3DMark 11 (DX11) Benchmark Scores

Index of benchmark threads on Modacity:

1. Unigine Valley (DX11) Benchmark Scores
2. 3DMark 11 (DX11) Benchmark Scores
3. Unigine Heaven (DX9, DX10, DX11) Benchmark Scores
4. 3DMark Vantage (DX10) Benchmark Scores

--------------------------------------------------------------

Lets get another benchmark thread going, start by downloading the 3DMark 11 benchmark and then run it using the following settings:


This benchmark requires DirectX 11 and "Basic" users will ONLY be able to use the "Performance" preset. I highly recommend you select the "Benchmark tests only" and "Display Scaling Mode - Stretched" options for the fastest full-screen experience.

To be considered for "official" entry you need to provide a link to your result on 3dmark.com which means you should create an account there. Alternatively you can sign in to 3dmark.com using your Google or Steam credentials.

Your benchmark results submission page should look like this:

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4522712

Tips for improving your benchmarking performance:

Before you start the benchmark:

1. Close all irrelevant programs running on your system. This frees up resources that the benchmark could potentially make use of.
2. Navigate to the benchmark installation directory, enter the "bin\x64" directory, Right-Click on "3DMark11.exe", select "Properties", select the "Compatibility" tab, select "Change settings for all users", set the following options:
   http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/626...atibilityc.jpg
   When set you click "Apply", and then "OK". Click "OK" when brought back to the "3DMark11.exe Properties" window.

3DMark 11 - Performance Results:

Top 10:

1. 22440 - Cortexian
2. 10030 - InnerGoat
3. 7908 - JackalStomper
4. 1426 - NneYaTano
5. ...
6. ...
7. ...
8. ...
9. ...
10. ...

If you purchase 3DMark 11 Advanced you can unlock the "Extreme" preset for benchmarking. Extreme results are shown below:

3DMark 11 - Extreme Results:

Top 10:

1. 3293 - Cortexian
2. ...
3. ...
4. ...
5. ...
6. ...
7. ...
8. ...
9. ...
10. ...

Boooooooooo.

I have the full 3D Mark Vantage suite (won it a long time ago).

:c

Also, benchmark software settings aside, I think you should always run the benchmark under the same conditions you would actually play your games under. That means all of your normally running background applications should remain running, your visual themes should still be on, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Boooooooooo.

I have the full 3D Mark Vantage suite (won it a long time ago).

:c

Also, benchmark software settings aside, I think you should always run the benchmark under the same conditions you would actually play your games under. That means all of your normally running background applications should remain running, your visual themes should still be on, etc.

---

I'm gonna make a 3DMark Vantage thread as well, for people who don't have DX11 capable systems. Then I'll add a section at the top listing all three of the benchmark threads I have running. Vantage was given out like mad, I have like 5 copies of 3DMark Vantage and two copies of Vantage all from GPU and motherboard purchases. I think some even came with games...

I'm lucky to have 3DMark 11 Professional, normally it costs $900~ but I got to use the site license from work! Winning#

I run benchmarks with all my normal programs when I'm testing system stability. When I actually want to see how my system performs for the sake of actual benchmarking I kill them off like I recommend.

Have a feeling the red team will do better here than in ushit heaven, they usually do very well with synthetic benchmarks.

Time to warm up the card for some overclocking again...

Unigine is incredibly biased towards Nvidia, and it didn't help that the primary settings we were testing under used DX9, something ATI (fuck you, I don't like calling it AMD) really stopped developing for once performance had reached the "way better than necessary" point so they could refocus on DX11.

I mean, the fact that my setup had little to no advantage over Freelancer's under those settings in that test despite being vastly more capable should speak volumes about its validity.

On that note, 3DMark has also historically favoured Nvidia setups, but not to the same extent and ATI has managed to claim wins as of late.

Ugh, looks like the sweet spot on my 560 has changed since I last oc'd it :( will have to do an OC run later when I have time to find it again.

Until then:
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4529855


You can definitely see my bulldozer choking on the physics in the detailed report, matters little to me as I have yet to see a performance hit in any of the games I play :v:

Try disabling half of your Bulldozer cores. The documentation I've seen online says that should actually improve performance.

That said, the next wave of AMD chips is actually hitting the original target frequencies (4+GHz) at 125W TDP, so that means they'll finally be competitive with Nehalem (first generation Core i7)...which sounds terrible but it's a huge leap forward for AMD. Their current architecture has actually displayed an advantage over even the newer Intel CPUs in heavily threaded tasks, so the fact that the new CPUs are hitting the original target is fantastic news.

I'm trying to find my old 3dmark login with all the old scores, but here's the link at least

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4533178

I knew 670's raped but daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayum not by that much

resist thy temptation....

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4536373

reran it with a slightly higher memory clock. 1299mhz boost core, 7320mhz memory.

http://innergoat.modacity.net/comput...st_7320mem.jpg

Damn, them 600 series cards are beast. I figured that my TWO GTX 470's OC'd to 720MHz cores (as in all my latest scores) could hold their own against a single 670/680. LOL NOPE.

Time for an upgrade.

Until then I'm going to try and increase my Memory Clocks a bit more, see if I can't get them at 480 spec (my Core and Shader clocks are already higher than 480 spec). I wish I could find some water blocks for my 470's, I'd put them under water instead of upgrading for a couple more years.

