****OFFICIAL AMD 6000 series overclocking and benchmark results thread****

[555BUK]

Just realised that a single stock GTX 460 beats both single and SLI'd 6870's for minimun framerates in Heaven.

I know this isn't "real games", but it gives me something to hang on to. NVidia is still The Tesselator.

 

[Chisharpe]

Min have always been strong for nvidia cards

 

[Final8y]

Just realised that a single stock GTX 460 beats both single and SLI'd 6870's for minimun framerates in Heaven.

I know this isn't "real games", but it gives me something to hang on to. NVidia is still The Tesselator.

Minimum without a time scale is near useless.

1)min 5fps-1 seconds avg 60fps-9min max 90fps-59 seconds.

2)min 10fps-60 seconds avg 50fps-8min max 80fps-60 seconds.

Very simplified example but i would take 1) as the min & max can be just split second spikes.

 

[Helios1234]

I can't really find much at all as everyone seems to be waiting on the volt mod software. They can't be to bad as i seen somewhere that at 1000 core they had the fan running 40% during benchmarking. Was just one bench with no mention of the temps.

http://www.vortez.co.uk/contentteller/articles_pages/msi_r6870_review,9.html

 

[Martini1991]

There's nothing that seems to work with CHL8214 minus TriXX (Which only ***** got hold of)

 

[^Andy^]

I'm waiting for a new version of RBE so I can tewak the bios manually and tinker with the fan profiles at the same time. I'm certain there is more left in that card than the overdrive utility allows for.

 

[555BUK]

Minimum without a time scale is near useless.

1)min 5fps-1 seconds avg 60fps-9min max 90fps-59 seconds.

2)min 10fps-60 seconds avg 50fps-8min max 80fps-60 seconds.

Very simplified example but i would take 1) as the min & max can be just split second spikes.

Surely, minimun framerates are MUCH more important than average insofar as min fps remains higher than monitor refresh rate.

Example (sssuming your monitor refresh rate is 60Hz):
Min FPS = 65, Average = 80, Max = 95
will appear better than
Min FPS = 45, Average = 160, Max = 190

..and for benchmarks, the timescale is constant (the length of the benchmark).

 

[TheRealDeal]

I think whats being said is if you have a minimum frame rate of 14 but it only drops to that once for a second and the rest of the time your minimum is high then you will have great gameplay but it will look bad in a benchmark. Then you could have another benchmark with a minimum of 23 but while playing you are getting constant drops to 23 so your game will appear choppy but your benchmark score will look better. Thats why looking at benchmarks average is more important unless like some review sites you can see a graph showing you a time line of the fps peaks and troughs.

 

[Martini1991]

I always look at average over high/min.

 

[RavenXXX2]

Average/min is what everyone should be looking at.

 

[Martini1991]

Average/min is what everyone should be looking at.

If it dips to 1 FPS for a second and the rest of the time it's above 50?
That 1 FPS will mean nothing.

 

[RavenXXX2]

And what if you dip to 1FPS for 20 second or more.

 

[Martini1991]

And what if you dip to 1FPS for 20 second or more.

That'd effect the Average FPS quite abit.
You'd need a timescale.

 

[TheRealDeal]

And what if you dip to 1FPS for 20 second or more.

Benchmark results won't be able to tell you that though.

 

[RavenXXX2]

I agree so that's why I judge minimum FPS by reviews that show the FPS timescale.


HOCP are great for this.

 

[Final8y]

Surely, minimun framerates are MUCH more important than average insofar as min fps remains higher than monitor refresh rate.

Example (sssuming your monitor refresh rate is 60Hz):
Min FPS = 65, Average = 80, Max = 95
will appear better than
Min FPS = 45, Average = 160, Max = 190

..and for benchmarks, the timescale is constant (the length of the benchmark).

Nope as i have said a spike will throw the mins right of the the window.

I could play for an hour at solid 60fps but for 1 second something made me drop to 1fps & i get an avg of 30fps score just because of that 1fps for 1

So i would get a return of min 1fps avg 30fps max 60fps even though it was at 60fps 99% of the time.

Your Min FPS = 45, Average = 160, Max = 190 just proves that the min is of no use because the average is higher than Min FPS = 65, Average = 80, Max = 95 so it was playing in the 160 rage for longer which is important.


The only problem with your example is such a swing is very unlikely.
45, Average = 160, Max = 190
Min FPS = 65, Average = 80, Max = 95

 

[TheRealDeal]

I agree so that's why I judge minimum FPS by reviews that show the FPS timescale.


HOCP are great for this.

Yea just read through that review again and ati look just as good as nv when it comes to frame rate consistency.

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTI4NzY3NjAyMFZEMnhHeWRQNGZfNF81X2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTI4NzY3NjAyMFZEMnhHeWRQNGZfNV81X2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTI4NzY3NjAyMFZEMnhHeWRQNGZfN181X2wuZ2lm

 

[RavenXXX2]

lol @ res.

 

[555BUK]

Nope as i have said a spike will throw the mins right of the the window.

I could play for an hour at solid 60fps but for 1 second something made me drop to 1fps & i get an avg of 30fps score just because of that 1fps for 1

So i would get a return of min 1fps avg 30fps max 60fps even though it was at 60fps 99% of the time.

We agree to disagree. For me, whether I own NVidia or ATI (and I have owned a lot of both), minimun fps is more important and noticeably distracting than average fps. Perhaps this is because I set Vsync on for everything. I find the importanct of min fps inversely proportional to that of max fps (which to me is meaningless), with avg sitting in the middle.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Hes not saying minimum is not important when playing as it is the most important fact when playing for smooth gameplay but its not that important when looking through benchmarks as you can't tell from results whether a minimum of say 14 happens often or just once for a second.