• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

GPU PhysX Doesn't get you to 3DMark Vantage Hall of Fame Anymore

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
37,642 (8.52/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) Samsung U28D590 28-inch 4K UHD
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Antec EarthWatts Pro Gold 750W
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro

mullered07

New Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
2,646 (0.57/day)
Location
UK
System Name Ma Biatch
Processor i7 860
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-P55-UD3A
Cooling Noctua
Memory 8gb (4x2gb) G-Skill
Video Card(s) GTX 470
Storage WD5000aaks raid0
Display(s) Sony Bravia 37" 1080p
Case CM 690
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair HX520
Software Windows 7 Ultimate
the whole point futuremark are making is that the physX test in 3dmark vatage were made for the cpu not a gpu and it doesnt represent real world gaming as the nvidia gpus are only being used for the physx in the test and not for rendering graphics at the same time which is what would happen in a real world scenario (ie gpu would be rendering graphics and physx at the same time)

and ati gpu are fully capable of doing physx only they would have to create there own api as cuda belongs to nvidia (who didnt create it either before the nvidia fanboys start)
 

Kursah

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
12,671 (2.65/day)
Location
Missoula, MT, USA
System Name Kursah's Gaming Rig 2018 - Ryzen+ Edition | SpartanCore | SpartanCore2
Processor R7 2700X @ Stock (3.7/4.35) w/PBO+XFR2 | i7 3770 3.4/3.9 Stock | i7 4770 3.4/3.9 Stock
Motherboard Asus ROG Strix X370-F Gaming | Intel DQ77MK | SuperMicro X10SLQ
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S Push-Pull + NT-H1 | Stock Intel Cooler + AC MX4 | Stock Intel Cooler + AC MX4
Memory 16GB (2x8) G.Skill DDR4-3200 | 16GB (4x4) Samsung DDR3-1600 | 32GB (4x8) Mushkin Stealth DDR3-1600
Video Card(s) MSI GTX980 Ti Gaming 6G LE @ Stock | Onboard Intel HD 4000 | Onboard Intel HD 4600
Storage SSD 250GB + 960GB, 1x2TB | 120GB SSD, RAID10 6x2TB (6TB) | 120GB SSD, RAID10 6x3TB (9TB)
Display(s) Samsung 32" TV IPS 1080p, Dell 23" U2312HM IPS 1080p | 19" Dell on KVM..mostly headless operation.
Case Corsair 600C - Stock Fans on Low | Lian Li Lancool PC-K7 - Cougar fans | Modified Lenovo TS430 Case
Audio Device(s) Aune T1 mk1 > AKG K553 Pro + HiFiMAN HE-350 (Equalizer APO + PeaceUI) | Not in use
Power Supply EVGA 750G2 Modular + APC Back-UPS Pro 1500 | EVGA KR500 80+ Bronze (Both) + APC Smart-UPS 1500
Mouse Logitech G502 | Dell USB Laser Mouse (KVM)
Keyboard Logitech G15 rv2 | Dell USB Keyboard (KVM)
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 | Windows Server 2012 R2 (Hyper-V) | Windows Server 2016 (Hyper-V)
the whole point futuremark are making is that the physX test in 3dmark vatage were made for the cpu not a gpu and it doesnt represent real world gaming as the nvidia gpus are only being used for the physx in the test and not for rendering graphics at the same time which is what would happen in a real world scenario (ie gpu would be rendering graphics and physx at the same time)
This is what dissapointed me most of FM...they knew this was coming, couldn't have been completely blind to it and should've done another physX test that stressed modern GPU's on the PhsyX and Rendering at the same time for a more proper score...sure it might've been headscratching at release, and maybe they didn't know or didn't have the proper tools...if not then an update will hopefully truly be in the works to alleviate this. I'd like to see a test just for simultaneous Rendering and PhysX GPU...I don't care as much about benches or scores, but to tout a bench that should be better at predicing modern performance, it should have this test in it.

