# Unigine Heaven 4.0 Benchmark Scores



## Durvelle27 (Sep 8, 2013)

*Please use the new thread here: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/unigine-heaven-4-0-benchmark-scores.198888/#post-3080200*


***Please attach a screen capture of your results for score verification***

Benchmark setup:

1.1920x1080, Fullscreen, 8x Anti-Aliasing
2.Ultra Quality
3.Extreme Tessellation
4.No integrated GPU enabled, unless it's the only GPU in the build
5.Tessellation correctly set up on AMD cards and not bypassed in CCC
6.You must also provide correct GPU and CPU clocks
7.Must Be a Screenshot from within Heaven to be valid

It will ensure that we have consistent results.


***Scores***



Single GPU
____________


# | CPU| Frequency | GPU| GPU Clocks | Score | User Name
1.)| i7-4930K | 5.05GHz | GTX Titan | 1202/1777 | 1837 | MetalRacer
2.)| i7-2600K|  5GHz     | GTX 780 Ti| 1165/1925 | 1777| devilpepper
3.)| i7-4770K | 4.2GHz  | GTX 780 Ti| 1110/1750 | 1763 | Dj-Electric
4.)| i7-2600K | 4.6GHz  | GTX 780 Ti| 1241/1751 | 1743 |  BarbaricSoul
5.)| i7-3930K | 4.4GHz  | GTX Titan  | 1227/1752 | 1728 | the54thvoid
6.)| i7-3930K | 3.2GHz  | R9 290X   | 1247/1666 | 1691 | Eroticus
7.)| FX-8350  | 4.5GHz  | GTX 780 Ti| 1138/1915 | 1684 | goninja
8.)| FX-8350  | 5.1GHz  | GTX 780   | 1293/1850 | 1679 | Durvelle27
9.)| i7-2600K | 4.5GHz  | GTX 780   | 1280/1778 | 1669 | Droffz
10.)| i7-4770K | 3.5GHz  | GTX 780   | 1320/1750 | 1657 | MxPhenom 216
11.)| i7-920   | 3.4GHz  | GTX 780   | 1238/1600 | 1565 | mdbrotha03
12.)| i7-3770K| 4.7GHz  | GTX 780   | 1035/1604 | 1504 | freakshow
13.)| i7-4770K| 4.4GHz  | GTX 780   | 1150/1502 | 1466 | HammerON
14.)| FX-8350 | 5GHz    | R9 290    | 1150/1450 | 1465 | Durvelle27
15.)| i7-4770K| 4.3GHz  | R9 290    | 1150/1420 | 1441 | SimpleTech
16.)| i7-960  | 3.8GHz  | GTX 780   | 1031/1556 | 1433 | Rekkapena
17.)| i5-4670K| 4.2GHz  | R9 290    | 1120/1250 | 1410 | Tupac33
18.)| i7-3770K| 4.6GHz  | R9 290    | 1000/1250 | 1407 | sirbaili
19.)| Xeon W3520| 4GHz | R9 290X   | 1000/1250 | 1372 | Solaris17
20.)| FX-8350 | 4.8GHz  | HD 7970   | 1290/1850 | 1125 | Durvelle27
21.)| FX-8350 | 4.7GHz | HD 7970   | 1180/1680 | 1019 | MalcomXT
22.)| i5-3450 | 3.8GHz  | HD 7950   | 1240/1425 | 1000 | _larry
23.)| i7-3770K| 4.5GHz  | GTX 670   | 1129/1840 | 984  | Bladedrummer
24.)| FX-6350 | 4.4GHz  | R9 280X   | 1150/1500 | 974  | z1tu
25.)| i5-4670K| 3.4GHz  | R9 280X   | 1070/1550 | 943  | Valor
26.)| i7-3770K| 4.8GHz  | HD 7970   | 1010/1375 | 883  | fullinfusion
27.)| i7-920  | 4.4GHz  | GTX 580   | 950/1170  | 844  | GreiverBlade
28.)| i5-3450 | 3.1GHz  | HD 7950   | 1000/1380 | 843  | reny900
29.)| FX-8320 | 4.4GHz  | HD 7870   | 1150/1450 | 727  | Durvelle27
30.)| Xeon E3 1275 V2 | 3.5GHz | R9 270  | 1050/1500 | 702 | GreiverBlade
31.)| Phenom X4 9600B| 2.4GHz | GTX 460   | 930/1100  | 605  | GreiverBlade




Multi GPU
____________


# | CPU| Frequency | GPU| GPU Clocks | # of GPUs | Score | User Name
1.)| i7-4770K | 4GHz   | GTX 780 Ti| 1124/1750 | 2 | 4025 | JHThorpe
2.)| FX-8350  | 5.02GHz| HD 7970   | 1125/1575 | 4 | 3964 | red1414
3.)| i7-4930K | 4.4GHz | GTX 780 Ti| 1175/1785 | 2 | 3232 | Paladone
4.)| i7-4770K | 4.2GHz | GTX 780   | 1190/1502 | 2 | 2858 | Gribar
5.)| i7-4770K | 4.4GHz | GTX 780   | 1150/1502 | 3 | 2838 | HammerON
6.)| i7-3770K | 4.6GHz | R9 290    | 1100/1250 | 2 | 2730 | sirbaili
7.)| i7-2700K | 4.8GHz | R9 290    | ???/???   | 2 | 2659 | freeleacher
8.)| i7-3770K | 4.8GHz | HD 7970   | 1280/1770 | 2 | 2176 | fullinfusion
9.)| i5-2500K | 4.5GHz | GTX 670   | 1050/1750 | 2 | 1846 | renozi
10.)| i7-3770K | 4.2GHz | HD 7950   | 800/1250  | 2 | 1756 | Jetster
11.)| i7-3770K | 4.2GHz | GTX 760   | 995/1750  | 2 | 1720 | havene
12.)| FX-8320  | 4.8GHz | HD 7870   | 1150/1450 | 2 | 1389 | Durvelle27
13.)| Xeon E3 1275 V2 | 3.7GHz | GTX 580 | 900/1050 | 2 | 1322 | GreiverBlade




Single Card Multi GPU
___________________










XFX HD 7970 @1290/1850+FX-8350 @4.8GHz


----------



## d1nky (Sep 8, 2013)

this has been done and the thread had about 5 posts.

do something different, like BASIC preset. that's pure overclocking madness


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 3, 2013)

wellll i never thought of running H4.0 in ultra/tess extreme FSAA 8X on my rig ... but i have to say ... naahhh my dear Revy on my desktop background say more just by the pose. 





and for answering d1nky : "if my old bag can do it like that, no way any other "enthusiast" setup cant!"


----------



## HammerON (Oct 3, 2013)

Single GTX 780 @ 1150/3005 w/ i7 4770K @ 4.4GHz:





MSI GTX 780 SLI @ 1124/3005 w/ i7 4770K @ 4.4GHz:


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 3, 2013)

HammerON said:


> Single GTX 780 @ 1150/3005 w/ i7 4770K @ 4.4GHz:
> http://img.techpowerup.org/131003/Capture138847.jpg
> 
> MSI GTX 780 SLI @ 1124/3005 w/ i7 4770K @ 4.4GHz:
> http://img.techpowerup.org/131003/Capture137221.jpg



weeew when i see your 1st rig score im pretty proud of my rig (specially since its assembled from various 2nd hand parts and for a ridiculous price  )

duhhh my downside of the day ... i found a Intel DX79SI at 80$ but i cant find anymore the i7-3820 i saw at 150$ oh well s'not my day ...


----------



## Rekkapena (Oct 3, 2013)

*GTX780 slightly oc and i7 960@3,8GHz*

http://picsit.fi/k/2013/10/03/tulos.jpg


----------



## Durvelle27 (Oct 3, 2013)

*List Updated *


----------



## _larry (Oct 3, 2013)

Not sure why the benchmark itself doesn't show my CPU overclock. I feel like my score should be higher, no? I'm waiting on some new case fans to allow the card to breathe better at 100% fan. The three fans on it are LOUD and require a mass of airflow. I will break 1000~ before this is over.
i5 -3450 @ 3.8ghz
7950 @ 1110core/1480mem
Score - 923


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 3, 2013)

GTX Titan at 1176 core, 7008 memory.  i73930k @ 4.4Ghz








Also, how does a GTX 780 boosting at 1031 beat anther GTX 780 boosting at 1150 (Rekkapena versus HammerOn)?  That don't seem right at all, considering HammerON has a faster processor (4.4 versus 3.8).


----------



## sweet (Oct 3, 2013)

the54thvoid said:


> Also, how does a GTX 780 boosting at 1031 beat anther GTX 780 boosting at 1150 (Rekkapena versus HammerOn)?  That don't seem right at all, considering HammerON has a faster processor (4.4 versus 3.8).



HammerON has a SLI setup so I guess that he benched the main card first while the 2nd card is still on the board. Heat might be the factor here.


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 3, 2013)

d1nky said:


> this has been done and the thread had about 5 posts.
> 
> do something different, like BASIC preset. that's pure overclocking madness


Thats a lot of CPU too... and a bit pointless for a GPU thread. And he isn't using the Hwbot wrapper so, I do not think there is a 'basic' preset anyway?

If it was heat, sweet, it would throttle... If the card is below the throttling point, it wont perform and worse at the same clockspeed. My guess is drivers or something...


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 3, 2013)

_larry said:


> Not sure why the benchmark itself doesn't show my CPU overclock. I feel like my score should be higher, no? I'm waiting on some new case fans to allow the card to breathe better at 100% fan. The three fans on it are LOUD and require a mass of airflow. I will break 1000~ before this is over.
> i5 -3450 @ 3.8ghz
> 7950 @ 1110core/1480mem
> Score - 923



Unigines benchies show my 920 being at 3990mhz and CPU-Z/Bios/OHM report 4189mhz seems all post show that behavior, also your score show me i dont need to upgrade (the only upgrade in my budget, new and not 2nd hand as i allways do is about the same setup as yours) 

also my GTX580 is whisper quiet thanks Prolimatech and Noiseblocker  1260rpm on 2 140mm i cant hear them if i lower the CPU fan and my HAF-XB isnt what you can call a isolated box ,i just need to change the fan on my Macho  im using a Coolink Swif 120 pwm as a backup, since i put my 2 Ty-147 on the IFX-14 in the Boinc machine

im also waiting on a 2nd 580 from asus i will keep it with the DCUII cooler but im wondering if my InWin 700W gold will handle that setup


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 3, 2013)

Heaven on the 'extreme' setting like this is NOT remotely CPU dependent. Your scores will not change much at all from stock to overclocked.


