NEW Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 Scores

[Vellinious]

5820k - 2 cores at 4.9
8GB 290X @ 1303 / 1802
Score: 3513

5820k @ 4.7
2 x 970 SLI @ 1576 / 2026
Score: 5581

 

[EarthDog]

Now there is some SLI scaling... The others looked like it barely scaled.

 

[MrGenius]

Sorry for the lack of cropping. I made the screenshot my backround.

No cropping please. I changed the rules to state a Full Screenshot. And I would like to be able to see the upper right corner for GPU model and quantity verification. I hadn't mentioned that in this thread(and the rule is now changed to reflect that). So I will allow it to be not shown in this instance.

 

[Vellinious]

I just wish I had been pushing the 2 cores of the CPU higher when I had the 970s. I'm quite certain I could have pushed them up near 5700 with the additional CPU core clock.

I'm still pretty new to pushing hardware quite this hard and I'm still learning...I've been overclocking for a long while, but..not on this scale / level.

 

[BiggieShady]

Or a 3570K

So that's why you are a caring one ... first one was a typo and second one copy pasted ... fixed, lucky for me op ingeniously parsed the message correctly

 

[jaggerwild]

I just wish I had been pushing the 2 cores of the CPU higher when I had the 970s. I'm quite certain I could have pushed them up near 5700 with the additional CPU core clock.

I'm still pretty new to pushing hardware quite this hard and I'm still learning...I've been overclocking for a long while, but..not on this scale / level.

You mean additional cooling don't you? Of course you can push it higher, doesn't mean it will work but.

 

[EarthDog]

No cropping please. I changed the rules to state a Full Screenshot. And I would like to be able to see the upper right corner for GPU model and quantity verification. I hadn't mentioned that in this thread(and the rule is now changed to reflect that). So I will allow it to be not shown in this instance.

If it was me (and clearly its not, LOL) I would follow Hwbot rules since they are THE authority and site for that kind of stuff. A potential concern with the current method is that the OSD doesn't report much right a lot of the time so what is it really confirming? This is why they use GPUz and CPUz for verification.

 

[MrGenius]

I just wish I had been pushing the 2 cores of the CPU higher when I had the 970s.

I'm just so glad you didn't post that score in the previous thread. If I had to disqualify it based on that it was going to be a huge disappointment for me. Whether or not you disapproved of the decision. I want to tell you that I had to look for it there just in case. Not because I don't trust you. Just out of fairness to your competition. I didn't find it there thankfully. So as it sits, you're still #1. If it is there and I missed it, here's your chance to "plead the 5th".

Man...this is why I never take authoritative positions in life. I don't mind being the leader of the pack. So long as it doesn't require being the boss too. In that sense I'm much more comfortable being subordinate. I'm not really cut out for this giving orders and making rules crap. However, like I always say about such circumstances, "it's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it". Unfortunately in this case that somebody is me.

No big deal though. It could be much worse.

 

[MrGenius]

If it was me (and clearly its not, LOL) I would follow Hwbot rules since they are THE authority and site for that kind of stuff. A potential concern with the current method is that the OSD doesn't report much right a lot of the time so what is it really confirming? This is why they use GPUz and CPUz for verification.

Well I'm not a member there. And I don't frequent that site(what's Hwbot?). So I wasn't aware of their authority on the matter. I'm 100% aware that the info is often wrong(more often than not actually). But what does seem to be correct most, if not all, of the time is the GPU model and quantity. In particular the quantity(I guess you missed that argument in the Heaven thread). But even barring those things it's further proof that you didn't fabricate the screenshot in any way. I make sure that all my screenshots show as clearly as possible that I didn't photoshop the info in the upper right corner. Mostly because with my particular GPU the info shown there IS 100% accurate ALL of the time.

Oh..and the CPU-Z and GPU-Z info can also be wrong. And is just as easily fabricated. So I don't care to see it.

 

[BiggieShady]

@jboydgolfer You should post your actual clocks during the benchmark. For reference my card was much lower clocked than yours.

 

[jboydgolfer]

@jboydgolfer You should post your actual clocks during the benchmark. For reference my card was much lower clocked than yours.

Those are my actual clocks.....im not a liar.why wouldnt i post the actual settings?

What does your cards settings have to do with my scores for "reference"??

Edit
Based on the results, your clocks dont look much lower than mine.
i dont think i get what you mean
If your referring to "Boost" clocks, i'll re-run the test, and when it finishes, ill see what it reached, concerning that.

@MrGenius
My BOOST Clocks, (if they are indeed required are as follows
Core =1552Mhz
Memory 1890Mhz
ill add them to my original post as well.

 

[EarthDog]

GPUz shows that as well. there is a dropdown. Its also fairly obvious when someone uses multiple GPUs over one.