Hopefully we'll see that happen! :toast:
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
4,008 (0.85/day)
Location
Hurst, Texas
System Name The86
Processor Ryzen 7 1700X
Motherboard ASUS Prime X370 Pro
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo
Memory 2x8gb Patriot DDR4 2666 @ 2933
Video Card(s) Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X
Storage Samsung PM841
Display(s) HP 27in
Case Raidmax Alpha Prime
Power Supply 700W Thermaltake Smart
Mouse Logitech Mx510
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow 2012
Software Windows 10 Professional
personally whats the issue, the GPU was designed to act as a Physx card, so whats the issue you dont have to spend 100 bucks for the card now?
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
5,052 (1.06/day)
Location
Manchester, United Kingdom
Processor AMD FX 8320 @ 4GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5 rev1
Cooling Corsair H70
Memory 4 x 4GB DDR3 Ripjawz 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire Vapor-X AMD R9 280X
Storage 1 x 500GB Samsung Evo 850, 1 x 500GB Vrap Data Drive, 3 x 2TB Seagate, 1 x 1TB Samsung F1
Display(s) 3 x DGM IPS-2402WDH
Case Coolermaster HAF X
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Coolermaster 1000W Silent Pro M
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G510
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
personally whats the issue, the GPU was designed to act as a Physx card, so whats the issue you dont have to spend 100 bucks for the card now?
That's not the issue.

The issue is that a CPU physics test is being offloaded onto the GPU. In Futuremarks rules this is NOT allowed. Therefore its technically cheating.
 

Megasty

New Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
1,263 (0.30/day)
Location
The Kingdom of Au
Processor i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz (4.0 when gaming)
Motherboard Asus Rampage II Extreme - Yeah I Bought It...
Cooling Swiftech.
Memory 12 GB Crucial Ballistix Tracer - I Love Red
Video Card(s) ASUS EAH4870X2 - That Fan Is...!?
Storage 4 WD 1.5 TB
Display(s) 24" Sceptre
Case TT Xaser VI - Fugly, Red, & Huge...
Audio Device(s) The ASUS Thingy
Power Supply Ultra X3 1000W
Software Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit
That's not the issue.

The issue is that a CPU physics test is being offloaded onto the GPU. In Futuremarks rules this is NOT allowed. Therefore its technically cheating.
I don't care about the cheating. I just want them to get it right for the games.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
5,052 (1.06/day)
Location
Manchester, United Kingdom
Processor AMD FX 8320 @ 4GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5 rev1
Cooling Corsair H70
Memory 4 x 4GB DDR3 Ripjawz 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire Vapor-X AMD R9 280X
Storage 1 x 500GB Samsung Evo 850, 1 x 500GB Vrap Data Drive, 3 x 2TB Seagate, 1 x 1TB Samsung F1
Display(s) 3 x DGM IPS-2402WDH
Case Coolermaster HAF X
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Coolermaster 1000W Silent Pro M
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G510
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
I don't care about the cheating. I just want them to get it right for the games.
Same lol, but that's the topic of this discussion is it not? :)
 

Megasty

New Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
1,263 (0.30/day)
Location
The Kingdom of Au
Processor i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz (4.0 when gaming)
Motherboard Asus Rampage II Extreme - Yeah I Bought It...
Cooling Swiftech.
Memory 12 GB Crucial Ballistix Tracer - I Love Red
Video Card(s) ASUS EAH4870X2 - That Fan Is...!?
Storage 4 WD 1.5 TB
Display(s) 24" Sceptre
Case TT Xaser VI - Fugly, Red, & Huge...
Audio Device(s) The ASUS Thingy
Power Supply Ultra X3 1000W
Software Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit
Same lol, but that's the topic of this discussion is it not? :)
Yeah, but that is FM's problem. Its plain to anyone to see who is using PhysX & who isn't. The GPU score isn't affected by it but the overall score is. FM turned a blind eye to it at first but its still cheating, so they had finally step in, especially when it was making such a ridiculous difference with the CPU score :shadedshu
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
1,875 (0.44/day)
Location
Cobourg,Ontario
System Name FX CrossFireX
Processor AMD FX™ 8370 @Stock
Motherboard GA-990FXA-UD5 (rev. 3.1
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 the BEAST
Memory AMD Radeon™ R5 Entertainment Series 16GB (2x8GB) DDR3-1600 MHz CL11 Part Number: R5316G1601U2K-G T
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming R9 390
Storage x3 Seagates 1Terabyte X1 Seagate 2Terabyte <Steam Install
Display(s) 40 Inch Samsung HDTV (monitor)
Case HAF-X:)
Audio Device(s) AMD/HDMI to Onkyo HT-R508 Receiver
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G2 Power Supply
Software Windows 10 Pro X64
this is from Driver Heaven`s R700 preview test setup pic.......notice the blue card?
 