----------



## _larry (Oct 3, 2013)

the54thvoid said:


> Also, how does a GTX 780 boosting at 1031 beat anther GTX 780 boosting at 1150 (Rekkapena versus HammerOn)?  That don't seem right at all, considering HammerON has a faster processor (4.4 versus 3.8).



Look at the min. FPS. 
I think this test requires a few passes to get cached in. There is one point where the scene froze for a second like it was loading the textures and my min. fps went from 22 to 6~. Or maybe it is just an inconsistent benchmark..


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 3, 2013)

_larry said:


> Look at the min. FPS.
> I think this test requires a few passes to get cached in. There is one point where the scene froze for a second like it was loading the textures and my min. fps went from 22 to 6~. Or maybe it is just an inconsistent benchmark..



Good call m8.  5.5fps is pretty low minimum 

HammerOn - we demand you run the loop then bench again.  That being said - I didn't cache mine (except for the first 10 seconds before running the bench)


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 3, 2013)

pushing the bclk to 210 bringing that i7-920 to 4.4ghz (also the score grid shows 4.2)
getting the 580 to 950 core 1170 memory got me to 844 and min fps 16.7 instead of 7.2
indeed the cpu OC dont do much (i believe the little bump in the score and fps is only due to the card OC)




and wow 64c the highest temp i got on that card till now


----------



## _larry (Oct 3, 2013)

THEORY CONFIRMED.
I just used a LOWER overclock and got a HIGHER min. FPS by letting the scenes fully pass before doing the benchmark. Might want to make a note of this in the OP...Time to go break 1000 now haha!


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 3, 2013)

_larry said:


> THEORY CONFIRMED.
> I just used a LOWER overclock and got a HIGHER min. FPS by letting the scenes fully pass before doing the benchmark. Might want to make a note of this in the OP...



my 16fps min was achieved by directly hitting F9 at the start of the demo, no caching or letting the demo run

yahoohoo 965mhz/2365mhz throttle xD 15fps slideshow+ slight artifacting after scene 10, result : score 591 23.5 avg fps 11.8 min fps 106.2 max fps


----------



## _larry (Oct 3, 2013)

GreiverBlade said:


> my 16fps min was achieved by directly hitting F9 at the start of the benchmark, no caching or letting the demo run
> 
> yahoohoo 965mhz/2365mhz throttle xD 15fps slideshow+ slight artifacting after scene 10, result : score 591 23.5 avg fps 11.8 min fps 106.2 max fps



Might be different if you are running it off of an SSD or a fast hard drive. Some of the people who got below 10~fps might want to try my method. Then it will really be confirmed if their lowest fps was higher.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 3, 2013)

well i can try running it installed on the Vertex III or the Velociraptor instead of the 5k6 WD green xD


----------



## _larry (Oct 3, 2013)

GreiverBlade said:


> well i can try running it installed on the Vertex III or the Velociraptor instead of the 5k6 WD green xD



Don't bother. Apparently the lowest FPS doesn't even matter...I just got a score of 935 with a lowest fps of 20...only 12 points higher than my other benchmark that had a lowest fps of 6...


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 3, 2013)

The HDD shouldnt make a difference. In the Hwbot version of Heaven (same but with a wrapper and different scoring), I run it off an SSD in one machine and HDD in another. There is ALWAYS that 'hitch' at the very beginning for me. THough running the benchmark twice the FPS do not drop as low.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 3, 2013)

_larry said:


> Don't bother. Apparently the lowest FPS doesn't even matter...I just got a score of 935 with a lowest fps of 20...only 12 points higher than my other benchmark that had a lowest fps of 6...



well for me it made 816 to 844, 28pts more weird


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 3, 2013)

Run variance people...


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 3, 2013)

EarthDog said:


> Run variance people...



i know i know  (look my System Specs under "benchmark results"   )


----------



## HammerON (Oct 3, 2013)

the54thvoid said:


> Good call m8.  5.5fps is pretty low minimum
> 
> HammerOn - we demand you run the loop then bench again.  That being said - I didn't cache mine (except for the first 10 seconds before running the bench)



Yeah - I did notice the freeze with the single and SLI runs (you can see it in the min FPS for both benches). I did not let it loop but I do remember now that when we had the Heaven 3.0thread going users reported that it helped to let the app do a full loop before starting the benchmark.
As far as heat, I have no issues with heat as the cards are watercooled and the highest temp I have seen yet is 40c. They usually stay within the 30's when benching
I really love these Heatkiller waterblocks and SLI Link thing

One thing I ran into last night was when I overclocked the memory to a pretty high frequency (which worked with 3DMark Firestrike) I got a much lower score than without the memory overclock. It was wierd...


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 3, 2013)

Then your memory isnt stable there. 

You will likely not be able to run the same clocks in Heaven that you can in FS. FS is higher.


----------



## HammerON (Oct 3, 2013)

Yeah I know, but I do try to use clocks that I find stable on one benchmark on another to see what happens


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 3, 2013)

If it runs on heaven it will run on anything else. Start from Heaven and work your way UP in clocks is my method. That way, I know none with fail with my max heaven clocks.


----------



## HammerON (Oct 3, 2013)

Thanks for the pointer


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 3, 2013)

Just did a Fresh windows install and stumbled across this thread.

Stock clocks... latest 13.10 beta 2 driver


----------



## HammerON (Oct 3, 2013)

Can you run it with just one GPU???
Just curious to see your score...


----------



## _larry (Oct 3, 2013)

fullinfusion said:


> Just did a Fresh windows install and stumbled across this thread.
> 
> Stock clocks... latest 13.10 beta 2 driver
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/131003/heven4.0.png



Now I REALLY don't understand why I can't break 1k...
My memory bandwidth, pixel fill rate, texture fill rate AND clock speeds are higher than yours...I guess those extra shaders you have really make all the difference with this beast of a benchmark. I'm sure the i7 helps a ton compared to my i5 too.
I will try the 13.10 beta 2 drivers out. I'm using the official 13.10s. If that doesn't boost my score at all, I don't think I will be able to hit 1k on air.


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 4, 2013)

HammerON said:


> Can you run it with just one GPU???
> Just curious to see your score...


Yup for sure Hammer, just run the same clock's or hammer down?
Just let me finish downloading a game on Origin and will post.

Her ya go. Same settings but one card. Sure makes one appreciate the second card especially in scene #1 








_larry said:


> Now I REALLY don't understand why I can't break 1k...
> My memory bandwidth, pixel fill rate, texture fill rate AND clock speeds are higher than yours...I guess those extra shaders you have really make all the difference with this beast of a benchmark. I'm sure the i7 helps a ton compared to my i5 too.
> I will try the 13.10 beta 2 drivers out. I'm using the official 13.10s. If that doesn't boost my score at all, I don't think I will be able to hit 1k on air.



Don't hit benchmark straight away, wait about 5 seconds and then hit it.
Also I know my systems memory has helped out some as well over my old platnium sticks.
I'll disable hyper-threading and run it to and see how much it changes scores 

4c/4T vs 4c/8T , nada difference


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 4, 2013)

Slight bump.. Well for the CCC it is maxed out.






MSI AB clocked


----------



## HammerON (Oct 4, 2013)

the54thvoid said:


> Good call m8.  5.5fps is pretty low minimum
> 
> HammerOn - we demand you run the loop then bench again.  That being said - I didn't cache mine (except for the first 10 seconds before running the bench)



Ran the benches again. This time I let Heaven run before hitting the benchmark to let it cache:
Single GTX 780:
1466 - GTX 780 @ 1150/1502 - HammerON





GTX 780 SLI:
2838 - GTX 780 (SLI) @ 1150/1502 - HammerON





Minimum fps are definitely better


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 4, 2013)

_larry said:


> Now I REALLY don't understand why I can't break 1k...
> My memory bandwidth, pixel fill rate, texture fill rate AND clock speeds are higher than yours...I guess those extra shaders you have really make all the difference with this beast of a benchmark. I'm sure the i7 helps a ton compared to my i5 too.
> I will try the 13.10 beta 2 drivers out. I'm using the official 13.10s. If that doesn't boost my score at all, I don't think I will be able to hit 1k on air.



well me i understand ... single card versus CFX in the post and score you quoted. oh well i dont either understand ... my 5800K setup with a XFX 7950 at 1060/3100 was hitting 1300pts+ oh wait that was in ultra and normal tess  should have been 900ish in ultra+extrem tess

single gpu he does 39pts more than my highest score and he cache the demo, me on the other hand i dont 

i will really love when i will recieve next week my ASUS GTX580 DCUII 

i know i know ... power consumption ... ahahahhahaha


----------



## freakshow (Oct 5, 2013)

Single GTX 780 @ 996/1604 w/ i7 3770K @ 4.7GHz:


----------



## MetalRacer (Oct 5, 2013)

daily beater

1652 - GTX TITAN @ 1136/1692 - MetalRacer


----------



## freakshow (Oct 5, 2013)

MetalRacer said:


> daily beater
> 
> 1652 - GTX TITAN @ 1136/1692 - MetalRacer
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/131005/Capture849.jpg



Nice!


----------



## _larry (Oct 5, 2013)

GreiverBlade said:


> well me i understand ... single card versus CFX in the post and score you quoted. oh well i dont either understand ... my 5800K setup with a XFX 7950 at 1060/3100 was hitting 1300pts+ oh wait that was in ultra and normal tess  should have been 900ish in ultra+extrem tess
> 
> single gpu he does 39pts more than my highest score and he cache the demo, me on the other hand i dont
> 
> ...



I didn't realize it was crossfire. it all makes sense now!


