Jump to content
Brian

New Unigine Valley Benchmark

Recommended Posts

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By 750dmg
      Hi guys,
      I succesfully flashed v2 vbios from prema and I tried 1v and and oc but I couldnt. I think it was power suply. Mine is 230w. And I tried 0.75 0.50 0.25 and 0 volt. But now I m trying game, benchmark screen goes dark and after beeping at 0 volt. Is this a hardware damage? I used just 1v max.(temperature max 70c)
      I tried
      cmos reset
      DDU
      Xtu uninstall
      And come back to stock vbios
      I think my card is dying
      Please help me!
       
    • By Dr. AMK
      It’s about time we share first benchmarks of GeForce GTX 1080, new flagship graphics card that will be unveiled tomorrow by NVIDIA.

      NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080, 8GB RAM GDDR5X at 10 GHz
      I think the most interesting detail about GTX 1080 is the new memory. NVIDIA has finally used 8GB ram for its flagship card. It’s no longer an exclusive to mobile solutions. Additionally, the GDDR5X modules are clocked at 2500 MHz (which is shown as 5000+ MHz in 3DMark). However the effective clock is 10000 MHz, which means the bandwidth is somewhere around 320 GB/s (assuming it’s 256-bit wide).
      On the GPU side we have a huge improvement in terms of frequencies. It is said that GTX 1080 can boost up to 1.8 GHz, with base clock around 1.6 GHz. At the time of writing we are not able to confirm the exact reference clock. For such reason I decided to avoid making comparison charts, so this post will essentially tell you what GTX 1080 is capable of and nothing more.
      NVIDIA Pascal Series (To be confirmed) May 5th 2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 NVIDIA Tesla P100 GPU 16nm FF GP104-400 16nm FF GP104-200 16nm FF GP100-890 CUDA Cores ? ? 3584 Memory Type 8GB GDDR5X 8GB GDDR5 16 GB HBM2 Base Clock ? ? 1328 MHz Memory Clock 2500 MHz 2000 MHz 352 MHz Effective Memory Clock 10000 MHz 8000 MHz 1408 MHz Memory Bus 256-bit 256-bit 4096-bit Memory Bandwidth 320 GB/s 256 GB/s 720 GB/s NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB — 3DMark11 Performance
      Like always, we are only looking at graphics score. 3DMark11 Performance preset is rendered at 1280×720 resolution. GeForce GTX 1080 scores 27683 points, which is still above overclocked GM200 cards (~23-25k). Worth noting 3DMark11 is not showing correct GPU clocks, however the new driver already supports GTX 1080 by its name.
      http://videocardz.com/59558/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-benchmarks
       
    • By Brian
      We all love drama between technology companies and the latest deliciousness comes courtesy of AMD. They have a 4 minute video on YouTube that questions whether or not SYSmark is a reliable, objective benchmark to use when evaluating performance between different systems. 
       
      AMD's video opens with John Hampton, Director Computer Client Products, talking about how it is very important in choosing the right benchmark when evaluating a purchase because if you choose the wrong one , you can end up overpaying for technology or getting a lesser performing PC. To emphasize his point, he indirectly mentions Volkswagen's diesel debacle and uses the latter case as an example of how even established organizations can be misleading. 
       
      We are then introduced to Tony Salinas, an AMD Engineering Manager, who runs through a couple tests in SYSmark using two notebooks, one that has an Intel i5 CPU and the other with an AMD FX CPU. SYSmark returns a score of 987 for the Intel system and 659 for the AMD one which is a delta of 50%. AMD notes that this is misleading and not reflective of real life performance. To prove this, they run a different benchmark called PCMark 8 on both systems and the results show the Intel i5 system scoring 4199 and the AMD equipped one 3908 which is a delta of 7%. AMD says this is a far more realistic indicator of true performance as PCMark 8 tests the CPU, GPU and video subcomponents rather than emphasizing the CPU like SYSmark does.
       