mullered07

New Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
2,646 (0.57/day)
Location
UK
System Name Ma Biatch
Processor i7 860
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-P55-UD3A
Cooling Noctua
Memory 8gb (4x2gb) G-Skill
Video Card(s) GTX 470
Storage WD5000aaks raid0
Display(s) Sony Bravia 37" 1080p
Case CM 690
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair HX520
Software Windows 7 Ultimate
personally whats the issue, the GPU was designed to act as a Physx card, so whats the issue you dont have to spend 100 bucks for the card now?
read my last post :slap:

no one is moaning the gpu can do physics but in the cpu physx test the gpu is soley using physx, its not rendering anything else like it would do in game so therefore doesnt represent real gaming/benchmarking(in a game the gpu would be used to render the game aswell as using physx thus taxing it more ), if people are to stupid/ignorant to actually read the article and understand what fm are on about they really shouldnt be commenting on the topic at hand
 
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
5,242 (1.24/day)
Location
IRAQ-Baghdad
System Name MASTER
Processor Core i7 3930k run at 4.4ghz
Motherboard Asus Rampage IV extreme
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 4x4G kingston hyperx beast 2400mhz
Video Card(s) 2X EVGA GTX680
Storage 2X Crusial M4 256g raid0, 1TbWD g, 2x500 WD B
Display(s) Samsung 27' 1080P LED 3D monitior 2ms
Case CoolerMaster Chosmos II
Audio Device(s) Creative sound blaster X-FI Titanum champion,Creative speakers 7.1 T7900
Power Supply Corsair 1200i, Logitch G500 Mouse, headset Corsair vengeance 1500
Software Win7 64bit Ultimate
Benchmark Scores 3d mark 2011: testing
guys i just want to ask what is the last physics card release , last one i see it is asus p1 , anything new , and i see someone say the physics on nvidia gpu better than physics card is that true
 

Bytor

New Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
1,051 (0.23/day)
System Name "The Dark Spider"
Processor AMD Phenom 9850 @ 3.0
Motherboard Asus M3A79-T
Cooling Water: CPU and GPU's, 2 pumps, 2 BIX Rads, D-Tek Fuzion v1, 2 Swiftech MCW60
Memory 4 gigs Crucial Balistix Tracers (1066 @ 1256)
Video Card(s) Sapphire 4870x2
Storage WD SATA 640 Gig HDD
Display(s) Acer 24" beast...
Case Modded Rocketfish
Audio Device(s) Onboard (only use head phones)
Power Supply 700 watt
Software a bunch
Benchmark Scores 3D Mark 06: 9859 on 2-X1950 pro's Xfire 3D Mark 06: 12794 on 1-3870 3D Mark 06: 16484 Xfire
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
5,242 (1.24/day)
Location
IRAQ-Baghdad
System Name MASTER
Processor Core i7 3930k run at 4.4ghz
Motherboard Asus Rampage IV extreme
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 4x4G kingston hyperx beast 2400mhz
Video Card(s) 2X EVGA GTX680
Storage 2X Crusial M4 256g raid0, 1TbWD g, 2x500 WD B
Display(s) Samsung 27' 1080P LED 3D monitior 2ms
Case CoolerMaster Chosmos II
Audio Device(s) Creative sound blaster X-FI Titanum champion,Creative speakers 7.1 T7900
Power Supply Corsair 1200i, Logitch G500 Mouse, headset Corsair vengeance 1500
Software Win7 64bit Ultimate
Benchmark Scores 3d mark 2011: testing
as i told before , only a program can help physics on ati , just like some guy do it before and go more than p22000 score in vantage with 4870 , and nvidia got the guy and he work with nvidia now , aslo i sure for something which is it my frien want to buy a program from nvidia to help him render 3d max projects on gpu , we now it is more fater than cpu , and am sure physics is same thing
 
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
746 (0.17/day)
This is why I dislike Futuremark and their stupid benches so much. It's just some rabid fan boys trying to measure who's e-penis is the biggest, but at the end of the day, what did they really "win"? Even if they get the highest score, they're still retarded...nobody with an ounce of sanity wastes so much time and energy into such a pointless benchmark.
 

