Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > Video Cards

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old December 4, 2012, 03:38 PM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12
Default GTX 560 ti Core448 low 3dmark11 result

OK I think there is something wrong with this picture

I have a sytem built around an i5 3450 with a factory overclocked GTX 56oTi core 448

My 3dmark11 score was an abismall 4661

I just upgraded a freinds i7 920 PC at the same time with a GTX 650ti FOC and it scores 4880.

according to the 3dmark website - the i5 alone should beat that score let alone the 560ti core 448.

added to all this, I'm using premium Geil ram and an SSD drive......What the heck is going on with my system?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old December 4, 2012, 03:58 PM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazastar View Post
OK I think there is something wrong with this picture

I have a sytem built around an i5 3450 with a factory overclocked GTX 56oTi core 448

My 3dmark11 score was an abismall 4661

I just upgraded a freinds i7 920 PC at the same time with a GTX 650ti FOC and it scores 4880.

according to the 3dmark website - the i5 alone should beat that score let alone the 560ti core 448.

added to all this, I'm using premium Geil ram and an SSD drive......What the heck is going on with my system?
Overclock the i5 and you'll see the difference.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old December 4, 2012, 04:08 PM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12
Default overclock - maybe

Yeah I could overclock, but i shouldn't have to considering that my gear is newer, and higher spec'd than my freinds PC that I was upgrading...

I would like to find out the underpinning cause first. It's like saying I have to add NOS to my v8 supercar to beat a Ford XR5...sort of LOL
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old December 4, 2012, 04:13 PM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazastar View Post
Yeah I could overclock, but i shouldn't have to considering that my gear is newer, and higher spec'd than my freinds PC that I was upgrading...

I would like to find out the underpinning cause first. It's like saying I have to add NOS to my v8 supercar to beat a Ford XR5...sort of LOL
Technically the i7 920 is better due to the processor type and memory configuration.

Also overclocking a 560ti can result in lower performance than better performance as I found on my 560ti FPB
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old December 4, 2012, 04:36 PM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12
Default

Yeah, I hear you.

I got my info of of the future mark website
Intel Core i5-3450 Processor Performance:




3DMark11 Score
Price
NamePrice3DMark11
Score
0 10770
Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition $994 10770

Intel Core i7-3930K $570 10490

Intel Core i7-950 $405 6490

Intel Core i7-920 $379 5660

Intel Core i7-3770K $319 8350

Intel Core i7-2600 $293 8140

Intel Core i7-2600K $293 8140

Intel Core i7-3820 $293 10520

Intel Core i7-3770 $288 8110

Intel Core i7-2700K $285 8290

Intel Core i7-3610QM $252 6090

Intel Core i5-3570K $215 6430

Intel Core i5-2500K $200 5850

Intel Core i5-2500 $200 5850

Intel Core i5-3210M $190 3210

Intel Core i5-3450 $187 5890

AMD FX-8120 $157 5390

AMD FX-8150 $135 5880

But my results are showing your statement may hold more water.
Thanks for your advice, i may try a 650 ti OC out and see if it makes a diff...if anything, i'll save on the power bill LOL
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old December 4, 2012, 04:45 PM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12
Default futremark results

Yeah I hear you,

i was going by the reference results futuremark had on their website that said the i5 3450 was better value and performance

Intel Core i5-3450 Processor Review - Performance

Shows a higher 3dmark11 result.

But I think from my results that what you say seems to hold more water. Many thanks for your advice.

Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old December 4, 2012, 08:04 PM
gingerbee's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Posts: 6,828

My System Specs

Default

when i was running a zotec 560 448 core i with an i7 2600k all at stock i was getting just over 6000 so yes it seems a little low
__________________
Fav quote "One should strive to achieve; not sit in bitter regret." Ronin Harris
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old December 8, 2012, 03:01 PM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12
Default Hyperthreading makes huge 3dmark difference

Ah found out whats going on here ...

i5 3450 isnt hyperthreaded. Also noticed that with hyperthreading, graphics - not physics actually takes a performance hit with HT on. My graphics score is what is really up there - its my physics score that is low due to lack of hyperthreading.

Have a look at this dudes posted results from turning HT on and off - a reall eye opener.

HT on
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7-3930K Processor,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. RAMPAGE IV EXTREME score: P23009 3DMarks
ht off
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7-3930K Processor,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. RAMPAGE IV EXTREME score: P20995 3DMarks

Notice how the physics score is way higher, yet graphics is actually lower - but the overall is higher due to the insainly high physics.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3dmark11 score (gigabyte gtx 680 windforce 3x) fc0712 Video Cards 7 June 27, 2012 07:19 AM
VERY Low 3dmark11 score / XFX 7970 Mena Video Cards 9 April 15, 2012 01:00 PM
GTX580s nab 3DMark11 record The RealRollo Video Cards 0 December 2, 2011 04:36 AM
3DMark11 Won't Open??? bvsbutthd101 O/S's, Drivers & General Software 6 September 5, 2011 12:32 PM
1st Benchmark Result icodeit Overclocking, Tweaking and Benchmarking 6 November 23, 2008 06:02 AM