3D Mark 2006 Guru3d Records

[Lane]

ofc i know it Ricardo i can bench this cpu at 5.4ghz ... this is not for do score i have do this run lol. You know i bench for guru3D since 2005, and was bench even before for other site .. i know really well how work the old benchmark.

If i will do a score on 3D06, i will put a 3960 under LN2 ..

[ricardonuno1980]

Originally Posted by Lane

ofc i know it Ricardo i can bench this cpu at 5.4ghz ... this is not for do score i have do this run lol. You know i bench for guru3D since 2005, and was bench even before for other site .. i know really well how work the old benchmark.

If i will do a score on 3D06, i will put a 3960 under LN2 ..

ok, sorry, look my post previous due to the lastest edit but you don't need new CPU because new 3960 cannot be faster than your 2600K at SAME clock speed and at single or dual core(s)/thread(s) used.

[Lane]

why do you think i will use a 3960 otherwise.. 3Dmark vantage and 3Dmark 06 specially as their CPU socres count a lot in final numbers...

[cowie]

3570k dice 5.4 gtx680 stock air a great boost card 1188>1300

[cole2109]

Nice one cowie.
One of my 680 goes 1324MHz (stock) and another one just 1200

[cowie]

hey cole
1 of mine was slow like that so i got rid of it and i'm waiting for a lightning or dcII to go sli again

[ricardonuno1980]

@cowie: Can you fix the lack of GPU usages?
But if you enable GTX 680 SLi then you may not improve performance.

[cowie]

Ric,as you know in this bench sli does not give a great boost,its mostly all cpu and the ones with more cores add great cpu marks.
but a fast 4 core chip will often outrun a 4c/8t chip if you have enough speed on the 4core only chip just with better hdr 3. and 2sm scores but less cpu score....

[ToyTen]

First try on this new card and it reaches 1333Mhz at max for 1175mv.



i even havent tried to clock the memory, got this baby not long ago.

Edit: got it better,



i tried more freq on memory, till 1811Mhz and got little texture bugs, like red blurry points from time to time

[ricardonuno1980]

VERY IMPORTANT!!! If you get CPU tooooo bottlenecked then you must keep STOCK (reference or OC version*) for high-end GPU (GF 9800GX2, GTX 2xx, 4xx, 5xx and 6xx).

* - OC edition/version is DIFFERENT to OC enabled!

[smashly]

Cheap rig and a cheap score to match..lol

[ricardonuno1980]

Originally Posted by smashly

Cheap rig and a cheap score to match..lol
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/newuploads/9q94c.jpg

If you disable SLi then you will reduce only (much) slightly performance (graphics tests only) because your CPU bottlenecked toooo due to SLi enabled. lool

[smashly]

Just for your peace of mind ricardonuno1980, so you can see what your saying in my case is not correct... lol
1 x GTX 560 stock clocks, same CPU clock as my prior post:


1 x GTX 560 same oc gpu and cpu clocks as my earlier post:

[ricardonuno1980]

Originally Posted by smashly

Just for your peace of mind ricardonuno1980, so you can see what your saying in my case is not correct... lol
1 x GTX 560 stock clocks, same CPU clock as my prior post:
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/newuploads/rrq3v.jpg

it's true scores (not overall score and SM2.0 and HDR/SM3.0 only) on GTX 560 non-Ti@stock because sounds your CPU OCed doesn't bottleneck due to lastest and new CPU, except your videocard overclocked.

My GTX 480@stock got 131 fps (HDR1 test: Canyon Flight) running AMD X6 1055T@3.3GHz and XP x86. - see my thread "3DMark 03, 05 and 06 - 2560x1600 and x1920 inclueded" But unfortunately my CPU AMD isn't efficient each core but I will buy new to back to Intel (i7 2600k) in this year.

-see my post #15 of my thread "3DMark series in low/medium GPU usages to 100%", if you interest.

HDR1 test is very important and has more very intensive GPU than other graphics tests.

[smashly]

Originally Posted by ricardonuno1980

it's true scores (not overall score and SM2.0 and HDR/SM3.0 only) on GTX 560 non-Ti@stock because sounds your CPU OCed doesn't bottleneck due to lastest and new CPU, except your videocard overclocked.

My GTX 480@stock got 131 fps (HDR1 test: Canyon Flight) running AMD X6 1055T@3.3GHz and XP x86. - see my thread "3DMark 03, 05 and 06 - 2560x1600 and x1920 inclueded" But unfortunately my CPU AMD isn't efficient each core but I will buy new to back to Intel (i7 2600k) in this year.

-see my post #15 of my thread "3DMark series in low/medium GPU usages to 100%", if you interest.

HDR1 test is very important and has more very intensive GPU than other graphics tests.

Yes I understand what your saying.
Yes 3DMark06 is better with higher oc'd CPU then GPU.
Yes when you have 2+ GPU your CPU works harder to run the multi cards, in turn causes the CPU to bottleneck...
Also factor in that running more then 1 gpu only complicates oc'ing when trying to run high clocks.
Which I and many others have always known.