mullered07

New Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
2,646 (0.57/day)
Location
UK
System Name Ma Biatch
Processor i7 860
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-P55-UD3A
Cooling Noctua
Memory 8gb (4x2gb) G-Skill
Video Card(s) GTX 470
Storage WD5000aaks raid0
Display(s) Sony Bravia 37" 1080p
Case CM 690
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair HX520
Software Windows 7 Ultimate
i must say 3dMark vantage looks like a piece of shit to me anyway, god knows who they had coding that for them but that first test "jane nash" looks absolutely awful, i think all they have really done is concentrate on sm3/4? shaders and giving everything that gay unrealistic looking glow and thought bollox to the rest. im not impressed and feel its more of a tideover until 3dmark09/10? comes out.
 
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
555 (0.13/day)
Location
Indiana
System Name Evil Dragon
Processor AMD FX-8320 Vishera @4.7ghz
Motherboard Asus 970 pro gaming Aura
Cooling Corsair Hydro Series H100i V2(fully Lapped). 4 40mm NB/VRM fans. 6 Thermaltake Riing 12 Series fans
Memory 2X8gig GeIL EVO Veloce Series DDR3 1600 @9.9.9.26
Video Card(s) Powercolor Red Devil RX 480 (1400/2100)
Storage PNY XLR8 480gig SSD. Patriot Pyro SE 60gig SSD.
Display(s) ASUS VP228H LED
Case Thermaltake Core V31
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC1150 W/Creative Sound Blaster Cinema 2
Power Supply EVGA 850 BQ 110
Keyboard Roccat Isku FX
Software Win 10 Pro
People get waaaay to bent out of shape over this kind of thing. Must be a E-peen thing.. :slap:

I have always look at benchmarking as a way to judge changes I make to my system. OC this,
add a better cooler there, run Futuremark, see what the difference is. What matters to me is real world performance. As long as my system is capable of running what I throw at it, and is rock solid I dont really pay to much attention to the numbers...
 

warhammer

New Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
204 (0.05/day)
Processor Q6600@3.6
Motherboard Evga 680i
Cooling H20
Memory 2GB DDR2
Video Card(s) 8800GTS 512 SLI
Storage 4x320gig
Display(s) 21CRT
Case ARMOR
Audio Device(s) SB
Power Supply 750W
Software VISTA ULTIMATE
3dMark vantage is not real world gaming or performance..
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2007
Messages
4,838 (1.05/day)
System Name Glow
Processor Ryzen 5 1600
Motherboard Gigabyte B450M Aorus AM4 ATX
Cooling Stock Wraith Spire
Memory 2x8gb Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3000Mhz C15
Video Card(s) XFX RX 580
Storage 500 Samsung 960 Evo Pro M.2, 256 GB Samsung Evo 850, 1TB WD Blue
Display(s) Philips 276E8VJSB 27" 4k IPS
Case NZXT H500i
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 550W G2
Software Win 10 Education / KDE Neon Dual Boot
3dMark vantage is not real world gaming or performance..
Real world gaming is just another benchmark, and is subject to the same biases and differences that 3dmark is. I really don't know why that argument always gets brought up. Just b/c a game is popular doesn't make it a better bench than a program like 3dmark.

I personally find it a little hard to believe fm didn't intend for this sort of effect on scores, as physX is built into the final and difference making test. PhysX being there completely changes the way the test is run. Did they not know nvidia was putting physX on their cards? Did they think this would just be for dedicated physics cards? I doubt it. The bench really is done poorly, and planned very poorly. That last test should be a seperate category for physics, calling it a cpu score is a cause for all the frizzy. I also agree w/ mulder, I think it doesn't look very good at all. They need to figure out something new to accomodate this changing graphics processing arena.
 

mullered07

New Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
2,646 (0.57/day)
Location
UK
System Name Ma Biatch
Processor i7 860
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-P55-UD3A
Cooling Noctua
Memory 8gb (4x2gb) G-Skill
Video Card(s) GTX 470
Storage WD5000aaks raid0
Display(s) Sony Bravia 37" 1080p
Case CM 690
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair HX520
Software Windows 7 Ultimate
Real world gaming is just another benchmark, and is subject to the same biases and differences that 3dmark is. I really don't know why that argument always gets brought up. Just b/c a game is popular doesn't make it a better bench than a program like 3dmark.