      And just to drive the point home some more, AMD created their own in-house test using Microsoft Office Suite where they run a custom script on both notebooks and then measure the start and end of a task with a time stamp to gauge performance. Their in-house test shows the Intel system completing the task in approximately 61 seconds while the AMD based one finished it in roughly 64 seconds which is a delta of 6-7%.
       
      As AMD's results line up with those found with PCMark 8, they contend that PCMark 8 is a more fair and balanced indicator of overall performance while SYSmark is not and therefore should be discarded by any potential customers as a tool for evaluating a purchase. 
       

      Intel system using AMD in-house test: Test completed in ~61 seconds.

      AMD system using AMD in-house test: Test completed in ~64 seconds.
       
      They also take the time to remind us that the FTC has required SYSmark published benchmarks to contain fine print that notes their benchmark may only be optimized for Intel. Of course, this may have something to do with the fact that AMD resigned from BAPco consortium. Finally, AMD notes that a transparent benchmark should meet very specific criteria which includes being realistic, unbiased, objective and transparent, all of which SYSmark is not apparently. 
       

       
      While it's fun to see these types of videos from AMD, they also highlight the fact that the company is facing an uphill battle on all fronts, whether it's CPU or GPU, and 2016 may be the year that makes or breaks them.
       

      View full article
    • By Brian
      We all love drama between technology companies and the latest deliciousness comes courtesy of AMD. They have a 4 minute video on YouTube that questions whether or not SYSmark is a reliable, objective benchmark to use when evaluating performance between different systems. 
       
      AMD's video opens with John Hampton, Director Computer Client Products, talking about how it is very important in choosing the right benchmark when evaluating a purchase because if you choose the wrong one , you can end up overpaying for technology or getting a lesser performing PC. To emphasize his point, he indirectly mentions Volkswagen's diesel debacle and uses the latter case as an example of how even established organizations can be misleading. 
       
      We are then introduced to Tony Salinas, an AMD Engineering Manager, who runs through a couple tests in SYSmark using two notebooks, one that has an Intel i5 CPU and the other with an AMD FX CPU. SYSmark returns a score of 987 for the Intel system and 659 for the AMD one which is a delta of 50%. AMD notes that this is misleading and not reflective of real life performance. To prove this, they run a different benchmark called PCMark 8 on both systems and the results show the Intel i5 system scoring 4199 and the AMD equipped one 3908 which is a delta of 7%. AMD says this is a far more realistic indicator of true performance as PCMark 8 tests the CPU, GPU and video subcomponents rather than emphasizing the CPU like SYSmark does.
       
      And just to drive the point home some more, AMD created their own in-house test using Microsoft Office Suite where they run a custom script on both notebooks and then measure the start and end of a task with a time stamp to gauge performance. Their in-house test shows the Intel system completing the task in approximately 61 seconds while the AMD based one finished it in roughly 64 seconds which is a delta of 6-7%.
       
      As AMD's results line up with those found with PCMark 8, they contend that PCMark 8 is a more fair and balanced indicator of overall performance while SYSmark is not and therefore should be discarded by any potential customers as a tool for evaluating a purchase. 
       

      Intel system using AMD in-house test: Test completed in ~61 seconds.

      AMD system using AMD in-house test: Test completed in ~64 seconds.
       
      They also take the time to remind us that the FTC has required SYSmark published benchmarks to contain fine print that notes their benchmark may only be optimized for Intel. Of course, this may have something to do with the fact that AMD resigned from BAPco consortium. Finally, AMD notes that a transparent benchmark should meet very specific criteria which includes being realistic, unbiased, objective and transparent, all of which SYSmark is not apparently. 
       

       
      While it's fun to see these types of videos from AMD, they also highlight the fact that the company is facing an uphill battle on all fronts, whether it's CPU or GPU, and 2016 may be the year that makes or breaks them.
       
    • By Brian
      Desktop, laptop whatever you got in whatever configuration, no holds barred! Mine were done with high quality selected in NVCP, I'd probably squeeze a bit more out of performance textures:




×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.