3DMARK "LEGENDARY"

[ShrimpBrime]

RTX 4060 Time Spy Legendary!!
Bad ass little card actually

 

[FirstEver.eu]

RTX 4060 Time Spy Legendary!!
Bad ass little card actually

You've nicely boosted the final score with your processor... but this benchmark is just stupid.
Personally, I've come to the conclusion that it's better to have a weak CPU and a much better GPU. On my 3x slower (ancient) processor and RTX 4070 Ti I have 2x more FPS.
So the final score doesn't tell the truth about the performance 12680 (RTX 4060) vs 18447 (RTX 4070 Ti), and the Graphics Score is dramatically different 11660 (RTX 4070) vs 22815 (RTX 4070 Ti).

The FPS comparison looks better...

Graphics Test 1 - 77.54 FPS vs 148.06 FPS
Graphics Test 2 - 65.7 FPS vs 131.29 FPS

It's strange how much of a gap there is between RTX 4060 and 4070 Ti in this test.
I prefer 3DMark Speed Way benchmark, where the result translates directly to FPS, where 12.34 FPS =1234 points

 

[ShrimpBrime]

You've nicely boosted the final score with your processor... but this benchmark is just stupid.
Personally, I've come to the conclusion that it's better to have a weak CPU and a much better GPU. On my 3x slower (ancient) processor and RTX 4070 Ti I have 2x more FPS.
So the final score doesn't tell the truth about the performance 12680 (RTX 4060) vs 18447 (RTX 4070 Ti), and the Graphics Score is dramatically different 11660 (RTX 4070) vs 22815 (RTX 4070 Ti).

The FPS comparison looks better...

Graphics Test 1 - 77.54 FPS vs 148.06 FPS
Graphics Test 2 - 65.7 FPS vs 131.29 FPS

It's strange how much of a gap there is between RTX 4060 and 4070 Ti in this test.
I prefer 3DMark Speed Way benchmark, where the result translates directly to FPS, where 12.34 FPS =1234 points

View attachment 387960

Oh for sure a HUGE gap in performance, but also the price. 300$ vs 700$ card. I expect no less!!

4070 Super, haven't don't Speed Way with 4060 yet. I'll get there eventually.

 

[Arctucas]

You've nicely boosted the final score with your processor... but this benchmark is just stupid.
Personally, I've come to the conclusion that it's better to have a weak CPU and a much better GPU. On my 3x slower (ancient) processor and RTX 4070 Ti I have 2x more FPS.
So the final score doesn't tell the truth about the performance 12680 (RTX 4060) vs 18447 (RTX 4070 Ti), and the Graphics Score is dramatically different 11660 (RTX 4070) vs 22815 (RTX 4070 Ti).

The FPS comparison looks better...

Graphics Test 1 - 77.54 FPS vs 148.06 FPS
Graphics Test 2 - 65.7 FPS vs 131.29 FPS

It's strange how much of a gap there is between RTX 4060 and 4070 Ti in this test.
I prefer 3DMark Speed Way benchmark, where the result translates directly to FPS, where 12.34 FPS =1234 points

View attachment 387960

Speedway is basically GPU test, Timespy is a CPU + GPU test.

Not really fair to compare 4060 to 4070Ti.

Like comparing my 4070 Ti Super.

I scored 26 443 in Time Spy

Intel Core i9 processor 14900K, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER x 1, 49152 MB, 64-bit Windows 11}

www.3dmark.com

 

[FirstEver.eu]

Oh for sure a HUGE gap in performance, but also the price. 300$ vs 700$ card. I expect no less!!

4070 Super, haven't don't Speed Way with 4060 yet. I'll get there eventually.

In benchmarks I'm interested in the average number of FPS, not how many usb devices were connected or some other nonsense.

Left - RTX 4070 Ti @ 3015 MHz / 1544 MHz with Xeon E5-1680 v2 @ 4375 GHz - https://www.3dmark.com/spy/36527175
Right - RTX 4070 Ti @ 3075 MHz / 1532 MHz with Core i9-13900KF @ 5900 MHz - https://www.3dmark.com/spy/39563665 (GPU+60MHz = +1.95% / MEM-12MHz = -0.22%)

Graphics Test 1 - 161.48 fps (Xeon E5-1680 v2) vs 162.77 fps (Core i9-13900KF) +0.7%
Graphics Test 2 - 139.92 fps (Xeon E5-1680 v2) vs 140.06 fps (Core i9-13900KF) +0.1%

Please note that...

Xeon E5-1680 v2 was release on Sep 10th, 2013
Core i9-13900KF was release on Oct 20th, 2022

Now answer your question - do gamers really need new processors?

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Speedway is basically GPU test, Timespy is a CPU + GPU test.

Not really fair to compare 4060 to 4070Ti.

Like comparing my 4070 Ti Super.

I scored 26 443 in Time Spy

Intel Core i9 processor 14900K, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER x 1, 49152 MB, 64-bit Windows 11}

www.3dmark.com

View attachment 387976

I probably have a couple hundred legendary submissions.

Here's TimeSpy with RX 6700 (non XT) in crossfire (Mgpu). Something I'm not sure if they still support this for DX-12 or not with the new 9000 series cards.

I scored 18 191 in Time Spy

Intel Core i7-13700K Processor, AMD Radeon RX 6700 x 2, 16384 MB, 64-bit Windows 11}

www.3dmark.com

In benchmarks I'm interested in the average number of FPS, not how many USB devices someone has connected or other nonsense.

