Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › Fermi Tessellation Performance Comparison
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fermi Tessellation Performance Comparison - Page 7

post #61 of 105
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadlessKnight View Post
Also I am wondering does this reflect real world performance in all other applications?
Well, no games use the Heaven engine, nor do any current titles use tessellation as heavily as in this benchmark (on extreme), so the results are more of a "worst case scenario" so to speak.

It doesn't directly translate to real world performance in today's titles, but it should give an idea of the hypothetical performance potential in the future.
post #62 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadlessKnight View Post
From what I see from these benchmarks. The new 500 series is far superior in performance compared to the old 400 series. especially 570 & 580.
Also I am wondering does this reflect real world performance in all other applications?
As true as that may be! We aren't testing to get high scores!
We're testing to see what kind of hit the cards take when hit hard with tessellation

My cards, are at my "KFA2-GTX480s" stock clocks
I Like Smileys :)
(16 items)
 
Sony Vaio 1512
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-2600K 4.6GHz Asus P8P67 Pro Bios 3207 MSI GTX 970 GAMING 4G Ripjaws-X 16GB 1600MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
80GB Intel & 128GB 830  2 x WD640 Caviar Black LG DVD-RW Noctua NH-D14  
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 HP 64bit Acer 5906x1080 3D Logitech G15 Corsair TX850W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Antec Dark Fleet DF-85 Logitec G700 Razer Goliathus Sharkoon X-Tatic 5.1 Headset 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel® Core™ i5-3210M Laptop  HD 4000 Corsair Vengeance 8GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 840 250GB DVD Multi Windows 8 15.5 inch display (1366 x 768) 
Keyboard
LED Back lit 
  hide details  
Reply
I Like Smileys :)
(16 items)
 
Sony Vaio 1512
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-2600K 4.6GHz Asus P8P67 Pro Bios 3207 MSI GTX 970 GAMING 4G Ripjaws-X 16GB 1600MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
80GB Intel & 128GB 830  2 x WD640 Caviar Black LG DVD-RW Noctua NH-D14  
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 HP 64bit Acer 5906x1080 3D Logitech G15 Corsair TX850W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Antec Dark Fleet DF-85 Logitec G700 Razer Goliathus Sharkoon X-Tatic 5.1 Headset 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel® Core™ i5-3210M Laptop  HD 4000 Corsair Vengeance 8GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 840 250GB DVD Multi Windows 8 15.5 inch display (1366 x 768) 
Keyboard
LED Back lit 
  hide details  
Reply
post #63 of 105
I did a stock settings run. It seems to me clocks does involve in this though.
I got 42.3 fps without tess.
& 28.1 fps with extreme tess.
= 14.2 fps difference/42.3 fps=> 33.57% (not 100% sure, but I think it is correct)

Edited by HeadlessKnight - 8/1/11 at 3:05pm
Desktop
(16 items)
 
Laptop
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5820K @ 4.40 GHz Asus Rampage V Extreme/U3.1 MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6GB  Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (4x4) DDR4-3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Pro 1TB Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB NZXT Kraken X62 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus VG236H 23" 120 Sony XBR43X800D 43" 4K TV CoolerMaster Octane Storm + Razer Turret EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G3 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Graphite 760T Black Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum + Razer Turret Razer Goliathus Asus Xonar Essence STX II 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4720HQ @ 2.60 GHz Asus G751JY Asus GTX 980M 4GB SK hynix HMT41GS6BFR8A-PB 16GB (2x8) DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
SanDisk SD7SB3Q128G1002  HGST Travelstar 7K1000 1TB HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUC0N Windows 10 Home 64-bit 
MonitorAudio
LG Philips LP173WF4-SPD1 + G-SYNC @ 75 Hz Realtek ALC668 
  hide details  
Reply
Desktop
(16 items)
 
Laptop
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5820K @ 4.40 GHz Asus Rampage V Extreme/U3.1 MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6GB  Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (4x4) DDR4-3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Pro 1TB Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB NZXT Kraken X62 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus VG236H 23" 120 Sony XBR43X800D 43" 4K TV CoolerMaster Octane Storm + Razer Turret EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G3 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Graphite 760T Black Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum + Razer Turret Razer Goliathus Asus Xonar Essence STX II 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4720HQ @ 2.60 GHz Asus G751JY Asus GTX 980M 4GB SK hynix HMT41GS6BFR8A-PB 16GB (2x8) DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
SanDisk SD7SB3Q128G1002  HGST Travelstar 7K1000 1TB HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUC0N Windows 10 Home 64-bit 
MonitorAudio
LG Philips LP173WF4-SPD1 + G-SYNC @ 75 Hz Realtek ALC668 
  hide details  
Reply
post #64 of 105
Ya'll don't feel bad... from NONE to EXTREME both my systems (single cards) take a 42% hit... lot more than 33%ish...

LOL!

Blue Beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
W3670 4.0 GHz (HT On) 1.345v 24/7 Asus P6X58D Premium DUAL EVGA GTX 560 Ti SC 1G in SLI 12G Corsair Dominator GT2000MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Kingston V300 120G SSD, 2x 1TB Barracuda HD's LG BlueRay/LightScribe Burner Windows 7 Pro 64Bit 3x24", 1x22" LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Wireless Logitech K320 ULTRA X4 1200W Custom Danger Den LDR-29 Wireless Logitech M310 
Mouse Pad
Custom 
  hide details  
Reply
Blue Beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
W3670 4.0 GHz (HT On) 1.345v 24/7 Asus P6X58D Premium DUAL EVGA GTX 560 Ti SC 1G in SLI 12G Corsair Dominator GT2000MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Kingston V300 120G SSD, 2x 1TB Barracuda HD's LG BlueRay/LightScribe Burner Windows 7 Pro 64Bit 3x24", 1x22" LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Wireless Logitech K320 ULTRA X4 1200W Custom Danger Den LDR-29 Wireless Logitech M310 
Mouse Pad
Custom 
  hide details  
Reply
post #65 of 105
31.1% in SLI @ 880 core.