----------



## reny900 (Oct 5, 2013)

Here my one 
Cpu: Intel i5 3450 4 cores @3,1GHz (bios set max multipler *38x100MHz so max 3,8 GHz)
Vga: Gigabyte Ati Raden HD 7950 3 GB GDDR5 clock 1000/memory 1380
[url]http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/6281/bry3.png[/URL]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
If i miss something just reply


----------



## red1414 (Oct 6, 2013)

*Heaven 4.0*

Red1414
FX-8350/5011GHz/4x ZHD 7970/1125/1578 157.4 FPS/ score 3964


----------



## MetalRacer (Oct 6, 2013)

1837 - GTX TITAN @ 1202/1777 - MetalRacer


----------



## _larry (Oct 6, 2013)

Got 960 last night with 1200/1400 clocks. I'm getting closer!!


----------



## _larry (Oct 6, 2013)

reny900 said:


> Here my one
> Cpu: Intel i5 3450 4 cores @3,1GHz (bios set max multipler *38x100MHz so max 3,8 GHz)
> Vga: Gigabyte Ati Raden HD 7950 3 GB GDDR5 clock 1000/memory 1380
> [url]http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/6281/bry3.png[/URL]
> ...



Exact same setup as me. This makes my score feel normal lol.


----------



## _larry (Oct 7, 2013)

I HIT 1000 OMG!!!
Put some new thermal paste on my card and went for broke. I used Arctic Silver Ceramique 2 so it needs 25 hours to break in and then I will find the limit. it never got beyond 70C at any time though. 1240/1425 is still a DAMN fine overclock on air. This card is beast. I want to put it underwater so bad now.

EDIT: 1245 seems to be the core limit before i get unstable. I just broke 10k on 3dmark11 as well


----------



## freakshow (Oct 7, 2013)

_larry said:


> I HIT 1000 OMG!!!
> Put some new thermal paste on my card and went for broke. I used Arctic Silver Ceramique 2 so it needs 25 hours to break in and then I will find the limit. it never got beyond 70C at any time though. 1240/1425 is still a DAMN fine overclock on air. This card is beast. I want to put it underwater so bad now.
> 
> EDIT: 1245 seems to be the core limit before i get unstable. I just broke 10k on 3dmark11 as well



nice job!


----------



## renozi (Oct 7, 2013)

1846 - gtx 670 sli 1050/1750


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 8, 2013)

little joke : MSI N460GTX HAWK are beasty 




ok i have the lowest score but with a 460 and a Phenom X4 9600B Am2+ setup 32bits 4gb ram (3.25 ofc)

and from 780/900 to 930/1100


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 10, 2013)

GreiverBlade said:


> pushing the bclk to 210 bringing that i7-920 to 4.4ghz (also the score grid shows 4.2)
> getting the 580 to 950 core 1170 memory got me to 844 and min fps 16.7 instead of 7.2
> indeed the cpu OC dont do much (i believe the little bump in the score and fps is only due to the card OC)
> http://img.techpowerup.org/131003/Heaven4.02.jpg
> and wow 64c the highest temp i got on that card till now



what the hell is that bench 





a 7% OC'ed Phenom X4 9600B 4gb ram in 32bits mode and the GTX580 @ stock frequencies give me a result near my highest with the i7-920 @ 4.4ghz and the 580 at 950/2340


yeah its really GPU bound ... but still stock versus a high oc 

edit i recieved my 1st Matrix GTX580 Platinum... waiting on the 2nd ... sooo lets say my 260$ SLI setup enable me to wait for the next gpu gen either it will be AMD or Nvidia (AMD obviously nor the R9) it cost near 800$ cheaper thant the cheapest Titan in my region and 400$ less than the chapest 780 ... oh wait ... that exactely the price of a single 760 (cheapest also) more Watts eaten but it doesnt matter, and i game at 1080p and sometime at 1200 so 1.5gb is enough, cant wait to test


----------



## z1tu (Oct 21, 2013)

And here you have the results of my "crippled" 280x 




I'll post new tests when I get my new one


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 21, 2013)

How come my score from the first page isn't up?  I have screenshot of score and gpu-z.  Post #9


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 21, 2013)

the54thvoid said:


> How come my score from the first page isn't up?  I have screenshot of score and gpu-z.  Post #9



well he didnt updated my 2nd 3rd and 4th scores so i guess hes not active atm .... be patient(tm)

just a bit more


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 24, 2013)

Daily Beater 

2176-MSI R7970 CF @ 1280/1770 - Fullinfusion


----------



## GreiverBlade (Oct 24, 2013)

fullinfusion said:


> Daily Beater
> 
> 2176-MSI R7970 CF @ 1280/1770 - Fullinfusion
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/131023/newdriver13.11.3.png



well now im sure that the benchmark notify only the base speed and not the OC or turbo mode (even locked on 4 cores)


----------



## Valor (Dec 2, 2013)

Hello,

don't you think there is a problem with my result ? :'(

With an r9 280x Vapor-x


----------



## z1tu (Dec 2, 2013)

Valor said:


> Hello,
> 
> don't you think there is a problem with my result ? :'(
> 
> With an r9 280x Vapor-x


Hi there,

Try updating to the latest beta drivers and see how much you get afterwards.


----------



## the54thvoid (Dec 2, 2013)

Frankly this thread is trash.  The OP doesn't care to update scores (like mine which follows his exact same screenshot properties - gpu-z and Heaven 4.0).  Should be shut down for lack of care.


----------



## Valor (Dec 2, 2013)

z1tu said:


> Hi there,
> 
> Try updating to the latest beta drivers and see how much you get afterwards.




Done.. hmm... bit better...


----------



## z1tu (Dec 2, 2013)

Valor said:


> Done.. hmm... bit better...
> 
> View attachment 53161



I would say a lot better!  Now, if you have decent cooling you can also overclock your CPU, it will only probably give you a few tens of point plus but you'll definitely see a difference in gaming.


----------



## dj-electric (Dec 2, 2013)

I made dis... sorry...
4.2ghz 4770K, gpu at 1110 \ 1750


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 3, 2013)

Valor said:


> Done.. hmm... bit better...
> 
> View attachment 53161


Your score  is much lower than mine which it shouldn't be. something's wrong


----------



## z1tu (Dec 3, 2013)

Durvelle27 said:


> Your score  is much lower than mine which it shouldn't be. something's wrong


How do you figure? You have 1290 Ghz core clock, he has 1070 Ghz, pretty sure that should account for the difference in points.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 4, 2013)

*List Updated*


----------



## z1tu (Dec 4, 2013)

Just realized I had 4x AA, here is my latest with 1150 Core and 1500 Mem


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 4, 2013)

z1tu said:


> Just realized I had 4x AA, here is my latest with 1150 Core and 1500 Mem



Man push that GPU farther


----------



## z1tu (Dec 4, 2013)

Durvelle27 said:


> Man push that GPU farther


Would love to but memory chips on it are trash, even a 25hz increase ends up in artifacts


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 4, 2013)

Well try pushing the core further 





z1tu said:


> Would love to but memory chips on it are trash, even a 25hz increase ends up in artifacts


----------



## z1tu (Dec 4, 2013)

Durvelle27 said:


> Well try pushing the core further



I would, with better cooling tho


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 4, 2013)

z1tu said:


> I would, with better cooling tho


What card do you have ?


----------



## z1tu (Dec 4, 2013)

Durvelle27 said:


> What card do you have ?


Gigabyte Radeon R9 280X Windforce 3x OC


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 4, 2013)

z1tu said:


> Gigabyte Radeon R9 280X Windforce 3x OC


That cooler is adequate for a nice OC. Almost one of the best coolers available on a R9 280X/ HD 7970


----------



## z1tu (Dec 4, 2013)

Durvelle27 said:


> That cooler is adequate for a nice OC. Almost one of the best coolers available on a R9 280X/ HD 7970


I guess, but I was talking about in general in my case


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 4, 2013)

z1tu said:


> I guess, but I was talking about in general in my case


When benching just kick the fan speed up to 100% and make it purr like a kitten lol


----------



## z1tu (Dec 4, 2013)

Durvelle27 said:


> When benching just kick the fan speed up to 100% and make it purr like a kitten lol


 I could push it further just for the benchmark I guess, I tested my everyday clocks


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 4, 2013)

z1tu said:


> I could push it further just for the benchmark I guess, I tested my everyday clocks


Do it Do it Do it lol

Daily i ran my 7970 @1200/1600 but for benches i have taken it up to 1325/1850


----------



## z1tu (Dec 4, 2013)

Durvelle27 said:


> Do it Do it Do it lol
> 
> Daily i ran my 7970 @1200/1600 but for benches i have taken it up to 1325/1850



I'll give it a shot tonight with the new beta drivers and see what I get


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 4, 2013)

z1tu said:


> I'll give it a shot tonight with the new beta drivers and see what I get


good luck


----------



## goninja (Dec 8, 2013)

Hope I'm doing this right.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 8, 2013)

Sapphire R9 290 @1150/1450 + FX-8350 @5GHz


----------



## goninja (Dec 8, 2013)

Closing a few programs squeezed out a few more points.


----------



## SimpleTECH (Dec 8, 2013)

ASUS R9 290 @ 1100/1420 + Intel i7-4770K @ 4.3GHz





ASUS R9 290 @ 1150/1420 + Intel i7-4770K @ 4.3GHz


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 8, 2013)

SimpleTECH said:


> ASUS R9 290 @ 1100/1420 + Intel i7-4770K @ 4.3GHz
> 
> View attachment 53288


Added


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 9, 2013)

OP Updated


----------



## Tupac33 (Dec 18, 2013)

Asus r9 290 @ 1120/1250   Intel i5-4670K @ 4.2GHz


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 18, 2013)

Tupac33 said:


> View attachment 53431 Asus r9 290 @ 1100/1250   Intel i5-4670K @ 4.2GHz


Added


----------



## Eroticus (Dec 18, 2013)

You guys should capture picture  of application in the end of the test.  ;P it's html file some people can easily cheat, and add some points.


----------



## Solaris17 (Dec 25, 2013)

im curious *reserved*

Edit I take it back I cant do the resolution im 1600x1200

I must admit I am very close to you guys even on old hardware. and im probably heat throttling on this 290x and I didnt close any of my programs because i dropped out of the bench game a few years back.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Dec 25, 2013)

Solaris17 said:


> im curious *reserved*
> 
> Edit I take it back I cant do the resolution im 1600x1200
> 
> I must admit I am very close to you guys even on old hardware. and im probably heat throttling on this 290x and I didnt close any of my programs because i dropped out of the bench game a few years back.



GO FOR IT!

