Deleted member 66701
D
Deleted member 66701
I'm getting closer, what are your voltage settings on you CPU to get to 4.9?
![voltage_zpsetbyyewn.png](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v25/amigafan2003/voltage_zpsetbyyewn.png)
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.
I'm getting closer, what are your voltage settings on you CPU to get to 4.9?
Thats a lot of volts!
Cheers
Could someone else with a Fury X run this please? I would like to see if my score is ok or not as it looks really quite low in comparison to others.
Not really - it posts and runs some benches @ 5ghz and 1.4v
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v25/amigafan2003/5ghz_zpsca0ed0a1.png~original
Your CPU is the bottleneck but be proud, you smashed up my Fury X score![]()
Its 15% higher than a similar clocked 290X, fifteen percent. with 45% more Shaders and 60% more memory bandwidthWhy is your Fury X score so low? I would have expected a lot higher.
Currently the lowest 980Ti, and proud!... Not really though.
3943 score, GTX 980Ti @ 1560MHz/2000MHz, 353.49 drivers.
i5-3450 @ 3.5GHz
I think my CPU is the problem here..
Edit: I'm a little confused. My GPU-Z reads 1560MHz core (+181MHz in Afterburner) but Valley reads 1725MHz?
Edit again: Decided to do 2160p, same speeds as above. Score: 1345.
![]()
Its 15% higher than a similar clocked 290X, fifteen percent. with 45% more Shaders and 60% more memory bandwidth
If you asked other Fury-X owners to post a result i suspect it will be the same, its not just this, Fury-X averages less than 20% better @ 1440P than a Hawaii XT in Games, something just isn't right with it.