I got my $115 replacement GTX 470 a little while ago, it wouldn't run 2150 on the mem with 1125v so I just dropped it down to 2000 to bench.




Anyways, if you look at the gpu usage it makes me want to puke... I dunno what is going on with these drivers, but that type of usage isn't even possible, is it?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
post #66 of 105
LOL! You should see my 6 GPU's of various flavors (and all the cores) chunking along at 95-99% usage 24/7 doing BOINC tasks...

And yes, the whole idea behind all these fancy benchmarks is to load things up to the max and see how fast they go...



Screen shot, 4 monitors, all 3 systems running BOINC tasks... Graphs set to 3333 second update times.... LOL! I use TightVNC on my local LAN to talk to the other 2 systems as you can see on the left monitor.

http://i.imgur.com/WhmEG.jpg
Edited by Tex1954 - 8/1/11 at 9:01pm
Blue Beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
W3670 4.0 GHz (HT On) 1.345v 24/7 Asus P6X58D Premium DUAL EVGA GTX 560 Ti SC 1G in SLI 12G Corsair Dominator GT2000MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Kingston V300 120G SSD, 2x 1TB Barracuda HD's LG BlueRay/LightScribe Burner Windows 7 Pro 64Bit 3x24", 1x22" LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Wireless Logitech K320 ULTRA X4 1200W Custom Danger Den LDR-29 Wireless Logitech M310 
Mouse Pad
Custom 
  hide details  
Reply
Blue Beast
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
W3670 4.0 GHz (HT On) 1.345v 24/7 Asus P6X58D Premium DUAL EVGA GTX 560 Ti SC 1G in SLI 12G Corsair Dominator GT2000MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Kingston V300 120G SSD, 2x 1TB Barracuda HD's LG BlueRay/LightScribe Burner Windows 7 Pro 64Bit 3x24", 1x22" LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Wireless Logitech K320 ULTRA X4 1200W Custom Danger Den LDR-29 Wireless Logitech M310 
Mouse Pad
Custom 
  hide details  
Reply
post #67 of 105
lulz
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
post #68 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadlessKnight View Post
From what I see from these benchmarks. The new 500 series is far superior in performance compared to the old 400 series. especially 570 & 580.
Also I am wondering does this reflect real world performance in all other applications?
Then you're seeing wrong, because that's not what the results show at all.

What they're showing so far is that < tess units = larger perf hit from Extreme.

The generation the card is from appears totally irrelevant to the equation.

If you're just talking the raw numbers ... what are you comparing, and are you taking the clocks into account? It's fairly well established what perf increase the 5xx series have on a clock for clock basis ... 570's are about 6% faster than 470's, CFC, and about the same goes for the 580 vs the 480.

However, if you look at current prices ... the 5xx-series does terrible in bang/buck
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
post #69 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booty Warrior View Post
Sure, why not.

590s have full fledged GF110 GPUs right (16 tess units each)? Just downclocked?
Officially, I don't think we know but it would be good to find out


Quote:
Originally Posted by brettjv View Post
However, if you look at current prices ... the 5xx-series does terrible in bang/buck
This is really true for all current generations of GPUs. Especially true since the 5xx is just essentially a tweaked 4xx architecture. I could never understand why someone who had a 480 would think that getting a 580 was an upgrade for example. One would think that the prices would be competitive, but nVidia has this staunch pricing mentality where new cards cost x dollars, and older cards are priced y dollars. Unfortunately, their pricing scheme is borderline static and does not adhere to the performance of the card, thus they are not priced accordingly anymore (similar to AMD's pricing models.) Although nVidia has been successful in the past, the more competition they come under, the less likely people will remain customers.

There is no point to buying some GPU 33% more expensive if something else does the job on par (6970 vs. 580 for example.) If nVidia fail to update their pricing model, it won't matter who has the bigger guns, they simply will decline in business. Being loyal to a company does nothing to benefit the consumers, the gimmicky features each card competitively offer are becoming less appealing, when faced with cold hard reality.... its simply not worth it. The age of gouging the customers is coming to an end thank God (simply because the majority of us can no longer afford it)

nVidia have had one ace card in their pocket, and that has been extremely progressive and pro-active driver support. Unfortunately for them, AMD/ATi appear to have learned from past mistakes. They can have superior hardware (ala 58xx/59xx), and still lose customers due to shoddy support.
Edited by RagingCain - 8/2/11 at 6:28am
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Reply
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Reply
post #70 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post
31.1% in SLI @ 880 core.

I got my $115 replacement GTX 470 a little while ago, it wouldn't run 2150 on the mem with 1125v so I just dropped it down to 2000 to bench.



Anyways, if you look at the gpu usage it makes me want to puke... I dunno what is going on with these drivers, but that type of usage isn't even possible, is it?
Your sandy bridge is bottlenecking bro
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: NVIDIA
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › Fermi Tessellation Performance Comparison