# GTX 680s vs HD 7970s - The OCN Battle Royale - Part 2



## RagingCain

.


----------



## RagingCain

.


----------



## pioneerisloud

Subbed so I can compete, and keep this thread clean.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> Subbed so I can compete, and keep this thread clean.


2nded and 3rded. Thanks Pioneer!


----------



## leetmode

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> Subbed so I can compete, and keep this thread clean.


+1


----------



## DimmyK

Count me in, 680 incoming on Monday. This should get interesting.


----------



## JedixJarf

My body is ready for 3x1080 and xfire 7970 submissions.


----------



## RagingCain

I am a bit up for democracy on the settings for 3DMark11.

Water / AIR / Extremes will all be separated too.

I am also considering other resolutions as well, afterall, 3DMark11 P isn't 1920x1080.

I had a suggestion, it means more work for me, however, I think its a cool way of doing things.

We have limit imposed benchmarks - Restriction / Competition Style Benchmarks
CPUs around 4.4GHz (so that older i7s can partake)
Possible Core Count / HT Off?
Physx Off (nVidia) / Tessellation On (AMD)

We have balls the wall benchmarks - Pure Speed
Almost anything goes here, CPUs 4.4GHz +,
Physx On (nVidia) / Tessellation Adjustable (must still be on) (AMD)

What do you guys think? Very open to suggestions, I won't be thread dictator, unless its dealing with recording submissions.


----------



## jm3

my 7970 arrives next week so i am ready for this


----------



## RagingCain

Added a small guide for enabling full overclocking and overvolting for the AMD cards.

As always more to come....

If anyone with a 680 has issues with overclocking and figures out a workaround, please post here, I will consolidate to the main post.


----------



## m3t4lh34d

3x7970s ready to go here


----------



## polyzp

Thanks for this! Can i request clock per clock over clocks in the 1250 / 1750 clock/memory range for both cards? Alot of review sites are overclocking at different clocks then comparing the cards, but no actual clock per clock comparisons.


----------



## B!0HaZard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polyzp*
> 
> Thanks for this! Can i request clock per clock over clocks in the 1250 / 1750 clock/memory range for both cards? Alot of review sites are overclocking at different clocks then comparing the cards, but no actual clock per clock comparisons.


The situation is largely irrelevant as the cards have different stock clocks. An HD 7970 at the same clocks as a GTX 680 will be overclocked further relatively.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polyzp*
> 
> Thanks for this! Can i request clock per clock over clocks in the 1250 / 1750 clock/memory range for both cards? Alot of review sites are overclocking at different clocks then comparing the cards, but no actual clock per clock comparisons.


More than likely though we could probably pull this off for you, the thing is as mentioned by Bio, it doesn't really matter as much but they are 100% different GPUs, so the actual frequencies matching don't tell you anything, but if you are trying to determine which one is more "efficient" as a GPU then that would be something the frequencies will tell you.


----------



## polyzp

The max stable OCs for the cards with proper cooling are very close however, so this i think is important to enthusiasts who love over volting.


----------



## OverSightX

I got 2x7970s ready and waiting


----------



## derickwm

After reading this my brain is hurting. Such odd results, I'm interested to see some better ones after more updated drivers are released.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *derickwm*
> 
> After reading this my brain is hurting. Such odd results, I'm interested to see some better ones after more updated drivers are released.


First glance definitely looks like CPU bottleneck.


----------



## derickwm

If these cards are bottlenecked by a 3960x then...crap. -____-


----------



## Hellish

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *derickwm*
> 
> If these cards are bottlenecked by a 3960x then...crap. -____-


from the launch page










maybe launch drivers lack support so they didn't officially say 4-way yet.

Edit: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-680/specifications

Spec sheet says 3-way


----------



## derickwm

Wut.


----------



## youra6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hellish*
> 
> from the launch page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maybe launch drivers lack support so they didn't officially say 4-way yet.
> Edit: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-680/specifications
> Spec sheet says 3-way


I think it will. They said the same thing about GTX 580 and it ended up supporting 4-way SLI.


----------



## listen to remix

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *m3t4lh34d*
> 
> 3x7970s ready to go here


A 850W can handle three of those?? Good to know


----------



## derickwm

Did neither of you click on the link in my first post? It shows benchmarks and a video of quad 680s.


----------



## Hellish

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *derickwm*
> 
> Did neither of you click on the link in my first post? It shows benchmarks and a video of quad 680s.


I saw it, but I am saying it is not "officially" supported so that could cause some of the scaling with the 4th card problems.


----------



## derickwm

The drivers have a lot of work to do. Quad sli scaled much much better then tri sli did in some cases. Hopefully some decent drivers are around when the 4GB cards are launched.


----------



## RagingCain

Hey guys, please visit posts 1, 2, and 3, and let me know what you think. If there are no issues....

Only results following the respected categories will be included. I don't want no flaming or trouble. So far I think everyone has been pretty cool and supportive of me, I hope you all extend that to your future rivals.


----------



## pioneerisloud

1) Your unlocking instructions aren't exactly correct on the 7970. Same with the overclocking instructions (at least for me). I've found that JUST using the -xcl on the first startup of MSI AB (removing it after the clocks are unlocked) is actually perfect and the most stable way. As far as overclocking, I've found its best to setup a stock MSI AB profile, and an overclocked one (setting the +20%, volts...everything). Obviously a manual fan curve on both as well. And then using the stock profile for 2D clocks, and the overclocked one for 3D clocks. Ever since doing that...I have had ZERO issues.

2) What's the difference between your restricted and not restricted?









EDIT:
Nevermind on #2. Apparently I can't read today.


----------



## Smo

Here's a free-for-all entry from me.

*CPU:* 2500k @ 4.7GHz
*DRAM:* 1600MHz / 8-8-8-24
*GPU:* MSI 7970 Crossfire @ 1250MHz core - 1650MHz memory
*GPU Voltage:* 1.300
*Driver Version:* 7.14.10.0901 (8.950.5.0)
*3DMark11 Score:* P14717

Proof:


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> 1) Your unlocking instructions aren't exactly correct on the 7970. Same with the overclocking instructions (at least for me). I've found that JUST using the -xcl on the first startup of MSI AB (removing it after the clocks are unlocked) is actually perfect and the most stable way. As far as overclocking, I've found its best to setup a stock MSI AB profile, and an overclocked one (setting the +20%, volts...everything). Obviously a manual fan curve on both as well. And then using the stock profile for 2D clocks, and the overclocked one for 3D clocks. Ever since doing that...I have had ZERO issues.
> 
> 2) What's the difference between your restricted and not restricted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> Nevermind on #2. Apparently I can't read today.


It looks like /XCL has been deprecated and -xcl is now the way to go. See everyone kept saying that and looking at me weird, nothing worked for me. I assumed I may have been a special case. I am going to add your paragraph as well and a disclaimer to the top. You are the third person today that told me I was doing it all cookoo,


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smo*
> 
> Here's a free-for-all entry from me.
> 
> *CPU:* 2500k @ 4.7GHz
> *DRAM:* 1600MHz / 8-8-8-24
> *GPU:* MSI 7970 Crossfire @ 1250MHz core - 1650MHz memory
> *GPU Voltage:* 1.300
> *Driver Version:* 7.14.10.0901 (8.950.5.0)
> *3DMark11 Score:* P14717
> 
> Proof:


For driver version, just the simple one you are using 12.2 Pre-Cert for example, but good submission!


----------



## GoldenTiger

Subbed for when my GTX 680 SLI arrives Monday.

EDIT: Question: if I disable hyper-threading on my 2600K so that it's 4-threads for Restricted testing, will it bork my windows activation to do so and then toggle it back on once done?


----------



## Smo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> For driver version, just the simple one you are using 12.2 Pre-Cert for example, but good submission!


Ah, cheers dude! 12.2 it is


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoldenTiger*
> 
> Subbed for when my GTX 680 SLI arrives Monday.
> 
> EDIT: Question: if I disable hyper-threading on my 2600K so that it's 4-threads for Restricted testing, will it bork my windows activation to do so and then toggle it back on once done?


No it should have no affect, now changing your whole motherboard on the other hand.... hahaha.

Its a simple flip switch for on and off. Becareful though, HT uses more voltage, so if you were stable without it on at a high frequency, you may need to up the voltage when you turn it back on.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smo*
> 
> Ah, cheers dude! 12.2 it is


Congrats to Smo! He is the first entry in the Dual GPU FFA! Making him ranked number 1!


----------



## GoldenTiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> No it should have no affect, now changing your whole motherboard on the other hand.... hahaha.
> Its a simple flip switch for on and off. Becareful though, HT uses more voltage, so if you were stable without it on at a high frequency, you may need to up the voltage when you turn it back on.


Thanks, I run with it on for 24/7 usage, just wanted to make sure







.


----------



## Smo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Congrats to Smo! He is the first entry in the Dual GPU FFA! Making him ranked number 1!


My victory will be short, but sweet


----------



## jamaican voodoo

here my 3dmark 11 p score ....also how do i go about entering my score on that sheet than you.
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3024965;jsessionid=1n2kbj6tiktaba3d6krjp4vi6


----------



## pioneerisloud

Restricted Benchmark:

*Verification URL:*
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3024885

*CPU Clocks:* 4.42GHz, 1.50v (Core i5 2500k)
*DRAM Clocks / Timings:* DDR3-2245 @ 9-11-10-28-2T, 1.75v
*GPU Information:* Sapphire HD7970 @ 1240 / 1680, 1.225v
*GPU Voltage:* 1.225v
*Driver Version*: 12.2 WHQL's
*3DMark11 Score:* P9707
*Proof (of score AND settings):*


----------



## pioneerisloud

Free For All Benchmark:

*Verification URL:*
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3025087

*CPU Clocks:* 5.12GHz, 1.60v (Core i5 2500k)
*DRAM Clocks / Timings:* DDR3-2231 @ 9-11-10-28-2T, 1.75v
*GPU Information:* Sapphire HD7970 @ 1240 / 1680, 1.225v
*GPU Voltage:* 1.225v
*Driver Version*: 12.2 WHQL's
*3DMark11 Score:* P9982
*Proof (of score AND settings):*


----------



## pioneerisloud

I swear, 3DMark was screwing with me.







P9982, I was a measely 18 points shy of my 10k goal. I couldn't push that CPU any harder though at all, since I was already at 1.62v idle, and 1.60v load. I ran it 3 times for that one too....but that was my highest sadly.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> I swear, 3DMark was screwing with me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P9982, I was a measely 18 points shy of my 10k goal. I couldn't push that CPU any harder though at all, since I was already at 1.62v idle, and 1.60v load. I ran it 3 times for that one too....but that was my highest sadly.


Great results, I will add them ASAP (tonight or morning.) If you want to an alternative, try lowering your memory speeds. Taking stress off the IMC might actually give you the edge in pushing the main CPU frequency another 50~100 MHz. I don't know how much slower RAM will affect 3DMark11 but I am sure its not as much as raw CPU speed.

The difference of 4800 to 4948 MHz for me though is another 3.5 frames per second on the Physics test. Can really add up if you can get there ^.^


----------



## pioneerisloud

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> I swear, 3DMark was screwing with me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P9982, I was a measely 18 points shy of my 10k goal. I couldn't push that CPU any harder though at all, since I was already at 1.62v idle, and 1.60v load. I ran it 3 times for that one too....but that was my highest sadly.
> 
> 
> 
> Great results, I will add them ASAP (tonight or morning.) If you want to an alternative, try lowering your memory speeds. Taking stress off the IMC might actually give you the edge in pushing the main CPU frequency another 50~100 MHz. I don't know how much slower RAM will affect 3DMark11 but I am sure its not as much as raw CPU speed.
> 
> The difference of 4800 to 4948 MHz for me though is another 3.5 frames per second on the Physics test. Can really add up if you can get there ^.^
Click to expand...

My chip is dead anyway, it will NOT push any harder. I have honestly never even gotten it THAT high.

And memory speeds can certainly impact the scores. When I had my 580, I saw 1,000 point difference between 1600 and 2133 using a BCLK of 100MHz.

EDIT:
Also, I just noticed you have the URL's reversed on the one score that's in the spreadsheets. Just an FYI.


----------



## jamaican voodoo

Verification URL:
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3025201;jsessionid=vx4ukoibrvh31migcof5add1r

CPU Clocks: 4.87GHz, 1.44v (Core i7 3820 )
DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1600 @ 9-9-9-29-1T, 1.45v
GPU Information: HIS/Power Coler 7970 Crossfire @ 1260 / 1700, 1.268v
GPU Voltage: 1.268v
Driver Version: 12.2 WHQL's
3DMark11 Score: P16794
Proof (of score AND settings):


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> My chip is dead anyway, it will NOT push any harder. I have honestly never even gotten it THAT high.
> 
> And memory speeds can certainly impact the scores. When I had my 580, I saw 1,000 point difference between 1600 and 2133 using a BCLK of 100MHz.
> 
> EDIT:
> Also, I just noticed you have the URL's reversed on the one score that's in the spreadsheets. Just an FYI.


Thanks, good eyes. I am going to probably need some help editing the spreadies, pm me if you want to  Especially on those long days when I can't get on.

@Jamaican, working on your entry now.

Edit:

Got something special in the works  A few points faster than my 2x 590s were.


----------



## OverSightX

Just installed the the 8.95.5. Threads like these make me want to upgrade platforms just because CPU score kind of hinders me a little.

CPU Clocks: 4.2GHz, 1.38V (i7 920)
DRAM Clocks / Timings: 12GB DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-24 1.51V
GPU Information: Sapphire 7970 Crossfire @ 1265 / 1625
GPU Voltage: 1.274
Driver Version: 8.95.5
3DMark11 Score: P14983
Proof (of score AND settings): http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3025388


----------



## Nemesis158

ffa air-cooling submission here:
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3025669
Card at 1180/1630 @ 1168mv
i7 920 3.8GHz
12GB DDR3 1600 8-8-8-24


----------



## jtom320

After reinstalling drivers with my card Afterburner decided to hate my over 1125 OC's again so I'm going to wait on this and submit some stuff tommorow. I love 3dmark but I hate how my 2500k holds me back in it though. I got a lemmon of a 2500k that simply will not clock past 4.5. I've tried putting 1.45 Vcore thru it and it still won't do 4.6. I know I could try higher but it's really not worth it to me at that point.

Still I'll be in soon.


----------



## youra6

I know that there is at least several members here who have a GTX 680 benchmark they can put up.


----------



## jtom320

Ragin you really got a golden chip being able to do 1340 like that. I thought I had a good one but man that is impressive.


----------



## pioneerisloud

I did it!!!! Broke 10k!!!









Free For All Benchmark:

*Verification URL:*
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3026166

*CPU Clocks:* 5.15GHz, 1.62v (Core i5 2500k)
*DRAM Clocks / Timings:* DDR3-2244 @ 9-11-10-28-2T, 1.75v
*GPU Information:* Sapphire HD7970 @ 1280 / 1680, 1.275v
*GPU Voltage:* 1.275v
*Driver Version*: 12.2 WHQL's
*3DMark11 Score:* P10203
*Proof (of score AND settings):*


EDIT:
It would appear MSI AB decided to switch me back to 2D clocks before I screenshotted that. You're just going to have to trust me on my GPU speeds. If you don't...well then compare my GPU score to similar clocked 7970's and see for yourself. Sorry, I really REALLY doubt I can get that to rerun...I'm not even stable at stock on my CPU right now. The Verification URL shows the clock speeds though too.


----------



## dph314

Sub'd. 680 SLI max OC results coming Monday/Tuesday


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *youra6*
> 
> I know that there is at least several members here who have a GTX 680 benchmark they can put up.


Sweeeet. You have your Quad-Core only section in Restricted =) You can also compete in FFA and go all out.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Ragin you really got a golden chip being able to do 1340 like that. I thought I had a good one but man that is impressive.


Really? Sweet, I literally put on the blocks Thursday night and overclocked them for the first time. Looks like XFX did cherry pick the Black Editions. I am hoping the memory will go higher. I really wanted 22000 GPU score.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did it!!!! Broke 10k!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free For All Benchmark:
> 
> *Verification URL:*
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3026166
> 
> *CPU Clocks:* 5.15GHz, 1.62v (Core i5 2500k)
> *DRAM Clocks / Timings:* DDR3-2244 @ 9-11-10-28-2T, 1.75v
> *GPU Information:* Sapphire HD7970 @ 1280 / 1680, 1.275v
> *GPU Voltage:* 1.275v
> *Driver Version*: 12.2 WHQL's
> *3DMark11 Score:* P10203
> *Proof (of score AND settings):*
> 
> EDIT:
> It would appear MSI AB decided to switch me back to 2D clocks before I screenshotted that. You're just going to have to trust me on my GPU speeds. If you don't...well then compare my GPU score to similar clocked 7970's and see for yourself. Sorry, I really REALLY doubt I can get that to rerun...I'm not even stable at stock on my CPU right now. The Verification URL shows the clock speeds though too.


CONGRATS! Don't worry about it, the reason I have you guys post all that good info is in case this stuff happens! Your previous post have very similar settings with a similar score and the the verification URL actually has your clocks too, so 3DMark11 saved you too!

Just so anyone doesn't think I playing favorites, this is from is verification page:



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OverSightX*
> 
> Just installed the the 8.95.5. Threads like these make me want to upgrade platforms just because CPU score kind of hinders me a little.
> 
> CPU Clocks: 4.2GHz, 1.38V (i7 920)
> DRAM Clocks / Timings: 12GB DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-24 1.51V
> GPU Information: Sapphire 7970 Crossfire @ 1265 / 1625
> GPU Voltage: 1.274
> Driver Version: 8.95.5
> 3DMark11 Score: P14983
> Proof (of score AND settings): http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3025388


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> ffa air-cooling submission here:
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3025669
> Card at 1180/1630 @ 1168mv
> i7 920 3.8GHz
> 12GB DDR3 1600 8-8-8-24


Nemesis158, I need a screenshot of the action, OverSightX I need a little more information in your screens like CPU-z. For all those unsure of what to put in the screenshot I realize I didn't place the instructions for screenshots in the main post, its now there under "All Benchmarks" please take a gander.


----------



## Smo

My score looks a little on the low side - seems the 2500k is holding me back a little. I've got a 5.4GHz 2600k coming on the 30th so I'll fire that up for a few benches and see what kind of difference it makes.


----------



## Billy O

Free for all SLI:

Verification URL:
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3030653;jsessionid=r2a8plknqp5vjv1g5b53bnn4

DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-24
GPU Information: EVGA GTX 680 x 20 @ +190 / +500, 1.175v
GPU Voltage: 1.175v
Driver Version: 301.1
3DMark11 Score: P15100


----------



## Smo

Nice score dude!


----------



## youra6

Nice SLI score. Looks pretty even steven with some of the 7970 scores.


----------



## Smo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *youra6*
> 
> Nice SLI score. Looks pretty even steven with some of the 7970 scores.


Do you know if overclocked RAM makes much of a difference in the 3DMark11 test? He scored a few hundred more than me with a lower CPU clock and I'm interested to see if that would close the gap.


