well since nobody wants to bench here is one from tpu
It is Crysis (v 1.21), not warhead, unless he ran warhead and I'm just having a long day and missed that??
you should use Hawx2 and see the 215% gain have the GTX480 over a 5870 2gb in this benchmark/game ( developped with and by by Nvidia )
Even a GT430 is faster of the 5870 in this game ..
Lost Planet 2 ( like the one ) have been developped in collaboration ( complete collaboration ) with Nvidia, the DX11 part have been completely ( i say completely and this is not a joke ) designed by Nvidia,
forget to see any other cards who are not Nividia to shine in this game .
Last edited by Lanek; 12-11-2010 at 12:24 PM.
CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0
3dmark11 with another driver (the one from the 07.12.):
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/136857
didn't change much.
1. Asus P5Q-E / Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @~3612 MHz (8,5x425) / 2x2GB OCZ Platinum XTC (PC2-8000U, CL5) / EVGA GeForce GTX 570 / Crucial M4 128GB, WD Caviar Blue 640GB, WD Caviar SE16 320GB, WD Caviar SE 160GB / be quiet! Dark Power Pro P7 550W / Thermaltake Tsunami VA3000BWA / LG L227WT / Teufel Concept E Magnum 5.1 // SysProfile
2. Asus A8N-SLI / AMD Athlon 64 4000+ @~2640 MHz (12x220) / 1024 MB Corsair CMX TwinX 3200C2, 2.5-3-3-6 1T / Club3D GeForce 7800GT @463/1120 MHz / Crucial M4 64GB, Hitachi Deskstar 40GB / be quiet! Blackline P5 470W
note today's date in US style: 12/11/10 - mystery?![]()
Last edited by SpuTnicK; 12-11-2010 at 12:20 PM.
An unfortunate person is one tries to fart but sh1ts instead...
My Water Cooling Case Build (closed)
Asus M5G / i7 3770K / Corsair H100 / G.SKILL TridentX 2400MHz / HD7970 / SSD Intel Postville 2x80GB RAID0 / HDD 2x1TB Samsung HD103UJ / PSU TT 1200W / Dell 3xU2311 ef / TJ07
If AMD is releasing something 10% faster than a 5870 that is complete facking fail no matter how you spin it. The only thing that makes those scores acceptable is if they were for 6950. But seems like not. Now that begs the question, what is the point of a 6950 if its barely above a 6870?
Can we still be looking at fake scores even at this point?
wtf happened AMD?
Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H
G-Skill Ripjaws X 16Gb - 2133Mhz
Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme
i7 2600k @ 4.4Ghz
Sapphire 7970 OC 1.2Ghz
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 128Gb
Vantage numbers look unreal.but yea...a synthetic benchmark is not that important
---
---
"Generally speaking, CMOS power consumption is the result of charging and discharging gate capacitors. The charge required to fully charge the gate grows with the voltage; charge times frequency is current. Voltage times current is power. So, as you raise the voltage, the current consumption grows linearly, and the power consumption quadratically, at a fixed frequency. Once you reach the frequency limit of the chip without raising the voltage, further frequency increases are normally proportional to voltage. In other words, once you have to start raising the voltage, power consumption tends to rise with the cube of frequency."
+++
1st
CPU - 2600K(4.4ghz)/Mobo - AsusEvo/RAM - 8GB1866mhz/Cooler - VX/Gfx - Radeon 6950/PSU - EnermaxModu87+700W
+++
2nd
TRUltra-120Xtreme /// EnermaxModu82+(625w) /// abitIP35pro/// YorkfieldQ9650-->3906mhz(1.28V) /// 640AAKS & samsung F1 1T &samsung F1640gb&F1 RAID 1T /// 4gigs of RAM-->520mhz /// radeon 4850(700mhz)-->TRHR-03 GT
++++
3rd
Windsor4200(11x246-->2706mhz-->1.52v) : Zalman9500 : M2N32-SLI Deluxe : 2GB ddr2 SuperTalent-->451mhz : seagate 7200.10 320GB :7900GT(530/700) : Tagan530w
I dont know man this story is turning flipside very quickly. First Amd was keeping secret cause performance was really high now its the opposite, seems like Amd is hiding a mediocre product at best. And lets face it if the rumors hold true for the 1536 shaders, its going to be a huge letdown. The truth about the 4d is that one smd cluster is 90% the performance with 10% less die space. So although you got 20% more shaders they perform 90% as good so in reality 1536 shaders will be only 18% more efficient than 1600.