Don't be retarded. A pair of full cover blocks for those old cards is going to cost as much as a 660ti :I

Buy a GTX 690 and join the cool-kids-with-enthusiast-cards club.

so i currently have a 560ti. i have no problem running anything now, but would it be worth it to upgrade to a 660ti or something like that some time in the future? or should i just wait for whatever comes after the 600 series?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InnerGoat

Don't be retarded. A pair of full cover blocks for those old cards is going to cost as much as a 660ti :I

---

Nah, you can't get them new anymore that I can see. If they're new they're retard price cause of demand. I'd get used ones for $80 a piece tops. I'd still need a rad/fans/pump/res though.

Sorry about your scores InHerGoat.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4545400

No seriously, cards won't OC anymore. Literally at all. I up them to 831MHz and they crash the system requiring a hard reset.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8rZWw9HE7o
(my GPU's at 0:48)

Please OC your 670 and rape me anally my body is ready.

I'd need modded bios to get more core voltage and I really don't care.

sry m8

Cant you just use EVGA Precision or Afterburner to crank it up a bit? I was able to on my cards, or is that the weird 600 series voltage thing you're talking about. I can get up to 1.087 V.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donut

so i currently have a 560ti. i have no problem running anything now, but would it be worth it to upgrade to a 660ti or something like that some time in the future? or should i just wait for whatever comes after the 600 series?

---

I'd say wait

Yes the 600 series is an impressive improvement but is there a point when you can run pretty much everything anyway?

all the games are still designed around the shitbox 360

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cortexian

Cant you just use EVGA Precision or Afterburner to crank it up a bit? I was able to on my cards, or is that the weird 600 series voltage thing you're talking about. I can get up to 1.087 V.

---

No they have a limit enforced in bios, which I would need to mod.

I upgraded


www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4930126

Don't plan on overclocking anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InnerGoat

No they have a limit enforced in bios, which I would need to mod.

---

My MSI 670 has voltage unlocked in afterburner, not that I'm going to be toying with it anytime soon.

It's pretty safe to overclock temporarily to run benchmarks, just set your fan speeds to manual and 100% while testing for the highest degree of safety. You could easily OC a 670 to 680 spec.

I could, and know its not any real danger as long as I don't go ramming up the volts too high. I just have no desire to do so.
The 8000 series of course are known for their ability to hit close to 5ghz on air, and I could probably push a lot from it, but again same answer.

So I updated my Performance score in here with my Titan-equipped system...

I'm cry. ;_;


http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7783418?

But really, it is just a lelbad computer.

Haven't seen any Pentium 4s glued together in a while.... :ugh:

pick up a core2duo for 10 dollars on ebay if your motherboard supports it for 2x the performance in everything~

It's a Pentium Dual Core E5700. :x

Versus a $10 or less Core 2 Duo E7600, it's only about a 7% performance increase.
If I were to go for the Core 2 Duo E8600, which can be anywhere from $30-$80, I would get about a 32%-36% performance increase.

Why waste money on little upgrades that don't make a desirable mark? Like I said in the other thread though, I'll be weighing my needs and build a new computer with price/performance in mind.

3dmark sucks it says Pentium D right on the screenshot lol. Though it was the original, not the later core based one welp...

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7802863

Now with 4930k, lol.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7814495?

meh. I'd still like to get another of the same gpu and see how that works out with crossfire but there still kind of expensive.

Just done a quick test, I'll do another once I've installed the second card.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7815439?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InnerGoat

Haven't seen any Pentium 4s glued together in a while.... :ugh:

pick up a core2duo for 10 dollars on ebay if your motherboard supports it for 2x the performance in everything~

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NneYaTano

It's a Pentium Dual Core E5700. :x
Versus a $10 or less Core 2 Duo E7600, it's only about a 7% performance increase.
If I were to go for the Core 2 Duo E8600, which can be anywhere from $30-$80, I would get about a 32%-36% performance increase.

Why waste money on little upgrades that don't make a desirable mark? Like I said in the other thread though, I'll be weighing my needs and build a new computer with price/performance in mind.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InnerGoat

3dmark sucks it says Pentium D right on the screenshot lol. Though it was the original, not the later core based one welp...

---

So I pulled my CPU out yesterday and saw something that irked me after removing the thermal paste: "Intel '05 Pentium D"
And I went back through my archived emails and saw something else that irked me even more: http://puu.sh/6S9IR.png

I was shipped the wrong CPU and have been using it for a few years without even knowing it. I don't know how much more of an idiot I can feel like. Oh wait, we're going to find out because here's the fun bit: It's a 64-bit motherboard. It's a 32-bit CPU.

Talk about bottlenecks. :ugh:


http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7959751

That's about 200 points higher than what it was, but these are DX11 results, so I don't expect it to soar. I did get a chance to see the comparisons between my old CPU versus the new one though, and for the low, low price of free (minus about $5.00 for a tube of thermal paste), it's alright for now. I'm still saving up quite a bit so I can get a system with productivity/gaming in mind with heavy consideration of price versus performance.

That's shitty about being shipped the wrong CPU. Could of very weel been a scam on eBay too. Was the price exceptionally good at the time? Because eBay CPU sellers will often sell the bare CPU without packaging and fan for cheap, and advertise it as a different type of CPU. Most people don't check the little writing on their CPU before installing it, so yeah...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NneYaTano

x

---

That's painful. I wouldn't worry about the 32-bit vs 64-bit though. Unless you've got a load of RAM, it's not really an issue.

I feel the GPU is limiting my CPU :S Though I may be wrong

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7963057

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4689696

http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i8...psa7153c02.jpg

hopefully in a few days or week i'll be able to put the new build together

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/9007917

Don't plan on overclocking

It's amusing seeing the benchmark run great till the physics tests, then it just TANKS.
AMD ftw right?
But no seriously I've been happy with this CPU for the ~year that I've had it so far, no complaints.

http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i8...psd8dd6447.jpg

New comps doing well :D