1600x1200 is good either and you can specify it in the result show so @Durvelle27 can specify it on the score board.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 25, 2013)

This 




GreiverBlade said:


> GO FOR IT!
> 
> 1600x1200 is good either and you can specify it in the result show so @Durvelle27 can specify it on the score board.


----------



## Bladedrummer (Dec 25, 2013)

Hello, I've never posted on here before but I often read this site and I thought I'd join. =) 

EVGA GTX 670 FTW 2GB @1050/1840 - i7 3770K @ 4.5 GHz

Not sure if those clocks should include boosts and OC values. Either way, I overclocked the GPU clock by another +44MHz and the memory by +575MHz with PrecisionX.


----------



## Solaris17 (Dec 26, 2013)

Here ya go 1600x1200 vanilla 290x at stock clocks and my 3520 down to 4ghz I managed this with a single card (that was throttling) and I didnt close any apps except chrome 9AV acronis etc running like normal)


----------



## Durvelle27 (Dec 29, 2013)

OP Updated


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 4, 2014)

FX-8350 @4.8GHz & GTX 780 @1280/1502


----------



## Jetster (Jan 4, 2014)




----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 4, 2014)

Nice score

Added 




Jetster said:


>


----------



## sirbaili (Jan 4, 2014)

Relatively low score - 3770k  -  4600Mhz - R9 2900 X2  1100Mhz Mem: 1250 Mhz


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 4, 2014)

sirbaili said:


> Relatively low score - 3770k  -  4600Mhz - R9 2900 X2  1100Mhz Mem: 1250 Mhz


Your score is very off. Is it a single or dual run


----------



## Jetster (Jan 4, 2014)

Sirbaili
Integrated GPU enabled? You running Lucid virtu?


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 4, 2014)

Jetster said:


> Sirbaili
> Integrated GPU enabled? You running Lucid virtu?


Bud rules state no iGPU as it boosts score


----------



## sirbaili (Jan 4, 2014)

its a crossfire x setup


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 4, 2014)

sirbaili said:


> its a crossfire x setup


if its a Crossfire score seems borked for 2x 290X


----------



## Jetster (Jan 4, 2014)

Hybrid Crossfire? Run it without the igpu then post your score


----------



## sirbaili (Jan 5, 2014)

Hi Jester 

I do not know how but I had to reset my BIOS and specifically disable multi GPU support  in IGPU options (I have a Asrock Z77 oc formula motherboard).

Now I got this:

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?res...uthkey=!AA--dDajorTKKj8&v=3&ithint=photo,.jpg


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 5, 2014)

sirbaili said:


> Hi Jester
> 
> I do not know how but I had to reset my BIOS and specifically disable multi GPU support  in IGPU options (I have a Asrock Z77 oc formula motherboard).
> 
> ...


Much better


----------



## Jetster (Jan 5, 2014)

Lol,  you're welcome


----------



## Droffz (Jan 5, 2014)

I was wondering if I did anything wrong because my score hasn't been updated for a single gtx 780.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 5, 2014)

Droffz said:


> I was wondering if I did anything wrong because my score hasn't been updated for a single gtx 780.


Yes i need a full screen image from within Heaven 4.0


----------



## Droffz (Jan 5, 2014)

That's weird because goninja didn't have a fullscreen image but had his score updated.  Hm...  guess I'll have to run it again.


----------



## Droffz (Jan 5, 2014)

As AB stated GTX780 @ 1280mhz core and 1778mhz memory (7114mhz).  CPU i7 2600k @ 4.5ghz


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jan 5, 2014)

GTX780 @ 1320mhz core 1750mhz memory (7.0GHZ). CPU at stock. Probably not 100% stable, seeing how that minimum FPS is so low.


----------



## HammerON (Jan 5, 2014)

Droffz said:


> View attachment 53745 View attachment 53744 When I try to print screen while heaven 4.0 is in fullscreen it comes up dark and I can't find the screenshots in unigine heaven screenshots folder.  I have 0 artifacts and such so it's rather weird but here's another score I guess.


 After the run is completed you can save the file.


----------



## Droffz (Jan 5, 2014)

HammerON said:


> After the run is completed you can save the file.


Yeah man, it was just weird because it was coming as a tga file which I had to convert but I also got fraps so yeah.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 5, 2014)

Droffz said:


> View attachment 53746 View attachment 53747 View attachment 53748


I need clocks



MxPhenom 216 said:


> GTX780 @ 1320mhz core 1750mhz memory (7.0GHZ). CPU at stock. Probably not 100% stable, seeing how that minimum FPS is so low.


Added


----------



## Droffz (Jan 6, 2014)

I updated my earlier post and typed in my clocks which are right under my AB which also showed my clocks.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 6, 2014)

Something's doesn't seem right here.


----------



## Droffz (Jan 6, 2014)

Alright bro, let me know how many more hoops you want me to jump through.  Sucks that I have to provide so much proof while not many others provide much and you update their scores asap.





Ran Heaven again and got .1 less FPS which got 1669 now.  Probaby didn't help that I had 3 monitoring programs and the internet open.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 6, 2014)

The reason Im putting you through the loops is because scores didn't add up. You said you were 1280 on core but outperformed me at 1280 and MXPhenom at 1320.



Droffz said:


> Alright bro, let me know how many more hoops you want me to jump through.  Sucks that I have to provide so much proof while not many others provide much and you update their scores asap.
> 
> View attachment 53752
> 
> ...


----------



## Droffz (Jan 6, 2014)

I really think you're underestimating the mem clocks which is what I did at first.

I was running at 6600 MHz mem at first because I heard it was a good range.  After exhausting my experiments with core I found where I was comfortable and could possibly push more from the core if I wanted to.

I thought I had Elpedia mem chips also which is why I settled for 6600 MHz.  After more tinkering I found out that I had Hynix mem chips and then started pushing them and they made a good difference in the score.

As for the 1320 core not running as well... I don't think they were stable because like he even said the min fps dropped to 8.6 which hasn't happened to me.

I believe this is a good score for me even though I know I could do better if I flash my bios and unlock more voltage/power limit.

My 2 bios on the card are stock bios/ln2 stock.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jan 6, 2014)

Droffz said:


> I really think you're underestimating the mem clocks which is what I did at first.
> 
> I was running at 6600 MHz mem at first because I heard it was a good range.  After exhausting my experiments with core I found where I was comfortable and could possibly push more from the core if I wanted to.
> 
> ...



Dude, I was running faster memory and core clock, and you were beating me. Memory clocks do not help THAT much.


----------



## Droffz (Jan 6, 2014)

My memory was 7114 and yours was 7000.  Don't know where you saw you had more and like I said man, those were my results with what I had.  Nothing has been edited like what you guys are strongly implying.

As for the memory not being a huge deal.  I was getting the same scores Durvelle was until I started messing with the memory and pushing it.

Can't believe you guys are giving a noob overlocker such a big deal after all the proof I've been throwing out there.

Guess I'll post my entire specs again which I deleted before because Durvelle wasn't updating my earlier scores.

Asus sabertooth z77 i7 2600k @4.5 ghz/Water 2.0 pro | GTX 780 Lightning | corsair vengeance 16gb 1600mhz | corsair hx850w | ocz vertex 4 128gb/2tb seagate hdd 7200rpm | Tt level 10 GT | LG blu ray


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 6, 2014)

Droffz said:


> Alright bro, let me know how many more hoops you want me to jump through.  Sucks that I have to provide so much proof while not many others provide much and you update their scores asap.
> 
> View attachment 53752
> 
> ...


Added


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 6, 2014)

marwaremas said:


> I was talking about in general in my case


What are you talking about bud


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 7, 2014)

FX-8350 @5.1GHZ + GTX 780 1293/1850


----------



## fullinfusion (Jan 7, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> Your score is very off. Is it a single or dual run


It shows as a single gpu.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 7, 2014)

fullinfusion said:


> It shows as a single gpu.


He said it was two GPUs


----------



## fullinfusion (Jan 7, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> He said it was two GPUs


Yeah I seen that. Probably figured it was in crossfire mode but clearly the screen shot shows x1 for gpu and not x2


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 7, 2014)

fullinfusion said:


> Yeah I seen that. Probably figured it was in crossfire mode but clearly the screen shot shows x1 for gpu and not x2


Yep but i think he fixed it


----------



## Droffz (Jan 7, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> FX-8350 @5.1GHZ + GTX 780 1293/1850


Crazy what happens when you start messing with mem clocks...

I've been away on a trip for a buddy's surgery but when I get back I might try pushing it a bit more.

Grats dude.  Also, if you don't mind my asking what program are you using to show the info on the top left?  Thanks.


----------



## Gribar (Jan 7, 2014)

i7 4770k @4.2 Ghz

EVGA GTX 780 SC (ACX) SLI:
-GPU 0: core 1027 mhz, boost 1080, est max 1196, memory 6008 mhz
-GPU 1: core 1027 mhz, boost 1080, est max 1157, memory 6008 mhz

16 GB Kingston hyper X @ 1600 mhz


----------



## fullinfusion (Jan 8, 2014)

Gribar said:


> i7 4770k @4.2 Ghz
> 
> EVGA GTX 780 SC (ACX) SLI:
> -GPU 0: core 1027 mhz, boost 1080, est max 1196, memory 6008 mhz
> ...


Welcome to TPU and nice score!


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 8, 2014)

MSI Afterburner / River Tuner 



Droffz said:


> Crazy what happens when you start messing with mem clocks...
> 
> I've been away on a trip for a buddy's surgery but when I get back I might try pushing it a bit more.
> 
> Grats dude.  Also, if you don't mind my asking what program are you using to show the info on the top left?  Thanks.


----------



## mdbrotha03 (Jan 8, 2014)

Me


----------



## broken pixel (Jan 8, 2014)

Some Red for the #2 spot. (Multi- GPU)

Dual XFX 290x @ 1155MHz/1500MHz +100mV +100mV(aux)- 3930k @ 4.7GHz/ 2133MHz


----------



## sirbaili (Jan 8, 2014)

O.K.
3770k - 4.6ghz
R9-290 Crossfire 1100Ghz Memory - NO OC.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 8, 2014)

Guys you must provide a in bench screen shot to be valid


----------



## broken pixel (Jan 8, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> Guys you must provide a in bench screen shot to be valid



It does not state in bench screen shot in your first post.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 8, 2014)

broken pixel said:


> It does not state in bench screen shot in your first post.


was stated a few posts back but it has been added to OP


----------



## mdbrotha03 (Jan 8, 2014)

Me again with more juice


!