Its just not enough even with the other changes and this lets me down big time. Unless they manage 100% more shaders at 28nm then kepler with 700+ cuda will rape southern islands.
of course there is antiles but how many people will afford that and how much better is it gonna be than 580? from these scores it will be at best 15%.![]()
Last edited by Dimitriman; 12-11-2010 at 01:01 PM.
Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H
G-Skill Ripjaws X 16Gb - 2133Mhz
Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme
i7 2600k @ 4.4Ghz
Sapphire 7970 OC 1.2Ghz
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 128Gb
Someone said that the guy is getting these low scores because Power Tune(a new feature of 69xx series) is not working properly with the drivers he is using. It would be interesting to check the GPU load to make sure that the core is working 100%.
Hmm, better than GTX 480, still well under GTX 580, probably on pair with GTX 570 at least on Vantage.
![]()
i5 2500K@ 4.5Ghz
Asrock P67 PRO3![]()
P55 PRO & i5 750
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=966385
239 BCKL validation on cold air
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=966536
Almost 5hgz , air.
unless he had wrong driver or something it looks to be about the same as a gtx570
if priced the same or a little lower should do ok
but at 450 forget it![]()
Man... i don't think i've ever used my keyboard's F5 key as much as i've used today
Only reviewers, retailers, members of the illuminati, and God himself; know the real performance of the 6900 series![]()
Jokes aside, 570 will still beat that score i reckon, considering it has a performance bump over the 480 in vantage.
But really, take a look at this post from OCUK staff:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...5&postcount=69
At those prices, something must be horribly wrong with these benchmarks, either that or those prices are horribly wrong.![]()
-
Core i7 860 @ 3.80GHz, 1.28v | GA-P55A-UD4 | G.Skill Ripjaw 4GB DDR3 @ 1900MHz 7-9-8-24 1N, 1.57v | HIS HD 6950 2GB, 1536sp @ 900/1400, 1.10v | Samsung F3 500GB | Thermaltake 750W | Windows 7 64bit | Air
Crunching away...
Why do people keep posting 3dmark studded? I already said the scores will disappoint since shader count is lower. But gaming performance is a different story
Something has to be wrong.. look at this Compute score. That's no better than 2x5770
![]()
Well Gibbo says 6970 competes with GTX580 and is priced accordingly.Similar goes for 6950 and 570. And this guy has payed a lot of $$$$ in order to get healthy stock of those cards(meaning he has the cards,he has the hard numbers and knows how each performs).
When two-three syntetic benches show the same thing, the truth isn't far away even in games...The price is the key...
Still considering the biger die size, the 2gb of memory, the prices i don't think that can be very low...
i5 2500K@ 4.5Ghz
Asrock P67 PRO3![]()
P55 PRO & i5 750
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=966385
239 BCKL validation on cold air
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=966536
Almost 5hgz , air.
Although these benches and everything is a nice sneak peak, I won't draw any conclusions until actually release, just hold your horses off for a little bit longer guys.
Home PC: Intel i7 4770K @ 4.6ghz l Asus Maximus VI Hero l Corsair Dominator Plantinum 2400mhz (4x4GB) l Asus GTX 690 l Samsung 840 Pro 256gb l 2 x WD Black 1T storage drive l WD MyBook 500gb External l Samsung SH-S203N DVD l Creative X-Fi Titanium HD l Corsair AX1200 PSU l Planar SA2311W23 3D LCD Monitor l Corsair 800D Case l Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit l Sennheiser HD-590
Water Cooling Setup: Swiftech 320 Radiator (3 X Gentle Typhoons 1450rpm 3 x Gentle Typhoons 1850 rpm) l Swiftech Pump w/XSPC Res Top l Heatkiller 3.0 CPU Block l Heatkiller GPU-X GTX 690 "Hole Edition" Nickel l Heatkiller Geforce GTX 690 GPU Backplate l Koolance 140mm Radiator l Danger Den 1/2ID UV Green tubing l EK EKoolant UV Green Liquid
-Impossible is not a word
Bookmarks