4870 Diamond XOC BE BIOS (CCC upto 990MHz/1200MHz)

[CraptacularOne]

Spin it off whichever way you want my friend, facts are facts and you got NOTHING to back up your claims. Like I said before, FurMark and ATITool or it never happened. And you definitely did not make those scores with 8.5 or 8.6 betas...check your version strings...me 9.5k score 8.520.2.0, you on the 9k score 8.520.0.0, on the 9.8k score 8.522.0.0

Edit: The last run too is August 21, so that's with 8.8 official which matches your version string. < 300pts more for you with your setup compared to mine, really, get a clue...

Way to beat yourself down in your own defensive argument

Anyway, I made my point before. No point in spreading lies.

No kidding the last run is Aug 21. Apparently you are brain dead and caoont understand written text. I was pointing out to you the increase in score from the driver revision. It's a GPU test captain troll. 300 points better is quite a difference and is well within reason for a 50Mhz speed in increase. What were you expecting from only 50Mhz? 1,000 points? All you are doing is accentuating your own ignorance with every reply.

[dejanh]

No kidding the last run is Aug 21. Apparently you are brain dead and caoont understand written text. I was pointing out to you the increase in score from the driver revision. It's a GPU test captain troll. 300 points better is quite a difference and is well within reason for a 50Mhz speed in increase. What were you expecting from only 50Mhz? 1,000 points? All you are doing is accentuating your own ignorance with every reply.

300 is a very small difference. More than likely it is ONLY due to your CPU being significantly better and not bottlenecking your card, unlike mine, and maybe, just maybe a bit to do with the newer driver revision. Newer driver, 50MHz more on the core, combined with apparent 100MHz more base memory clock, combined with a massively better platform and CPU should definitely account for more than 300pts.

This is my last plea to you, FurMark and ATITool or it never happened. Why is it so difficult to do that? If anything, you'd make me eat my own words and prove to EVERYONE that 900/1250 can be done.

I am begging you to prove me wrong in fact. I want to see that 900/1250 can be done and can be done solid. There is not ONE person that managed this so far, especially on stock everything.

[CraptacularOne]

300 is a very small difference. More than likely it is ONLY due to your CPU being significantly better and not bottlenecking your card, unlike mine, and maybe, just maybe a bit to do with the newer driver revision. Newer driver, 50MHz more on the core, combined with apparent 100MHz more base memory clock, combined with a massively better platform and CPU should definitely account for more than 300pts.

This is my last plea to you, FurMark and ATITool or it never happened. Why is it so difficult to do that? If anything, you'd make me eat my own words and prove to EVERYONE that 900/1250 can be done.

I am begging you to prove me wrong in fact. I want to see that 900/1250 can be done and can be done solid. There is not ONE person that managed this so far, especially on stock everything.

300 points is not a "very small" difference in a benchmark. It's actualy quite the gain. And Vantage is not nearly as CPU bound as the previous benchmarks were as evidenced by your being able to get 9.5k on the GPU score on your AMD X2.

I really can't stand, ignorant forum trolls.


Wait, let me guess: I'm just faking that screen shot too? Get a clue junior. Just because YOU can't do it or your cards aren't capable of it, doesn't mean nobodies cards can.

[dejanh]

300 points is not a "very small" difference in a benchmark. It's actualy quite the gain. And Vantage is not nearly as CPU bound as the previous benchmarks were as evidenced by your being able to get 9.5k on the GPU score on your AMD X2.

I really can't stand, ignorant forum trolls.


Wait, let me guess: I'm just faking that screen shot too? Get a clue junior. Just because YOU can't do it or your cards aren't capable of it, doesn't mean nobodies cards can.

Jeez was that so difficult? Finally, something. It's looking like you really got some kick ass cards. Congrats

...now for the benefit of the rest of us can you please post some screens of longer ATITool runs showing no artifacts and maybe get FurMark running at 1280x1024 at least? Also, if you do not mind grabing Everest or GPU-Z 0.2.7 and showing the current draw of your GPU with your VRM temps.

I think a lot of us would appreciate it

Thanks!

[CraptacularOne]

Jeez was that so difficult? Finally, something. It's looking like you really got some kick ass cards. Congrats

...now for the benefit of the rest of us can you please post some screens of longer ATITool runs showing no artifacts and maybe get FurMark running at 1280x1024 at least? Also, if you do not mind grabing Everest or GPU-Z 0.2.7 and showing the current draw of your GPU with your VRM temps.

I think a lot of us would appreciate it

Thanks!

So let me get this straight: You first accuse me of making this up, then say I don't know what I'm talking about, then proceed to insult me and now you want me to do something for your benefit? Yeah, umm...good luck with that

[Caveman787]

It's for everyone that wants to overclock there 4870's and wanna see the good results available. I think he was just overly aprehensive because like he said not many people have been able to get that high.

snippe had to v mod to get to 895.

[Rick Flair]

So let me get this straight: You first accuse me of making this up, then say I don't know what I'm talking about, then proceed to insult me and now you want me to do something for your benefit? Yeah, umm...good luck with that

Actually I would like to see ATItool pics also of your card running those speeds in the artifact scan. Furmark has been nerfed with later ATI drivers.

[dejanh]

Actually I would like to see ATItool pics also of your card running those speeds in the artifact scan. Furmark has been nerfed with later ATI drivers.

I completely forgot about that. You are right. They nerfed FurMark in the driver so that it does not crash the cards. We definitely need to see ATITool or furmer with 8.7 or prior drivers at 1280x1024 at least, longer runs for both.

[Dirton]

I really can't stand, ignorant forum trolls.
.

Rename FurMark.exe to something like test.exe and run it then, you'll be pleasantly supriced. I get 82A and rock solid instability after that.

[CraptacularOne]

Rename FurMark.exe to something like test.exe and run it then, you'll be pleasantly supriced. I get 82A and rock solid instability after that.

If you look at the fps there genius, you'll see that the card is not throttling down. When the exe is named "furmark.exe" the fps drop significantly from the displayed numbers. Which can only mean one thing: I obviously already knew this and renamed the .exe