Associate
Already got a retail sitting next to me waiting for an Apex...
Yep yep yep, I would. But then i'd need two Titan Xp's as well and it doesn't end
JR
-
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.
Unigine Heaven 4 benchmark
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
Yep yep yep, I would. But then i'd need two Titan Xp's as well and it doesn't end
JR
Soldato
Just tested this out after the FC update to windows 10. No discernible difference. I've managed to gain one point since my last run with the i7 4820K.
Ryzen threadripper 1920x @ 3.7 (stock turbo)
GTX 780 @ 1271/1872 with driver 385.69
Ryzen threadripper 1920x @ 3.7 (stock turbo)
GTX 780 @ 1271/1872 with driver 385.69
Scoreboard updated.
Soldato
In comparison to my 4 year old 780, this vega 56 is generally around double the performance, however, in heaven it's definitely not.
Threadripper 1920x @ 4GHz
RX Vega 56 @ 1677/1075
Threadripper 1920x @ 4GHz
RX Vega 56 @ 1677/1075
Scoreboard updated.
i7 8700k @4.8ghz
EVGA 1080Ti Black
1987mhz
5505mhz
Was trying to get my head around why this scores so much higher (just stuck the same impulse 1080Ti in) - It has no AA on ...
Last edited:
First stab with the 'temp' 1080Ti (random buy tide over until Volta):
8700k @5.1 1.35v (seems to do worse at 5.3 who knows haha!)
1080Ti EVGA SC Black Edition, 2050mhz, 5,985 mem (GPU doenst seem to like more than 2060-70)
Score: 4,016
Feel like it should be better... Currently running cache max 44 on the CPU so potentially thats a contributing factor and the mobo BIOS could use some updates (Apex z370) and I need to tweak it more.
8700k @5.1 1.35v (seems to do worse at 5.3 who knows haha!)
1080Ti EVGA SC Black Edition, 2050mhz, 5,985 mem (GPU doenst seem to like more than 2060-70)
Score: 4,016
Feel like it should be better... Currently running cache max 44 on the CPU so potentially thats a contributing factor and the mobo BIOS could use some updates (Apex z370) and I need to tweak it more.
Man of Honour
I tried my new card on this after a bit of fiddling:
i7 4790K at stock
1070 Ti GPU max boost 2101, RAM 4404 (according to MSI Afterburner, so it's actually 2202)
i7 4790K at stock
1070 Ti GPU max boost 2101, RAM 4404 (according to MSI Afterburner, so it's actually 2202)
Last edited:
I tried my new card on this after a bit of fiddling:
i7 4790K at stock
1070 Ti GPU max boost 2101, RAM 4404 (according to MSI Afterburner, so it's actually 2202)
For the scoreboard you need to turn off the integrated graphics please.
I will sort this when I get home in the morning.
Man of Honour
Ah, that's what I forgot to do after I reset BIOS settings to default.
Scoreboard updated.
Man of Honour
Reapplied overclocking and did another run with the integrated graphics disabled:
CPU: i7-4790K at stock
MSI 1070 Ti Gaming
max GPU 2126 (no idea if it held that boost - I forgot to check the graph in Afterburner in time - but from previous experience I expect it sustained ~50 below that)
max RAM 4450 (which is presumably actually 2225)
And with those and +20% power usage (which takes it to recommended limits) max GPU temp was 66C and max fan speed was 43% which is ~1000 rpm and barely audible ~1m away. A fine card.
Just a quick check, not absolutely max overclock. Might be able to top 2900, maybe more.
I'm running it at only +200/+200 at stock voltages normally to take it easy.
CPU: i7-4790K at stock
MSI 1070 Ti Gaming
max GPU 2126 (no idea if it held that boost - I forgot to check the graph in Afterburner in time - but from previous experience I expect it sustained ~50 below that)
max RAM 4450 (which is presumably actually 2225)
And with those and +20% power usage (which takes it to recommended limits) max GPU temp was 66C and max fan speed was 43% which is ~1000 rpm and barely audible ~1m away. A fine card.
Just a quick check, not absolutely max overclock. Might be able to top 2900, maybe more.
I'm running it at only +200/+200 at stock voltages normally to take it easy.
Put the power limit at 100%, its not 'extra' 100% its just giving it full allowance and your temps seem ok. Might give you a bit of a bump, if you see powerlimit hitting 1's in the charts on afterburner?
Scoreboard updated.
Man of Honour
That's why I put the power limit at +20% when overclocking for the benchmark. I brought it back down to default (i.e. 100%) when I reduced the clocks afterwards. Afterburner allows up to +33%, but +20% resulted in 1.065V at full load and I think that's the recommended limit. Although come to think of it, I don't know why I think that.
Temps are more than OK. The fans don't even come on until 65C and even with that overclock and 100% load temps peaked at 69C before the fans brought it back down to 66C. That only required 43% fan speed. The card won't hit thermal throttling unless it gets to 83C, so it's nowhere near the limit even with low fan speed.
I wouldn't hesitate to recommend this card. It even beats some overclocked 1080s in this benchmark and I'm sure I could overclock it further if I wanted to. But it has more power than I use even at stock (it holds 1911MHz boost at stock) so why bother?
Sorry bud I meant 'voltage limit' the slider you have to unlock in settings. If you stick that to 100% you might find a few frames but its nothing to write home about in real life...
Man of Honour
I left that locked because I'm not certain of safe values. The power limit slider will of course affect the voltage, but it's much more constrained. I'm not really tempted to push to the limits on it. Too new, too expensive, not enough reason. Gaming at 1920x1080, I'd be moving from far over vsync to slightly further over vysnc and wouldn't even notice. Any overclocking is only for a benchmark score and that's nowhere near enough motive to be unlocking voltages and trying my luck.