Left - RTX 4070 Ti @ 3015 MHz / 1544 MHz with Xeon E5-1680 v2 @ 4375 GHz - https://www.3dmark.com/spy/36527175
Right - RTX 4070 Ti @ 3075 MHz / 1532 MHz with Core i9-13900KF @ 5900 MHz - https://www.3dmark.com/spy/39563665 (GPU+60MHz = +1.95% / MEM-12MHz = -0.22%)

Graphics Test 1 - 161.48 fps (Xeon E5-1680 v2) vs 162.77 fps (Core i9-13900KF) +0.7%
Graphics Test 2 - 139.92 fps (Xeon E5-1680 v2) vs 140.06 fps (Core i9-13900KF) +0.1%

View attachment 388067

Please note that...

Xeon E5-1680 v2 was release on Sep 10th, 2013
Core i9-13900KF was release on Oct 20th, 2022

Now answer your question - do gamers really need new processors?

I'm sorry friend, I noticed the mods removed your other posts for off topic chat. This forum is for Legendary submissions only and chat about getting the status legendary.

You can start a new thread maybe in the general hardware section and tag me if you like, and I'm all about sharing opinions and facts with you!

 

[Ruru]

Steel Nomad Light with my 3rd PC

Result not found

www.3dmark.com

 

[Tropick]

Attempting to keep my ol' 6950XT up to speed with today's high end cards with a relatively heavy daily driver OC. Seeing some good gains in raster, RT is a different story...

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/53932022

 

[AMF]

Result not found

www.3dmark.com

 

[RJ]

Hotfix driver and kind of a dud but eh:

 

[AMF]

 

[freeagent]

These are my daily settings, I was just messing around lol.. like first run type of thing. Next time I will have some form of Z program installed for verification

I can assure you I was not cheating

 

[RJ]

 

[FirstEver.eu]

With all due respect to people who post their "Legendary" results - that term makes no sense, because all you have to do is find a niche/old processor and run the benchmark with a new graphics card, then you will get a "Legendary" result 95% of the time - that should be called "Unique or Special". In my humble opinion "Legendary" should only be used for the best result for a specific graphics card.

See how ridiculous that is...

@freeagent posted a few results where on a 10+ year old processor and lower GPU clock speed, I got a better result, and yet he has a "Legendary" result.

3DMark Solar Bay - 116 705 <- Link
AMD Ryzen 9 9900X @ 5,818 MHz (Launch Date: August 2024) & NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti @ 3,030 MHz

3DMark Solar Bay - 117 292 <- Link
Intel Xeon Processor E5-1680 v2 @ 4,375 MHz (Launch Date: September 2013) & NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti @ 2,925MHz

I tested this on a beta driver, so the result was not added to the rankings.
Note that there's no score for Average and Best, as my score is the only score ever tested for the RTX 4070 Ti and this CPU, and it immediately earns Legendary status.


The real "Legendary" 3DMark Solar Bay score for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti should be Qillerz's - 125,341 <- Link
Intel Core i7-13700KF Processor @ 5,400 MHz (Launch Date: September 2022) & NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti @ 3,120 MHz

 

[freeagent]

3DMark says its legendary, not me, not the other guys. But thanks for choosing me out of many I guess.

 

[AVATARAT]

With all due respect to people who post their "Legendary" results - that term makes no sense, because all you have to do is find a niche/old processor and run the benchmark with a new graphics card, then you will get a "Legendary" result 95% of the time - that should be called "Unique or Special". In my humble opinion "Legendary" should only be used for the best result for a specific graphics card.

See how ridiculous that is...

@freeagent posted a few results where on a 10+ year old processor and lower GPU clock speed, I got a better result, and yet he has a "Legendary" result.

You don't seem to understand how it works.
3DMark evaluates the CPU+GPU combination as a score because it matters a lot.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

3DMark says its legendary, not me, not the other guys. But thanks for choosing me out of many I guess.

Lol, cheater!!

Just don't tell him this next screen shot, over a year old may not be legendary anymore.

4060ti Solar Bay legendary.

 

[Arctucas]

 

[ShrimpBrime]

View attachment 390438

View attachment 390443

View attachment 390447

View attachment 390449

Should hit 400k pts Ice Storm. Disable the E-cores. Do the same for Cloud Gate but that will bring the gpu score up maybe not the cpu score. Nice thing about no e-cores, it gives you a little extra thermal headroom. SkyDiver looks great! Beats my 4o7o super pretty good.

 

[AVATARAT]

Ryzen 9700x PBO
2x32GB DDR5 @ 6200MHz, 28-36-32-48-80
RX 9070 XT +10% PL
Win 11 24H2 (26100)

 

[Jops]

 

[Paganstomp]

Did this yesterday on my "new" Ryzen build. ASRock B550 Phantom Gaming 4 ac with Sapphire RX 460. I overclocked nothing.

 

[Jops]

Navi 21 XTXH is great.

 

[Ninja Weedle]

Got a Legendary in steel nomad (technically a world record for the specific combo) on a 9700x + 3050 6GB.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

View attachment 395437
Got a Legendary in steel nomad (technically a world record for the specific combo) on a 9700x + 3050 6GB.

Which Rtx 3050 is that? They made 5 different versions. Can you add a GPU-Z screen shot please for reference??