Overclock.net › Forums › Benchmarks › Benchmarking Software and Discussion › [OFFICIAL] Top 30 Heaven Benchmark 4.0 Scores
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[OFFICIAL] Top 30 Heaven Benchmark 4.0 Scores - Page 42

post #411 of 3606
Man I wish the cooling of the TFIV's was a little better. I was headed for an epic score but as soon as the top card hits 84C I get artifacts. Just two more stages to go too! Looks like I may be at the temperature limit with these cards:

Majin SSJ Eric --- Intel Core i7 3960X / 4800 MHz ---- 2 x MSI R7970 Lightnings CF, 1215 MHz Core / 1750 MHz Memory ---- 118.3 FPS ---- 2979

375

I ain't quitting until I hit 3000! thumb.gif
post #412 of 3606
AMD has compromised benchmarks like this with their built in tessellation driver cheat that is enabled by default. "AMD Optimised" is auto enable through the Catalyst and it boost fps in games as well as benchmarks. When the GTX 680 released, 99.9% of reviews that ran Heaven Bench had the GTX 680 on top by a couple hundred points. I suspect the users on this forum are completely turning off or toning down tessellation in AMD Catalyst to boost their scores. The samething happens in 3DMark11. The top 100 is filled with i7-3960K Quad 7970's bench runs with Tessellation turned off. Good thing futuremark caught on and invalidated the scores when you look at the actual bench run. thumb.gif
GTX 680 overclock or not is the fastest single gpu on the market until HD 8000 or GK110.
Carry on with your unfair unbalanced bench "competition" rolleyes.gif
Edited by PrincetonM - 5/16/12 at 10:09am
post #413 of 3606
Joke's on you dude, I completely uninstalled CCC in the Control Panel. Besides, that's the reason the OP stated that the screen shots have to be taken on the cobblestone road section. Pretty easy to see for yourself whether tess is enabled or not. Face it, the 7970's are much stronger in Heaven 3.0 than the 680's are and they scale better in 3+ card configurations. The 680's are better in 3DMark11 (with 1 or 2 cards that is).... thumb.gif
post #414 of 3606
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincetonM View Post

AMD has comprimised benchmarks like this with their built in tessellation driver cheat that is enabled by default. "AMD Optimised" is auto enable through the Catalyst and it boost fps in games as well as benchmarks. When the GTX 680 released, 99.9% of reviews that ran Heaven Bench had the GTX 680 on top by a couple hundred points. I suspect the users on this forum are completely turning off or toning down tessellation in AMD Catalyst to boost their scores. The samething happens in 3DMark11. The top 100 is filled with i7-3960K Quad 7970's bench runs with Tessellation turned off. Good thing futuremark caught on and invalidated the scores when you look at the actual bench run. thumb.gif
GTX 680 overclock or not is the fastest single gpu on the market until HD 8000 or GK110.
Carry on with your unfair unbalanced bench "competition" rolleyes.gif

So just like that, you come in and accuse every AMD user here of cheating in your first post? Way to go buddy, work on gaining that respect you deserve... Oh, wait...
post #415 of 3606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Joke's on you dude, I completely uninstalled CCC in the Control Panel. Besides, that's the reason the OP stated that the screen shots have to be taken on the cobblestone road section. Pretty easy to see for yourself whether tess is enabled or not. Face it, the 7970's are much stronger in Heaven 3.0 than the 680's are and they scale better in 3+ card configurations. The 680's are better in 3DMark11 (with 1 or 2 cards that is).... thumb.gif

Here is a link to the top scores in 3DMark11. ALL of those scores you see have been invalidated because of the driver cheat. The top score for Quad GTX 680 blows away the top quad 7970 score that hasnt been invalidated for tessellation.

http://3dmark.com/search?resultTypeId=232&linkedDisplayAdapters=0&searchKey=1337183912943&cpuModelId=0&chipsetId=0

Maybe, just maybe if amd put more emphasis on their architecture instead of driver short cuts they would fair much better head to head with Nvidia. rolleyes.gif