----------



## youra6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smo*
> 
> Do you know if overclocked RAM makes much of a difference in the 3DMark11 test? He scored a few hundred more than me with a lower CPU clock and I'm interested to see if that would close the gap.


I have heard claims that it does improve scores by as much as 1K.

But... I used to have the mundane RipJaws at 1600Mhz CAS 9, went to 2133 9-10-10-26 and I personally have not seen any improvements at all.

I think what is holding back the most is lack of HT. I dont know if that makes a huge difference in 3dmark11, but in it did in Vantage.


----------



## Billy O

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smo*
> 
> Do you know if overclocked RAM makes much of a difference in the 3DMark11 test? He scored a few hundred more than me with a lower CPU clock and I'm interested to see if that would close the gap.


Sorry. My RAM is not overclocked. That was a leftover value from the field I took the template from. I'm at 1600 on RAM.


----------



## RagingCain

Just a reminder guys, Screenshot submissions instructions are on the first page, post 1. Under Rules \ All Benchmarks.

3DMark11 doesn't capture all information about the system accurately.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Billy O*
> 
> Free for all SLI:
> Verification URL:
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3030653;jsessionid=r2a8plknqp5vjv1g5b53bnn4
> DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-24
> GPU Information: EVGA GTX 680 x 20 @ +190 / +500, 1.175v
> GPU Voltage: 1.175v
> Driver Version: 301.1
> 3DMark11 Score: P15100


You rock









So...705mhz core clock? What's up with the 3dMark11 results?


----------



## OverSightX

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Sweeeet. You have your Quad-Core only section in Restricted =) You can also compete in FFA and go all out.
> 
> Really? Sweet, I literally put on the blocks Thursday night and overclocked them for the first time. Looks like XFX did cherry pick the Black Editions. I am hoping the memory will go higher. I really wanted 22000 GPU score.
> 
> CONGRATS! Don't worry about it, the reason I have you guys post all that good info is in case this stuff happens! Your previous post have very similar settings with a similar score and the the verification URL actually has your clocks too, so 3DMark11 saved you too!
> 
> Just so anyone doesn't think I playing favorites, this is from is verification page:






Quote:


> Nemesis158, I need a screenshot of the action, OverSightX I need a little more information in your screens like CPU-z. For all those unsure of what to put in the screenshot I realize I didn't place the instructions for screenshots in the main post, its now there under "All Benchmarks" please take a gander.


Ah Hopefully this one suffices







I actually broke 15K with the same settings this time around







.

Verification URL:
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3032410

DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-24 1.51V
GPU Information: Sapphire 7970 x2 1265/1625
GPU Voltage: 1.247V
Driver Version: 8.95.5
3DMark11 Score: P15016


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OverSightX*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah Hopefully this one suffices
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I actually broke 15K with the same settings this time around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Verification URL:
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3032410
> DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-24 1.51V
> GPU Information: Sapphire 7970 x2 1265/1625
> GPU Voltage: 1.247V
> Driver Version: 8.95.5
> 3DMark11 Score: P15016


Excellent







I hope come Monday I can offer some good competition!


----------



## Smo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *youra6*
> 
> I have heard claims that it does improve scores by as much as 1K.
> 
> But... I used to have the mundane RipJaws at 1600Mhz CAS 9, went to 2133 9-10-10-26 and I personally have not seen any improvements at all.
> 
> I think what is holding back the most is lack of HT. I dont know if that makes a huge difference in 3dmark11, but in it did in Vantage.


In that case mate I probably won't bother messing with the RAM. My system is stable and I'd like to keep it that way!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Billy O*
> 
> Sorry. My RAM is not overclocked. That was a leftover value from the field I took the template from. I'm at 1600 on RAM.


Fair enough dude. Looks like I've got ~300 points to catch up on. I've got a 2600k incoming so fingers crossed I can make up some ground with that


----------



## OverSightX

Just got back home and decided to try another run with some bumped up settings. Added a 100+ to my score! CPU/Physics score is still holding me back.

Verification URL:
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3033507

DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-24 1.51V
GPU Information: Sapphire 7970 x2 1280/1680
GPU Voltage: 1.281V
Driver Version: 8.95.5
3DMark11 Score: P15187


----------



## OverSightX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Excellent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope come Monday I can offer some good competition!


I have no doubts you'll give me a "run for my money." Look forward to see your scores.


----------



## RagingCain

CPU: i7 2600K @ 5314.2 MHz

8GB DDR3 2223.6 @ 8-9-8-2T
PCI - E: 104.2 MHz
Radeon HD 7970 CFX @ 1357 GPU / 1760 Mem
GPU Voltage: 1.299v
Driver Version: 12.4 Beta
3DMark11 Score: P18060

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3035079

No Driver Tweaks, Default Settings, Including Tessellation.

Screenshot:


----------



## RagingCain

CPU: i7 2600K @ 5314.2 MHz

8GB DDR3 2223.6 @ 8-9-8-2T
PCI-E: 104.2 MHz
Radeon HD 7970 CFX @ 1357 GPU / 1760 MEM
GPU Voltage: 1.299v
Driver Version: 12.4 Beta
3DMark11 Score: P19660

Verification URL: http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3035250

Aniso = 2x, Texture Filtering = Performance, SFO Enabled, Tessellation = Off


----------



## OverSightX

@RagingCain How you liking those 12.4 Betas?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> CPU: i7 2600K @ 5314.2 MHz
> 8GB DDR3 2223.6 @ 8-9-8-2T
> PCI-E: 104.2 MHz
> Radeon HD 7970 CFX @ 1357 GPU / 1760 MEM
> GPU Voltage: 1.299v
> Driver Version: 12.4 Beta
> 3DMark11 Score: P19660
> 
> Verification URL: http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3035250
> 
> Aniso = 2x, Texture Filtering = Performance, SFO Enabled, Tessellation = Off
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *OverSightX*
> 
> @RagingCain How you liking those 12.4 Betas?


I have been benching for four hours. They like to crash hard lock the system ^.^. Gaming wise though they seem pretty stable, some ME3 and World of Warcraft. I can play BF3 @ 1200 MHz, but it can crash on start up. Seems to be that whole launch from Browser -> To Window -> To Fullscreen thing. Also have an issue playing video on a small 1080 monitor while gaming on big bertha though. Kinda of annoying. 12.3 was only working some of the time though so... still Beta unfortunately.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*Unrestricted submission:*

CPU: i7 2600K @ 5200 MHz
Bclk: 103.5
8GB DDR3 2133.6 @ 9-10-10-1T
3x Sapphire HD 7970 @ 1200 GPU / 1575 Mem
GPU Voltage: 1.20v
Driver Version: 12.3
3DMark11 Score: P20881

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3035889

No Driver Tweaks at all, Default CCC Settings, Including Tessellation.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*Restricted submission:*

CPU: i7 2600K @ 4400 MHz
Bclk: 100
8GB DDR3 2133.6 @ 9-10-10-1T
3x Sapphire HD 7970 @ 1200 GPU / 1575 Mem
GPU Voltage: 1.20v
Driver Version: 12.3
3DMark11 Score: P19464
Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3036013
No Driver Tweaks at all, Default CCC Settings, Including Tessellation.


----------



## trippinonprozac

*UNRESTRICTED SUBMISSION*

CPU Clocks: i7 2600k 5.10GHz, 1.48v
DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-2133 @ 9-11-10-28-1T, 1.68
GPU Information: Sapphire HD7970 @ 1355 / 1550, 1.3v
GPU Voltage: 1.3v
Driver Version: 12.3
3DMark11 Score: P11271
Proof (of score AND settings):

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3036026;jsessionid=hpgzmwchxyn7nojb8z6m7aty


----------



## OverSightX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> I have been benching for four hours. They like to crash hard lock the system ^.^. Gaming wise though they seem pretty stable, some ME3 and World of Warcraft. I can play BF3 @ 1200 MHz, but it can crash on start up. Seems to be that whole launch from Browser -> To Window -> To Fullscreen thing. Also have an issue playing video on a small 1080 monitor while gaming on big bertha though. Kinda of annoying. 12.3 was only working some of the time though so... still Beta unfortunately.


Ye I haven't heard to many good things about those, but I see you with those scores and it makes me







The 12.2 have been pretty stable for me so looks like that's where i stay for now.


----------



## jtom320

Goddamn a lot of people have really impressive OC's. 1357 is the highest I've personally seen that's not on crazy cooling.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Goddamn a lot of people have really impressive OC's. 1357 is the highest I've personally seen that's not on crazy cooling.


Someone has to give the 680s a run for their money  It might as well be us  I have updated the submission rules for the main post, there is now a link to my first post to give a better idea on how to do it.

North America - Water Cooling Ranking:



I am a little proud of myself on that one. If it wasn't for my CPU I could be a top 10 contender for World.

Attention: The point of the screen shot isn't just to prove the score, but to fill out the spreadsheet too. Plus it shows your settings for other people to compare and figure out how to do the same.


----------



## veblen

Nicely done, RagingCain!










That's a great GPU score; now move to X79!









I wonder if getting waterblocks will help improve my OC.


----------



## trippinonprozac

Where are the 680 owners?


----------



## Robilar

So just 3dmark11? I can add some results for SLI.

Not sure what the reference to crashing above pertains to, my cards have been rock stable since last Thursday when I picked them up. Battlefield 3 runs like a dream.

For frame of reference:

CPU: 2600k at 4.5ghz
RAM: 8 GB at 1600mhz 8-8-8-24
GPU: 2 - MSI GTX680's, stock for now
PCI-E Frequency: 100.00
Motherboard: Asus P8Z68-V Pro (3203 bios)


----------



## killerhz

not sure what class i go under but hope am able to get in on this.

* CPU: i7 920 @ 4440 MHz
* 12GB DDR3 1691 @ 9-9-9-1T
* GTX 680 @ 1374 GPU / 3524 Mem (132% - +200 - +520) hope and think i did the math right








* GPU Voltage: 1.174v
* Driver Version: 310.10
* 3DMark11 Score: P11014

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3040159

No Driver Tweaks at all.....


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killerhz*
> 
> not sure what class i go under but hope am able to get in on this.
> * CPU: i7 920 @ 4440 MHz
> * 12GB DDR3 1691 @ 9-9-9-1T
> * GTX 680 @ 1374 GPU / 3524 Mem (132% - +200 - +520) hope and think i did the math right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * GPU Voltage: 1.174v
> * Driver Version: 310.10
> * 3DMark11 Score: P11014
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3040159
> No Driver Tweaks at all.....


Nice overclock!

I will set my CPU to 4.4ghz tonight and see what I can get.


----------



## Robilar

Here is my unigine, cards at stock, test at default settings.


----------



## killerhz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Maybe but I don't see how any general concensus has formed around anything. I'm tired of people trolling 680/7970 threads from both sides.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Couldnt agree more!
> It always becomes a childish battle!
> Both are great cards in my opinion!


back in the day i use to use OCN see what new tech to get. now i can barley stand reading threads the offer reviews or opinions of users.

so many trolls / fan-bois. and if you favor one over the other...look out.

anyways, i love me some nvidia and just happy to have been able to get a nice card with nice results.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> The reason the Tesselation slider is there is because in many cases it can be turned down and produce nearly the exact same image quality with a reduced performance hit. People have taken screens before to show this but I don't know where they are off the top of my head. The slider is from 2X-64X. Think of the IQ difference between 8xAF and 16xAF and you get the picture. Good on AMD for having it so that people with lower end cards can turn it down but still have it. Extreme Tesselation in practice at this point doesn't look that good anyway. See normal vs extreme in Heaven to get an idea of what I'm talking about.
> 
> But again none of this has to do with the benchmark competition. At all.
> 
> And besides I would be willing to bet *no one is beating Ragin's absolutely ridiculously clocked 7970s anyway.*


When I was using 580s/590s, I did think it was cheating, but you are absolutely right, the image quality can be replicated at 4x/2x and sometimes looks more natural. This is not always the case so discretion is advised. It will be restricted though in Heaven to being on. We will being doing two Heaven benchmark settings for Tess, so 4 benchmarks, and possibly a 5th one for anybody who wants Eyefinity and Surround. More to come.

I could of said the samething with my 33+% OC of my 590s. Some punk with a 15% overclock and newer drivers wiped the floor with me. Kind of urked me haha.

I will get to updating the scores that have properly submitted tomorrow, 3DMark11 Performance will continue, but instead of jumping to Extreme, I was thinking about pushing Heaven 3.0 first. What do you guys think?


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> When I was using 580s/590s, I did think it was cheating, but you are absolutely right, the image quality can be replicated at 4x/2x and sometimes looks more natural. This is not always the case so discretion is advised. It will be restricted though in Heaven to being on. We will being doing two Heaven benchmark settings for Tess, so 4 benchmarks, and possibly a 5th one for anybody who wants Eyefinity and Surround. More to come.
> 
> I could of said the samething with my 33+% OC of my 590s. Some punk with a 15% overclock and newer drivers wiped the floor with me. Kind of urked me haha.
> 
> I will get to updating the scores that have properly submitted tomorrow, 3DMark11 Performance will continue, but instead of jumping to Extreme, I was thinking about pushing Heaven 3.0 first. What do you guys think?


I think Heaven would be better just because it's a completely seperate bench and you can get a little wider view of both cards performance.


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> I think Heaven would be better just because it's a completely seperate bench and you can get a little wider view of both cards performance.


And if you force ppl to sumbit screens in bench you can see if they be tess cheating or not.


----------



## pioneerisloud

Thread cleaned. Keep the arguments out of this thread guys, I will NOT give another public warning for that.

I think some Heaven runs would be an absolute fair test if you ask me. Make sure you require 2 screenshots though. 1 with the in game screenshot feature, to show that there's no tesselation cheating. Another showing the HTML output, along with GPUz / CPU screenshots and their user name....to prove clock speeds.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> I think some Heaven runs would be an absolute fair test if you ask me. Make sure you require 2 screenshots though. 1 with the in game screenshot feature, to show that there's no tesselation cheating. Another showing the HTML output, along with GPUz / CPU screenshots and their user name....to prove clock speeds.


I agree with this.


----------



## RagingCain

Alright guys we have green, thanks to Killerhz for his great score. If your submission did not make it to spreadsheet, its because it was missing either too much information, or missing the subscores of your 3DMark11 submission. So they were simply left out unfortunately. He is ranked currently number on single GPU submissions. I will try and beat him this weekend though I am sure 

I would love to have some more data. As we go on, I am sure it will spring up.

Please do check the scores, any missing data is in ? marks, help me fill in the blanks please!

There will be two more bechmarks tomorrow, starting with Heaven on Normal Tessellation, and another on Extreme Tessellation. Resolutions so far will be 1920x1080, 2560x1600, and 5760x1080, separated by pages. Depending on how many really want to, we will leave the restriction one out of this.

Two screenshots necessary like mentioned, grabbing Tess on with the score hovering in the foreground, and one with all the CPU-z/GPU-z/ABs up to see the settings.

I will have these rules added to main, if you feel like benching ahead, thats fine, just make sure to submit all the data in screenshots.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I should have my 7970 Lightnings by this weekend so I look forward to competing!


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Alright guys we have green, thanks to Killerhz for his great score. If your submission did not make it to spreadsheet, its because it was missing either too much information, or missing the subscores of your 3DMark11 submission. So they were simply left out unfortunately. He is ranked currently number on single GPU submissions. I will try and beat him this weekend though I am sure
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would love to have some more data. As we go on, I am sure it will spring up.
> 
> Please do check the scores, any missing data is in ? marks, help me fill in the blanks please!
> 
> There will be two more bechmarks tomorrow, starting with Heaven on Normal Tessellation, and another on Extreme Tessellation. Resolutions so far will be 1920x1080, 2560x1600, and 5760x1080, separated by pages. Depending on how many really want to, we will leave the restriction one out of this.
> 
> Two screenshots necessary like mentioned, grabbing Tess on with the score hovering in the foreground, and one with all the CPU-z/GPU-z/ABs up to see the settings.
> 
> I will have these rules added to main, if you feel like benching ahead, thats fine, just make sure to submit all the data in screenshots.


not too sure what I missed but mine hasnt been put up :-/


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> There will be two more bechmarks tomorrow, starting with Heaven on Normal Tessellation, and another on Extreme Tessellation. Resolutions so far will be 1920x1080, 2560x1600, and 5760x1080, separated by pages. Depending on how many really want to, we will leave the restriction one out of this.


Thanks, will run mine up tonight.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

Sorry to be a pain, just noticed my submissions were not added (post 72 and 73) can you advise what I have missed out please as they look correct to me?


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> not too sure what I missed but mine hasnt been put up :-/


@Trip

Your screenshot shows that 3DMark11 without any results, and your link *had* no scores under the detailed section. It may have been a glitch with 3DMark11's server but they are showing up on the link now. I will see about adding this score.

@Stu

Your settings for the unrestricted benchmark don't match, i.e. the GPU has no overclock for example. Afterburner is not running and voltage and settings are missing.

Don't make me hunt all over trying to find your scores, if I can't find it, I will only look so hard for them. I am holding everyone to the same standards, thats all.

Just re-submit matching one of my screenshots, and follow the screenshot example/instructions in Main.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I don't think anybody's going to be beating RagingCain's CF score! That's a crazy OC for two 7970's!


----------



## youra6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I don't think anybody's going to be beating RagingCain's CF score! That's a crazy OC for two 7970's!


Beatable if someone has good OCing 7970s and a 3960K. CPU test definitely prefers MOAR cores!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *youra6*
> 
> Beatable if someone has good OCing 7970s and a 3960K. CPU test definitely prefers MOAR cores!


Oh I'll give it a go with my 3960X once I get my Lightnings up and running!


----------



## Faded

i'm up for this. i can make a submission on air, later tonight. The new waterblock is going in this weekend


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *youra6*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I don't think anybody's going to be beating RagingCain's CF score! That's a crazy OC for two 7970's!
> 
> 
> 
> Beatable if someone has good OCing 7970s and a 3960K. CPU test definitely prefers MOAR cores!
Click to expand...

I am absolutely going to lose to the 3xxx CPUs. Holding me back in HWBOT too.


----------



## Celeras

Fix the order of the spreadsheets.. ranks being randomly distributed throughout is silly.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

We need moar rezultz!!!!!!!! I'll get to benching this weekend once my 7970 shows up...


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Celeras*
> 
> Fix the order of the spreadsheets.. ranks being randomly distributed throughout is silly.


I will when I have time, being a full time employee and college student and programmer is a bit time consuming. Thought it would be nice to at least have the results on there.


----------



## killerhz

not sure what class i go under but hope am able to get in on this.

* CPU: i7 920 @ 4440 MHz
* 12GB DDR3 1691 @ 9-9-9-1T
* GTX 680 @ 1384 GPU / 3530 Mem (132% - +210 - +525) hope and think i did the math right tongue.gif
* GPU Voltage: 1.174v
* Driver Version: 310.10
* 3DMark11 Score: 11044

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3054019

No Driver Tweaks at all.....

hope i an posting and entering this correctly. please let me know if i am doing this wrong


----------



## svthomas

This thread is full of so much win! Excited to see what happens once more people submit results!


