Yes! Just found it myself actually, but thanks for quick reply. 3DMark's in minimum requires 1.8Ghz DualCore CPU with SSSE3 support, and my Phenom does not have SSSE3 instruction support. Thanks again tho.
His Phenom II is lacking SSE4 instructions. I've seen quite a few games not running at all becouse that problem so i thought there is a connection.
I have my 280 @ 1120/1400 Whats weird is I have no voltage options in Afterburner even though this is a black edition XFX 280. Guess I need to make a bios for it. I used to have a reference Sapphire 7950 boost with a custom bios @ 1300/1500. Yes its time to snag up a $199 XFX 4GB RX 480 and use it ill high end vega drops.
Your graphics score is 7% faster than i am at stock and SLI disabled, while your CPU is 80% faster lol. http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/59072/spy/53924
You can't deny that Maxwell doesn't support Async-Compute as it is stated. If not, how do you explain the performance drop? c:
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13312297 GTX 970 SLI FTW running at pre-oc speeds. I7 3930k @ 4.3ghz 3DMark score:6732 Graphics Score :7104 CPU core:5195
I can't remember the exact wording, but think the Oxide dev explained that while Maxwell cards do have support for async compute, they are unable to use it and gain performance, if anything there is a risk of performance loss. I just tried with and without, and i gained 50 on the graphics score by disabling async compute. Nearly a year done the line, i'm sure some of us can give up on this every being a feature on Maxwell cards. Not the end of the world though, performance is still great with this benchmark and competitive considering what i paid. Just a pity DX12/Vulkan games are not this well optimised. Not much between our two systems, just my CPU starting to show it's age. 3DMark score:6512 Graphics Score :7335 CPU core:3982 http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/64011/spy/61196
Indeed. Maxwell cards are good performers overall. It's a shame that wont get any better at this point. Peak of performance and async as you see above, isnt helping at all. Considering how Kepler cards are performing bad lately (Vulcan and DX12) Maxwell is still standing.
Or just not enabled properly yet. Nv didnt say anything about it with r367 branch, so.. You can continue with your conspiracy theory.
The most this system can get is 7184 so not to shabby! http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13303389 ok new best! http://www.3dmark.com/spy/286168
SCORE 3 796 with AMD Radeon R9 290(1x) and AMD FX-8350 Graphics Score 3 924 CPU Score 3 204 3dmark.com/3dm/13336973 Worst motherboard on the planet ASRock 970 Extreme4
Driver: 368.81 GTX980M@1.2 GHz , i74860HQ Time Spy Result: 3296 Graphics score: 3223 CPU Test: 3790 http://imgur.com/a/txXPP
messed up well nothing changes. http://steamcommunity.com/app/223850/discussions/0/366298942110944664/ what he said was interesting. Im not sure of any of it If you guys made Time Spy and use Async Compute to overlap rendering , you play right into Pascal's hand. It does not have real parallel execution but it can fast context switch, with preemption and dynamic load balancing to improve it's shader utilization if it's under used. At 1080 and 1440p, it is very much likely not to be using 100% hence the very small gains. People find the gains drop to almost zero at 4K due to all the shaders being utilized already. If you guys had actually used a real parallel and multi-engine approach, you would see major gains across the board for all GPUs capable of this on hardware. Regardless of whether it's a low shader GPU like 380/X or even the new RX 480, which only have 2304 shaders vs Fury X 4096.