Don't attack the messanger, I'm only stating the truth. thumb.gif
post #416 of 3606
Quote:
Originally Posted by DimmyK View Post

So just like that, you come in and accuse every AMD user here of cheating in your first post? Way to go buddy, work on gaining that respect you deserve... Oh, wait...
I'm not accusing anyone of cheating. I'm just saying that this "competiton" is comprimised because the AMD users have the option to modify or remove tessellation, while the Nvidia guys don't. There is no clear cut way of knowing for sure until unigne implements something similar to what 3DMark11 has.
post #417 of 3606
I thought I already stated that the 680's were stronger in 3DMark11??? All I can do is refer to the guys I know here and the numbers they are getting. I only know a couple of guys with quad 680's and they both have said that the scaling was bad above two cards.

You're not "stating the truth", you're trolling AMD users and violating the TOS. rolleyes.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincetonM View Post

I'm not accusing anyone of cheating. I'm just saying that this "competiton" is comprimised because the AMD users have the option to modify or remove tessellation, while the Nvidia guys don't. There is no clear cut way of knowing for sure until unigne implements something similar to what 3DMark11 has.

Dude, everybody here is well aware of the AMD tess cheats but we are mature enough to operate on the honor system. I could videotape a run of Heaven for you proving that I don't even have CCC installed on my computer but I simply can't be bothered to respond to you any further. Believe whatever you want to believe but please refrain from calling OCN member liars and cheaters...
Edited by Majin SSJ Eric - 5/16/12 at 9:21am
post #418 of 3606
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincetonM View Post

I'm not accusing anyone of cheating. I'm just saying that this "competiton" is comprimised because the AMD users have the option to modify or remove tessellation, while the Nvidia guys don't. There is no clear cut way of knowing for sure until unigne implements something similar to what 3DMark11 has.

You aren't?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincetonM View Post

AMD has comprimised benchmarks like this with their built in tessellation driver cheat that is enabled by default. "AMD Optimised" is auto enable through the Catalyst and it boost fps in games as well as benchmarks. When the GTX 680 released, 99.9% of reviews that ran Heaven Bench had the GTX 680 on top by a couple hundred points. I suspect the users on this forum are completely turning off or toning down tessellation in AMD Catalyst to boost their scores. The samething happens in 3DMark11. The top 100 is filled with i7-3960K Quad 7970's bench runs with Tessellation turned off. Good thing futuremark caught on and invalidated the scores when you look at the actual bench run. thumb.gif
GTX 680 overclock or not is the fastest single gpu on the market until HD 8000 or GK110.
Carry on with your unfair unbalanced bench "competition" rolleyes.gif

Isn't that direct accusation towards all AMD users? It sure looks like one to me. As for knowing, isn't everyone here required to provide a screenshot with gobllestones to show applied level of tesselation for their scores to be accepted? Did you even read OP?
post #419 of 3606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

I thought I already stated that the 680's were stronger in 3DMark11??? All I can do is refer to the guys I know here and the numbers they are getting. I only know a couple of guys with quad 680's and they both have said that the scaling was bad above two cards.
You're not "stating the truth", you're trolling AMD users and violating the TOS. rolleyes.gif
Dude, everybody here is well aware of the AMD tess cheats but we are mature enough to operate on the honor system. I could videotape a run of Heaven for you proving that I don't even have CCC installed on my computer but I simply can't be bothered to respond to you any further. Believe whatever you want to believe but please refrain from calling OCN member liars and cheaters...
You're being immature and bitter over my comments. Never did I once call you a liar or cheater. you're simply trying to deflect because I bring up a valid point. The naked eye is unable to see all of the intricacies of tessellation in a screen shot so dont be silly. Secondly, until all benchers are on equal footing, this competition will be considered compromised and invalid.
Edited by PrincetonM - 5/16/12 at 10:08am
post #420 of 3606
edit: disregard, im an idiot lol.

i'll be posting my results soon
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Overclock.net › Forums › Benchmarks › Benchmarking Software and Discussion › [OFFICIAL] Top 30 Heaven Benchmark 4.0 Scores