----------



## Emitz989

Great thread, here's mine,

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3054310;jsessionid=q8l2r5wi12kf1j4131r2xs3un

CPU i7 920 @ 4245 Mhz / QPI 3821 Mhz
RAM @1700Mhz / 8-8-8-19 1T
GTX 680 SLI -Core @ 1224 Mhz - Mem @ 6400 Mhz (1600x4)
Driver Version: 301.10
3DMark11 Score: P15922
Proof (of score AND settings):
Screenshot



I will break 16000







. CPU definitely holding back my score!


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killerhz*
> 
> not sure what class i go under but hope am able to get in on this.
> 
> * CPU: i7 920 @ 4440 MHz
> * 12GB DDR3 1691 @ 9-9-9-1T
> * GTX 680 @ 1384 GPU / 3530 Mem (132% - +210 - +525) hope and think i did the math right tongue.gif
> * GPU Voltage: 1.174v
> * Driver Version: 310.10
> * 3DMark11 Score: 11044
> 
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3054019
> 
> No Driver Tweaks at all.....
> 
> hope i an posting and entering this correctly. please let me know if i am doing this wrong


You have two CPU-z's showing memory, its the CPU tab, Mainboard, and Memory tab. Start taking screenshots with the results in the actual program, really speeds things up. The website shows nothing but the main score in these submissions. You provide the link to the website anyways.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Emitz989*
> 
> Great thread, here's mine,
> 
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3054310;jsessionid=q8l2r5wi12kf1j4131r2xs3un
> 
> CPU i7 920 @ 4245 Mhz / QPI 3821 Mhz
> RAM @1700Mhz / 8-8-8-19 1T
> GTX 680 SLI -Core @ 1224 Mhz - Mem @ 6400 Mhz (1600x4)
> Driver Version: 301.10
> 3DMark11 Score: P15922
> Proof (of score AND settings):
> Screenshot
> 
> I will break 16000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . CPU definitely holding back my score!


Doing my best to record results, stop posting the 3DMark11 website in the image guys, it doesn't show anything really useful, the verification link is the important part of course, but their (3DMark11) servers are crapping out not loading detail scores.

Post the actual benchmark after it ran. Like the example shows. I will do my best to sit here refreshing your scores but I am only going to sit here for so long.


----------



## wireeater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Celeras*
> 
> Fix the order of the spreadsheets.. ranks being randomly distributed throughout is silly.


If it bothers you that much why don't you offer your time to do it send send it to the OP.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wireeater*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Celeras*
> 
> Fix the order of the spreadsheets.. ranks being randomly distributed throughout is silly.
> 
> 
> 
> If it bothers you that much why don't you offer your time to do it send send it to the OP.
Click to expand...

Its already done, spreadsheets updated.


----------



## DimmyK

Here is mine, unrestricted single GPU:

Verification URL

CPU i7 930 @ 4008 Mhz / QPI ???
RAM 1527Mhz / 9-9-9-24
GTX 680 1206Mhz GPU, 6928Mhz effective memory
Driver Version: 301.10
3DMark11 Score: P10101
Proof of score and settings:


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DimmyK*
> 
> Here is mine, unrestricted single GPU:
> 
> Verification URL
> 
> CPU i7 930 @ 4008 Mhz / QPI ???
> RAM 1527Mhz / 9-9-9-24
> GTX 680 1206Mhz GPU, 6928Mhz effective memory
> Driver Version: 301.10
> 3DMark11 Score: P10101
> Proof of score and settings:


Got you added Dimmy, thanks.


----------



## K62-RIG

Very nice score there DimmyK.


----------



## trippinonprozac

Ill do another run tonight and take the correct screenshot so I get on the board









I want to lead that Unrestricted leaders board!!


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Ill do another run tonight and take the correct screenshot so I get on the board
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I want to lead that Unrestricted leaders board!!


I will be waiting


----------



## trippinonprozac

Have you tried the ASUS modified bios for your 7970s Cain?

It allows up to 1.4v for the core.

I plan on benching at 1400mhz core tonight.


----------



## DimmyK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *K62-RIG*
> 
> Very nice score there DimmyK.


Thanks. Unfortunately, not a game stable clocks, just for benching.

@ragin: can't multiquote on tapatalk, thanks for adding


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Have you tried the ASUS modified bios for your 7970s Cain?
> It allows up to 1.4v for the core.
> *I plan on benching at 1400mhz core tonight*.












That result ought to be impressive if you can pull it off!









By the way, I found my second 7970 Lightning on the Egg and they both should be here by the weekend! The wifey is just gonna have to keep herself company because I plan on a weekend of straight benching!!!!


----------



## killerhz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> You have two CPU-z's showing memory, its the CPU tab, Mainboard, and Memory tab. Start taking screenshots with the results in the actual program, really speeds things up. The website shows nothing but the main score in these submissions. You provide the link to the website anyways.
> 
> Doing my best to record results, stop posting the 3DMark11 website in the image guys, it doesn't show anything really useful, the verification link is the important part of course, but their (3DMark11) servers are crapping out not loading detail scores.
> 
> Post the actual benchmark after it ran. Like the example shows. I will do my best to sit here refreshing your scores but I am only going to sit here for so long.


um i can't show it in the progam cuz i didn't pay for it. i can only got see it on the web site. so if my score not taken? it's kk i don't mind. im not going to run it again tonite. and when link should i post? i post the details link no?


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That result ought to be impressive if you can pull it off!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, I found my second 7970 Lightning on the Egg and they both should be here by the weekend! The wifey is just gonna have to keep herself company because I plan on a weekend of straight benching!!!!


Those things ship at 1070 stock I believe. Your stock results are going to be crazy on their own. I hope your able to get 1300 as your everyday OC man. I feel like that is kind of the measure of a golden 7970. I can get it but it's only bench stable. You'll definitely have the cooling headroom to make it happen though.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Those things ship at 1070 stock I believe. Your stock results are going to be crazy on their own. I hope your able to get 1300 as your everyday OC man. I feel like that is kind of the measure of a golden 7970. I can get it but it's only bench stable. You'll definitely have the cooling headroom to make it happen though.


I know what you mean but I never run an overclock 24/7, just for benches. The Lightnings will be more than enough for any game at stock clocks...


----------



## aoya

Anyone know if AB is reading the 7970 correctly? I slide it to 1.3 volts but GPU-Z is reading it much lower -- somewhere around 1.21 or something. How can I get a real 1.3v?


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That result ought to be impressive if you can pull it off!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, I found my second 7970 Lightning on the Egg and they both should be here by the weekend! The wifey is just gonna have to keep herself company because I plan on a weekend of straight benching!!!!


I can do 1370mhz core @ 1.3v so 1400mhz shouldnt be a problem.

Yeah cant wait to see what your lightnings will do mate! Should be very impressive!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I can't wait! Just two more days!!!


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Have you tried the ASUS modified bios for your 7970s Cain?
> 
> It allows up to 1.4v for the core.
> 
> I plan on benching at 1400mhz core tonight.


What are using to flash? WinFLASH or ATi Flash doesn't recognize my cards. I planned on possibly editing my own bioses, but would be forced to make my own editor since Radeon Bios Editor is over.

@killerhz I completely understand. I apologize. We are now doing Heaven 3.0 which is completely free.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> What are using to flash? WinFLASH or ATi Flash doesn't recognize my cards. I planned on possibly editing my own bioses, but would be forced to make my own editor since Radeon Bios Editor is over.
> @killerhz I completely understand. I apologize. We are now doing Heaven 3.0 which is completely free.
> Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk


There is a special version of ATIWINFLASH.

Ill pm you now.


----------



## pioneerisloud

Depending on how long this competition lasts...... I might have some better runs up my sleeves.







Going to be plunging all of my equipment under water here in about 2 weeks, along with an RMA on my motherboard and CPU. I already know my 7970 can pull 1300 under water. I can't wait.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> Depending on how long this competition lasts...... I might have some better runs up my sleeves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Going to be plunging all of my equipment under water here in about 2 weeks, along with an RMA on my motherboard and CPU. I already know my 7970 can pull 1300 under water. I can't wait.


Should be awesome Pio. At least the 7970's scale under water; I don't think the 680's will be able to push much further than we are seeing here, even under water...


----------



## RagingCain

I will be adding the 7970 flashing the ASUS BIOS for 1.4v unlock in main.

Any of you more experienced 680 users have some tweaks, I will be more than happy to share that info in main too.

Looks like I have another 100mV to mess around with.


----------



## svthomas

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> I will be adding the 7970 flashing the ASUS BIOS for 1.4v unlock in main.
> 
> Any of you more experienced 680 users have some tweaks, I will be more than happy to share that info in main too.
> 
> Looks like I have another 100mV to mess around with.


The asus bios is extremely handy, I must say. Just flashed to it last night.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*Restricted performance submission - Single 7970 watercooled GPU*

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3063248

CPU 4.4ghz 100x44
DRAM 2133
AMD 7970 1200/1575 _(please ignore notepad saying standard)_
GPU Voltage: 1.20
Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
Watercooled
3DMark11 Score: P9926










Image link


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Stu-Crossfire*
> 
> *Restricted performance submission - Single 7970 watercooled GPU*
> 
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3063248
> 
> CPU 4.4ghz 100x44
> DRAM 2133
> AMD 7970 1200/1575 _(please ignore notepad saying standard)_
> GPU Voltage: 1.20
> Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
> Watercooled
> 3DMark11 Score: P9926
> 
> Image link


Quick glance looks like a perfect submission.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

When are we going to start seeing some Heaven 3.0 runs guys????


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> When are we going to start seeing some Heaven 3.0 runs guys????


Yeah are they making a Heaven spreadsheet? I'll post if there is going to be one. I'll do some 3dMark 11 now though in the meantime.


----------



## thrgk

how much more of a core oc have people been getting with the Asus BIOS? also you can hit higher oc once the card is water cooled right? so if im at 1250 @ 1.26 can i hit 1300mhz stable? asic quality is 71%, Idk is like 80% and above best or? what's best for hitting 1300+ core?


----------



## killnine

@ killerhz : Dang man, living the dream. Thanks for keeping my i7 920 hopes alive


----------



## Blindsay

ill be participating in this shortly, my 7970 arrives tuesday. I want to break 10k in 3dmark11 with a single card







my best with my 6970s was 11,151 so ideally ideally id like to beat that but im not holding my breath


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> When are we going to start seeing some Heaven 3.0 runs guys????


tonight if I fix my driver issue


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> Quick glance looks like a perfect submission.


Thanks, will run up a couple more before I head out diving then. Wanted to make sure it was right before I wasted too many submissions getting it wrong.









I aim to do 1x crossfire and trifire in all benchmarks so we have a good scaling comparison on same PC too.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*UN-Restricted performance submission - Single 7970 watercooled GPU*
Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3064827

CPU 5.17ghz 101.5 x 51
DRAM 2133
AMD 7970 1200/1575
GPU Voltage: 1.20
Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
Watercooled
3DMark11 Score: P10071










Image link


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*HEAVEN 3.0 Normal Tesselation - 1080
UN-Restricted performance submission - Single 7970 watercooled GPU*

CPU 5.17ghz 101.5 x 51
DRAM 2133
AMD 7970 1200/1575
GPU Voltage: 1.20
Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
Watercooled
Heaven Score: 2449








Image link
[/quote]


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*HEAVEN 3.0 Extreme Tesselation - 1080
UN-Restricted performance submission - Single 7970 watercooled GPU*
CPU 5.17ghz 101.5 x 51
DRAM 2133
AMD 7970 1200/1575
GPU Voltage: 1.20
Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
Watercooled
Heaven Score: 1525









Image link

Gotta go now, got a nice quarry dive today in the sunny lake district, but will be back tonight to submit 2x and 3x results for all tests.


----------



## trippinonprozac

Restricted performance submission - Single 7970 watercooled GPU
Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3065523;jsessionid=9sethenaisy4dupmbi22asb9

CPU 4.4ghz 100 x 44
DRAM 2133
AMD 7970 1360/1600
GPU Voltage: 1.30
Driver Version: 12.3 BETA
Watercooled
3DMark11 Score: P10582


----------



## pioneerisloud

@trippin
How did you get your card to show 1360 as the default clock speed? BIOS Flash? How well does it function like that (idle lock up problem)? If I can do that, and avoid using profiles in MSI AB (or using MSI AB at all)...that would be amazing!


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> @trippin
> How did you get your card to show 1360 as the default clock speed? BIOS Flash? How well does it function like that (idle lock up problem)? If I can do that, and avoid using profiles in MSI AB (or using MSI AB at all)...that would be amazing!


Its actually just an AB overclock but for some weird reason the overclock is showing as the default clock??

I have no problems with lockups at all however that is about as far as I can stretch the clock on this card @ 1.3v

I have installed the ASUS bios and have GPU tweak but for some reason the core V tops out at 1.25 on that??? it should be giving me 1.4.


----------



## Kerian

Here is my contribution.
Hope I did right.


----------



## svthomas

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thrgk*
> 
> how much more of a core oc have people been getting with the Asus BIOS? also you can hit higher oc once the card is water cooled right? so if im at 1250 @ 1.26 can i hit 1300mhz stable? asic quality is 71%, Idk is like 80% and above best or? what's best for hitting 1300+ core?


Got this run last night with the ASUS BIOS. 1275/1600 on xfire 7970s w/ 8x AA enabled. Both cards are watercooled--first card sits in the 40s under load, the second card is in low 50s (they're in series). But it really depends on ambient, as you can see in the screenshot, they were actually a little lower temp because it wasn't too warm in the house. As for hitting 1300 stable, it's all silicon lottery.

This isn't a submission, I will get a screenshot with the proper AA tonight, among other things that are required.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*Restricted performance submission - 2x 7970 watercooled GPU*
Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3068235

CPU 4.4ghz 100x44
DRAM 2133
2x AMD 7970 1200/1575 ]
GPU Voltage: 1.20
Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
Watercooled
*3DMark11 Score: P15849*










Image link


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*UN-Restricted performance submission - 2x 7970 watercooled GPU*
Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3068298

CPU 5.17ghz 101.5 x 51
DRAM 2133
2x AMD 7970 1200/1575
GPU Voltage: 1.20
Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
Watercooled

3DMark11 Score: P16610










Image link


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*HEAVEN 3.0 Normal Tesselation - 1080
UN-Restricted performance submission - 2x 7970 watercooled GPU*

CPU 5.17ghz 101.5 x 51
DRAM 2133
2x AMD 7970 1200/1575
GPU Voltage: 1.20
Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
Watercooled
*Heaven Score: 4710*









Image link


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Dang all of you W/C guys, my Lightnings ain't going to have a chance!! Jk, great scores guys, keep them coming!


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

*HEAVEN 3.0 Extreme Tesselation - 1080
UN-Restricted performance submission - 2x 7970 watercooled GPU*

CPU 5.17ghz 101.5 x 51
DRAM 2133
2x AMD 7970 1200/1575
GPU Voltage: 1.20
Driver Version: WHQL 12.3
Watercooled
Heaven Score: 2976










Image link


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Anyone care to run 3DMark 11 under Xtreme (not for the Battle, just for fun). I want to compare my 580 score before installing my 7970's...


----------



## RagingCain

Great submission guys, I won't be able to update till tomorrow night.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Anyone care to run 3DMark 11 under Xtreme (not for the Battle, just for fun). I want to compare my 580 score before installing my 7970's...


How many 7970s in use mate?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stu-Crossfire*
> 
> How many 7970s in use mate?


Two 580 Lightnings...

I havent installed my 7970's yet...

Edit - Wait, are you asking how many 7970's to use? If so the two please!!


----------



## jacedaface

Just done my first Heaven run with a bit of a dirty OCing, put +180 on core and +450 on memory.
My boost seems really good on my card stock is 1137 so im getting 1316 now on the core.
Is there any sort of safe limit to stay under on the memory or the core? Or as long as it stays cool its fine? It didnt go over 58C with 85% fan.

PS all my CPU and everything else is at stock at the minute.


Sorry FAIL, just changed the picture.


----------



## jtom320

Dude you have tess disabled?


----------



## jacedaface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Dude you have tess disabled?


Yep i just changed the picture. Epic Fail!


----------



## dph314

1316/3450 is a damn fine OC on these volts. You got a great card


----------



## trippinonprozac

Ill get my unrestricted done @ 5.2ghz tonight.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Ill get my unrestricted done @ 5.2ghz tonight.


The darn ASUS GPU Tweak holding me back. Doesn't properly sync multiple-cards 

I will go back on Black Edition bioses.


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> The darn ASUS GPU Tweak holding me back. Doesn't properly sync multiple-cards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will go back on Black Edition bioses.


I thought there was a sync GPUs option on it?

Were you able to increase core voltage on your card/cards?


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jacedaface*
> 
> Just done my first Heaven run with a bit of a dirty OCing, put +180 on core and +450 on memory.
> My boost seems really good on my card stock is 1137 so im getting 1316 now on the core.
> Is there any sort of safe limit to stay under on the memory or the core? Or as long as it stays cool its fine? It didnt go over 58C with 85% fan.
> PS all my CPU and everything else is at stock at the minute.
> 
> Sorry FAIL, just changed the picture.


HAHA you got a score of LEET!!!


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> The darn ASUS GPU Tweak holding me back. Doesn't properly sync multiple-cards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will go back on Black Edition bioses.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought there was a sync GPUs option on it?
> 
> Were you able to increase core voltage on your card/cards?
Click to expand...

Yeah the Voltage option is there, when I go to sync cards, sets all the settings, to both cards, to 925 ~ 1375 Mem, and voltage of 1125v. Lowers your maximum as well so you have to restart the entire program to unlock higher voltages than 1125v. Its really buggy.

It also does "set" GPU2. So if I set it 1475 @ 1.400v on GPU1, it sets fine, I set on GPU2, it just doesn't catch. Like I said its really buggy.

Lightning users beware  GPU1 @ 1475 @ 42c


----------



## thrgk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Yeah the Voltage option is there, when I go to sync cards, sets all the settings, to both cards, to 925 ~ 1375 Mem, and voltage of 1125v. Lowers your maximum as well so you have to restart the entire program to unlock higher voltages than 1125v. Its really buggy.
> 
> It also does "set" GPU2. So if I set it 1475 @ 1.400v on GPU1, it sets fine, I set on GPU2, it just doesn't catch. Like I said its really buggy.
> 
> Lightning users beware  GPU1 @ 1475 @ 42c


You hit 1475mhz core? How, what voltage/ bios?


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thrgk*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Yeah the Voltage option is there, when I go to sync cards, sets all the settings, to both cards, to 925 ~ 1375 Mem, and voltage of 1125v. Lowers your maximum as well so you have to restart the entire program to unlock higher voltages than 1125v. Its really buggy.
> 
> It also does "set" GPU2. So if I set it 1475 @ 1.400v on GPU1, it sets fine, I set on GPU2, it just doesn't catch. Like I said its really buggy.
> 
> Lightning users beware  GPU1 @ 1475 @ 42c
> 
> 
> 
> You hit 1475mhz core? How, what voltage/ bios?
Click to expand...

The ASUS BIOS that has the 1.4 volts. I will add a thing in Main tomorrow how to flash it. Unfortunately you have to use GPU Tweak for it.