But in my case if you look at the images I posted then you'll see that me running Sli with the hardware I have at the clocks I have gives me a larger score.

Bottom line:
The idea is to try and get a higher overall score!
Me using one card does not give me a higher overall score at the clocks I'm running.

As for the bottleneck part with the cpu.
Sli GTX 560's oc'd & oc'd CPU: CPU Score = 8326
Single GTX 560 No OC & oc'd CPU: CPU Score = 8346
Single GTX 560 oc'd & oc'd CPU: CPU Score = 8406

So it sorta blows your theory out of the water that disable Sli get less graphics and higher CPU score to get better overall score when running at my current clocks.

As I say different story if I was oc'ing my CPU to 5Ghz+, then it'd probably be better to run one card to get a higher score as well as give better stability for benching.

Same if I wanted to commit to it then I'd be doing it in a custom minimal XP instal and not a bloated over weight Win7.

[ricardonuno1980]

Originally Posted by smashly

As for the bottleneck part with the cpu.
Sli GTX 560's oc'd & oc'd CPU: CPU Score = 8326
Single GTX 560 No OC & oc'd CPU: CPU Score = 8346
Single GTX 560 oc'd & oc'd CPU: CPU Score = 8406

The difference between your scores is ZERO on CPU tests because your videocard(s) does(do) never work. lool

Same if I wanted to commit to it then I'd be doing it in a custom minimal XP instal and not a bloated over weight Win7.

You chose well XP (native OS (without virtual OS program)) to improve performance - good luck!

[cowie]

single 448 ti and sli but not same cpu speeds or gpu clock speeds thuo just what i had around..... so i guess it means nothing
i have not a 4c/8t i use to overclock so i always use xp.


sli if you look you can see slower cpu got me off single card sm2.0 scores sli had little to do with it.
but sm3.0 score did raise and thats when you need to push it on sli or crasy clocked gpu to get a bump in score if you dont have a 5.9 sandy you know?


you get only small increase in this bench with sli about 1200-2200 points depends on the card.
forget tri its really bad in 06

[smashly]

Nice
I enjoy your posts cowie
They always put a grin on my face with those crazy cpu clocks.
awesome

[Hippie Tech]

Hio all

3dmark runs on xp should have an * beside them. lol

The last time I ran xp, my 9800gt scored 11.5k, compared to the 9.5-10k with vista/7.

I'm temped to run xp, but not looking forward to the 3 - 4+ hours needed to install it. xD

Does my SM2.0 score seem low ?



pEACe

[ricardonuno1980]

Originally Posted by Hippie Tech

Hio all

3dmark runs on xp should have an * beside them. lol

The last time I ran xp, my 9800gt scored 11.5k, compared to the 9.5-10k with vista/7.

I'm temped to run xp, but not looking forward to the 3 - 4+ hours needed to install it. xD

Does my SM2.0 score seem low ?

http://img.hwbot.org/u41557/image_id_850507.pjpeg

pEACe

No, sounds your SM2.0 score is normal due to CPU too bottlenecked but you add a partition for Win XP (recommended for get improve performance).
look - my old AMD X6 1055T and now current i5-2500K -> 3DMark 03, 05 and 06 - 2560x1600 and x1920 inclueded

[Hippie Tech]

Originally Posted by ricardonuno1980

No, sounds your SM2.0 score is normal due to CPU too bottlenecked but you add a partition for Win XP (recommended for get improve performance).
look - my old AMD X6 1055T and now current i5-2500K -> 3DMark 03, 05 and 06 - 2560x1600 and x1920 inclueded

Thats what I thought. But funny how some 3d apps are not much by the cpu used. eg. AVP benchmark, Unigine Heaven...

If I can stop mining long enough, I'll give xp64 a try lol..

pEACe

[ricardonuno1980]

Originally Posted by Hippie Tech

Thats what I thought. But funny how some 3d apps are not much by the cpu used. eg. AVP benchmark, Unigine Heaven...

If I can stop mining long enough, I'll give xp64 a try lol..

pEACe

Ok. You may run XP 64-bit (maybe recommended) but I ran XP x86 only.

[Techjesse]

Just goofing off stock clocks on the GPU's, will push it next time.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm06/17026453

[ricardonuno1980]

Originally Posted by Techjesse

Just goofing off stock clocks on the GPU's, will push it next time.
http://i628.photobucket.com/albums/u..._33_53_230.png
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm06/17026453

I got almost same level of CPU limited to you because:
-My old PC with old AMD X6 1055T@stock and single GTX 480@stock-reference - 18765 3DMarks running XP x86 SP3
-Your PC - 38713 3DMarks running Win 7 x64
->You are 2x faster than that my old PC.

Try to enter XP x86 and to test on single videocard because XP is lighter than Win 7.

[Techjesse]

I'll have to find a copy of XP x86 SP3 and give it a run Will XP 64bit do just as good?