEW ENTRY"

Validation link: https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24941693

HoneyBadger84 - 3930K @ 4.2GHz - NVidia Titan Xp @ STOCK - 20733

Screenshot attached!

I'm just outside of the top 30, even with that old processor @ slow speed. lol


----------



## HoneyBadger84

*Update*

So I disabled my AV software & malwarebytes, got another 400 points out of it. Interesting.

Validation Link: https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24942684

HoneyBadger84 - 3930K @ 4.2GHz - NVidia Titan Xp @ STOCK - 21125

Screenshot attached...


----------



## HoneyBadger84

*Update*

Finally ran an OC, lookin' good, decent gains.

Validation Link: https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/25020049

HoneyBadger84 - 3930K @ 4.2GHz - NVidia Titan Xp @ 2035/6300 - 21896 - Date [02/06/18]

Screenshot attached...


----------



## truehighroller1

'New Entry'

truehighroller1 - 7900X @ 5Ghz - 1080ti Lightning @ 2063 / 1615 - 25480
- Date (02/07/2018)

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14876734


----------



## AvengedRobix

*New score*

Update whit new CPU

AvengedRobix - [email protected] 5,2Ghz - 1080ti FTW3 Elite XOC Bios @ 2227 / 1667 - 27898

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14897403


----------



## AvengedRobix

*New score*

Update whit new CPU

AvengedRobix - [email protected] 5,2Ghz - 1080ti FTW3 Elite XOC Bios @ 2227 / 1667 - 27898

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14897403


----------



## Nicklas0912

'New Entry'

34100 ON water.

2088Mhz on Core, 1620Mhz on Memory.

Not powermoed yet, will do some more tomrrow 

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14948961


----------



## Bride

still under ocing, but pretty satisfied

Intel 8700k 5.2 GHz core 5.2 GHz cache
GTX 980 Ti 1468 MHz core 3505 MHz memory (1.225 V)

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14951946


----------



## HoneyBadger84

*UPDATE*

Ran the PCI-E 3.0 patch & picked up a bit of a score increase, no other changes:

HoneyBadger84 - 3930K @ 4.2GHz - NVidia Titan Xp @ 2035/6300 - 22389 - Date [02/20/18]

Validation Link: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14965399


----------



## zGunBLADEz

8700K @ 5.1GHz & 1080 TI 2101/620 stock 24/7 clocks lol no xoc bios yet XD



https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/25367051


----------



## nlitworld

Not half bad for a mid-range setup

nlitworld
i7-6700K @4.8Ghz
EVGA GTX1070FTW @ 2113 / 4681
Score 18,036

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15021003


----------



## fearthisneo

Update

fearthisneo - 1950X @ 4ghz- 1080ti @ 2025/1600 - 24804
- Date (03/03/2018)
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15040247


----------



## Bride

'New Entry'

Bride - 8700k @ 5.3GHz - GTX 980Ti @ 1519 / 4005 - 19649 - 11/03/2018

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15091341


----------



## zGunBLADEz

zGunBLADEz said:


> 8700K @ 5.1GHz & 1080 TI 2101/620 stock 24/7 clocks lol no xoc bios yet XD
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/25367051


rolled back the bios 

8700k @ 51x 1080TI @ 2101/620 (24/7 overclock) 

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15101713

sneak peak of benching clocks lol
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/25575103?


----------



## rv8000

'New Entry'

rv8000 - 7800x @ 4.6GHz - RX 580 @ 1590 / 2375 - 14439 - 3/23/2018

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/25753887

I Couldn't resist as I picked up a wicked good 580, 1590/2375 on stock air with +156mV. 

The entry probably won't be accepted because 3DMark doesn't like Adrenalin 18.3.2 beta, but I guess I can always find the last WHQL to bench on. Really impressed with how good this card is.


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 8700K @ 5.4GHz | GTX 1080 Ti SC2 @ 2088/6005 - Score: 26947

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15212225


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 8700K @ 5.4GHz | 1080 Ti SC2 @ 2202 / 6000 / 1.200V - Fire Strike: 27296

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15284348


----------



## AT0MAC

AT0MAC - [email protected] - GTX 1070 @ 2076/2250 - 17169 - 1 June 2018

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/26876077?


----------



## eeeven

eeeven - 8700K @ 5.51GHz | 1080 Ti FE @ 2215 / 6180 / 1.200V - Fire Strike: 28471

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15012019


----------



## johnksss

Johnksss - I9 7980XE @ 4.9 - 2080 Ti @ 2130/8000 - Score: 33312
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/29147274


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 7960X @ 5.2GHz | 1080 Ti SC2 @ 2202 / 6000 / 1.200V - Fire Strike: 30117

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/16750031


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 7960X @ 5.2GHz | 1080 Ti SC2 @ 2202 / 6000 / 1.200V - Fire Strike: 30232

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/16773590


----------



## fearthisneo

fearthisneo - 1950X @ 4ghz- 2080ti @ 2115/2000 - 25198
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/16839821


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 7960X @ 5.2GHz - 1080 Ti SC2 @ 2240 / 6100 / 1.200V: 30357


https://www.3dmark.com/fs/16911415


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 7960X @ 5.2GHz - 1080 Ti SC2 @ 2252 / 6100 / 1.200V: 30805

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/16929134


----------



## DooRules

DooRules --- 7980x @ 4.934 --- 2080ti @ 2100/1975 --- 32781

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/16911530


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wicked :thumb:


----------



## DooRules

DooRules --- 7980x @ 4.934 --- 2080ti @ 2100/1975 --- 33084

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/16931128


----------



## melodystyle2003

melodystyle2003 --- 4790k @ 4.9 --- 980ti @ 1545/4106 --- 17749 (22685 graphics score)
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/30260599?