It ran for a few minutes in Heaven, little bit of Artifacting, but no crashing.


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> The ASUS BIOS that has the 1.4 volts. I will add a thing in Main tomorrow how to flash it. Unfortunately you have to use GPU Tweak for it.
> 
> It ran for a few minutes in Heaven, little bit of Artifacting, but no crashing.


WOW!!

Cant wait to see your 3dmark 11 result with a single card!

sounds like I will have a hard time catching you!!

What were your VRM temps like?


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thrgk*
> 
> You hit 1475mhz core? How, what voltage/ bios?


The same bios I supplied you mate.


----------



## trippinonprozac

@RAGINGCAIN

Can you list exactly how your got it to unlock the higher voltage as my GPU tweak shows a max voltage of 1.25v??

Cheers mate!


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> @RAGINGCAIN
> 
> Can you list exactly how your got it to unlock the higher voltage as my GPU tweak shows a max voltage of 1.25v??
> 
> Cheers mate!


I just installed it, I will say this I have ECL applied from Afterburner (perhaps try that first.)

Are you sure yours flashed? You can verify with GPU-z it will say ASUS is the vendor.


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> I just installed it, I will say this I have ECL applied from Afterburner (perhaps try that first.)
> 
> Are you sure yours flashed? You can verify with GPU-z it will say ASUS is the vendor.


Yep, ASUS vendor so I am sure!

plus I believe GPU tweak doesnt work with NON Asus cards.

What is ECL?


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> I just installed it, I will say this I have ECL applied from Afterburner (perhaps try that first.)
> 
> Are you sure yours flashed? You can verify with GPU-z it will say ASUS is the vendor.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, ASUS vendor so I am sure!
> 
> plus I believe GPU tweak doesnt work with NON Asus cards.
> 
> What is ECL?
Click to expand...

Have a look at the main post under 7970 Overclocking, it mentions what to do with ECL. Extended Clock Limits (might work on voltages too) you launch Afterburner for it, but it makes registry changes. Those registry changes are effective for multiple programs.

Worth a shot.


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Have a look at the main post under 7970 Overclocking, it mentions what to do with ECL. Extended Clock Limits (might work on voltages too) you launch Afterburner for it, but it makes registry changes. Those registry changes are effective for multiple programs.
> 
> Worth a shot.


awesome!

Now post up some +1400mhz 3dmark scores!! haha


----------



## trippinonprozac

I cant see any reference to ECL??


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> hahaha wow!
> *grabs some popcorn and pulls up a seat*


Please understand, I hold GT in the highest regard. I just think its time to put up or shut up. I certainly intend to...


----------



## pioneerisloud

Thread cleaned. Keep it on topic, or move it to a PM. Don't start arguments here.


----------



## grunion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Dude, if anybody has an obligation to back up all of the smack talking you have been doing its you! The purpose of this thread is to determine a true champion between the 680 and 7970 so that should matter to a guy who goes around ad nauseam stating with such certainty how much "superior" the 680 is to the 7970! If you're going to talk the talk then walk the walk...


When people bring up the cooler/quieter/power argument, well...

We all remember the 5870 vs 480 days


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grunion*
> 
> When people bring up the cooler/quieter/power argument, well...
> We all remember the 5870 vs 480 days


Lol, yeah! I don't really care about cooler or quieter. For me its just which is faster at the max. Between these two cards its hard to say, thus this thread!


----------



## Arizonian

I'm new to bench competition. I have one question.

IF this series AMD 7970 claims they now run tessellation as good as Nvidia, why do we have to run two benchmarks with Tess on & off to enter? Isn't the point of benching to have the highest possible graphic settings offered?

When I game I look to have settings turned up as far as I can go. Wouldn't that pertain to benching?

On a side note, there should be a 'How to overclock the GTX 680' like the tips provided for the 7970. To be fair, for a noob bencher (like myself) to join in the fray as well.


----------



## Celeras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> I'm new to bench competition. I have one question.
> IF this series AMD 7970 claims they now run tessellation as good as Nvidia, why do we have to run two benchmarks with Tess on & off to enter? .


They're better than the 5000s were, but its still not really close at all when it comes to extreme tessellation.


----------



## svthomas

Heaven 3.0 - Normal Tessellation 1080 - Speed - Dual GPU
SCORE: 4914

CPU: intel i5 2500k @ 5.0Ghz 50 x 100 1.44v (overvolted just so I didn't need to worry...lol)
RAM: 1600 DDR3 16GB
MOBO: ASUS Sabertooth P67
PowerColor Radeon 7970 ref. flashed w/ ASUS BIOS - 1260/1650 1.231v
Sapphire Radeon 7970 ref. flashed w/ ASUS BIOS - 1260/1650 1.3v
DRIVER: 8.951.0.0
Stock CCC Profiles - Whatever an install + cap install set by default.
Watercooled


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

For reference, all my benchmarks are done with CCC settings at default, so no tesselation tweaks.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

3DMark11 Performance (restricted)

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3073150

*CPU:* i5-2600K (HT off) at 4424MHz








*RAM:* 8GB at 1876MHz 8-10-9-24-1T
*GPU:* GTX680 +125 GPU +510 VRAM stock volts
*Driver:* 301.10
*3DMark11 Score:* P10172


----------



## xxmastermindxx

Heaven 3.0 Normal Tess 1080p Speed

*CPU:* i5-2600K (HT off) at 4424MHz
*RAM:* 8GB at 1876MHz 8-10-9-24-1T
*GPU:* GTX680 +127 GPU +475 VRAM stock volts
*Driver:* 301.10

*Settings:*
DX11
1920x1080
No AA
Normal Tessellation
16x AF
High Shaders


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Somebody should write up an overclocking guide for the 680's and post it in the OP. I'd personally nominate Murlocke as he seems to be very knowledgeable about these cards...


----------



## jacedaface

Here is mine, although the only thing overclocked is the GPU at the moment also i ran Heaven at 8xAA instead of 4xAA.
My 3D mark scores are getting held back by my CPU.

CPU: i7 2.6Ghz stock HT on and Turbo on (2.8Ghz)
RAM: 24GB DDR3 @ 1066 (underclocked) 7-7-7-19
GPU: EVGA GTX 680 +200 core and +500 Memory at full boost GPU core reads 1337Mhz
Driver: 301.10




Heaven Settings
DX11
1920x1080
8xAA
16xAF
Tessellation EXTREME
Everything else high and enabled.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> I'm new to bench competition. I have one question.
> 
> IF this series AMD 7970 claims they now run tessellation as good as Nvidia, why do we have to run two benchmarks with Tess on & off to enter? Isn't the point of benching to have the highest possible graphic settings offered?
> 
> When I game I look to have settings turned up as far as I can go. Wouldn't that pertain to benching?
> 
> On a side note, there should be a 'How to overclock the GTX 680' like the tips provided for the 7970. To be fair, for a noob bencher (like myself) to join in the fray as well.


The Tessellation for the Heaven 3.0 benchmarks is always on, its just normal vs. extreme. Normal is what you are likely to see in a game, Extreme is just for benchmarking. Both are included here because they both have merits.

The reason why AMD users may be called upon to bench with it off is if it appears its been disabled and show potential cheating. You can hide a little tessellation adjustment, but you can't hide disabling it completely, the scores go off the charts. Is this what you meant by on/off?

The good reason to include Normal is to have another non-biased benchmark that shows off the cards in terms of FPS. It also will illustrate the effectiveness of a good CPU overclock. In essence its a GPU benchmark that can be CPU bound. We will see how well we can make the GPUs dance based off the overall system performance.

The second Tess Extreme benchmark is to specifically test the Tessellation with GPU performance of the cards. The benchmark results aren't meant to override each other as one being better, but compliment each other. These benchmarks will display more useful data to discerning eyes.

The least discerning eyes will just see a clear victor, while people like myself will see what kind of bottlenecks appear, which card is better at raw tessellation, which video card is better at a blend of settings etc., we include benchmarks of Eyefinity and 2560x1600 but only a small percentage of gamers actually use that resolution. While it is certainly probable that a card can "win" in benchmarks at those resolutions, we often see some cards before better than the competitors at lower resolutions or higher resolutions than what the focus is on reviews.

Same goes for in game settings, while it may totally destroy a competitor at highest settings, it might lose at slightly lower settings. Things like this show us bottlenecks in architecture, or better yet, issues with drivers (i.e. results that should be higher.) We can mitigate one card dominating all benchmarks by making more benchmarks, and making them dynamic. You could say we are doing the ultimate Overclock review of the cards this way.

I would love to write the GTX 680 overclocking guide but sadly, do not have one  I will definitely include it if someone provides a good detailed one for noobs.


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> The ASUS BIOS that has the 1.4 volts. I will add a thing in Main tomorrow how to flash it. Unfortunately you have to use GPU Tweak for it.
> 
> It ran for a few minutes in Heaven, little bit of Artifacting, but no crashing.


I used this bios also and can confirm you can put the voltage up higher. However, using HWINFO and GPUZ I seen some insane voltage spikes I would closly monitor that mate.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> The ASUS BIOS that has the 1.4 volts. I will add a thing in Main tomorrow how to flash it. Unfortunately you have to use GPU Tweak for it.
> 
> It ran for a few minutes in Heaven, little bit of Artifacting, but no crashing.
> 
> 
> 
> I used this bios also and can confirm you can put the voltage up higher. However, using HWINFO and GPUZ I seen some insane voltage spikes I would closly monitor that mate.
Click to expand...

I couldn't get it working right/well, I am heading back to my old BIOS. I will settle for my scores as is. I will let the Afterburner makers work on compatibility a bit more, maybe will unlock the option to 1.4v and I will try again.


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> I couldn't get it working right/well, I am heading back to my old BIOS. I will settle for my scores as is. I will let the Afterburner makers work on compatibility a bit more, maybe will unlock the option to 1.4v and I will try again.


Yeah I did the exact same thing. Also can I ask what the ASIC of your cards are?


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> I couldn't get it working right/well, I am heading back to my old BIOS. I will settle for my scores as is. I will let the Afterburner makers work on compatibility a bit more, maybe will unlock the option to 1.4v and I will try again.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I did the exact same thing. Also can I ask what the ASIC of your cards are?
Click to expand...

Sure they are 84.4% and 80.4% both XFX Black Edition, Reference Fans.


----------



## Ruined

My submission for Restricted Single. Reference MSI 7970, flashed to the ASUS bios, at 1330 core @ 1.3v core, 1850 memory @ 1.65v memory, Power +20%. i5 2500k @ 4420mhz, 1.330 vcore, base clock 102.8 x 43. Ram @ 2193mhz, 10-11-10-34, 1.65v. CCC Beta 12.4, all settings are stock except image quality which is at performance. P 10270 http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3079046.


----------



## myrtleee34

Has everyone bought the full version of 3Dmark 11 or is there a free full version?


----------



## jacedaface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *myrtleee34*
> 
> Has everyone bought the full version of 3Dmark 11 or is there a free full version?


Google is your friend.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *myrtleee34*
> 
> Has everyone bought the full version of 3Dmark 11 or is there a free full version?


Got my copy from EVGA with a 570 way back in the graphic card days


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxmastermindxx*
> 
> Got my copy from EVGA with a 570 way back in the graphic card days


Me too but it was a 560Ti...


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xxmastermindxx*
> 
> Got my copy from EVGA with a 570 way back in the graphic card days
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Me too but it was a 560Ti...
Click to expand...

Me three, with each 580, and each 590.... gave all my keys away 

@Stu-Crossfire

Hey buddy just noticed this: restricted benchmarks is only 4 threads. Want me to include it in the unrestricted section as well as the other submission?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/100_50#post_16834551

And Again:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/100_50#post_16839718

@TrippinOnProzac

Samething as Stu here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/100_50#post_16837415

@Jace

Do you have a verifcation URL for you stock i7 920 run??

Half of the results are updated, Heaven benchmark sheets on the way. Please make sure I didn't make any mistakes, and if you can help me fill out the the missing data ( ? ) I would really appreciate it.


----------



## tsm106

I ran a restricted single gpu for the hell of it. I feel so icky for disabling my array.









cpu [email protected]
gpu core [email protected] mem 1740 1.66v

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3080581


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tsm106*
> 
> I ran a restricted single gpu for the hell of it. I feel so icky for disabling my array.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpu [email protected]
> gpu core [email protected] mem 1740 1.66v
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3080581


Great score! Now see if you can take down that 680 in the single-GPU Free For All category!


----------



## xxmastermindxx

3DMark11 Performance (restricted)

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3081088

*CPU:* i5-2600K (HT off) at 4424MHz
*RAM:* 8GB at 1920MHz 8-10-9-24-1T
*GPU:* GTX680 +150 GPU +500 VRAM stock volts
*Driver:* 301.10
*3DMark11 Score:* P10415



Edit: just noticed my notepad doesn't show I bumped up GPU offset to +150. You can see it in AB though


----------



## jacedaface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> @Jace
> Do you have a verifcation URL for you stock i7 920 run??
> 
> Half of the results are updated, Heaven benchmark sheets on the way. Please make sure I didn't make any mistakes, and if you can help me fill out the the missing data ( ? ) I would really appreciate it.


Sorry forgot that bit, my results are pretty pointless till i get my CPU overclocked again. Had this thing running 4.2Ghz 24/7 stable for two years. Flashed my BIOS because i got some new RAM and wanted to make sure it would be compatable. Now i cant get my Overclock right! Its doing my head in!


----------



## Denim-187

3DMark11 Performance Free For All

*CPU*: i7-2700K (HT) at 5200MHz
*RAM*: 8GB at 2133MHz 8-9-8-28-1T
*GPU*: 2x 7970 @ 1250mhz
*Driver*: 11.12
*3DMark11 Score*: *P 17099*


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> @Stu-Crossfire
> 
> Hey buddy just noticed this: restricted benchmarks is only 4 threads. Want me to include it in the unrestricted section as well as the other submission?
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/100_50#post_16834551
> 
> And Again:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/100_50#post_16839718


Gutted, I didnt notice that, and If I am honest, i am not sure how to disable 4 threads for this benchmark?

No, just leave my highest scores in for the correct sections please.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jacedaface*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> @Jace
> Do you have a verifcation URL for you stock i7 920 run??
> 
> Half of the results are updated, Heaven benchmark sheets on the way. Please make sure I didn't make any mistakes, and if you can help me fill out the the missing data ( ? ) I would really appreciate it.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry forgot that bit, my results are pretty pointless till i get my CPU overclocked again. Had this thing running 4.2Ghz 24/7 stable for two years. Flashed my BIOS because i got some new RAM and wanted to make sure it would be compatable. Now i cant get my Overclock right! Its doing my head in!
Click to expand...

Competition wise, I know it doesn't make sense, but we get a lot of amateurs here, and it never hurts to have different or even Multiple results, even if some of those results are stock. Go ahead and keep submitting. My belief is that CPUs non-OC even i7s will bottleneck these cards (even if its a single GPU.) You could prove that kind of.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Stu-Crossfire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> @Stu-Crossfire
> 
> Hey buddy just noticed this: restricted benchmarks is only 4 threads. Want me to include it in the unrestricted section as well as the other submission?
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/100_50#post_16834551
> 
> And Again:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/100_50#post_16839718
> 
> 
> 
> Gutted, I didnt notice that, and If I am honest, i am not sure how to disable 4 threads for this benchmark?
> 
> No, just leave my highest scores in for the correct sections please.
Click to expand...

Its totally fine, to disable Hyper Threading, scour your BIOS. I know all ASUS mobos allow you to disable Hyper Threading, its usually under CPU Performance or Options or something like that. You can even go to a single Core if you want to be curious at what the benchmarks look like.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

For an Asus mobo, go to the Advanced tab, then CPU Configuration, and disable Hyper-threading to get 4 threads


----------



## xxmastermindxx

3DMark11 Performance Free For All (Single GPU)

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3086944

*CPU:* i5-2600K (HT ON) at 5353MHz (53x101)
*RAM:* 8GB at 1616MHz 9-9-9-24-1T
*GPU:* GTX680 +156 GPU +515 VRAM stock volts
*Driver:* 301.10
*3DMark11 Score:* P10601


----------



## Hambone07si

Here's my run

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3087335;jsessionid=1v5ghmwdxijee1gdonlwufekm

Cpu 2700k @ 5.2ghz Ht on 1.464v 52x100
Ram 8 gigs Dominator Gt 1866mhz 8-8-8-20-1t
Gpu's 2 x HD 7970's Crossfire @ 1200/1600 1.200v/1.637v
Driver 12.3 WHQL
3dmark11 P16600


----------



## SeanA

I know this is a rain on the beautiful parade with all the hard going enthusiasts,

and maybe I missed it, but what is, if anything, being done to correct the AMD tessellation driver cheat...

I think the tessellation off scores are the ones to go by.

k|ngp|n

" When comparing my GTX 680 or really any results with those of 7970, always keep in mind that all scores here are done with FULL TESSELATION and not using any sort of *driver cheats that reduce it in TESSELATION heavy benchmarks as AMD drivers do.*
3DMARK 11 (all 3 presets)"

http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1681

It obviously affects 3DMark 11, and by what that master OC'er says it affects Unigine Heaven as well.

So AMD users have an "optimized" driver by no fault of their own. (woo hoo ! ;-)

Forgive me if I take any and every tessellated amd score with a number of grains of salt subtracted.

I have not looked nor found any analysis on what percentage additional score that driver may be delivering.

It would be fairer if someone finds a way to either test that or disable the optimization part of it.








lol is dat me ?

I guess not because I have no real suggestions for a "fairer test fix", but I do believe people should know the above.


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> I know this is a rain on the beautiful parade with all the hard going enthusiasts,
> and maybe I missed it, but what is, if anything, being done to correct the AMD tessellation driver cheat...
> I think the tessellation off scores are the ones to go by.
> 
> k|ngp|n
> 
> " When comparing my GTX 680 or really any results with those of 7970, always keep in mind that all scores here are done with FULL TESSELATION and not using any sort of _*driver cheats that reduce it in TESSELATION heavy benchmarks as AMD drivers do.*_
> 
> 3DMARK 11 (all 3 presets)"
> 
> http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1681
> 
> It obviously affects 3DMark 11, and by what that master OC'er says it affects Unigine Heaven as well.
> So AMD users have an "optimized" driver by no fault of their own. (woo hoo ! ;-)
> Forgive me if I take any and every tessellated amd score with a number of grains of salt subtracted.
> I have not looked nor found any analysis on what percentage additional score that driver may be delivering.
> It would be fairer if someone finds a way to either test that or disable the optimization part of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol is dat me ?
> 
> I guess not because I have no real suggestions for a "fairer test fix", but I do believe people should know the above.


There is no driver cheat bro. There is a tesselation slider. It does the exact same thing your AF slider does. Funny that I don't see anyone freaking out about the possibility of setting your AF to low.

It's been a feature in AMD drivers for several years. This has been addressed several times in the thread now and looking athe scores it is pretty obvious that no one is cheating. It shouldn't suprise you that 1350mhz 7970s are rolling over voltage locked 680s considering 7970s scale better with OCs and people are delievering nearly 50% increased clocks.

