Permabanned
- Joined
- 15 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 3,417
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
1178/1753 (stock) = 9677
1253/1903 = 10098
1253/1978 = 10179
Do they look about right?
Tried running at 1253/2000 but starts to flicker and odd artefact but i'll be honest i've not dabbled in overclocking GTX much, just using PrecisionX at the moment.
Are those GPU scores?
Graphics score is more important, which by the way yours is lower then my 290's.
Ok thanks! Wasn't comparing to be honest fella!
Why did you compare it with Jimlads anyway, he's not at 1.5ghz core speed.Your CPU is at 5ghz which is giving you a nice boost to your score.
Both me and thefogo got GPU scores higher than your 290, 1500mhz isn't even pushing my card either, it will easily do 1600mhz and take into account the drivers for your AMD card are mature and this card cost less than a 290 did on release.
You can't compare core speeds directly either, saying yours is 350mhz less means nothing.
Cool, well in that list there's only three 290's that have scored higher than my 970.
If custom bios and extra voltage become available and for those who watercool, who knows what kind of scores we'll see.
No but it's always nice getting the same or better performance for less power
Okay then I think you'll find many would disagree. All the review sites wouldn't bother measuring power usage if it didn't matter.
Still going to be much lower than mega clocked 290's and cooler.