Using this GPU

GIGABYTE GV-N780GHZ-3GD


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 8, 2014)

Weird why is it offcenter but score will be added



mdbrotha03 said:


> Me again with more juice
> 
> View attachment 53812
> !View attachment 53811


----------



## mdbrotha03 (Jan 8, 2014)

I moved it to get a better picture of the dragon .


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 8, 2014)

Lol ok



mdbrotha03 said:


> I moved it to get a better picture of the dragon .


----------



## mdbrotha03 (Jan 10, 2014)

Haven't been added yet.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 10, 2014)

mdbrotha03 said:


> Haven't been added yet.


I'm very busy you have to give me time but it has been updated


----------



## Gribar (Jan 11, 2014)

There's something I still can't understand, I have 2 GTXs 780 SC (acx). I purchased the first one in july 2013, and the second one in december 2013, ok both cards have different ASIC quality, the first one is 58% and the second one is 75%, the card with the highest ASIC quality is capable of achieving higher core clock offset, but the card with the lowest ASIC quality only reaches +50 mhz and then it shows artifacts or crashes. The problem is that Unigine Heaven fps and score only change if I overclock the lowest card, I can push the fastest card to +200 mhz but it doesn't make a difference, for exaple:

Test 1:

GTX 780 SC with lowest ASIC quality: +50 mhz (max boost clock 1147 mhz)
GTX 780 SC with highest ASIC quality: +50 mhz (max boost clock 1196 mhz)

Results: UH score 2848    - avg FPS 113


Test 2:

GTX 780 SC with lowest ASIC quality: +50 mhz (max boost clock 1147 mhz)
GTX 780 SC with highest ASIC quality: +100 mhz (max boost clock 1252 mhz)

Results: UH score 2846    - avg FPS 112.9


Test 3:

GTX 780 SC with lowest ASIC quality: +70 mhz (max boost clock 1172 mhz)
GTX 780 SC with highest ASIC quality: +70 mhz (max boost clock 1206 mhz)

Results: UH score 2988    - avg FPS 117.4

Is there something I'm doing wrong???


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 11, 2014)

Gribar said:


> There's something I still can't understand, I have 2 GTXs 780 SC (acx). I purchased the first one in july 2013, and the second one in december 2013, ok both cards have different ASIC quality, the first one is 58% and the second one is 75%, the card with the highest ASIC quality is capable of achieving higher core clock offset, but the card with the lowest ASIC quality only reaches +50 mhz and then it shows artifacts or crashes. The problem is that Unigine Heaven fps and score only change if I overclock the lowest card, I can push the fastest card to +200 mhz but it doesn't make a difference, for exaple:
> 
> Test 1:
> 
> ...


You really want clocks to mirror each other so try clocking them at the same clock


----------



## Gribar (Jan 11, 2014)

I'ts supposed that Kepler architecture allows SLI setups to handle different clock speeds at the same time, that's why identical cards have different boost clocks, depending on chip quality


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 11, 2014)

Was just throwing out a suggestion bud




Gribar said:


> I'ts supposed that Kepler architecture allows SLI setups to handle different clock speeds at the same time, that's why identical cards have different boost clocks, depending on chip quality


----------



## Bladedrummer (Jan 13, 2014)

Don't underestimate stability. You got the best results with the most stable clocks for both cards. 



Gribar said:


> There's something I still can't understand, I have 2 GTXs 780 SC (acx). I purchased the first one in july 2013, and the second one in december 2013, ok both cards have different ASIC quality, the first one is 58% and the second one is 75%, the card with the highest ASIC quality is capable of achieving higher core clock offset, but the card with the lowest ASIC quality only reaches +50 mhz and then it shows artifacts or crashes. The problem is that Unigine Heaven fps and score only change if I overclock the lowest card, I can push the fastest card to +200 mhz but it doesn't make a difference, for exaple:
> 
> Test 1:
> 
> ...


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 13, 2014)

my set-up







my results


----------



## Paladone (Jan 13, 2014)

Just ran a benchmark, is this a normal score for my system?

EDIT: Updated it


----------



## havene (Jan 14, 2014)

760 SLI, 3770k







I'm not sure how my setup performs worse than a 780 ti/780 in this benchmark, I've even overclocked the cards, plus they should be on average 15%+ faster than a 780 ti.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 14, 2014)

havene said:


> I'm not sure how my setup performs worse than a 780 ti/780 in this benchmark, I've even overclocked the cards, plus they should be on average 15%+ faster than a 780 ti.



Well my ti has almost 400mhz OC over a "plain Jane" reference ti. I'm actually above GTX690 performance levels and with that OC,  probably right about even with the HD7990


----------



## Paladone (Jan 14, 2014)

havene said:


> 760 SLI, 3770kView attachment 53951View attachment 53952View attachment 53953
> 
> I'm not sure how my setup performs worse than a 780 ti/780 in this benchmark, I've even overclocked the cards, plus they should be on average 15%+ faster than a 780 ti.



I would have said that two would be about the same as a 780ti, about 15% faster than a 780 though.


----------



## Paladone (Jan 14, 2014)

BarbaricSoul said:


> Well my ti has almost 400mhz OC over a "plain Jane" reference ti. I'm actually above GTX690 performance levels and with that OC,  probably right about even with the HD7990



I had a 7990, had a lot of issues with it >.< It also ran exceptionally hot, and typically seemed to lose performance as it heated up. Much prefer the 780Ti to 7990 haha


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 14, 2014)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> I made dis... sorry...
> 4.2ghz 4770K, gpu at 1110 \ 1750



What I'd like to know is why I can't beat this guy's score.  CPU and GPU wise, I'm running considerably higher clock speeds.


----------



## Paladone (Jan 14, 2014)

BarbaricSoul said:


> What I'd like to know is why I can't beat this guy's score.  CPU and GPU wise, I'm running considerably higher clock speeds.



Maybe he had IGP enabled? Wait, so is your card running at 1241/1851?! or is that with GPU boost 2.0?


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 14, 2014)

with K-Boost on, yes, my card runs that 24/7 according to EVGA Precision. No, I don't keep K-Boost on.


----------



## Paladone (Jan 14, 2014)

BarbaricSoul said:


> with K-Boost on, yes, my card runs that 24/7 according to EVGA Precision. No, I don't keep K-Boost on.



So what is K-boost supposed to do? because when I enable it, my cards, according to Precision-x, are running at like 600Mhz (and I see a massive performance decrease).

EDIT: Never mind, It appears that I just needed to restart Precision-X. I don't seem to be able to enable it for the second card though, but it does work for the first.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 14, 2014)

It locks your clock speeds and voltage to what you set them at, so that your card will not throttle when their full power is not needed.

I think your enabling K-Boost thinking your disabling it(I did this once, and didn't realize it until I noticed the excess heat my tower was producing). With K-Boost enabled, your cards should not downclock to 600mhz


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 14, 2014)

Paladone said:


> EDIT: Never mind, It appears that I just needed to restart Precision-X. I don't seem to be able to enable it for the second card though, but it does work for the first.



You did notice the "select GPU" option in the voltage and tweaks controller? You probably need to select the 2nd GPU to enable/disable K-Boost for it.


----------



## Paladone (Jan 14, 2014)

BarbaricSoul said:


> You did notice the "select GPU" option in the voltage and tweaks controller? You probably need to select the 2nd GPU to enable/disable K-Boost for it.



Ahh yeah I think I got it sorted.


----------



## Kaapstad (Jan 14, 2014)

A fun one here, going for my lowest score.

GTX 690 running on one core

CPU is running @1.2ghz


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 14, 2014)

£600 for the 2 cards.
price vs performance nothing can touch them right now 14/1/14
GPU overclock 1050 from 947 memory 1350 from 1250 Core V + 6% on both. Power limit +30
Cpu 2700k @ 4.8









Just for the fun I did a 2560x1600









GPU overclock 1050 from 947 memory 1350 from 1250 Core V + 6% on both. Power limit +30
Cpu 2700k @ 4.8


----------



## Eroticus (Jan 14, 2014)




----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 14, 2014)

I will remind you guys again. To be added to list you have to post a screenshot from within Heaven 4.0


List Updated


----------



## Eroticus (Jan 14, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> I will remind you guys again. To be added to list you have to post a screenshot from within Heaven 4.0
> 
> 
> List Updated



Print Screen not working in app xD tested again =) and pictured with phone. same score.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 14, 2014)

Eroticus said:


> Print Screen not working in app xD tested again =) and pictured with phone. same score.


Added


----------



## Eroticus (Jan 14, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> Added



100 HZ was not stable ( Screen)  ;D so update it again =) it's the limits for stock bios xd


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 14, 2014)

Eroticus said:


> 100 HZ was not stable ( Screen)  ;D so update it again =) it's the limits for stock bios xd


Updated but your still in the same position  XD


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 15, 2014)

I voided my warranty to replace the paste.
I have to redo both of them because the surface of the copper is very pitted and the one has a concave surface so its high in the centre,
I wish I had myself a surface grinding right now so im going to have to lap the surface gently to remove any blemishes and make it flat because it isn't.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 15, 2014)

Jetster said:


>





Durvelle27 said:


> Nice score
> 
> Added





Durvelle27 said:


> Bud rules state no iGPU as it boosts score



then remove that one too as it use IGP under Lucid Virtu MVP (at last it seems. ) 

tuning the last settings before launching the bench on my new "reduction budget µPerformancesATX build"


----------



## Jetster (Jan 15, 2014)

I didn't even notice that. No its not Lucid but I correct it


----------



## JThorpe (Jan 15, 2014)

Hello All,

I just finished my new build. Here is my information. I was not able to print screen while it was running (not sure on boost clock), but everything is stock.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 15, 2014)

could be worse considering that i have a µATX  Intel DQ77MK but im quite impressed at MSI the R9 270 Gaming OC is whisper quiet, never reach above 65° and direct out of the box you can max core/mem sliders without voltage control all that on a single 6pin connector


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 15, 2014)

dam this bench really favours nvidea cards.
I think its the tessellation settings are locked and amd cant access it to improve there performance.