I missed the Heaven argument, yes, but again, its obvious to those that benchmark for Hwbot by scores... or if you use multiple GPUs, you use the dropdown in GPUz.

Use the best tools for the job.

A bit too late now of course, but if you get saucy and want to start another one, that is the way to go.

thanks for starting up a new one!!

Those are my actual clocks.....im not a liar.why wouldnt i post the actual settings?

What does your cards settings have to do with my scores for "reference"??

Nobody is calling you a liar... read what we talked about earlier... the boost clocks. GPUz (nor Valley) report the right clocks. Boost clocks will vary..what GPUz reports as boost, it goes WAY higher (unless you modded your BIOS???).

He mentioned reference because you have a "reference" card...

 

[Vellinious]

You mean additional cooling don't you? Of course you can push it higher, doesn't mean it will work but.

Not quite sure what you're saying....

 

[jaggerwild]

I'm just so glad you didn't post that score in the previous thread. If I had to disqualify it based on that it was going to be a huge disappointment for me. Whether or not you disapproved of the decision. I want to tell you that I had to look for it there just in case. Not because I don't trust you. Just out of fairness to your competition. I didn't find it there thankfully. So as it sits, you're still #1. If it is there and I missed it, here's your chance to "plead the 5th".

Man...this is why I never take authoritative positions in life. I don't mind being the leader of the pack. So long as it doesn't require being the boss too. In that sense I'm much more comfortable being subordinate. I'm not really cut out for this giving orders and making rules crap. However, like I always say about such circumstances, "it's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it". Unfortunately in this case that somebody is me.

No big deal though. It could be much worse.

I'm sure he can clock out way higher, keep it in #1 place he's a slippery one!!! Your doing a good job Mr Genius, its a fun thread that's all!

I'm quite certain I could have pushed them up near 5700 with the additional CPU core clock

I thought you meant cooling, not core's is all..................

 

[Vellinious]

Ah, nope...core clock. Valley is super CPU bound, so the higher you can clock your CPU, the better you'll score. And since it only uses 2 threads max, you can disable all but 2 cores and hyperthreading to keep the heat down, and be able to clock the remaining cores higher. It helps.... Depending on the GPU setup, it'll help a TON.

 

[PHaS3]

i5 3570K @ 4.5GHz
GTX 970 @ 1524 Core / 1851 (7404) RAM
Score: 2609

 

[jboydgolfer]

update to MY old Score

You'll notice GPUz has its reading set to "MAX" reading, so You can see MY "actual" scores my bad i didnt think of that b4
Core= 1558
Memory =1879

 

[MrGenius]

My BOOST Clocks, (if they are indeed required...

I'm making no such requirement. At this point the rules are set in stone(I hope). And they state you must provide correct clocks. That's your job, not mine. You make the call. Since you're making the change, I will change the record of it. I'm taking everyone's word on what their correct clocks are. I don't care what the screenshot says, or what CPU-Z or GPU-Z says. I care what you say they are. And that's all. If that seems unfair to anyone...tough titties. Fight amongst yourselves. I'm not stepping in.

 

[jboydgolfer]

I'm making no such requirement. At this point the rules are set in stone(I hope). And they state you must provide correct clocks. That's your job, not mine. You make the call. Since you're making the change, I will change the record of it. I'm taking everyone's word on what their correct clocks are. I don't care what the screenshot says, or what CPU-Z or GPU-Z says. I care what you say they are. And that's all. It that seems unfair to anyone...tough titties.

i didnt think so, but just the same, so theres no whining, I posted a new result, with GPUz set to "MAX" reading, that way there IS no doubt . i suppose i can understand that these results are important to people.

 

[EarthDog]

Not so much important as it is people want to use it to compare their results to those on this table. If people are posting XXXX clocks when its actually boosting 100 Mhz higher that is, as you can see, a SIGNIFICANT difference.

Its just about 'doing it right', that is all.

This isn't really a dedicated overclocking site, so the finer points can easily be missed by those not as well versed in such activities.

 

[jaggerwild]

Not quite sure what you're saying....

I'll have to try it, never bothered disabling cores for Valley. Think my max was 5700Mhz with 2 cores, that was on a RIVE board, this X79 Deluxe seems way better I guess cause it's a server board.

 

[Vellinious]

5820k @ 4.7
970 @ 1607 / 2105

I know it probably won't count, but.....it's the 2nd highest single 970 score I've seen. This card was phenomenal.

 

[BiggieShady]

... so theres no whining, I posted a new result ...

Nah, no whining, I just wanted to compare how much score increases with core frequency and memory frequency increase ... because 1375 is my average boost clock (quiet build on air)

 

[jaggerwild]

I know it probably won't count, but.....it's the 2nd highest single 970 score I've seen. This card was phenomenal.

Did it Die, you said "Was" or sold it?

 

[Vellinious]

Sold them. I get bored easily.