I personally find it a little hard to believe fm didn't intend for this sort of effect on scores, as physX is built into the final and difference making test. PhysX being there completely changes the way the test is run. Did they not know nvidia was putting physX on their cards? Did they think this would just be for dedicated physics cards? I doubt it. The bench really is done poorly, and planned very poorly. That last test should be a seperate category for physics, calling it a cpu score is a cause for all the frizzy. I also agree w/ mulder, I think it doesn't look very good at all. They need to figure out something new to accomodate this changing graphics processing arena.
its mullered :laugh::toast:
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2007
Messages
4,838 (1.05/day)
System Name Glow
Processor Ryzen 5 1600
Motherboard Gigabyte B450M Aorus AM4 ATX
Cooling Stock Wraith Spire
Memory 2x8gb Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3000Mhz C15
Video Card(s) XFX RX 580
Storage 500 Samsung 960 Evo Pro M.2, 256 GB Samsung Evo 850, 1TB WD Blue
Display(s) Philips 276E8VJSB 27" 4k IPS
Case NZXT H500i
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 550W G2
Software Win 10 Education / KDE Neon Dual Boot

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
37,642 (8.52/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) Samsung U28D590 28-inch 4K UHD
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Antec EarthWatts Pro Gold 750W
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro
this is from Driver Heaven`s R700 preview test setup pic.......notice the blue card?
PhysX driver allows you to use either the Ageia card or GeForce physics, not both. So if they use a test bed with a Ageia card, it makes for an even (fair) ground in which to test R700 against GTX 280 or any other card, since GTX 280's physics abilities won't be used by the driver, in each test, the PhysX card adds to the score.
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (5.07/day)
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
I think it's silly to not include the Physx scores, so long as you are using FM approved WQHL drivers.

Banning gpu Physx in Vantage is like banning quad core cpus in 06. Going from a 3Ghz dual core to a 4GHz quad doesn't change your gaming experience at all, but it sure as hell boosts 06 scores.

I think if they are gonna ban hardware that gives an "unfair advantage" in their benchmarks because "it doesn't reflect real world scenarios", then they should do it with all of there benchmarks.

It's not the decision that upsets me, it's their lack of consistency in this. If you apply an "unfair advantage" rule to one bench, you should do it to all of them.
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2006
Messages
6,957 (1.45/day)
Location
Australia, Sydney
I think it's silly to not include the Physx scores, so long as you are using FM approved WQHL drivers.

Banning gpu Physx in Vantage is like banning quad core cpus in 06. Going from a 3Ghz dual core to a 4GHz quad doesn't change your gaming experience at all, but it sure as hell boosts 06 scores.

I think if they are gonna ban hardware that gives an "unfair advantage" in their benchmarks because "it doesn't reflect real world scenarios", then they should do it with all of there benchmarks.

It's not the decision that upsets me, it's their lack of consistency in this. If you apply an "unfair advantage" rule to one bench, you should do it to all of them.
Think of this. One system with one 8800GT. When you're gaming I doubt the GPU will simultaneously process physics while processing graphics. FM basically are saying that and thats why the GPU score is invalid.

Okay so lets say you have one 8600GT for Physics and one 8800GT for Graphics.

Going from 3Ghz to 4Ghz DOES give performance gains with Core 2. GRID goes from moderately smooth 30-40 FPS up to 50-60 FPS.
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (5.07/day)
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
Going from 3Ghz to 4Ghz DOES give performance gains with Core 2. GRID goes from moderately smooth 30-40 FPS up to 50-60 FPS.
I'm sorry TK (and no offense intended), but I don't believe that. I think you are simply mistaken. I would need proof. I've already seen countless benchmarks that say otherwise, even in some of my own testing.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 26, 2006
Messages
6,957 (1.45/day)
Location
Australia, Sydney
I'm sorry TK (and no offense intended), but I don't believe that. I think you are simply mistaken. I would need proof. I've already seen countless benchmarks that say otherwise, even in some of my own testing.
Consider the chipset, and memory that you are using first. This RAM doesn't yield good memory performance; latencies are fairly high with rather weak read/write.

I take no offense, and in your case its different its like comparing apples to oranges.
 
Top