You have to do a screen shot inside the benchmark before the results are valid.
Its to easy to edit the html file


----------



## Eroticus (Jan 15, 2014)

freeleacher said:


> dam this bench really favours nvidea cards.
> I think its the tessellation settings are locked and amd cant access it to improve there performance.
> 
> You have to do a screen shot inside the benchmark before the results are valid.
> Its to easy to edit the html file



It's bcuz app not test amount of memory and memory clock up score more then gpu core clock lol ...


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 15, 2014)

Please guys read the rules before posting


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 15, 2014)

tess set to extreme for all no bypasser! if i use the preset that Durvelle27 ask even on my R9 270 i don't care that a NV card do better in the same segment because of tess 

same for Tomb Raider 2013 and TressFX i benched my 770 and 7950 previously and the 7950 was a bit above the 770 even if it's the 7970ghz the 770 counterpart 

they should add a blonde bimbo (or any color you like ...) with TressFX hair dancing in the Dragon plaza scene to add a bit of fairness


----------



## Jetster (Jan 15, 2014)

Anyone else notice this benckmark is all over the place. I messed around with disabling the IGPU and overclocked the cards and one test is up then down. I ran 3DMark and the tests are consistent.

BTW I love the TressFX hair in Tomb Raider


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 15, 2014)

Jetster said:


> Anyone else notice this benckmark is all over the place. I messed around with disabling the IGPU and overclocked the cards and one test is up then down. I ran 3DMark and the tests are consistent.
> 
> BTW I love the TressFX hair in Tomb Raider


yes i noticed ... hence my old benchmark slogan in System Specs : why bother 2 run never the same result ... (this doesn't concern 3DMark) 

for TressFX ... i did know it was taxing for NV gpu but even with my 580 or the SLI of them or the 770 i have always let all option to the max  just like on my 7950 and now on my R9 270


----------



## Eroticus (Jan 15, 2014)

here bro =) you wanted higher score ?

1247 / 1666 =D


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 15, 2014)

Eroticus said:


> here bro =) you wanted higher score ?
> 
> 1247 / 1666 =D


No fair. You can't come and just out do me 

**Updated**


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 15, 2014)

I gained tons of speed on my machine by making a win7 disk with all my drivers and updates on keeping the graphics drivers out.
So now when ever there is a driver update I just reset because it only takes me 15 min 5 if I install the install to a hidden partition.
Its something you lot may want to think about doing because my machine hasn't been so good.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 15, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> No fair. You can't come and just out do me
> 
> **Updated**


snirfle you didn't add my R9 270 
downgrade but ... proud of my little MSI OC potential


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 15, 2014)

Settings- 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Results-


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 15, 2014)




----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 15, 2014)

freeleacher said:


> Battlefield 4 290 crossfire cheaper than a single 780ti and 170% faster 2560x1600 200% res scale.
> Fact



So what? This is not a BF4 benchmark thread. Everyone knows two 290 beat a single GTX 780ti. Hell, a 7990 beats a 780ti, and that's like two 280 cards in crossfire(7990=2*7950 IIRC)


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 15, 2014)

true sorry


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jan 15, 2014)

Jetster said:


> Anyone else notice this benckmark is all over the place. I messed around with disabling the IGPU and overclocked the cards and one test is up then down. I ran 3DMark and the tests are consistent.
> 
> BTW I love the TressFX hair in Tomb Raider



All my run have between 1698 and 1747. Fifty points doesn't seem too much of a spread considering we're talking about 1700+ points. What's that, like 3% variance?


----------



## JThorpe (Jan 16, 2014)

Updated Entry per the instructions.

780Ti Superclocked w/ ACX x2 (SLI)
1006Mhz (Boost: 1124Mhz entire time)
1750Mhz Memory


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 16, 2014)

we will have to start to use mantle to compare amd and nvid cards soon,
will keep it as fare as this program does,,
Shouldn't use this program nvida have a huge advantage as the program is optimised for them.
amd hast a chance.
But stick us in a game that's a different story


----------



## havene (Jan 16, 2014)

Is it just me or does Heaven 4.0 dislike SLI setups, my 760 SLI setup seems to seriously under perform in this benchmark. Statistically 760 SLI should be average 15% faster than a 780 ti card, don't believe me? Look up benches for yourselves, and here I see 780s destroying me and 7950 CF + 670 SLI.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 16, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> snirfle you didn't add my R9 270
> downgrade but ... proud of my little MSI OC potential



ohhh i see since someone told it is easy to modify HTML you changed the rule about the result screenshot mmhhh ok i will redo it later.



freeleacher said:


> we will have to start to use mantle to compare amd and nvid cards soon,
> will keep it as fare as this program does,,
> Shouldn't use this program nvida have a huge advantage as the program is optimised for them.
> amd hast a chance.
> But stick us in a game that's a different story



don't care, and nope the advantage is not huge ... plus its a specific benchmark result thread: your post has little to do here.



havene said:


> Is it just me or does Heaven 4.0 dislike SLI setups, my 760 SLI setup seems to seriously under perform in this benchmark. Statistically 760 SLI should be average 15% faster than a 780 ti card, don't believe me? Look up benches for yourselves, and here I see 780s destroying me and 7950 CF + 670 SLI.




aherm so 2659 - R9 290 CFX @ ???/??? - freeleacher
                2176 - 7970 CFX @1280/1770 - fullinfusion
                1846 - GTX 670 SLI @1050/1750 - renozi are s lower than 1763 - GTX 780 Ti @1110/1750 - Dj-ElectriC (oh well the last one is pretty close ... but the 670 is weak)

760 have almost the same perf level of a 670 (oh i forgot ... get over it the 780 are : over finished soo 2013, the 780Ti is the new 780  i'm joking don't worry)

i'd say im more impressed at the 3 top single card and their respective owner (for clocking and optimisation) than any "big" SLI score luckily Durvelle27 separate CFX/SLI and single cards chart.
1837 - GTX Titan @1202/1777 - MetalRacer keeping a titan above a 780Ti ahah nice one
1763 - GTX 780 Ti @1110/1750 - Dj-ElectriC
1691 - R9 290X @1247/1666 - Eroticus munching at a 780Ti tails with a AMD card in a "nVidia favored benchmark" good work.

hey...
1322 GTX 580 SLI @900/1050 - GreiverBlade
i am close to them ... oh oops no single card ...


----------



## havene (Jan 16, 2014)

I have an update on my 760 SLI setup, I didn't like the fact that single cards were beating me, so I pushed my cards further... 300mhz mem clock and 15mhz core further... I did manage to increase my score, and I'm happy


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 16, 2014)

havene said:


> I have an update on my 760 SLI setup, I didn't like the fact that single cards were beating me, so I pushed my cards further... 300mhz mem clock and 15mhz core further... I did manage to increase my score, and I'm happy View attachment 54055 View attachment 54057View attachment 54059


you should get along with the fact of a single card can beat a SLI  me i am just sad that i forgot to bench my 770 before selling it and get a R9 270  (sad of the selling not of the R9 270 )

i noticed in the GTX760 MARS 4gb review that a 780Ti is 2% to 8% faster depending the resolution but it's a single card SLI


----------



## sirbaili (Jan 16, 2014)

I just succeeded to flash my asus r9-290 to r9-290x and here is the result:

Cpu - 4600mhz -  core-i7 3770k 

Gpu - Asus R9-290X


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 16, 2014)

New Table

**Updated**


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 16, 2014)

freeleacher said:


> we will have to start to use mantle to compare amd and nvid cards soon,
> will keep it as fare as this program does,,
> Shouldn't use this program nvida have a huge advantage as the program is optimised for them.
> amd hast a chance.
> But stick us in a game that's a different story



3DMark(2013) is thought to favour neither brand, if not a little AMD skewed.  Go and bench on that.

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/3dmark-2013.179767/


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nvidia cards have ALWAYS been better with tessellation, and this is a tessellation heavy benchmark, that's why the Green Team is doing better across the board.


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 16, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> 3DMark(2013) is thought to favour neither brand, if not a little AMD skewed.  Go and bench on that.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/3dmark-2013.179767/



All ready have


----------



## HammerON (Jan 16, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> New Table
> 
> **Updated**


 Cool


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 16, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> New Table
> 
> **Updated**


thanks  looks nice!


----------



## devilpepper (Jan 16, 2014)

Hi, everyone 

I just replaced my 2x GTX 680s with a Gigabyte GTX 780Ti Windforce OC card and I have to say I am pretty happy with it.  Just ran a quick bench with a very mild overclock on the card.


----------



## devilpepper (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumped up the CPU and the gfx memory a bit but didnt make much of a difference ...well I guess better than nothing ;-)


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 16, 2014)

Thought I'd have another go, see if a few more micro volts will help.

I had to run the bench and then re-run with all the settings and filed score.  It's quite awkward to screenshot for some folk - it doesn't work 

What's weird is that my clocks were set to be 1227MHz but Afterburner OSD reports it as 12MHz lower each increment i tried.   But Nvidia Inspector and GPU-z both report correctly as 1227MHz.

So, GTX Titan at 1227MHz core, 1752MHz (7008) memory.  Core i7 3930k at 4.4GHz.

I was using the voltage hack on afterburner and was set up as 1.263v but with vdroop (or LLC) it was fluctuating between 1.231-1.238v (0.025-0.032 vdroop?).  Core temp only got to 43max after 3 consecutive runs.   I figure my VRM's should be quite cool as well.  I tried 1240MHz but it crashed to a system restart.  Wonder if i plugged in 1.3v (1.268v with LLC) I could get closer to 1300MHz?


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 17, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> Thought I'd have another go, see if a few more micro volts will help.
> 
> I had to run the bench and then re-run with all the settings and filed score.  It's quite awkward to screenshot for some folk - it doesn't work
> 
> ...



nice, btw is it not millivolt ? mV microvolts should be µV (i know im nitpicking)


----------



## MalcomXT (Jan 17, 2014)

Hello ,

FX-8350
HD7970 3GB
i could get more score with higher GPU clocks but then artifacts was seen like red and green lights random show so 1180/1680 is the maximum stable OC for my HD7970.