Go on 3dmark 11 and look at the list of top scores. The people who are scoring 14.5k with one 7970 are the ones who have disabled tesselation thru the slider. A 10k or 11k score is about normal. 12 could probabally been done with the right cooling and extra voltage tweaks.

Also since you didn't bother reading the OP.
Quote:


> AMD users may need to run one extra run of the benchmark showing Tessellation On/Off in drivers to help prevent biased looking results.


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

Plus... thats the reason in heaven we are showing a screenshot as its VERY obvious when tessealation has been disabled.

Finally, the Futuremark link we have to submit, if clicked on, will actually TELL YOU that the score is invalid due to tesselation changes.


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stu-Crossfire*
> 
> Plus... thats the reason in heaven we are showing a screenshot as its VERY obvious when tessealation has been disabled.
> Finally, the Futuremark link we have to submit, if clicked on, will actually TELL YOU that the score is invalid due to tesselation changes.


Yeah I just figured that out. I ran the bench with the tesselation set down a bit. DOn't laugh at my score my daily OC on my 2500k is only 4.0.









http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3088340


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> I know this is a rain on the beautiful parade with all the hard going enthusiasts,
> 
> and maybe I missed it, but what is, if anything, being done to correct the AMD tessellation driver cheat...
> 
> I think the tessellation off scores are the ones to go by.
> 
> k|ngp|n
> 
> " When comparing my GTX 680 or really any results with those of 7970, always keep in mind that all scores here are done with FULL TESSELATION and not using any sort of *driver cheats that reduce it in TESSELATION heavy benchmarks as AMD drivers do.*
> 3DMARK 11 (all 3 presets)"
> 
> http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1681
> 
> It obviously affects 3DMark 11, and by what that master OC'er says it affects Unigine Heaven as well.
> 
> So AMD users have an "optimized" driver by no fault of their own. (woo hoo ! ;-)
> 
> Forgive me if I take any and every tessellated amd score with a number of grains of salt subtracted.
> 
> I have not looked nor found any analysis on what percentage additional score that driver may be delivering.
> 
> It would be fairer if someone finds a way to either test that or disable the optimization part of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol is dat me ?
> 
> I guess not because I have no real suggestions for a "fairer test fix", but I do believe people should know the above.












3dmark will let you know you've changed the tess slider, because it checks for that and will display that disclaimer in an obvious fashion just like it does with non-whql drivers. Anyone who posts a 3dmark score without the actual link is a dead giveaway. Posts here have to have the 3dmark link you know?


----------



## Ken1649

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> I know this is a rain on the beautiful parade with all the hard going enthusiasts,
> 
> and maybe I missed it, but what is, if anything, being done to correct the AMD tessellation driver cheat...
> 
> I think the tessellation off scores are the ones to go by.
> 
> k|ngp|n
> 
> " When comparing my GTX 680 or really any results with those of 7970, always keep in mind that all scores here are done with FULL TESSELATION and not using any sort of *driver cheats that reduce it in TESSELATION heavy benchmarks as AMD drivers do.*
> 3DMARK 11 (all 3 presets)"
> 
> http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1681
> 
> It obviously affects 3DMark 11, and by what that master OC'er says it affects Unigine Heaven as well.
> 
> So AMD users have an "optimized" driver by no fault of their own. (woo hoo ! ;-)
> 
> Forgive me if I take any and every tessellated amd score with a number of grains of salt subtracted.
> 
> I have not looked nor found any analysis on what percentage additional score that driver may be delivering.
> 
> It would be fairer if someone finds a way to either test that or disable the optimization part of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol is dat me ?
> 
> I guess not because I have no real suggestions for a "fairer test fix", but I do believe people should know the above.


This is one of the reasons I stop reading reviews or simply copy and paste what others wrote for whatever reasons. Because without proper basics understanding of what they are talking about might lead me to the "right" absolute truth. At least I would think so.


----------



## jtom320

Well we jumped on that poor guy well enough. I kind of feel bad now. Ken you just kind of put the cherry on top right there.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> I know this is a rain on the beautiful parade with all the hard going enthusiasts,
> 
> and maybe I missed it, but what is, if anything, being done to correct the AMD tessellation driver cheat...
> 
> I think the tessellation off scores are the ones to go by.
> 
> k|ngp|n
> 
> " When comparing my GTX 680 or really any results with those of 7970, always keep in mind that all scores here are done with FULL TESSELATION and not using any sort of *driver cheats that reduce it in TESSELATION heavy benchmarks as AMD drivers do.*
> 3DMARK 11 (all 3 presets)"
> 
> http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1681
> 
> It obviously affects 3DMark 11, and by what that master OC'er says it affects Unigine Heaven as well.
> 
> So AMD users have an "optimized" driver by no fault of their own. (woo hoo ! ;-)
> 
> Forgive me if I take any and every tessellated amd score with a number of grains of salt subtracted.
> 
> I have not looked nor found any analysis on what percentage additional score that driver may be delivering.
> 
> It would be fairer if someone finds a way to either test that or disable the optimization part of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol is dat me ?
> 
> I guess not because I have no real suggestions for a "fairer test fix", but I do believe people should know the above.


You did miss it, post one. Its not hard.


----------



## Ken1649

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Well we jumped on that poor guy well enough. I kind of feel bad now. Ken you just kind of put the cherry on top right there.


Oh no what have I done









I look this up







. The definition is "teaching".

So the teacher is always "right" and you n00bs are always "wrong".


----------



## jacedaface

New 3D mark 11 score now my CPU is back to 4.18GHz HT on
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3088592;jsessionid=t7qtusd87h5a1p6j7mmc63ph2

CPU: 4.18, 1.36875V
QPI: x36, 1.335V
DRAM 1320
uncore x15
Driver 301.10
3D Mark 11 10265
GTX 680 +200 core = 1337 +500 Memory

Dirty overclock at the minute need to tweak Volts...


----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> There is no driver cheat bro. There is a tesselation slider. *It does the exact same thing your AF slider does*. Funny that I don't see anyone freaking out about the possibility of setting your AF to low.


What is "AF'? Is that in 3DMark11 or Heaven Benchmark? Is this a slider that helps Nvidia cards somehow?

I'd love to know which one?

Thanks in advance JTom


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> There is no driver cheat bro. There is a tesselation slider. *It does the exact same thing your AF slider does*. Funny that I don't see anyone freaking out about the possibility of setting your AF to low.
> 
> 
> 
> What is "AF'? Is that in 3DMark11 or Heaven Benchmark? Is this a slider that helps Nvidia cards somehow?
> I'd love to know which one?
> Thanks in advance JTom
Click to expand...

I meant Antistrophic Filtering which can be forced up and down in both drivers. I mean really there are a ton of IQ things you could change if you want to. "Trilinear Optimization", "Surface Format Optimization" etc etc

Pretty sure 3dmark in performance mode defaults to 2xAF anyway but you see my point. You could definitely squeeze out 2-3 more frames in Heaven though by forcing it off. It's easy to change things in drivers to make your card run faster. That's the whole point of them being there. It bothers me when people describe it as if it's a cheat. A lot of things can be slid down and have almost indistinguishable quality. See the difference between 8xAF and 16xAF or 32x tesselation and 64x tesselation for an example.


----------



## SeanA

to #214

Ok, let's use Endless City with tessellation levels up to 64.

Or this one, as the objections subside.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,860536/Test-Radeon-HD-7970-Erste-Grafikkarte-mit-DirectX-111-PCI-Express-30-und-28-nm/Grafikkarte/Test/bildergalerie/?iid=1607694


----------



## SeanA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> I know this is a rain on the beautiful parade with all the hard going enthusiasts,
> and maybe I missed it, but what is, if anything, being done to correct the AMD tessellation driver cheat...
> I think the tessellation off scores are the ones to go by.
> 
> k|ngp|n
> 
> " When comparing my GTX 680 or really any results with those of 7970, always keep in mind that all scores here are done with FULL TESSELATION and not using any sort of _*driver cheats that reduce it in TESSELATION heavy benchmarks as AMD drivers do.*_
> 
> 3DMARK 11 (all 3 presets)"
> 
> http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1681
> 
> It obviously affects 3DMark 11, and by what that master OC'er says it affects Unigine Heaven as well.
> So AMD users have an "optimized" driver by no fault of their own. (woo hoo ! ;-)
> Forgive me if I take any and every tessellated amd score with a number of grains of salt subtracted.
> I have not looked nor found any analysis on what percentage additional score that driver may be delivering.
> It would be fairer if someone finds a way to either test that or disable the optimization part of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol is dat me ?
> 
> I guess not because I have no real suggestions for a "fairer test fix", but I do believe people should know the above.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no driver cheat bro. There is a tesselation slider. It does the exact same thing your AF slider does. Funny that I don't see anyone freaking out about the possibility of setting your AF to low.
> 
> It's been a feature in AMD drivers for several years. This has been addressed several times in the thread now and looking athe scores it is pretty obvious that no one is cheating. It shouldn't suprise you that 1350mhz 7970s are rolling over voltage locked 680s considering 7970s scale better with OCs and people are delievering nearly 50% increased clocks.
> 
> Go on 3dmark 11 and look at the list of top scores. The people who are scoring 14.5k with one 7970 are the ones who have disabled tesselation thru the slider. A 10k or 11k score is about normal. 12 could probabally been done with the right cooling and extra voltage tweaks.
> 
> Also since you didn't bother reading the OP.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> AMD users may need to run one extra run of the benchmark showing Tessellation On/Off in drivers to help prevent biased looking results.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Perhaps you didn't read what I wrote ?

" I think the tessellation off scores are the ones to go by."

Thanks for now noticing I did read the OP's post.


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> Perhaps you didn't read what I wrote ?
> 
> " I think the tessellation off scores are the ones to go by."
> 
> Thanks for now noticing I did read the OP's post.


I said there was no driver cheat. Your opinion on that doesn't matter to me and that doesn't make sense anyway.


----------



## SeanA

You said to me : " Also since you didn't bother reading the OP."

I showed you why you should have known I did read the OP.

Glad my opinion doesn't matter to you, as yours matters none to me as well.


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> You said to me : " Also since you didn't bother reading the OP."
> 
> I showed you why you should have known I did read the OP.
> 
> Glad my opinion doesn't matter to you, as yours matters none to me as well.


Glad my opinions don't suck.

Why anyone would think running a tesselation benchmark without the tesselation is a good idea I don't know.


----------



## SeanA

The answer would be of course because of cheating, which you obviously understood in your initial reply, but now you claim you don't understand it.










Thanks, you're very helpful.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

The results and link on 3dmark website will say result invalid because tessellation load changed by AMD driver. That's all there is to it dude. You and kingpin can let it go now


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> The answer would be of course because of cheating, which you obviously understood in your initial reply, but now you claim you don't understand it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, you're very helpful.


The point is there is no cheating, did you read any of the six posts after yours? It says in 3dmark if you disable or turn down tesselation.

I mean I don't know how else to explain this to you.


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanA*
> 
> The answer would be of course because of cheating, which you obviously understood in your initial reply, but now you claim you don't understand it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, you're very helpful.


You're not helpful and you've been ignoring the answers.


----------



## thrgk

CPU: i7 2600K @ 5000.0 MHz
8GB DDR3 1866 @ Class 9 1.5v

Radeon HD 7970 @ 1315 GPU / 1600 Mem
GPU Voltage: 1.287v
Driver Version: 12.3 WHQL
3DMark11 Score: P10726

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3090074;jsessionid=xhj2lxva6yme13938therrrj5

Screenshot


----------



## thrgk

Little better score
CPU: i7 2600K @ 5200.0 MHz
8GB DDR3 1866 @ Class 9 1.5v

Radeon HD 7970 @ 1315 GPU / 1600 Mem
GPU Voltage: 1.287v
Driver Version: 12.3 WHQL
3DMark11 Score: P10765

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3090227;jsessionid=xfx8if242rpl1mk1kjepr2ai6

Screenshot


----------



## thrgk

Best I can get. Wanted 11k, but aint gonna happen.
CPU: i7 2600K @ 5200.0 MHz
8GB DDR3 2133 @ Class 9 1.5v

Radeon HD 7970 @ 1315 GPU / 1600 Mem
GPU Voltage: 1.37v
Driver Version: 12.3 WHQL
3DMark11 Score: P10947

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3090356;jsessionid=19ev9lst2f7ogyuf864l6t1t4

Screenshot


----------



## psikeiro

Please add:

Code:



Code:


http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3090833;jsessionid=srtgwvyfzqnqe0lsi2us7ry8

CPU i7-3820 @ 4624.15
16gb G. SKill Sniper 9-9-9-25 2t @1666mhz
GTX680 SLi 1146/ 1727Mhz effective memory
Driver Version: 301.10
3DMark11 Score: P16705



QPI FREQUENCY 5000.03

PCI-E FREQUENCY 125.01

ASUS RAMPAGE IV FORMULA

NVIDIA GTX680 REFERENCE

301.1 WHQL DRIVERS

1146/1727 1199 BOOST CLOCK


----------



## Eagle07

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxmastermindxx*
> 
> The results and link on 3dmark website will say result invalid because tessellation load changed by AMD driver. That's all there is to it dude. You and kingpin can let it go now


Read the thread, both this one and Kingpins....

The dude got beaten by Shamino fair and square but he is crying about it.
http://rog.asus.com/63422012/overclocking/shamino-hits-1700mhz-gpu-with-an-ln2d-hd-7970/


----------



## Stu-Crossfire

Perhaps this thread shoul be split and the tess discussion moved to a new topic to clean this one up as this is a great topic and it would be a shame for it to turn into a flame fest.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Here's my first, rather disappointing submission. Still very new to these cards and their eccentricities but its coming along...

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3096150;jsessionid=1qvl731sop6syi6j8imh2azor

*3960X 4.8GHz
16GB Patriot Viper Xtreme 9-11-9-27-1T @ 1866Mhz
CF MSI R7970 Lightning 1175MHz/1400MHz
GPU Voltage: 1.212V
Driver Version: Cat 12.3 08.951
3DMark11 Score: P16884*


----------



## jtom320

What are your temps like? Those lightnings I imagine can take quite a bit of voltage and still stay cool. I'm at 1231 for 1250 and still under 80 degrees, around 45 fan speed.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

I might grab a Lightning and put it under water, depending on whether or not non reference 680's have beefed up VRM and normal voltage control.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> What are your temps like? Those lightnings I imagine can take quite a bit of voltage and still stay cool. I'm at 1231 for 1250 and still under 80 degrees, around 45 fan speed.


That might be the case if I only had one but adding a second card always makes the temps shoot up on the top card. At 1212mV and 1175MHz the top card got up to 80C. It got up to 85C when I tried to do 1200MHz/1225mV...


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> That might be the case if I only had one but adding a second card always makes the temps shoot up on the top card. At 1212mV and 1175MHz the top card got up to 80C. It got up to 85C when I tried to do 1200MHz/1225mV...


Well 85 really isn't bad. Wasn't that long ago we were running 100 degree 480s. Certainly cool enough to bench with. I'm assuming you set up a fan profile?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Well 85 really isn't bad. Wasn't that long ago we were running 100 degree 480s. Certainly cool enough to bench with. I'm assuming you set up a fan profile?


Yeah, I run the fans at 100% during benches...


----------



## psikeiro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Here's my first, rather disappointing submission. Still very new to these cards and their eccentricities but its coming along...
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3096150;jsessionid=1qvl731sop6syi6j8imh2azor
> *3960X 4.8GHz
> 16GB Patriot Viper Xtreme 9-11-9-27-1T @ 1866Mhz
> CF MSI R7970 Lightning 1175MHz/1400MHz
> GPU Voltage: 1.212V
> Driver Version: Cat 12.3 08.951
> 3DMark11 Score: P16884*


that physics core is killer man!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Yeah, I run the fans at 100% during benches...


100% and 85C i would have to say Stock is much better.


----------



## grunion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> That might be the case if I only had one but adding a second card always makes the temps shoot up on the top card. At 1212mV and 1175MHz the top card got up to 80C. It got up to 85C when I tried to do 1200MHz/1225mV...


Spacing looks good..
What kind of direct airflow to the cards?
Pulling the side panel will probably net a 10°c drop in temps.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grunion*
> 
> Spacing looks good..
> What kind of direct airflow to the cards?
> Pulling the side panel will probably net a 10°c drop in temps.


Yeah, my problem is my case. The 600T is not the greatest with airflow. I did find a way around that though; I benched right after turning on my PC after being off for a couple hours and amazingly passed 1200MHz easily topping out at 78C on the top card. These things just need to be cool...



*3960X 4.8GHz
16GB Patriot Viper Xtreme 9-11-9-27-1T @ 1866Mhz
CF MSI R7970 Lightning 1200MHz/1400MHz
GPU Voltage: 1.250V
Driver Version: Cat 12.3 08.951
3DMark11 Score: P17120*

Also keep in mind that I haven't even touched the memory yet. Still trying to find my max core clocks...


----------



## jtom320

You could try to ghetto rig a fan to blow cool air on them from the front.

I know your a bit dissapointed but you are already second highest on dual GPU ahead of 1 680 pair and 6 other 7970s. Not too shabby.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> You could try to ghetto rig a fan to blow cool air on them from the front.
> I know your a bit dissapointed but you are already second highest on dual GPU ahead of 1 680 pair and 6 other 7970s. Not too shabby.


Nah, I'm not really disappointed. I said I'd be happy with 1200MHz and that's what I got so far and there is still plenty of room for improvement. Btw, the only reason I am anywhere near the top PScore is because of my CPU...


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Also keep in mind that I haven't even touched the memory yet. Still trying to find my max core clocks...


Damn, that's a good score for running gimped vram speeds! Get your ram upto around 1700 with 1.65v.


----------



## Levesque

Majin SSJ Eric.

EK-Supreme universal waterblocks are pretty cheap (half the price of a full cover block) and would work fine on your Lightnings. Low cost watercooling options.









I'm using one on my 2 Asus DirectCU II with great results: 1025/1500 on air = crash lol, and with the EK universal block: 1175/1600 on STOCK voltage and pretty low temp (cores are under 30 celsius even on high load).


----------



## RagingCain

Just a quick update, I will be adding the Heaven spreadsheets tonight, they will be replacing the current 3DMark11 sheets (to compress size) and there will be ONE 3DMark11 window now with multiple pages. You will still be able to submit 3DMark11 results too.

You are all more than welcome to provide Heaven benchmarks. I know the thread lost a little momentum, hopefully, I can push us forward and keep it alive.