----------



## Omega Cain

9900k 1080ti 4000mhz ... rank 23 using a 9900k and one gpu

https://www.3dmark.com/search#/?mod...gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti&gpuCount=1


----------



## HiqhWoltage

HiqhWoltage - Ryzen 2600 @3.9Ghz - 4GB Rx580 Nitro+ @1537 /2160 ---> Score: 14.202 (17.154 Graphics Score)
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/17555109


----------



## The Pook

Even though this thread doesn't seem to be updated anymore: 

*The Pook - 9900K @ 5.0GHz - MSI 1080 Ti Gaming @ 1548 / 6300 - Fire Strike: 26027*

This board refuses to boot much above DDR4 2600/2800 and I've been trying to figure it out but haven't been able to. In the mean time I'm just running (relatively) tight timings at 2666. 

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/31890469?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*MrTOOSHORT -- 9900K @5500MHz -- 2080TI @2145/8500MHz -- 33 057

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/17676869*


----------



## Hale59

Hale59 --- [email protected] --- GTX 1080 Ti @2025/1514 --- 23927

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/32383643


----------



## CptSpig

CptSpig --- [email protected] --- RTX 2080ti @ 2160/2050 --- 33696

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/18048001


----------



## Hale59

3DMark - Fire Strike 12754

Hale59 - 2600X @4,073.55MHz - GTX 970 @ 1,586/2,153MHz

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/32965525


----------



## 113802

WannaBeOCer -- 6700K 5000MHz -- RX Vega 64 @1827/1140MHz -- 22036

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/18270986


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*MrTOOSHORT -- 9980XE @5.1GHz -- 2080TI @2160MHz -- 35082:


https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/33496616*


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 7960X @ 5.3GHz - 2080 Ti @ 2220 Core / 8070 Memory - Score: 35445

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/18318952


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*MrTOOSHORT -- 9980xe @5.2GHz -- 2080ti @2175MHz -- 35477:

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/18378163*


----------



## MrFox

MrFox - 7960X @ 5.3GHz - 2080 Ti @ 2220 Core / 8500 Memory - Score: 35494

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19306613


----------



## shar00750

9900k 6.0g + gtx 1080 hof 2330/1500 boat on dice . score : 25638
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19349347


----------



## MrFox

NEW ENTRY @Forceman

MrFox - 7960X @ 5.3GHz - 2080 Ti @ 2235 Core / 8400 Memory - Score: 36252 - 5/27/2019

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19438829


----------



## ntuason

ntuason - 9900k @ 5.1GHz - 2080 Ti @ 2,130 MHz/2,070 MHz - Score: 30373

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/40454231


----------



## os2wiz

ntuason said:


> ntuason - 9900k @ 5.1GHz - 2080 Ti @ 2,130 MHz/2,070 MHz - Score: 30373
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/40454231


Here is my Ryzen3900X on MSI X570 ACE motherboard, 32 GB of Gskill Trident Z NEO DDR4 3600 CL16 dual rank dimms running at 3733mhz CL16-16-16-17 with AMD Radeon VII gpu on auto overclock.


----------



## cssorkinman

os2wiz said:


> Here is my Ryzen3900X on MSI X570 ACE motherboard, 32 GB of Gskill Trident Z NEO DDR4 3600 CL16 dual rank dimms running at 3733mhz CL16-16-16-17 with AMD Radeon VII gpu on auto overclock.


Nice score!


----------



## os2wiz

cssorkinman said:


> Nice score!


I had one a little higher but I couldn't find it my pictures to upload it. I think I have reached my limit pretty mcuuh with Radeon VII. I hope I can sell it a decent price when I m ready to move up to a future Navi card.


----------



## 113802

WannaBeOCer - 9900k @ 5.4GHz - Radeon VII @ 2,165 MHz/1,250 MHz - Score: 27707

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19766406


----------



## ntuason

UPDATE: ntuason - 9900k @ 5.1GHz - 2080 Ti @ 2,160 MHz/2,094 MHz - Score: 31139

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20894203

Highest I can get on air. I'm too scared to watercool.


----------



## Bride

New Entry --- Bride --- I9 9900KS / 5.2 Ghz ---- RTX2080S 2115 / 9000 MHz ---- 25606

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/43907999?


----------



## Steven Stacy

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/22901229
2080 (non super) 2106/2053


----------



## Farih

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/22931062

30539 graphics score, not to shabby for a 5700xt
Not used More Power Tool yet either


----------



## Steven Stacy

Farih said:


> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/22931062
> 
> 30539 graphics score, not to shabby for a 5700xt
> Not used More Power Tool yet either


Thats about what I see for directx 11 benchmarks with the 5700xt. With a 3950x it hits has high as 34000 gpu score on fire strike. I'm not sure if that has to do with gen 4 pcie or not. Wish I hadn't ruined my water-cooled 5700xt. I had power tools cranked up and it did really well on certain benchmarks. On FFXV it tanked but with all the updated drivers, I wouldn't mind of giving it another shot. The multiple file hvec encoding speed was impressive.


----------



## Steven Stacy

Farih said:


> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/22931062
> 
> 30539 graphics score, not to shabby for a 5700xt
> Not used More Power Tool yet either


Thats about what I see for directx 11 benchmarks with the 5700xt. With a 3950x it hits has high as 34000 gpu score on fire strike. I'm not sure if that has to do with gen 4 pcie or not. Wish I hadn't ruined my water-cooled 5700xt. I had power tools cranked up and it did really well on certain benchmarks. On FFXV it tanked but with all the updated drivers, I wouldn't mind of giving it another shot. The multiple file hvec encoding speed was impressive.


----------

