Official - Unigine Valley Benchmark Ranking thread

Heres mine with everything stock:



And yes, the whole minimum FPS thing should be dropped from the chart as it has no relevance to the test.
 
Last edited:
G80FTW said:
Heres mine with everything stock:



And yes, the whole minimum FPS thing should be dropped from the chart as it has no relevance to the test.
Click to expand...

how can this be all stock default clock is 1084, this card runs at 1109 and also a little higher on the mem, so that's no stock.
 
asus r9 280x and the i7 2700k all stock turbo cpu enabled

w2sj.png
 
turbobooster said:
how can this be all stock default clock is 1084, this card runs at 1109 and also a little higher on the mem, so that's no stock.
Click to expand...

Because I have the FTW version, so it came overclocked. These are the stock settings on the FTW version of the 680 that I have. I actually have not overclocked this card at all I dont think. Havent really had the need to.

Even so, Im not sure that the whole 25mhz overclock is really significant on this card. I got it for the 4GB and when I bought it they did not have a standard 4GB version available.

Jamebonds1 said:
Sorry that I beat your score by 40 point :D
Click to expand...

Your also running a much overclocked more efficient processor than I am along with having higher clocks on the video card. So with that said, I am not impressed by your extra 4FPS ;)

EDIT: Looking at that 280x, it looks like it scales almost perfectly in performance with my 680 despite its higher memory bandwidth.
 
Last edited:
G80FTW said:
Because I have the FTW version, so it came overclocked. These are the stock settings on the FTW version of the 680 that I have. I actually have not overclocked this card at all I dont think. Havent really had the need to.

Even so, Im not sure that the whole 25mhz overclock is really significant on this card. I got it for the 4GB and when I bought it they did not have a standard 4GB version available.



Your also running a much overclocked more efficient processor than I am along with having higher clocks on the video card. So with that said, I am not impressed by your extra 4FPS ;)

EDIT: Looking at that 280x, it looks like it scales almost perfectly in performance with my 680 despite its higher memory bandwidth.
Click to expand...

I can tell you that I had the ftw also, and its default clock speed is 1085 on the core, and not 1110 like yours, I now about the different cpu, but I can tell you that in valley the cpu doesn't do much, I can run on 4.5 and have still the same points.
so if I put my card on 1100 on the core then I have less on the core then yours, not saying that the gtx 680 isn't a great card.
but I shell put it on 1085, and 1515 on the mem.
and like you say in the 2013 benchmark the boost speed of the 680 is higher then 1175, it runs over the 1200 so technically that's what your gpu should have been under load
 
Last edited:
turbobooster said:
I can tell you that I had the ftw also, and its default clock speed is 1085 on the core, and not 1110 like yours, I now about the different cpu, but I can tell you that in valley the cpu doesn't do much, I can run on 4.5 and have still the same points.
so if I put my card on 1100 on the core then I have less on the core then yours, not saying that the gtx 680 isn't a great card.
but I shell put it on 1085, and 1515 on the mem.
and like you say in the 2013 benchmark the boost speed of the 680 is higher then 1175, it runs over the 1200 so technically that's what your gpu should have been under load
Click to expand...

I dont see why my card would go over its boost speed. I never noticed it do it before when I first got it, under any load.

I couldnt find any official documentation in the box that the card came in, but Newegg does suggest that the default clock speeds on the FTW are 1084/1150. I dont remember overclocking this card though.

Oh well, might as well overclock it some more then I suppose if its been overclocked this whole time and I didnt know it :D

Heres 1200/1527:



A whole 50mhz OC on both the GPU and memory.
 
Last edited:
lol, haha but start valley and look at the top right corner you see white letters and numbers when benchmarking, there it will say what the core speed is under load.
it will be higher then the core boost showen in gpu-z
 
turbobooster said:
lol, haha but start valley and look at the top right corner you see white letters and numbers when benchmarking, there it will say what the core speed is under load.
it will be higher then the core boost showen in gpu-z
Click to expand...

MSI Afterburner has my speeds at 1241 core and 3055 memory (which would be 1527).

The top right was displaying 1330 core and 3055 memory. I dont think the benchmark is accurately displaying the speeds as they do not change.

So then its running over its boost clock... I think there isnt a real way to determine what our nvidia GPUs should be running at once we overclock them unless we turn boost off. It seems that even the evga precision overclocking is completely off as it has my boost speed below 1200mhz.

Looks like MSI Afterburner or other monitoring programs are the only way to know without turning boost off.
 
depending on the power the gtx needs it goes over his boost speed, when its under load.
it has to with the gpu 2.0 features

NVIDIA GPU Boost
Up until now, GPUs have operated at a fixed clock speed when playing 3D games, even if they have the potential to run faster. GPU Boost intelligently monitors graphics work load and increases the clock speed whenever possible. The result is that the GPU always performs at its peak and you get the highest framerate possible.

so normally when you want the same settings on the amd, I will have to put the core speed at 1200mhz, for valley.
but in some benchmarks amd runs better then NVidia

like you can see here, the first link is of the gtx 680 with a small overclock and the cpu at 4.5
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1803157

this 1 is the new 280x on stock and the cpu also at 4.5

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1990938

both are the beta drivers.
 
Last edited:
Jamebonds1 said:
You're right. Benchmark on top left is never accurately.

In fact, I would choose EVGA or Gigabyte for better benchmark.
Click to expand...

true that benchmark number is not correct but the 1 in msi afterburner and gpu-z on the tab sensor is, so his evga gtx 680 is running at 1240 lets say running valley
 
Ok this one would be with everything stock:



As you can see MSI and the benchmark display some very different speeds when it comes to the GPU itself. However, according to GPU-z it should only go up to 1150mhz.
 
G80FTW said:
Ok this one would be with everything stock:



As you can see MSI and the benchmark display some very different speeds when it comes to the GPU itself. However, according to GPU-z it should only go up to 1150mhz.
Click to expand...

the 1216 according to msi afterburner is the good 1.
in gpu-z the boost give,s you 1150 its says, but if you go to the tab sensors, and then to gpu core cloclk, and open that and click on show highest reading it will give you more then 1150
 
Haha, I think I have some really good memory on this card :P

My FTW edition comes with a 50MHz factory OC on the memory and a 91MHz OC on the core, so I'm pretty happy that I've got the last ounces of power out of the card :)

Overall I have a 151MHz OC on the core and a 325MHz OC on the mem, which is effectively running at 7308MHz :P

Most users over on Hard Forum are hitting between 1200-1300MHz boost clocks on the core and are really lucky to get 7GHz effective (1750MHz) on the mem, it looks like I have a not so good core but awesome memory lol
 
WeatherMan said:
Haha, I think I have some really good memory on this card :P

My FTW edition comes with a 50MHz factory OC on the memory and a 91MHz OC on the core, so I'm pretty happy that I've got the last ounces of power out of the card :)

Overall I have a 151MHz OC on the core and a 325MHz OC on the mem, which is effectively running at 7308MHz :P

Most users over on Hard Forum are hitting between 1200-1300MHz boost clocks on the core and are really lucky to get 7GHz effective (1750MHz) on the mem, it looks like I have a not so good core but awesome memory lol
Click to expand...

My card has touched 1300mhz on the core a few times. Doesnt seem to bother it. When I get around to replacing my PSU I might really push this thing. But for now, I dont wanna do any major overclocking with my 7 year old PSU. :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top