Hi,
Nice effort in collecting these.
And is quite an effort: not many people listened to how to run the test, or report the data....:-}
Couple comments about the data in the compiled lists:
(1) One comment about a few cases where the entries are recorded as Multi GPU's.
I think they should be noted as SINGLE GPU:
NCoastTweater (2123)
Christes (1458)
silkstone (1404)
Maybe more: these were all I saw in your list.
As I understand it, where the CPU has an integrated GPU, and there's a standalone one as well, it never uses BOTH.
It just uses the fancier and more power hungry one on demand: which would be 100% of the time when running a demanding game, or benchmark like Heaven.
So in all cases, the dominant GPU is the AMD Radeon R9 280(x).
(2) Reported Clock Data:
I was looking at the GPU-Z reports where done, as well as what people reported if they didn't run these.
And it's very confusing about what speeds are to be reported in the compilation summary.
Not your fault: unless they ran GPU-Z, it's hard to tell.
But I think one cannot rely on about 80% of the values for GPU or Memory speeds.
I think it might be better just to use the values from the TPU GPU Database for anthing except where GPU-Z was run.
And please don't take this as destructive criticism of your great effort in compiling the lists.
(3) General Comments:
But this is why these benchmarks are not compiled anywhere else, as you have done: it's just too much hassle.
I see the problem: you have to buy the "Advanced Version" to get CSV format output.
And for Superposition, that doesn't include it, you need to get the very expensive "Professional Version" at a whopping $995 to get CSV output.
Although I guess if you agree to submit the Superposition benchmark to them online, you could then go to the website and get the output from that.
It's a strange business model for Unigine: with the free "Gamer's" version providing most information an individual wants, I cannot see them selling very many copies of the Advanced, or especially the Pro Versions.
After all, why pay $20 for something you can get off a screen shot for your own person use?
It's only if you are trying to do it for LOTS of records that it's a hassle.
So wht's the point of developing a fancy benchmark if you get very litttle revenue from it?
Maybe it helps feed business to their other activities.
But I think they'd get a LOT more exposure if they added in CSV output to the Gamers version.
Alan
i7-6950X @ 4.375GHz + Titan x (pascal) x2 @ 2113/5555 = 6317
View attachment 86711
Hi,
Very good score, and done with an older system.
I this a typo for the CPU? It says i7-6950X.
But your other reports are i7-5960X.
Plus in your signature, it says 5960 as your System.
I also see that you OC.
My analysis suggests a surprising (to me, in any case) effect of CPU FREQUENCY.
Woul it be possible to post a CPU-Z and GPU-Z report, with fresh Heaven scores?
Ideally three time, done with some variations in CPU speed:
(1) no OC
(2) moderate OC
(3) full OC
I'm going to post my analysis, and your results are very interesting.
Thx,
Alan
Thank you for pointing that out--now this is hopefully in line with the others.
