Originally Posted by moccor
Not sure if its been proven, but people have said the way Maxwell (or was it GDDR5?) works is it will fix errors it comes accross, which will cause lower fps/scores. So a higher clocked card, doesn't always give better scores for this reason. Lower more stable/fully stable clocks will give better scores cuz there is no errors to correct on the GPU side. The awful score you speak of might mean its not fully stable at 1605. Even if it is fine with every game you play, at 100% load (hard for a game to stress this much due to ever changing environments) it may not be.
While this was written before Maxwell I'm sure it still holds some truth.http://www.anandtech.com/show/2841/12
"Stable" is a relative term. A lot of things may seem stable, until just the right situation injects itself. BOOM.....you're like "What the....". We are all just still lottery winners or losers(silicon). I'm not implying that anyone has a "loser" card. I think all of the 970's are able to hold their own@1080p(1440 in some situations). These cards OC very well for the most part. The bios' on the other hand left a lot to be desired. I can look back at some of my Firestrike runs and see just how bad the original bios was. OMG. Horrible. It made me nervous to run GPU-Z. Looked like a rainbow on my screen. Now, nothing but grey when not in use.
Originally Posted by jlhawn
yes I have heard that too. all other benchmarks 1605 is stable and get good scores, firestrike is just eh.
also I'm running an old X58 pcie 2.0 system.
I've tested in PCIe 2.0 and the difference was maybe 1-2fps in most benchmarks.
I just found this.....this was the first run of Valley. Out of the box. CPU was i5-3470.
EDIT: Added Valley screenshot.Edited by Hequaqua - 11/2/15 at 4:34pm