----------



## Blindsay

my 7970 arrived today along with the waterblock. Will be putting it together tonight and will get some benches either tonight or tomorrow









my personal goal is to beat my best 3dmark11 score with my pair of 6970s (11,151)

edit: slacking a bit but i got the block on










Entry for - 3DMark11 - Performance - Free For All
CPU 4.6
DRAM 1866
AMD 7970 1125/1575
GPU Voltage: stock
Driver Version: cats 12.3
3DMark11 Score: P9532
Proof - http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3117544
http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/b2k8a/

The overclock was done via the catalyst control panel, as far over as the slider bars would go lol. Going to download AB soon and see what it can really do









GPU never got above 41c even after multiple runs of Heaven and 3dmark11


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

*3960X 4.8GHz
16GB Patriot Viper Xtreme 9-11-9-27-1T @ 1866Mhz
CF MSI R7970 Lightning 1225MHz/1600MHz
GPU Voltage: 1.250V + 10mV AUX
Driver Version: Cat 12.3 08.951
3DMark11 Score: P17742*

Proof: http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3120173;jsessionid=1b9hnzodzeb511zwjgdbk0lev

My Lightnings are starting to come around! Just need to get to 1250/1850MHz and i'll have a killer score!


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> 
> 
> *3960X 4.8GHz
> 16GB Patriot Viper Xtreme 9-11-9-27-1T @ 1866Mhz
> CF MSI R7970 Lightning 1225MHz/1600MHz
> GPU Voltage: 1.250V + 10mV AUX
> Driver Version: Cat 12.3 08.951
> 3DMark11 Score: P17742*
> 
> Proof: http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3120173;jsessionid=1b9hnzodzeb511zwjgdbk0lev
> 
> My Lightnings are starting to come around! Just need to get to 1250/1850MHz and i'll have a killer score!


Do you prefer AB over precision?


----------



## Projector

*** lightinings cant even reach 1300? I thought when the fanboys where fighting each other in the original vs thread that the main argument for the 7970s is that EVERY single card alteast reached 1300 with lots reaching 1400 lmao hmmmmm.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Projector*
> 
> *** lightinings cant even reach 1300? I thought when the fanboys where fighting each other in the original vs thread that the main argument for the 7970s is that EVERY single card alteast reached 1300 with lots reaching 1400 lmao hmmmmm.


Temperature seems to be a limiting factor on some cards. Stability issues have been seen at temps we consider normally safe such as 80-85c.

Most cards can hit 1200 MHz, a lot can hit 1250 MHz, some can hit 1300 MHz, few can hit 1325+


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Projector*
> 
> *** lightinings cant even reach 1300? I thought when the fanboys where fighting each other in the original vs thread that the main argument for the 7970s is that EVERY single card alteast reached 1300 with lots reaching 1400 lmao hmmmmm.


The legend of the Lightning is bigger than reality itself.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Temperature seems to be a limiting factor on some cards. Stability issues have been seen at temps we consider normally safe such as 80-85c.
> 
> Most cards can hit 1200 MHz, a lot can hit 1250 MHz, some can hit 1300 MHz, few can hit 1325+


I think for most cards its 1175-1225Mhz. 1250Mhz you got a good card. Over that you got a very good card. 80% will not hit over 1225Mhz. I cant hit 1250Mhz even with 1.3v and Water.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Well I got to 1225MHz with two in CF. I'll keep trying for that 1250MHz but my case limits me temperature-wise...


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Projector*
> 
> *** lightinings cant even reach 1300? I thought when the fanboys where fighting each other in the original vs thread that the main argument for the 7970s is that EVERY single card alteast reached 1300 with lots reaching 1400 lmao hmmmmm.


He's running two cards bro. It changes things a lot. Temperature obviously becomes a much larger issue. It seems as well that both 28nm cards are much more sensitive to temps that two years ago people would have considered good (80-85 degrees).


----------



## DimmyK

I finally broke down and bought Z68 mobo and 2500K. Restricted section, here I come. Ya'll better beware, my 680 does +200 in 3D Mark


----------



## Jixr

I vote for the 7970, my 680 is a terrible OC'er, I can't even hit +60mhz without a crash ( and before i'm flamed, yes i'm doing it right )
at 45°c underwater

Back to the store it goes for a 7970 if they have any, if not, back to my beat of an OC'ed 580.


----------



## B!0HaZard

*3DMark11 - Performance - Free For All*

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3107921

i5 2500k 5.1 GHz
12 GB Kingston DDR3 1600 MHz
GTX 680 - 1176 Core - 1777 Memory - 1229 Boost
GPU Voltage: Stock
Driver Version: 301.10
3DMark11 Score: P10069
Proof (of score AND settings):



*Heaven 3.0 - Normal Tessellation*

DX11
1920x1080
0x AA
Normal Tessellation
16x AF
High Shaders

i5 2500k 4.7 GHz
12 GB Kingston DDR3 1600 MHz
GTX 680 - 1066 Core - 1702 Memory - 1219 Boost
GPU Voltage: Stock
Driver Version: 301.10
Heaven Score: 2619
Heaven FPS: 104.0
Proof (of score AND settings):

 

*Heaven 3.0 - Extreme Tessellation*

DX11
1920x1080
4x AA
Extreme Tessellation
16x AF
High Shaders

i5 2500k 4.7 GHz
12 GB Kingston DDR3 1600 MHz
GTX 680 - 1066 Core - 1702 Memory - 1219 Boost
GPU Voltage: Stock
Driver Version: 301.10
Heaven Score: 1652
Heaven FPS: 65.6
Proof (of score AND settings):

 

BTW, you wrote Heaven 3.0 - Extreme Tessellation *1080* - GPU & Tess Load twice by mistake.


----------



## 4514kaiser

great thread can't wait to seem more results!!


----------



## Blindsay

Still got more left in this beast but here is a start

3DMark11 - Performance - Free For All

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3132338http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3132704

i7 2700k 4.6 GHz5.0
AMD 7970 - 1200 Core - 1575 Memory
GPU Voltage: Stock
Driver Version: 12.3
3DMark11 Score: P996810,015
Proof (of score AND settings): http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/3e37u/


----------



## guts

I did a mild OC with CPU set at 4.25, ram 1666, and HD7970 set at 1200/1600/1200. It ran nicely with 3dmark11, and scored P10044. But before I could open the required windows for screenshot and save my score on the computer, I some how double opened trixx and some how the two settings were different. After shut off both of them and restart trixx, the screen went out of sync and black out.......now I'm left with only a web score. I'll try benching tomorrow with 1250/1600/1250 to see if I can reach P10500 plus.

Verification URL: http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3122131


----------



## Smo

Looks like I need to get my ass in gear and do some more benches with my new CPU! Can't do with being at the bottom


----------



## 4514kaiser

Hey i need to buy 3DMark11 to enter... or is there some free version that i can use!


----------



## 7ranslucen7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4514kaiser*
> 
> Hey i need to buy 3DMark11 to enter... or is there some free version that i can use!


3dmark11 free version can run performance benchmark.


----------



## 4514kaiser

KK cheers will enter into the free for all once i'v OCed


----------



## xxmastermindxx

WTB updates


----------



## guts

Did just now, not an extreme OC, but I guess this would have to do for now.

Restricted single GPU:

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3137261

CPU i7 [email protected]
RAM 1666MHz / 9-9-9-24
Sapphire Dual-X HD7970 1225MHz GPU, 1600MHz memory, 1.225v voltage
Driver Version: 12. 3
3DMark11 Score: P10193
Screenshot:


Cheers.


----------



## Smo

Here's another free-for-all dual-GPU entry from me;

*CPU:* i7 2600k @ 5.2GHz
*DRAM:* 1600MHz / 8-8-8-24
*GPU:* MSI 7970 Crossfire @ 1250MHz core - 1725MHz memory
*GPU Voltage:* 1.300
*Driver Version:* 12.3 (8.950.5.0)
*3DMark11 Score:* P16541

Proof:



Finally not last anymore









Once my rig is underwater I'll push a little harder.


----------



## jacedaface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Celeras*
> 
> Has there really not been any eligible applicants since 3/26, or does the OP just fail at life ;/


Op Fail im afraid. I updated my scores that should have taken me from 7th to 3rd days ago. But havent seen any of the spread sheets change in days now.


----------



## Smo

Some of us live for more than the forum guys. He'll get to it.

Raging is a great bloke.


----------



## jacedaface

lol, fair enough. Ive been in bed sick for about 6 days so had nothing better to do! lol


----------



## xxmastermindxx

New free for all single GPU run for me

3DMark11 Performance Free For All

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3073150

*CPU:* i5-2600K HT on at 5353MHz (101*53)
*RAM:* 8GB at 2154MHz 10-10-10-26-1T
*GPU:* GTX680 +155 GPU +255 VRAM stock volts
*Driver:* 301.10
*3DMark11 Score:* P11030


----------



## lightsout

Damn thats a ton of voltage on the cpu.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

lol yes, yes it is. I'm comfortable with it though since I have the Tuning Plan, and its under water. Only go that high to try and max that physics score so load temps barely hit 45C at that speed and voltage.


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxmastermindxx*
> 
> lol yes, yes it is. I'm comfortable with it though since I have the Tuning Plan, and its under water. Only go that high to try and max that physics score so load temps barely hit 45C at that speed and voltage.


45c with just water? I can't believe that. No chiller?

Wow I did not know about the tuning plan. Man that is freakin cool. Maybe intel wants to see how much punishment their chips can take. I may have to do this. $20 is so worth it. +rep


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> 45c with just water? I can't believe that. No chiller?
> Wow I did not know about the tuning plan. Man that is freakin cool. Maybe intel wants to see how much punishment their chips can take. I may have to do this. $20 is so worth it. +rep


You better believe I signed up the day I got my 3960X! $30 and I can punish my $1000 chip as much as I want? Yes please!


----------



## xxmastermindxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> 45c with just water? I can't believe that. No chiller?
> 
> Wow I did not know about the tuning plan. Man that is freakin cool. Maybe intel wants to see how much punishment their chips can take. I may have to do this. $20 is so worth it. +rep


Tuning Plan is definitely worth it for people like us :thumbup:

My ambient floats between 18C and 23C, CPU idles between 25C and 32C, and that physics test only pushes it to between 45C and 48C. 30C ambients will get me around 55C during physics.

I'm positive that IBT or Prime would push me to 75C-80C, but I'm pretty sure it won't be stable nor am I interested lol. I back down to about 4.8GHz at 1.38V for daily stability.


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> 45c with just water? I can't believe that. No chiller?
> Wow I did not know about the tuning plan. Man that is freakin cool. Maybe intel wants to see how much punishment their chips can take. I may have to do this. $20 is so worth it. +rep
> 
> 
> 
> You better believe I signed up the day I got my 3960X! $30 and I can punish my $1000 chip as much as I want? Yes please!
Click to expand...

This is crazy. Its $20 for my 2500k. I'm on air too I wonder if I should see how long it can do 5ghz for.


----------



## 4514kaiser

Yer got the plan also great deal but honestly I rather not have to install a new cpu lol, think i'll just OC mine to 4.8Ghz and leave it and if it becomes unstable after 2 years just get a new one under the plan and sell it and go IB-E!







on another subject my pc (cf 7970) is crashing on the physics test in Mark11 what do you guys think driver issue (no OC yet)?? Not getting any bsod it just starts seizing up and freeze's.... I'm also starting to get a discolored Green screen's when windows start up....... drivers?


----------



## smex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> Damn thats a ton of voltage on the cpu.


on 24/7 it will kill it in one or two years.. or at least it will degrade and get unstable so you gotta clock it downwards if you use your rig constantly :/

i wouldn´t buy this chip anymore if somebody would sell it..

its still a great OC and sys u got there









edit: sry of OT


----------



## xxmastermindxx

Physics freeze/crash is normally a CPU/RAM issue because the GPU isn't utilized for that test.


----------



## 4514kaiser

kk i'll run memtest and prime95 a bit and see if there is any issues ty for the help


----------



## RagingCain

Okay working on the Heaven stuff a little bit later tonight / tomorrow. I am caught up till the last 35 ish posts. I will go about double checking and filling in the missing 3DMark11 data since their servers are down again for me.


----------



## El_Capitan

Ok, started preliminary benchmarks. I'll start piecing things together some benchmark results here every once in a while, but the whole piece will go on my blog once it's completed. Benchmarks will all be with highest stable overclocks in SLI at 1920 x 1200, 2560 x 1600, and 5760 x 1200 (which will come last since I need to clear up some room to configure that set-up).

I also threw in some overclocked GTX 580 3GB's in SLI.

These are all in systems with an i7 2600K/2700K at 4.9GHz, 4x4GB 1866MHz memory at 8-9-9-24-1T with an AX1200 PSU. Basically clones of each other except for cooling and storage. Only the GTX 680's aren't yet watercooled, but will be sometime soon.

El_Capitan's GTX 580 3GB Overclocks:
SLI = 935/1002MHz at 1100mV's

El_Capitan's GTX 680 2GB Overclocks:
GPU 1 = 1146/1700MHz 1199MHz Boost with 1264MHz max Core Clock
GPU 2 = 1116/1725MHz 1169MHz Boost with 1234MHz max Core Clock
SLI = 1111/1700MHz 1164MHz Boost with 1229MHz max Core Clock

El_Capitan's HD 7970 3GB Overclocks:
GPU 1 = 1170/1780MHz at stock voltages | 1290/1780MHz at 1300mV's
GPU 2 = 1160/1725MHz at stock voltages | Unknown
Crossfire = 1150/1725MHz at stock voltages | 1255/1725MHz at 1300mV's (benchmarks higher, but without negative visual impacts, this is as high as it gets)

Starting off, here's how they do with and without Virtu Quick Sync for video encoding:


Here's some 3DMark11 Performance results:


3DMark11 Extreme results:


Unigine Heaven v2.1 (DirectX 11, Shaders High, Tessellation Normal, Anisotropy 16, Anti-aliasing 8x, Full Screen at 1920 x 1200) - I prefere v2.1 since the way I test, it measure the Min FPS more accurately than v2.5 and v3.0:


Unigine Heaven v2.1 (DirectX 11, Shaders High, Tessellation Normal, Anisotropy 16, Anti-aliasing 8x, Full Screen at 2560 x 1600):


Then some results with Tessellation set to Extreme:
Unigine Heaven v2.1 (DirectX 11, Shaders High, Tessellation Normal, Anisotropy 16, Anti-aliasing 8x, Full Screen at 1920 x 1200):


Unigine Heaven v2.1 (DirectX 11, Shaders High, Tessellation Extreme, Anisotropy 16, Anti-aliasing 8x, Full Screen at 2560 x 1600):


That's it for now. I'll do some benchmarks on Dirt3, AVP, and Batman Arkham City next.

I have a 3rd GTX 680 coming, so hopefully that one overclocks better than the two I have right now, and maybe the overclocks will get better under watercooling? We'll see.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Okay working on the Heaven stuff a little bit later tonight / tomorrow. I am caught up till the last 35 ish posts. I will go about double checking and filling in the missing 3DMark11 data since their servers are down again for me.


Is that site piss slow for you too? Its almost always a super slow crawl for me, although last week for 2 days it got super snappy.


----------



## guts

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *El_Capitan*
> 
> Ok, started preliminary benchmarks. I'll start piecing things together some benchmark results here every once in a while, but the whole piece will go on my blog once it's completed. Benchmarks will all be with highest stable overclocks in SLI at 1920 x 1200, 2560 x 1600, and 5760 x 1200 (which will come last since I need to clear up some room to configure that set-up).
> I also threw in some overclocked GTX 580 3GB's in SLI.
> These are all in systems with an i7 2600K/2700K at 4.9GHz, 4x4GB 1866MHz memory at 8-9-9-24-1T with an AX1200 PSU. Basically clones of each other except for cooling and storage. Only the GTX 680's aren't yet watercooled, but will be sometime soon.
> El_Capitan's GTX 580 3GB Overclocks:
> SLI = 935/1002MHz at 1100mV's
> El_Capitan's GTX 680 2GB Overclocks:
> GPU 1 = 1146/1700MHz 1199MHz Boost with 1264MHz max Core Clock
> GPU 2 = 1116/1725MHz 1169MHz Boost with 1234MHz max Core Clock
> SLI = 1111/1700MHz 1164MHz Boost with 1229MHz max Core Clock
> El_Capitan's HD 7970 3GB Overclocks:
> GPU 1 = 1170/1780MHz at stock voltages | 1290/1780MHz at 1300mV's
> GPU 2 = 1160/1725MHz at stock voltages | Unknown
> Crossfire = 1150/1725MHz at stock voltages | 1255/1725MHz at 1300mV's (benchmarks higher, but without negative visual impacts, this is as high as it gets)
> Starting off, here's how they do with and without Virtu Quick Sync for video encoding:
> 
> Here's some 3DMark11 Performance results:
> 
> 3DMark11 Extreme results:
> 
> Unigine Heaven v2.1 (DirectX 11, Shaders High, Tessellation Normal, Anisotropy 16, Anti-aliasing 8x, Full Screen at 1920 x 1200) - I prefere v2.1 since the way I test, it measure the Min FPS more accurately than v2.5 and v3.0:
> 
> Unigine Heaven v2.1 (DirectX 11, Shaders High, Tessellation Normal, Anisotropy 16, Anti-aliasing 8x, Full Screen at 2560 x 1600):
> 
> Then some results with Tessellation set to Extreme:
> Unigine Heaven v2.1 (DirectX 11, Shaders High, Tessellation Normal, Anisotropy 16, Anti-aliasing 8x, Full Screen at 1920 x 1200):
> 
> Unigine Heaven v2.1 (DirectX 11, Shaders High, Tessellation Extreme, Anisotropy 16, Anti-aliasing 8x, Full Screen at 2560 x 1600):
> 
> That's it for now. I'll do some benchmarks on Dirt3, AVP, and Batman Arkham City next.
> I have a 3rd GTX 680 coming, so hopefully that one overclocks better than the two I have right now, and maybe the overclocks will get better under watercooling? We'll see.


Nice work!


----------



## psikeiro

Here's something that took me all day. It goes: low, high, average all the way down the line. Enjoy.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *psikeiro*
> 
> 
> 
> Here's something that took me all day. It goes: low, high, average all the way down the line. Enjoy.


Looks like a clear bottleneck in PCI-E 2.0 but not a vast one. It more than likely has more to do with overall system efficiency and the new CPU architecture than it does with any bandwidth.

Looks like my 8x PCI-E 2.0 is holding me back  We should get some more numbers.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxmastermindxx*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Okay working on the Heaven stuff a little bit later tonight / tomorrow. I am caught up till the last 35 ish posts. I will go about double checking and filling in the missing 3DMark11 data since their servers are down again for me.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that site piss slow for you too? Its almost always a super slow crawl for me, although last week for 2 days it got super snappy.
Click to expand...

And yes. Reason why I have been holding off updating... takes over 20 minutes to load a single set of results.


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Looks like a clear bottleneck in PCI-E 2.0 but not a vast one. It more than likely has more to do with overall system efficiency and the new CPU architecture than it does with any bandwidth.
> 
> Looks like my 8x PCI-E 2.0 is holding me back


Those numbers really surprise me a actually. It's a pretty significant bottleneck at higher resolution.


----------



## Blindsay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blindsay*
> 
> Still got more left in this beast but here is a start
> 
> 3DMark11 - Performance - Free For All
> 
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3132338http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3132704
> 
> i7 2700k 4.6 GHz5.0
> AMD 7970 - 1200 Core - 1575 Memory
> GPU Voltage: Stock
> Driver Version: 12.3
> 3DMark11 Score: P996810,015
> Proof (of score AND settings): http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/3e37u/


Just wondering if my score hasnt been added because of FM being slow or some other reason?