----------



## Paladone (Jan 18, 2014)

Sorry, I should have mentioned this but my CPU was (and is) clocked at 4.4GHz during the test


----------



## Paladone (Jan 18, 2014)

JThorpe said:


> Hello All,
> 
> I just finished my new build. Here is my information. I was not able to print screen while it was running (not sure on boost clock), but everything is stock.


I don't understand how you got such a higher score than I did, my 4930k is at 4.4 vs. 4.0GHz and and both my cards were overclocked :O Nice score none the less.

EDIT: Are you sure that you had Anti-Aliasing enabled and on x8? I disabled my Anti-aliasing and got a score almost exactly the same as yours. It's just that 4000 seems abnormally high for 780Ti SLI


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 18, 2014)

now you say that i see your point,
he actually got more than double than his single card test by a huge margin,
That kind of goes against the general rule of less than 100% efficiency wile in sli,
His getting 30% more in sli but maybe thats how its suppose to be who knows.


----------



## Paladone (Jan 18, 2014)

freeleacher said:


> now you say that i see your point,
> he actually got more than double than his single card test by a huge margin,
> That kind of goes against the general rule of less than 100% efficiency wile in sli,
> His getting 30% more in sli but maybe thats how its suppose to be who knows.



The reason that it baffles me is because I'm running a 4930k at 4.4GHz vs his 4770k at 4.0 and my graphics cards are also overclocked and I got 800 points less


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 18, 2014)

Paladone said:


> The reason that it baffles me is because I'm running a 4930k at 4.4GHz vs his 4770k at 4.0 and my graphics cards are also overclocked and I got 800 points less


if the bench only use 4 core (i am not sure even if Heaven show 6 core or 4 core in the result pannel if it really use cores above the 4th one ) afaik a 4930X is on same level of a 4770K (luckly it is not a 4820X, they even perform under a 4770k) also the CPU has little to do in a 100% GPU bound benchmark

also i wonder if since it's Haswell versus Ivy-E the ipc has something to do

i once read this about 3.0 i think 4.0 do same 
"Unigine Heaven3.0 scored exactly the same with 4 cores vs 8 cores."


----------



## Paladone (Jan 18, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> if the bench only use 4 core (i am not sure even if Heaven show 6 core or 4 core in the result pannel if it really use cores above the 4th one ) afaik a 4930X is on same level of a 4770K (luckly it is not a 4820X, they even perform under a 4770k) also the CPU has little to do in a 100% GPU bound benchmark
> 
> also i wonder if since it's Haswell versus Ivy-E the ipc has something to do
> 
> ...


I understand that but regardless, my 4930k is still 400MHz higher and both of my graphics cards are over clocked (while his are not) yet he scored 800 Pts higher. 4k for 780Ti SLI does not seem right.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 18, 2014)

Paladone said:


> I understand that but regardless, my 4930k is still 400MHz higher and both of my graphics cards are over clocked (while his are not) yet he scored 800 Pts higher. 4k for 780Ti SLI does not seem right.


well the 400mhz clock more does nothing. my old i7-920 did the same score at 2.6ghz with a SLI of GTX580 Matrix @950/1170 and at 4.4ghz

after that i don't know about the GPU OC ... maybe your cards throttle down which could explain a 800pts less versus a stock clocked 

also i noticed that the screen resolution line show 1920x1080 Fullscreen normally it shows 1920x1080 8xAA Fullscreen, so as you pointed he might have forgot to put 8xAA so his score is voided by that.

aka : nothing to see nothing to bother ...

so Durvell27 should remove the 1st rank multicard setup from him until we see a ingame shot with proof of FxAA x8 active


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 18, 2014)

Table

**Updated**


----------



## JThorpe (Jan 18, 2014)

I apologize, I will double check my settings and run it again.

Sorry it was not intentional


----------



## Paladone (Jan 18, 2014)

JThorpe said:


> I apologize, I will double check my settings and run it again.
> 
> Sorry it was not intentional



It's not biggy dude, it happens


----------



## JThorpe (Jan 18, 2014)

It looks like I did forget that setting. I ran the benchmark again with the 8xAA. Same stats as last time.

Here is my results (definitely lower).





Sorry again


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 18, 2014)

JThorpe said:


> It looks like I did forget that setting. I ran the benchmark again with the 8xAA. Same stats as last time.
> 
> Here is my results (definitely lower).
> 
> ...


as Paladone wrote: no biggies, mistake can happen  that's still a nice score


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jan 18, 2014)

I might need to do a rerun at my clock I did before at 1320. Some of these posts aren't making much sense to me. same GPU, lower clocks, higher score.........


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 19, 2014)

re done due to missing clocks in image
A low 4.8 ghz on a i7 2700k





Single gpu


----------



## HammerON (Jan 19, 2014)

I am not sure if most of you are aware of this or not but CPU over clocks have little effect on Heaven and Valley. GPU over clocks is where you want to focus
3DMark on the other hand...


----------



## Paladone (Jan 19, 2014)

JThorpe said:


> It looks like I did forget that setting. I ran the benchmark again with the 8xAA. Same stats as last time.
> 
> Here is my results (definitely lower).
> 
> ...



Still a nice score


----------



## dr_dx (Jan 19, 2014)

290x @ 1240/1600 with stock bios on Trixx.  i7-3770K @ 5GHz 24/7.


----------



## zezinhocrack (Jan 19, 2014)




----------



## freeleacher (Jan 19, 2014)

3770K @ 5GHz 24/7
what you using to cool nitrogen ?


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 19, 2014)

freeleacher said:


> 3770K @ 5GHz 24/7
> what you using to cool nitrogen ?



it is not that hard under water or even with a top class air cooler like a Thermalright Silver Arrow SB-E (and the extreme version of it)
plus its a 3770 luckily it's not a 4770


----------



## matthew12106 (Jan 20, 2014)

Not going to lie to start with i was not pleased with my scores with my default  clock of 960 I was getting place #29 under a 7950 and above a 7850 which was not pleasing at all so that was the point i decided why not try overclocking for the first time i increased to 980 then 1000 then 1020 all the way to 1100 and now i'm pretty happy I'm running a
AMD FX-8350 @ the stock 4 ghz no overclocking
MSI 7950 Boost Twin froz
I had to overclocked my graphics card to 1100 mhz ( from 960 ) and kept the memory at stock 1250
My score puts me in number #26 above a
i7-3770K_*I *_4.8GHz_*I*_ HD 7970*I *1010/1375

And below a

i5-4670K*I *3.4GHz*I* R9 280X*I* 1070/1550




Maybe if I actually overclocked my cpu a bit and overclocked my gpu memory I could get a better score but all in all for the meantime considering i'm beating a 7970 with a 3770k I'm happy

Score & Rig Pic:







New Score set the graphics card to 1100/1350 this time


----------



## Paladone (Jan 25, 2014)

I believe that we resolved that jthorpe had made an error and that his original score of 4k was invavlid (Anti-aliasing was not enabled)


----------



## dr_dx (Jan 27, 2014)

freeleacher said:


> 3770K @ 5GHz 24/7
> what you using to cool nitrogen ?



LOL

No just water.  Single 3/8" loop for CPU, motherboard, and GPU.





Been running at 5 Ghz @ 1.288v 24/7 for over 17 months. It gets up to 51C after an hour of Linx stress testing.

I use a 3.5 year old home made chiller - got NO fans, radiators, heat, or noise.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 28, 2014)

this is fun... in valley my AMD setup did 12pts more than the Intel setup ... with the same R9 270 i thought it was a coincidence and was a normal run variance... but ...


 

then it does also 12pts more than the Xeon setup ... in heaven ... so in both bench from Unigine my Athlon X4 760K do 12pts more than my Xeon E3-1275V2 and both with the same GPU in a GPU bound bench? indeed this is really fun


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 29, 2014)

CREEPING UP


----------



## Kaapstad (Jan 29, 2014)

4 x 290Xs @1200/1600
4930k @4.8






Who said AMD cards are no good on this bench


----------



## freeleacher (Jan 29, 2014)

wow what a score.
4 290x card :O
There scaling really well awsome


----------



## Zimny_Kartofel (Feb 2, 2014)

*Single MSI 7850 OC 1GB*








*CrossFireX Enabled MSI 7850 OC 1GB*


----------



## oli_ramsay (Feb 2, 2014)

3770k @ 4.3 + 7970 @ 1125/1575


----------



## superiorpyre (Feb 5, 2014)

3770k at stock
pny gtx780 @ 1202/3341
8gb (2x4gb) crucial

 1600 c8
128gb Toshiba Qpro


----------



## Durvelle27 (Feb 5, 2014)

zezinhocrack said:


>


*Rejected *

*


matthew12106 said:



			Not going to lie to start with i was not pleased with my scores with my default  clock of 960 I was getting place #29 under a 7950 and above a 7850 which was not pleasing at all so that was the point i decided why not try overclocking for the first time i increased to 980 then 1000 then 1020 all the way to 1100 and now i'm pretty happy I'm running a
AMD FX-8350 @ the stock 4 ghz no overclocking
MSI 7950 Boost Twin froz
I had to overclocked my graphics card to 1100 mhz ( from 960 ) and kept the memory at stock 1250
My score puts me in number #26 above a
i7-3770KI 4.8GHzI HD 7970I 1010/1375

And below a

i5-4670KI 3.4GHzI R9 280XI 1070/1550




Maybe if I actually overclocked my cpu a bit and overclocked my gpu memory I could get a better score but all in all for the meantime considering i'm beating a 7970 with a 3770k I'm happy

Score & Rig Pic:







New Score set the graphics card to 1100/1350 this time
		
Click to expand...

*


matthew12106 said:


>


*Rejected
*



Zimny_Kartofel said:


> Single MSI 7850 OC 1GB
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Rejected



oli_ramsay said:


> 3770k @ 4.3 + 7970 @ 1125/1575



*Rejected *


----------



## freeleacher (Feb 6, 2014)

Kaapstad said:


> 4 x 290Xs @1200/1600
> 4930k @4.8
> 
> 
> ...



An amazing score and pound for pound even though this favours nvidia cards its still better.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 6, 2014)

nickjk said:


> Hi guys, I am new to this forum and pretty new to overclocking. Got my new card a few days ago, went with the Gigabyte GTX 780 OC (Rev 2.0) instead of the Ghz edition believing save myself £30 and should be able to overclock to a similar degree.
> 
> My build
> 
> ...



post a screenshot of the ending screen of the benchmark, not a screenshot of the HTML result file in a browser, it will be rejected otherwise.


