What is the possible cause of indifference between the scores of benchmarks?

[TahoeDust]

OK...well that was depressing. My machine almost mutinied when I asked it to run at stock speed after 3 years of at least 4.8GHz. From what I see, it looks like your score is pretty close to what it should be, which means one thing. Overclock your shiz!

Also, from what I saw it appears that a 2700k at stock speed will bottleneck SLI 970s, which I would not have thought. When running the benchmark in SLI with the 2700k at stock speed the cards were hardly ever running over 95% and at times as low as 60%. When running it at my normal OC the card stay locked over 95% utilization. Here is what I got:

and for reference here are the numbers at my 24/7 stable OC numbers...

So we are looking at a 12% increase by overclocking when running one 970 and 21% when running two. Makes me want to crank my 2700k to its bench max of 5.1GHz and see what it does.

ps. The VNC mirror driver has no effect on my numbers. I have run it with and without it installed...and yes, I use VNC on this machine daily.

 

[toyota]

just running other test results but now i feel like its made some improvements.

Im currious how much 670 was REALLY getting.
I might test it again.

Had Oculus Running on background.
Turned it off and heres the result.
I guess having 3rd monitor does effect performance (slightly)

And I am really glad I am catching up to what seems to be new standard
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5030773

I still dont see how I am getting 40% higher than you with a 100% stock 980. a 970 gaming should be well within 20% of what I am scoring.

 

[KaRLiToS]

I still dont see how I am getting 40% higher than you with a 100% stock 980. a 970 gaming should be well within 20% of what I am scoring.

Is your 4770k at 4.4ghz, then if the answer his yes. His 2600k is stock.

 

[toyota]

Is your 4770k at 4.4ghz, then if the answer his yes. His 2600k is stock.

there is no way my cpu is giving me a 25% advantage.

EDIT: I just ran it with only 2 cores and it only dropped from 19119 to 18585. plus I was actually hitting my card's power limit at times which he would not be doing.


host image

 

[KaRLiToS]

The CPU is not the same and your 2 cores are at 4.4Ghz.

 

[toyota]

The CPU is not the same and your 2 cores are at 4.4Ghz.

again you have to be kidding. there is no way my cpu is going to give me a 20-25% advantage like this. and this benchmark uses not only 4 cores but also HT. for me to still be getting 30% better than him only using just 2 cores makes it clear that his system is still not performing at its best. and again I am hitting my power limit a couple of times where he will not with his card.

 

[KaRLiToS]

Why not try with your 4 cores and at 3.4 Ghz?

Look toyota

But how about Hyper Threading? Well, our findings are somehow similar to our previous results. Enabling HT had a negative impact in games like Resident Evil 5, Resident Evil 6 and Cryostasis. Lost Planet 2, on the other hand, saw significant gains when HT was enabled. Crysis 3, Battlefield 4 and Civilization V did not see any performance gain whatsoever.

In conclusion, PC games are still unable to take advantage of more than 4 CPU cores (something we’ve been claiming this whole time). While there are currently a number of games that benefit from a penta-core system, there is no game that can push a hexa-core to its limits. Still, a lot of games are CPU-limited because they can’t put more than four CPU cores to good use. Therefore, PC gamers – with even high-end CPUs like ours – will have to resort to overclocking their machines in order to overcome these CPU optimization issues.

Batman: Arkham City, Saints Row IV, Resident Evil 6, Cryostasis, Resident Evil 5, The Last Remnant and Sleeping Dogs did not benefit from the two additional CPU cores of our i7 4930K, as our performance was similar to our simulated quad-core system.

So maybe try like him, you are trying to compare apple to watermelon.

You have a 4770k at 4.4Ghz, he has a 2600k at 3.4 Ghz, you have a GTX 980, he has a GTX 970.

TahoeDust did a fair comparaison, HE nailed it. 3 fps difference in Valley with a i7 2700k and i7 2600k. And with same cards... that sometime boost differently.

 

[toyota]

Why not try with your 4 cores and at 3.4 Ghz?

Look toyota





So maybe try like him, you are trying to compare apple to watermelon.

You have a 4770k at 4.4Ghz, he has a 2600k at 3.4 Ghz, you have a GTX 980, he has a GTX 970.

TahoeDust did a fair comparaison, HE nailed it. 3 fps difference in Valley with a i7 2700k and i7 2600k. And with same cards... that sometime boost differently.

thats odd because I thought RE 5 and 6 were always know for doing better with HT then without even back when lots of games gained zero from it.

and that site is clueless claiming no benefit from HT in Crysis 3 as its one of the few games that does.

and I just ran the RE 6 bench it without HT and got 19175 so yes its better without HT but that is within margin of error and only .3%. yes 1/3 of 1 percent.

but surely you know there is zero chance that 2 of my cores at 4.4 most certainly dont match 4 of his at 3.5 in a game that uses 4 cores.

 

[KaRLiToS]

toyota, I don't know, I am clueless. If I had your rig I would test it the right way to be 100% sure but you don't test it correctly to make it a good comparaison. I'm not talking like if I know it, I'm just sceptic.

but surely you know there is zero chance that 2 of my cores at 4.4 most certainly dont match 4 of his at 3.5 in game that uses 4 cores.

I don't know this either until you try to test it. You might be right mate.

But we have to admit TahoeDust did a fair comparaison with Valley.

 

[toyota]

toyota, I don't know, I am clueless. If I had your rig I would test it the right way to be 100% sure but you don't test it correctly to make it a good comparaison. I'm not talking like if I know it, I'm just sceptic.



I don't know this either until you try to test it. You might be right mate.

But we have to admit TahoeDust did a fair comparaison with Valley.

lol I am just too lazy to restart the pc and lower my turbo. plus everything has been working perfect since I have had my 4.4 oc for all these many months and I am paranoid to muck with it.

 

[TahoeDust]

Bumping my 2700K to 5.1GHz only gave a 2.6fps bump.

 

[BFG10K]

I sincerely appreciate all with inputs, and am still open for more suggestion to make things better (including upgrading hardware)

Try installing the latest chipset drivers for your motherboard, if you haven't already done so.

 

[therealnickdanger]

Bumping my 2700K to 5.1GHz only gave a 2.6fps bump.

Why does the benchmark say you're still at stock speeds?

 

[KaRLiToS]

Why does the benchmark say you're still at stock speeds?

Valley never indicated the CPU real clock, only the stock clock. And this for everyone and every CPUs.

 

[therealnickdanger]

Valley never indicated the CPU real clock, only the stock clock. And this for everyone and every CPUs.

Funny, I never actually noticed that until now. Thanks!