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blindsay*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Blindsay*
> 
> Still got more left in this beast but here is a start
> 
> 3DMark11 - Performance - Free For All
> 
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3132338http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3132704
> 
> i7 2700k 4.6 GHz5.0
> AMD 7970 - 1200 Core - 1575 Memory
> GPU Voltage: Stock
> Driver Version: 12.3
> 3DMark11 Score: P996810,015
> Proof (of score AND settings): http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/3e37u/
> 
> 
> 
> Just wondering if my score hasnt been added because of FM being slow or some other reason?
Click to expand...

Missing a screenshot of all the hardware and settings. Refer to Main, if you have any questions.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Looks like a clear bottleneck in PCI-E 2.0 but not a vast one. It more than likely has more to do with overall system efficiency and the new CPU architecture than it does with any bandwidth.
> 
> Looks like my 8x PCI-E 2.0 is holding me back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those numbers really surprise me a actually. It's a pretty significant bottleneck at higher resolution.
Click to expand...

A lot of people quickly dismissed the 3.0 Generation jump as unnecessary, not necessarily for bad reasons, there is more to it than "bandwidth." Much as I suspect the significant gains from Memory OC speeds, there is more to that as well. Another good example of "wait till you see the results" before making the conclusion. We all fall victim to it once in a while.


----------



## El_Capitan

Well, one thing that may account for PCIE2.0 vs PCIE3.0 is fluctuation of data. BD3 I believe was tested by playing the game with the FPS monitored by using FRAPS? How about using benchmarks to ensure the same amount of frames and rendering are being used? Thay may give a better indication of bandwidth gains.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *El_Capitan*
> 
> Well, one thing that may account for PCIE2.0 vs PCIE3.0 is fluctuation of data. BD3 I believe was tested by playing the game with the FPS monitored by using FRAPS? How about using benchmarks to ensure the same amount of frames and rendering are being used? Thay may give a better indication of bandwidth gains.


We definitely could use more results, before concluding definitively.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I think its funny that I am second in the dual card FFA with like the lowest graphics scores! That 3960X makes up for a lot!

Oh, and btw Ragin, my CPU actually has 12 cores, not 8! Lol...


----------



## psikeiro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I think its funny that I am second in the dual card FFA with like the lowest graphics scores! That 3960X makes up for a lot!
> Oh, and btw Ragin, my CPU actually has 12 cores, not 8! Lol...


6 cores, 12 threads, isn't it?


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I think its funny that I am second in the dual card FFA with like the lowest graphics scores! That 3960X makes up for a lot!
> 
> Oh, and btw Ragin, my CPU actually has 12 cores, not 8! Lol...


12 threads you mean  Fixed, and yes your Physics score and Combined score are ridiculous.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

If only I could have as much luck overclocking these 7970's. I'm running vanilla 12.4 right now just to be able to play my games stably...


----------



## DimmyK

My 1st submission for *3Dmark 11 restricted:*

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3158858

CPU 4.4 / QPI ??
DRAM 1600 / Uncore ?? / PCI-E ??
GTX 680 - 1206 - 1727
GPU Voltage: 1.175
Driver Version: 301.10
3DMark11 Score: *P10096*
Proof (of score AND settings):



So... by swapping 930 to 2500K my graphics score shot up, but physics score went down...







Should've gotten 2600K, 3D mark seems to love hyper threading.


----------



## guts

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guts*
> 
> Did just now, not an extreme OC, but I guess this would have to do for now.
> Restricted single GPU:
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3137261
> CPU i7 [email protected]
> RAM 1666MHz / 9-9-9-24
> Sapphire Dual-X HD7970 1225MHz GPU, 1600MHz memory, 1.225v voltage
> Driver Version: 12. 3
> 3DMark11 Score: P10193
> Screenshot:
> 
> Cheers.


Just wondering why my score isn't registered? Is it because of the CPU does not fit the restriction? Please count it for free for all score then. Cheers.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guts*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *guts*
> 
> Did just now, not an extreme OC, but I guess this would have to do for now.
> Restricted single GPU:
> Verification URL
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3137261
> CPU i7 [email protected]
> RAM 1666MHz / 9-9-9-24
> Sapphire Dual-X HD7970 1225MHz GPU, 1600MHz memory, 1.225v voltage
> Driver Version: 12. 3
> 3DMark11 Score: P10193
> Screenshot:
> 
> Cheers.
> 
> 
> 
> Just wondering why my score isn't registered? Is it because of the CPU does not fit the restriction? Please count it for free for all score then. Cheers.
Click to expand...

Your fine, I just didn't get to my last page, I mentioned it. I *should* have everything updated tomorrow.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guts*
> 
> Just wondering why my score isn't registered? Is it because of the CPU does not fit the restriction? Please count it for free for all score then. Cheers.


Restricted is a CPU thread count of 4, you have 12


----------



## guts

Cheers


----------



## lightsout

I want to try it!


----------



## gliggo

hey guys

CPU i7 [email protected]
RAM 2133MHz / 9-11-10-27- Dominator Gt
Sapphire HD7970 1350MHz GPU, 1850MHz memory, 1.28v voltage
Driver Version: 12. 3
3DMark11 Score: P11106


----------



## Emitz989

I edged out a few more points, finally broke P16k - which I think is quite the achievement with my cpu

Also just picked up a Dell 3007WFP monitor to enjoy these cards in all their glory!

*Score: P16199*
Link : http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3124269;jsessionid=14fo5etfwkph6adhj6628vlct

CPU: Core i7 920 @ 4.3Ghz
GPU: GTX 680 SLI @ +169 Core, +400 Mem = 1175 core / 1228 boost / 6400 mem
MEM: DDR3 6GB @ 1650Mhz 8 8 8 19 1T


----------



## EKfine

cpu = 2600k @ 5.0ghz
ram = 8gig @ 2133

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3192509


----------



## svthomas

Just single GPU for now, will do SLI later this week.

CPU: 2500k @ 4.8 Ghz - watercooled
Memory: 16GB @ 800 Mhz
GPU: msi Geforce GTX 680 - stock cooling
Mobo: Asus Sabertooth p67

Geforce GTX 680
Core: 1214
Memory: 1802

3DMark Score P10458
Graphics Score 11271
Physics Score 8625
Combined Score 8560

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3202996


----------



## El_Capitan

If someone can PM me, I can send you the link to my Part 1 of 2 blog post that compares the GTX 580 3GB SLI vs the GTX 680 SLI vs the HD 7970 CrossfireX all overclocked to their potential on custom watercooling solutions at 1920 x 1200 and 2560 x 1600 resolutions. Part 2 will compare them on 5760 x 1200 resolutions, and later, I'll have them all updated with more in-game benchmarks.

I cannot link my blog here as it's against OCN's rules, but someone else can.


----------



## Derek1387

Now I am trying to debate. I have an offer on my 7970 with water block, and can pick up an EVGA for $525... but then i would need a water block (not right away...but when I can). It would be an even wash minus buying the water block.... thoughts?


----------



## El_Capitan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Derek1387*
> 
> Now I am trying to debate. I have an offer on my 7970 with water block, and can pick up an EVGA for $525... but then i would need a water block (not right away...but when I can). It would be an even wash minus buying the water block.... thoughts?


An EVGA GTX 680, or EVGA HD 7970? I'd keep what you have, either way.


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *El_Capitan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Derek1387*
> 
> Now I am trying to debate. I have an offer on my 7970 with water block, and can pick up an EVGA for $525... but then i would need a water block (not right away...but when I can). It would be an even wash minus buying the water block.... thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> An EVGA GTX 680, or EVGA HD 7970? I'd keep what you have, either way.
Click to expand...

EVGA 7970?

Derrick how well does the 7970 clock. If really good you may just want to keep it. But if you are just looking for something new to play with then go for it.

FYI water cooling the 680 is almost pointles if you are doing it to get more oc headroom.


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Derek1387*
> 
> Now I am trying to debate. I have an offer on my 7970 with water block, and can pick up an EVGA for $525... but then i would need a water block (not right away...but when I can). It would be an even wash minus buying the water block.... thoughts?


All depends on how well your 7970 clocks. If you got one that will do 1250+ I'd say stay where you are. Otherwise the 680 might be a better choice on an even trade.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

agree with these guys, if your 7970 is a monster clocker, keep it. water does nothing for the potential of current 680's.


----------



## 4514kaiser

bit disappointing to see all this great hardware no longer limited by heat... also i would just stay with the 7970 unless you are having driver issues or want to burn some money...... If you want nivida upgrade i would just wait for the GTX 690 that should be a beast of a card which would really benefit from WC!


----------



## atibbo69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> EVGA 7970?
> Derrick how well does the 7970 clock. If really good you may just want to keep it. But if you are just looking for something new to play with then go for it.
> FYI water cooling the 680 is almost pointles if you are doing it to get more oc headroom.


I'm getting a WB for mine because it sounds like a hair dryer when I OC it


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *atibbo69*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> EVGA 7970?
> Derrick how well does the 7970 clock. If really good you may just want to keep it. But if you are just looking for something new to play with then go for it.
> FYI water cooling the 680 is almost pointles if you are doing it to get more oc headroom.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm getting a WB for mine because it sounds like a hair dryer when I OC it
Click to expand...

Your 680 does? Mine is pretty quiet unless maxed at 85% of course but I haven't needed to take it that high.


----------



## atibbo69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> Your 680 does? Mine is pretty quiet unless maxed at 85% of course but I haven't needed to take it that high.


Yeah my room gets really warm.. Card is always around 70c when I play games.


----------



## Denim-187

SLI FFA

CPU: 2700k @ 5.2 Ghz - H20
Memory: 8GB @ 2133 Mhz
GPU: SLI 680's
Voltage: *1175mv* (Nvidia nailed the die shrink with efficiency, who needs voltage control?)

Geforce GTX 680
BOOST: 1215
Memory: 1702

3DMark Score: *P 17535*
Graphics Score: *21127*

Check out the FPS yoooo
-


----------



## 4514kaiser

Hey here is a great comparison by El_Capitan well worth checking out its part one of his 'GTX 580 3GB SLI vs GTX 680 SLI vs HD 7970 CrossfireX Overclocked Review '

And here the LINK


----------



## Derek1387

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Derek1387*
> 
> Now I am trying to debate. I have an offer on my 7970 with water block, and can pick up an EVGA for $525... but then i would need a water block (not right away...but when I can). It would be an even wash minus buying the water block.... thoughts?


Mine is a gigabyte.... I didnt go water for OCing... i did it because it keeps everything much cooler, and is also just about dead silent. That would be the same reason i would do a 680.

Still keep the 7970?


----------



## khemist

delete.


----------



## knusper

*P11104*

3DMark2011 - Performance - Single GPU - Free For All

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3208954

CPU: i7 2600k @ 4,8Ghz - watercooled
DRAM G.Skill Ripjaws 1600 CL9
GTX 680 - 1216 Core - 1346 Boost - 3506 Memory - stock cooler -> air
GPU Voltage: 1,175mv
Driver: 301.25 BETA
3DMark11 Score: P11104
Proof (of score AND settings):


Hope this screenshot covers everything.


----------



## El_Capitan

Wow, nice overclock! Wanna trade?


----------



## svthomas

I am actually shocked that 680 overclock didn't take that graphics score into the 12s. Regardless, beastly OC you have there.


----------



## El_Capitan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4514kaiser*
> 
> Hey here is a great comparison by El_Capitan well worth checking out its part one of his 'GTX 580 3GB SLI vs GTX 680 SLI vs HD 7970 CrossfireX Overclocked Review '
> And here the LINK


Thanks. I updated my blog for Part 2 to show some 5760 x 1200 benchmarks.


----------



## stevman17

*P10172*

3DMark2011 - Performance - Single GPU - Free For All

Verification URL
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3224049;jsessionid=hs74zx5jji18bsr75pdwoiw

CPU: i5 2500k @ 4.7Ghz - Air Cooled
DRAM G.Skill Ripjaws 1600 CL9
GTX 680 - 1126 Core - 1179 Boost - 1602 Memory - stock cooler -> air
GPU Voltage: 1.175mv
Driver: 301.10
3DMark11 Score: P10172
Proof (of score AND settings):


----------



## knusper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *El_Capitan*
> 
> Wow, nice overclock! Wanna trade?


Haha thanks but sorry - I'mma keep her! At least until I can get my hands on a nice custom card...








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svthomas*
> 
> I am actually shocked that 680 overclock didn't take that graphics score into the 12s. Regardless, beastly OC you have there.


12k... that would be awesome! I'll do another bench with 5 Ghz CPU and overclocked RAM because I can't stand the 10xxx physics score...


----------



## svthomas

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *knusper*
> 
> Haha thanks but sorry - I'mma keep her! At least until I can get my hands on a nice custom card...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12k... that would be awesome! I'll do another bench with 5 Ghz CPU and overclocked RAM because I can't stand the 10xxx physics score...


Only reason I say that is because on the scoreboard a user got 11759 graphics score with a 1269 boost clockspeed.

Best of luck!


----------



## knusper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svthomas*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *knusper*
> 
> Haha thanks but sorry - I'mma keep her! At least until I can get my hands on a nice custom card...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12k... that would be awesome! I'll do another bench with 5 Ghz CPU and overclocked RAM because I can't stand the 10xxx physics score...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only reason I say that is because on the scoreboard a user got 11759 graphics score with a 1269 boost clockspeed.
> 
> Best of luck!
Click to expand...

Well cant say for sure because Im here via smartphone right now but it could be a wrong number taken from cpu-z instead the actual boost!


----------



## quakermaas

Dual GPU - FFA

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3235104

*CPU:* 3930k @ 4.875GHz
*DRAM:* 2000MHz / 9-11-9-27-T1
*GPU:* MSI 7970 Crossfire @ 1280MHz core - 1725MHz memory
*GPU Voltage:* 1.281
*Driver Version:* 12.3
*3DMark11 Score:* 18330


----------



## Smo

Great score dude.


----------



## furyn9

very nice!!!!


----------



## svthomas

Dual GPU - FFA

CPU: 2500k at 4800 Mhz
DRAM: 16GB 1600MHz
GPU: msi Geforce gtx 680 SLI - 1164 core (1229 boost) / 1727 memory (actually have my cards clocked independently so they boost the same)
GPU Voltage: 1.1750
Driver Version: 301.10

3DMark Score P15349
Graphics Score 21051
Physics Score 8539
Combined Score 8364

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3241421


----------



## quakermaas

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svthomas*
> 
> Dual GPU - FFA
> 
> CPU: 2500k at 4800 Mhz
> DRAM: 16GB 1600MHz
> GPU: msi Geforce gtx 680 SLI - 1164 core (1229 boost) / 1727 memory (actually have my cards clocked independently so they boost the same)
> GPU Voltage: 1.1750
> Driver Version: 301.10
> 
> 3DMark Score P15349
> Graphics Score 21051
> Physics Score 8539
> Combined Score 8364
> 
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3241421


http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3235104

I know you have had high end cards from both camps and I am looking at your scores and comparing to my highest so far (HD 7970 crossfire),in your opinion, is your first graphic test score a lot higher due partly to the turbo( TDP limited) feature of the GTX 680 ? because the next three graphic tests are very close.


----------



## Arizonian

i7 950 4.0GHz - GTX 680 SC Base Core 1124 Base Memory 1752 - Max Boost 1228

3DMark11 Performance Score *P10099* Validation Link
3DMark11 Extreme Score *E3718* Validation Link
CPU-Z Validation Link
GPU-Z Validation Link


----------



## TheJesus

Can I compete with 7950s?


----------



## Aaranu

A bit late to the party but here we go.
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3294854;jsessionid=1sxhlyuusgnsenvh4pgxl950t
CPU - 2600k & 4.8ghz
RAM - 16gb & 2133mhz 9-11-10-27
GPU 680 SLI 1283mhz core 1952 Memory
Driver - 301.10


----------



## OverSightX

Where are the original score sheets? Haven't checked this for a bit. They used to be on the first page.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OverSightX*
> 
> Where are the original score sheets? Haven't checked this for a bit. They used to be on the first page.


All still there, OP just combined them into single chart with multiple pages. There is a link to each page of the chart along the bottom border of the chart itself. Scores for 3DM11 are the only ones up.


----------



## 4514kaiser

Ya took me a while to spot them also the old layout was better IMO


----------



## Arizonian

Ragin has been very busy with real life currently to be able to keep up with this thread. He's asked me if it was possible if someone wanted to assume the role of OP. He's obviously would love to do it but it's more than he can take on atm, hence why updates has been very seldom.

He will do his best in the interim between any free time to jump in and try to do updates when possible. It's just he's not had much free time as he did when he originally started this thread for us.

If anyone is interested in taking over as an unbiased OP, please let us know. It requires your willing to sift through the submissions and update those qualifying entries to the main thread. It's going to be a busy voluntary job. Hopefully an enthusiastic bencher will come forward.

Personally I'm not a benching fanatic more than was being helpful by submitting my entry for informational purposes mostly. Anyone think they'd like take over the helm of the battle royale' between 7970 & 680 thread by all means step up and request.


----------



## TheJesus

If no one takes the position by the time they do moderators and I'm not selected, I'll do it.


----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheJesus*
> 
> If no one takes the position by the time they do moderators and I'm not selected, I'll do it.


Great - you'd be a perfect fit for the thread OP bud.







_Mighty good of you taking into consideration you don't have a 7970_.









If anyone else still wants to throw in their name as back up please do so. I'm already corresponding with the moderator who will reassign the thread.

i7 3770 Ivy stock - P10485 / E3728 - CPUZ Validation / GPUZ Validation - Max Core 1228 MHz





*CPU*: i7 3770K @ 3.5 Ghz *Stock* *cough*
*DRAM*: G.Skill Trident X 2400 CL10
*GPU*: GTX 680 - 1124 Core - 1228 Boost - 1752 Memory - stock cooler - air
*GPU Driver*: 301.10
*GPU Voltage*: 1.175mv


----------



## 996gt2

See my post below for updated results.


----------



## 996gt2




----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *996gt2*


One sweet arse score bud for one 680.







Those over clocks on CPU and RAM really helped.


