Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,160
The 7970 is also running 8xaa and not 4x. Its plain to see that a 7970 would comfortably beat this score. What we dont know is if the 7970 was running at stock speeds.
-
Competitor rules
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.
The first "proper" Kepler news Fri 17th Feb?
- Thread starter dave_beast
- Start date
The 7970 is also running 8xaa and not 4x. Its plain to see that a 7970 would comfortably beat this score. What we dont know is if the 7970 was running at stock speeds.
Caporegime
ALXAndy has an HD7970 3GB though!!
I have a Core i3 2100,although only an HD5850 1GB. Hence,I can put up a score of how much the HD5850 1GB is thrashed to bits by the GTX680!
Caporegime
Who can spot the 2 things wrong with this image?
No idea but please tell me.
So approximately a 30% improvement....not three bad (considering it's supposed to be a GTX660).
Unfortunately with a GTX680 name tag on the card it's not the sort of performance improvement I'd expect at all, and I blame AMD for not making the 7970 good enough
There's some daft logic here mate.
I'm downloading Heaven 3 now and running it the same res as OC.net shopguy....
I'll run first at stock clocks, then my regular 24/7 stable overclock.
If that benchmark is for real, Kepler is the biggest let down since Faildozer imo.
I'll run first at stock clocks, then my regular 24/7 stable overclock.
If that benchmark is for real, Kepler is the biggest let down since Faildozer imo.
Soldato
Who can spot the 2 things wrong with this image?
Enlighten us.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 26
dave, whats in your rig?
Who can spot the 2 things wrong with this image?
Th date is 7 years ago? Lol
First benchies from the guy in the shop with one.
(For comparison I get 48 at these same settings, my 480 runs ~580 speed, his CPU is an I3 but even so I am underwhelmed)
I7 @3.8gig
XFX 7970 Black stock 1000-1425Mhz
Oc CCC sliders only 1125-1575Mhz
If that benchmark is for real then his CPU is really really holding him back - or something - at that point after the benchmark finishes with that kinda score the fps top right should be atleast double that number - tho that not a reliable metric as random things could be pulling the fps low or his PC could be really slow at recovering after reloading after the benchmark.
Also not tried 300.6x drivers but pretty sure they don't have GK104 in the GPU ID string.
With those settings a GTX680 should be getting a ~80fps.
Stock GTX680 i3
[/quote]
Stock 7970 i7 with 2 cores disabled at stock speed 3.4ghz (best I could do!)
Not going to bother with the overclocked results as they were at least 10fps more
Stock 7970 i7 with 2 cores disabled at stock speed 3.4ghz (best I could do!)
Not going to bother with the overclocked results as they were at least 10fps more
Soldato
So you're saying it's fake ?
Soldato
This does indeed look nastily like a fail, however thig guy's GPU-Z screens show the clock at 706MHz only. This was what people originally believed the GK104 was going to run at, however later reports have suggested a stock speed of 1006MHz.
I think we need more info!
I think we need more info!
Not saying it 100% is a fake but some oddities - pretty sure the drivers that are in the box don't identify the card as GK104 and that version of GPU-z should also pick it up correctly if the drivers are working properly.
The results are about inline off the top of my head for what you'd get for running it at 700MHz instead of the 1000MHz clocks - could be just a fubar with the drivers thats causing it not to spin up the clocks properly but still odd its being reported as GK104 I don't think even development drivers say that (atleast the ones I've seen for past generations haven't). At the very least his drivers aren't working properly even if he really has the card.
Last edited:
If it has (turbo-boost) technology surly it would be at max Mhz running Heaven.
Associate
for what it's worth...
stock 580, 2600k
stock 580, 2600k
Wouldn't be at all surprised if the drivers in the box don't recognize the card properly. that seems to be the norm now days, and in my opinion it is completely unacceptable (but I suppose at least they actually let you get the card up and running)
Soldato
This...
At a 706 Mhz core if it scores 1362 on heaven then at 1006 Mhz it should score 1940.