----------



## nickjk (Feb 6, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> post a screenshot of the ending screen of the benchmark, not a screenshot of the HTML result file in a browser, it will be rejected otherwise.



Thanks for the heads up, I'll run it again now and take the screen shot. Any chance you could answer my questions regardless?


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 6, 2014)

hum ... i don't know ... i use MSI Afterburner for all my GPU (no matter the brand)

and my only experience with a 7xx serie was with a 770 and it was a bad clocker (thanks Nvidia)
after that it could depend on the Throttling... same or higher clock but a lower score could mean his card throttle down when hitting the TDP/°C limit and never stay long at the highest clock rate in the settings, making the OC pointless since not stable .... but the owner of the card could give a better answer than me i assume


----------



## nickjk (Feb 6, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> hum ... i don't know ... i use MSI Afterburner for all my GPU (no matter the brand)
> 
> and my only experience with a 7xx serie was with a 770 and it was a bad clocker (thanks Nvidia)
> after that it could depend on the Throttling... same or higher clock but a lower score could mean his card throttle down when hitting the TDP/°C limit and never stay long at the highest clock rate in the settings, making the OC pointless since not stable .... but the owner of the card could give a better answer than me i assume



Ok, well hopefully someone else can jump in and answer for me at some point, just did it again (the benchmark) and took a different print screen. Lost 1.2 fps, damn rules.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 6, 2014)

nickjk said:


> Ok, well hopefully someone else can jump in and answer for me at some point, just did it again (the benchmark) and took a different print screen. Lost 1.2 fps, damn rules.


2 run never the same result: no biggies ... normal run variance parameter


----------



## freeleacher (Feb 7, 2014)

Kaapstad said:


> New entry
> 
> 4 x 290Xs @1220/1625
> 
> 4930k @4.8




Wow awesome benchmark kicking some ass there.


----------



## Kaapstad (Feb 7, 2014)

freeleacher said:


> Wow awesome benchmark kicking some ass there.



Thanks.


----------



## FX-GMC (Feb 20, 2014)

light001 said:


> Am i seriously in 2nd place? someone please tell me rofl. or 3rd?....light01@live.com or dinobot420 on skype. hope thats not against the rules, this is just a older thred, and i wanna be a part of itView attachment 54820



Nice score. You'll need to post a screenshot of the score at the end of the run while still in Heaven.

People are afraid of things like this:


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 20, 2014)

FX-GMC said:


> Nice score. You'll need to post a screenshot of the score at the end of the run while still in Heaven.
> 
> People are afraid of things like this:


IT'S OVER 9000!!!

sorry ... i couldn't resist


----------



## FX-GMC (Feb 23, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> ***Please attach a screen capture of your results for score verification***



This thread wants your attention.


----------



## Kaapstad (Mar 2, 2014)

Does anyone know when the next thread update is please.


----------



## FX-GMC (Mar 2, 2014)

Kaapstad said:


> Does anyone know when the next thread update is please.



Not sure, but don't hold your breath.  You won't survive if you do.


----------



## Kaapstad (Mar 3, 2014)

FX-GMC said:


> Not sure, but don't hold your breath.  You won't survive if you do.



It is enough to make someone go and start a Heaven 4 thread of their own lol.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18487976


----------



## HammerON (Mar 3, 2014)

Kaapstad said:


> It is enough to make someone go and start a Heaven 4 thread of their own lol.
> 
> http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18487976


Funny since that thread you created (if it is you) was created over a year ago...


----------



## Kaapstad (Mar 3, 2014)

HammerON said:


> Funny since that thread you created (if it is you) was created over a year ago...



It was indeed but then I was making a joke in my previous post here.

What is important about these type of threads is they should be updated regularly.  If people put the effort into doing the benches and posting the scores, the very least the person running the thread can do is update it promptly.

The other thread in the link often has to be updated several times a day as the people posting there can be quite competitive and the scoreboards need to show the latest results.


----------



## HammerON (Mar 3, 2014)

Taking on these bench marking results threads is a difficult task. I have been invloved in many since joining TPU in 2009. Those that start the threads take on the responsibility to update as new scores come in. For the most part they do, but after a while (and for many different reasons) they tend to "fall off". As our members are doing this on a voluntary basis, I do not feel ot is okay to pressure them to update the thread. Sometimes it is best for another member to offer to help. If enough time pases and the thread does not get updated, then it is time for a new thread...
What annoys me is when a member gets "pushy", feeling that it is their right for the OP to add their score. There are some old benchmark threads that members still post to and have no expectation that their score will be added to the original list. This is all for fun. If you want to really test your skills then join HWBOT.


----------



## Kaapstad (Mar 3, 2014)

I personally am not too worried if any scores I post here get updated or not.  What does concern me and the reason I commented in the first place is FX-GMC was politely asking the question above,  if this is the only forum he posts on it is a bit unfortunate for him as the thread has not been updated since 18th January.

I run a lot of threads like this one, not just the one I linked.  I feel it is my responsibility to keep these threads I have started updated and would feel like I was letting everyone who posted in these threads down if I did not.

As to HWBot I think it is well past its sell by date.  They use ancient benches which are very undemanding for the GPUs and more often than not it seems to turn into a competition who can overclock the CPU the highest using LN2.  The other thing I don't approve of is the tweaks they use at HWBot that means their results will be thrown out on mainstream benches.  Lets face it using Win8 and tampering with the CPU time data is cheating by most peoples standards.  Fortunately they use an ancient version of Heaven but again messing with the tessellation is not on.


----------



## Gregster (Mar 3, 2014)

Hi guys,

I, like Kaapstad feel that people who start these threads should know that they are taking on a responsibility to keep them updated. I also run a few FutureMark threads on OcUK and make sure they are updated as soon as possible. I am in no way having a dig at the OP and I understand it is a pain sometimes but if they feel they can no longer commit the time to them, they should let people know, so that someone with more time can keep the scores updated.

Some people seriously push their hardware and it is a massive achievement when they get a very good score with their hardware.


----------



## FX-GMC (Mar 3, 2014)

HammerON said:


> Taking on these bench marking results threads is a difficult task. I have been invloved in many since joining TPU in 2009. Those that start the threads take on the responsibility to update as new scores come in. For the most part they do, but after a while (and for many different reasons) they tend to "fall off". As our members are doing this on a voluntary basis, I do not feel ot is okay to pressure them to update the thread. Sometimes it is best for another member to offer to help. If enough time pases and the thread does not get updated, then it is time for a new thread...
> What annoys me is when a member gets "pushy", feeling that it is their right for the OP to add their score. There are some old benchmark threads that members still post to and have no expectation that their score will be added to the original list. This is all for fun. If you want to really test your skills then join HWBOT.



If the OP does not want to update the thread then it should be closed for new replies.  The "fun" is lost when you can't easily compare scores.

I specifically quoted @Durvelle27 to get his attention and he continued to ignore the thread.  I know he has been online since I saw him post in a For Sale thread I was looking at earlier.

I'm also interested to know how difficult it is to add a few scores every now and then.  At the very least @Durvelle27 could just say he is done with the thread (along with an edit to the OP) to avoid disappointing other members who were hoping to join in on the "fun".


----------



## Gregster (Mar 3, 2014)

FX-GMC said:


> If the OP does not want to update the thread then it should be closed for new replies.  Agree?



I wouldn't like to say as I am new and will leave that to the regulars


----------



## erocker (Mar 3, 2014)

I suggest someone makes a new thread. It's been less than two months, so I won't close this one yet, but if you want something done you can't expect others to do it.



Kaapstad said:


> I run a lot of threads like this one, not just the one I linked. I feel it is my responsibility to keep these threads I have started updated and would feel like I was letting everyone who posted in these threads down if I did not.



Sometimes, circumstances keep this from happening. Real life trumps the internet.


----------



## FX-GMC (Mar 3, 2014)

erocker said:


> I suggest someone makes a new thread. It's been less than two months, so I won't close this one yet, but if you want something done you can't expect others to do it.
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes, circumstances keep this from happening. Real life trumps the internet.



If I were to grab all of the data from this thread and create a new one, would you close this one then?

When real life trumps the internet, I don't use the internet....

EDIT: I must say it's annoying to see all this "If you don't like it start a new thread."  It seems ridiculous to have multiple threads that accomplish the same thing.


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 3, 2014)

erocker said:


> Real life trumps the internet.



You wish.  I was watching the news and the Oscar ceremony was higher billed than Russian forces entering the Ukraine.  Real life takes a back seat more and more these days for public frivolity and indulgence. 

But, tbh, if a thread creator is still regularly posting and hasn't declared themself as AWOL, then they really ought to keep that thread up to date, at least weekly.  I agree real life will interrupt normal routines when things get hairy but if they still have time to post they may also have time to update.


----------



## erocker (Mar 3, 2014)

FX-GMC said:


> EDIT: I must say it's annoying to see all this "If you don't like it start a new thread." It seems ridiculous to have multiple threads that accomplish the same thing.



If anyone else wants to update the thread, give me a PM and I'll make it happen. Nobody is going to force or shun anyone into doing anything.


----------



## freeleacher (Mar 5, 2014)

im 6th 
just not been updated


----------



## GreiverBlade (Mar 14, 2014)

mohit.mecanchie616 said:


> here one is mine with every thing on stock clocks



Benchmark setup:
1.1920x1080, Fullscreen, 8x Anti-Aliasing
2.Ultra Quality
3.Extreme Tessellation
4.No integrated GPU enabled, unless it's the only GPU in the build<<<<<<<<<<<<<requirement not fulfilled
5.Tessellation correctly set up on AMD cards and not bypassed in CCC
6.You must also provide correct GPU and CPU clocks
7.Must Be a Screenshot from within Heaven to be valid<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<requirement not fulfilled 

well that would be a problem if the op was around atm (and update the charts) if i had more time i would do a new thread or see if i could take charge of that one, but sadly not much free time atm.


----------



## FX-GMC (Mar 14, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> Benchmark setup:
> 1.1920x1080, Fullscreen, 8x Anti-Aliasing
> 2.Ultra Quality
> 3.Extreme Tessellation
> ...



See here: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/1k-usd-budget-which-one.198660/page-2#post-3079837


----------