----------



## jamaican voodoo

just an update finally manage to break 11000p score with one 7970 .....processor was @ 4.8ghz at the time of bench.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

3DMark11 Performance Free For All
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3362549
*CPU:* i5-2600K (HT on) at 5353 MHz
*RAM:* 8GB at 2154MHz 9-10-10-26-1T
*GPU:* GTX680 +155 GPU +510 VRAM max boost 1266 MHz
*Driver:* 301.10 WHQL
*3DMark11 Score:* P11355


----------



## kcuestag

*Heaven 3.0 - Extreme Tessellation 1080 - GPU & Tess Load*

*CPU:* i7 2600K (HT OFF) at 5GHz
*RAM:* 8GB at 1600MHz 7-8-7-24-1T
*GPU:* 2x GTX680 SLI @ 1240MHz Core Boost & 3456MHz Memory
*Driver:* 301.24 BETA
*Unigine Heaven Score:* 3101 (123.1 FPS)


----------



## m3t4lh34d

*4x GTX 680s running between 1230-1290 boost clock
3930k @ 4.5ghz
DDR3 2133 CAS 9

Nvidia Setup X Score*










*AMD Setup P Score

3x HD 7970 Black Editions @ 1250/1700
3930k @ 4.5ghz
DDR3 2133 CAS 9*


----------



## Aaranu

Hahaha metalhead i love it how its informining you that your score is 'low' compared to other systems, how amusing








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kcuestag*
> 
> *Heaven 3.0 - Extreme Tessellation 1080 - GPU & Tess Load*
> *CPU:* i7 2600K (HT OFF) at 5GHz
> *RAM:* 8GB at 1600MHz 7-8-7-24-1T
> *GPU:* 2x GTX680 SLI @ 1240MHz Core Boost & 3456MHz Memory
> *Driver:* 301.24 BETA
> *Unigine Heaven Score:* 3101 (123.1 FPS)


Kcuestag did you see any performance gain / overclocking headroom with the .24 beta drivers?


----------



## OverSightX

Finally can play with the big boys haha.. My first run with new platform. Will try for more tomorrow!

3930k @ 4.5 1.32V
7970 CF @ 1250/1600 1.262V
16GB Vengeance 1866


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

3960X @ 4800MHz +.040V offset
2 x 7970 Lightning CF @ 1225MHz / 1750MHz
16GB Patriot Viper Xtreme 1866MHz
Intel 320 160GB SSD
Catalyst 12.4 WHQL
Afterburner 2.2.1

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3456538


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Anybody seen Ragin around? Wth happened to this thread???


----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Anybody seen Ragin around? Wth happened to this thread???


Yeah I've been in contact with him.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/340#post_17110971

We have Thejesus that will volunteer to take over. However he may not be able to based on some obligations he might have. Therefore if any other OCN bencher would like to assume 'OP' responsibilities please let me know I'm working with moderator to have it re-assigned.

Majin SSJ Eric - perhaps you'd like to? I don't know of anyone else who loves benching as much as you do bud.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> Yeah I've been in contact with him.
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/340#post_17110971
> We have Thejesus that will volunteer to take over. However he may not be able to based on some obligations he might have. Therefore if any other OCN bencher would like to assume 'OP' responsibilities please let me know I'm working with moderator to have it re-assigned.
> Majin SSJ Eric - perhaps you'd like to? I don't know of anyone else who loves benching as much as you do bud.


OIC. I would do it but I'm no where near as knowledgeable as Ragin is about this stuff. It's too bad because this was a great opportunity to see how these cards really stack up to each other in the real world....


----------



## TheJesus

I'll take care of it.


----------



## jtom320

I'll be getting a 680 hopefully within the next week. Just realized I never actually submitted a 7970 score but we'll see where the 680 lines up at any rate.

Will probabally be switching to Ivy as well so it will be fun. Just gotta push the buy button at this point but keep hesitating.


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheJesus*
> 
> I'll take care of it.


Single card spreadsheet by chance?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> I'll be getting a 680 hopefully within the next week. Just realized I never actually submitted a 7970 score but we'll see where the 680 lines up at any rate.
> Will probabally be switching to Ivy as well so it will be fun. Just gotta push the buy button at this point but keep hesitating.


Lol, you're one of the reasons I decided to give the 7970's a shot! We flipped!


----------



## criznit

Modest overclock on both CPU and GPU got me a P9821 with the latest beta drivers


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Lol, you're one of the reasons I decided to give the 7970's a shot! We flipped!


I totally still think the 7970 is the faster card. I just never stick with the same hardware man. I've had literally like 7 different set ups in the last two and a half years. I'm one of those who just likes to tinker. 680 is next up in line.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> I totally still think the 7970 is the faster card. I just never stick with the same hardware man. I've had literally like 7 different set ups in the last two and a half years. I'm one of those who just likes to tinker. 680 is next up in line.


I hear ya man! I'll be moving to 680 Lightnings as soon as they release...


----------



## TheJesus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> Single card spreadsheet by chance?


I'll be updating everything once I find out all the details


----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheJesus*
> 
> I'll be updating everything once I find out all the details


You'll be getting the details shortly, things are in motion. Again thanks 'TheJesus' for volunteering your time to keeping this thread moving forward.









'GTX 680s vs HD 7970s - The OCN Battle Royal part 2" has been a great thread thus far, productively with good info regarding this aspect of over clocking among OCN members comparing both cards in sportsmanship fashion.

Thanks goes to *RaginCain* his hard work to date, a very sucessful first "Battle Royale" and now the start of this one "Part 2". Thank you very much.


----------



## pioneerisloud

Congrats to TheJesus for being the new OP here.


----------



## Tslm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> I totally still think the 7970 is the faster card. I just never stick with the same hardware man. I've had literally like 7 different set ups in the last two and a half years. I'm one of those who just likes to tinker. 680 is next up in line.
> 
> 
> 
> I hear ya man! I'll be moving to 680 Lightnings as soon as they release...
Click to expand...

You'll like them alot better I think, this coming from a loooong time AMD/ATI fanboy


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I definitely love me some Nvidia drivers!


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheJesus*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> Single card spreadsheet by chance?
> 
> 
> 
> I'll be updating everything once I find out all the details
Click to expand...

Excellent thanks


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I definitely love me some Nvidia drivers!


I do to but believe it or not I've had nothing but issues with these 580s. I've done a fresh install since my 7970s as well. I'm going to be getting a single 680 for the time being but will probabally end up with a second sometime in the next few months.


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I definitely love me some Nvidia drivers!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do to but believe it or not I've had nothing but issues with these 580s. I've done a fresh install since my 7970s as well. I'm going to be getting a single 680 for the time being but will probabally end up with a second sometime in the next few months.
Click to expand...

That sucks, both of my 580's (evga and later a DCII) were very stable.


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> That sucks, both of my 580's (evga and later a DCII) were very stable.


I think for some reason my system just doesn't get along very well with SLI. When I've tested with just one card I've had zero problems. Initially I thought maybe one of the cards was bad but have done many tests with both individually and they've worked beautifully.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I never had any issues with my 580's in SLI other than a lighting flicker in Crysis 2 that got fixed by the next driver release...


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I never had any issues with my 580's in SLI other than a lighting flicker in Crysis 2 that got fixed by the next driver release...


My main issue is they crash in BF3. All the time.


----------



## Benchmarksli

EVGA GTX 680 SC Signature running @ 1333Mhz core and 7000Mhz mem.
Stock voltage and no mods whatsoever. All on air cooling!
12168 GPU score on a single GTX 680


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benchmarksli*
> 
> EVGA GTX 680 SC Signature running @ 1333Mhz core and 7000Mhz mem.
> Stock voltage and no mods whatsoever. All on air cooling!
> 12168 GPU score on a single GTX 680


Lucid MVP running?


----------



## Benchmarksli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> Lucid MVP running?


Nope. How do you want me to prove it to you? What don't you understand about a GTX 680 running @ 1.3Ghz?


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benchmarksli*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> Lucid MVP running?
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. How do you want me to prove it to you? What don't you understand about a GTX 680 running @ 1.3Ghz?
Click to expand...

You don't need to prove anything to me it was just a question. And my bad I have been reading so much about 670's where 11000 is a top of the line graphics score. Forgot what thread I was in. Very impressive.

You should fill out your sig rig specs so we can see what your working with.


----------



## Benchmarksli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> You don't need to prove anything to me it was just a question. And my bad I have been reading so much about 670's where 11000 is a top of the line graphics score. Forgot what thread I was in. Very impressive.
> You should fill out your sig rig specs so we can see what your working with.


No problem. That was a legit question. I ran it again but with slightly different clocks. Boost was only about 1330mhz this time, and overall the score is a tad lower.I used EVGA precision and the off-set is a little different from afterburner. My gpu score is still over 12000 for one card.

I have a z68 motherboard and I "think" LucidMvp is only available with z77 chipset.

Ninja Edit: New high score 12242 gpu



http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3473960;jsessionid=k37hge053nfo1cqfi1qrroygd


----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benchmarksli*
> 
> No problem. That was a legit question. I ran it again but with slightly different clocks. Boost was only about 1330mhz this time, and overall the score is a tad lower.I used EVGA precision and the off-set is a little different from afterburner. My gpu score is still over 12000 for one card.
> I have a z68 motherboard and I "think" LucidMvp is only available with z77 chipset.
> Ninja Edit: New high score 12242 gpu
> 
> http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3473960;jsessionid=k37hge053nfo1cqfi1qrroygd


Congrats on your new GTX 680. Very nice OC on that baby.

Also noticed your pretty new to us here at OCN - Welcome aboard.







Nice way to start out with a great bench.









P.S. - As Lightsout stated, it is a good idea to have your specs listed of your computer through BIO - Edit System. We like to see the rigs being benched and should you ever ask any questions or for help it helps those assisting you to know what your dealing with. See you around the threads.


----------



## lightsout

That is a really nice graphics score. Lucid MVP will work on z68. I used it on my maximize. I think I hit almost 14000 or something crazy like that. But it sucked in game.


----------



## TheJesus

Alright, I'm thinking of redesigning the charts to make them easier to read and get vital info quickly instead of a hundred details most people aren't concerned with. Anyone have an opinion on this?

Also, I need RaginCain to remove the second post or have it transferred to me so I can edit it.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Agreed. Pertinent info only is preferred...


----------



## Arizonian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheJesus*
> 
> Alright, I'm thinking of redesigning the charts to make them easier to read and get vital info quickly instead of a hundred details most people aren't concerned with. Anyone have an opinion on this?
> Also, I need RaginCain to remove the second post or have it transferred to me so I can edit it.


Ok - there's no way to hand over control of post #2 like we can OP Thread Starter. Therefor I've sent a PM to Raging to delete his second post. You should start your own graph as you see fit, place it to the first post in the interim until Raging removes his off post #2.


----------



## TheJesus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Agreed. Pertinent info only is preferred...


That's what I was thinking. I'll still maintain all the extra info for those interested, but I don't like sideways scrolling, ever.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> Ok - there's no way to hand over control of post #2 like we can OP Thread Starter. Therefor I've sent a PM to Raging to delete his second post. You should start your own graph as you see fit, place it to the first post in the interim until Raging removes his off post #2.


I figured, its no big deal, I was going to go that way originally, so its all good.

I'll start working on some updated charts.


----------



## lightsout

Woot! TheJesus, nice work man.


----------



## TheJesus

Alright, I just finished compiling the entire 3DMark11 Performance Restricted/Free For All lists, I'll be editing OP soon with my design. I skipped a few submissions that did not have nearly enough info besides a picture. I'm requiring that people use the following format to make it easier for me to keep up to date.

Name : Competition : FFA/Restricted : PXXXXX
CPU Clocks: Model @ X.XXGHz
DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-XXXX / X-X-X-X
GPU Information: Brand 7970/680 (Special models can be added here) @ Core MHz/Memory MHz (AMD uses real numbers, Nvidia uses +MHz)
GPU Voltage: X.XXXV
Driver Version: (AMD 12.X) (Nvidia 301.XX)
3DMark11 Score: PXXXXX (Link to 3DMark page, I'll add it manually later)
Pics: Verification pictures with IMG tags.

Example:

Majin SSJ Eric : 3DMark11 Performance : Free For All : P18324
CPU Clocks: 3960X @ 4.8GHz
DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1866 / 9-11-9-27
GPU Information: MSI 7970 Lightning x2 @ 1225/1750
GPU Voltage: 1.287V
Driver Version: 12.4
3DMark11 Score: P18324 (http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3456538)
Pics: http://cdn.overclock.net/6/62/621b275d_3dmark111225mhzcore1750mhzmemory051812.jpeg

Thank you for your help with this. If I skipped your post, please feel free to repost


----------



## TheJesus

Alright, 3DMark11 done. That was like 3 hours of work, lol. I'll get to Heaven another day.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Dang dude! Thanks for putting so much effort into this thread!


----------



## lightsout

Awesome man, My .02 we should have 680 users list their actual boost clock and not the offset.


----------



## NateST

This is what I've gleaned from this thread, 680's on average in single card setups are slightly faster than 7970's. 7970's scale better in multi gpu configurations.


----------



## TheJesus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> Awesome man, My .02 we should have 680 users list their actual boost clock and not the offset.


If someone can compile a list with corrected clocks for the offset, that would be helpful, but some list offset, some list clocks, but the majority was offset.


----------



## lightsout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheJesus*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lightsout*
> 
> Awesome man, My .02 we should have 680 users list their actual boost clock and not the offset.
> 
> 
> 
> If someone can compile a list with corrected clocks for the offset, that would be helpful, but some list offset, some list clocks, but the majority was offset.
Click to expand...

Yah I guess it is what it is everyone would have to resubmit.


----------



## Benchmarksli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NateST*
> 
> This is what I've gleaned from this thread, 680's on average in single card setups are slightly faster than 7970's. 7970's scale better in multi gpu configurations.


Slightly? Clock for clock the GTX 680 is MUCH faster in 3dMark11. Check the 3dMArk11 thread in the benchmark section. FTW 420 has his modded 7970 lightning running at 1450MHz/1800MHz and it still loses to my GTX 680 Signature that was only boosting to 1330MHz/1800MHz.


----------



## xxmastermindxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benchmarksli*
> 
> Slightly? Clock for clock the GTX 680 is MUCH faster in 3dMark11. Check the 3dMArk11 thread in the benchmark section. FTW 420 has his modded 7970 lightning running at 1450MHz/1800MHz and it still loses to my GTX 680 Signature that was only boosting to 1330MHz/1800MHz.


3DMark11 is a great game isn't it? I'm on the 9th level.


----------



## Arizonian

Heh - realized this was my *Extreme* bench with my single 680. Disregard. Post deleted.


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxmastermindxx*
> 
> 3DMark11 is a great game isn't it? I'm on the 9th level.


You must be a real benchmark junkie, I only played it about 15 hours over the last few weeks & never got past the first stages, Always spawning right back at the beginning....


----------



## Disturbed117

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FtW 420*
> 
> You must be a real benchmark junkie, I only played it about 15 hours over the last few weeks & never got past the first stages, Always spawning right back at the beginning....


You need to try harder.


----------



## FtW 420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Disturbed117*
> 
> You need to try harder.


I did end up at #15 highest single gpu score. Need a better card....
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark11_-_performance/rankings?cores=1#start=0#interval=20


----------



## jtom320

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benchmarksli*
> 
> Slightly? Clock for clock the GTX 680 is MUCH faster in 3dMark11. Check the 3dMArk11 thread in the benchmark section. FTW 420 has his modded 7970 lightning running at 1450MHz/1800MHz and it still loses to my GTX 680 Signature that was only boosting to 1330MHz/1800MHz.


I was playing 3dmark the other day and I got to the level where there's a jeep and I was like omg I can't wait for this driving section but then it didn't happen and I was like oh synthetic benchmark.


----------



## Benchmarksli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jtom320*
> 
> I was playing 3dmark the other day and I got to the level where there's a jeep and I was like omg I can't wait for this driving section but then it didn't happen and I was like oh synthetic benchmark.


/Snip


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pioneerisloud*
> 
> Congrats to TheJesus for being the new OP here.


Damn, changed hands already.


----------



## RagingCain

Still have the highest 2x FFA GPU Score? Come on guys, I have been wasting away in work land, surely someone out there can beat my weak little 7970s. Some people even hitting 1900+ memory!


----------



## Benchmarksli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Still have the highest 2x FFA GPU Score? Come on guys, I have been wasting away in work land, surely someone out there can beat my weak little 7970s. Some people even hitting 1900+ memory!



What is your GPU score for dual 7970s? My gpu score for sli 680's is 22462. It could be much higher than that, but right now I'm fightning a dud overclocker in sli.

ninja edit: Of course your score is high in the FFA, you're able to adjust tessellation. I'm soooo impressed.


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benchmarksli*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Still have the highest 2x FFA GPU Score? Come on guys, I have been wasting away in work land, surely someone out there can beat my weak little 7970s. Some people even hitting 1900+ memory!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your GPU score for dual 7970s? My gpu score for sli 680's is 22462. It could be much higher than that, but right now I'm fightning a dud overclocker in sli.
> 
> ninja edit: Of course your score is high in the FFA, you're able to adjust tessellation. I'm soooo impressed.
Click to expand...

I submitted full tessellation and no tessellation

Full Tess:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/50_50#post_16802809

No Tess:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1233063/gtx-680s-vs-hd-7970s-the-ocn-battle-royale-part-2/50_50#post_16802823

Why would I break my own rules, and your GPU score is infact higher.


----------



## Benchmarksli

My submission:
*P18045
CPU: I7-3770K @ 4.9GHz
GPU1: 1337MHz/ 7112MHz
GPU2: 1257MHz/ 7112MHz*
*P18045
GPU 22546*

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3533381


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benchmarksli*
> 
> ninja edit: Of course your score is high in the FFA, you're able to adjust tessellation. I'm soooo impressed.


love these comments... it just makes me want to put them in context of funny topics like erectile dysfunction or something (see translation below) lol...

*translation:* _"of course its larger than mine, you're able to take another pill"_


----------



## kpforce1

edit: wrong thread...


----------



## TheJesus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Well, i can't run restricted because my lil Q9550 won't do 4.4Ghz +/- 25Mhz..... if it can fit somewhere cool, if not i guess its for giggles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU Clocks: 4.08 Ghz Model: Intel Q9550 @ 4.08 GHz
> DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1920 / 10-10-10-30
> GPU Information: SLI EVGA GTX 480's @ 888 MHz/Memory 2203 MHz
> GPU Voltage: 1.138V
> Driver Version: Nvidia 301.42 (i think)
> 3DMark11 Score: *P10153*
> Pics:


This is 680s vs 7970s...


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheJesus*
> 
> This is 680s vs 7970s...


Apparently I didn't have my V8 juice... lol my bad


----------



## PcBuilderBG

Hi there







There is my score :

PCBuilderbg : 3DMark11 Performance : Free For All : P10345
CPU Clocks: I7 2600K @ 4.6GHz
DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1600 / 9-9-9-24
GPU Information: Sapphire 7970 @ 1225/1701
GPU Voltage: 1.200V
Driver Version: 12.8
3DMark11 Score: P10345 - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4167557
Pics: http://dc618.4shared.com/download/Wu0kgc9h/tsid20120820-005924-31051f2d/proben_ekran_2.jpg


----------



## PcBuilderBG

Update









PCBuilderbg : 3DMark11 Performance : Free For All : P10507
CPU Clocks: I7 2600K @ 4.6GHz
DRAM Clocks / Timings: DDR3-1600 / 9-9-9-24
GPU Information: Sapphire 7970 @ 1225/1850
GPU Voltage: 1.200V
Driver Version: 12.8
3DMark11 Score: P10507 - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4171154
Pics: http://www.4shared.com/photo/fullsize/_QDk6C60/proben_ekran3.html


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Necro-thread revival! With the new 12.11 drivers coming out I think we need to revisit this here Battle Royale guys!


----------



## coachmark2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Necro-thread revival! With the new 12.11 drivers coming out I think we need to revisit this here Battle Royale guys!


----------

