Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Various] Futuremark Releases 3DMark Time Spy DirectX 12 Benchmark
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Various] Futuremark Releases 3DMark Time Spy DirectX 12 Benchmark - Page 41

post #401 of 772
I am very displeased with this benchmark. Doesn't anybody else find it weird that AMD gains 60% with Doom, but gets ~10-15% with a synthetic benchmark SShould it not be the other way around IF the benchmark would actually make use of the capabilities of. the card? Since when have synthetics displayed smaller gains than games? Why is this not being questioned by everyone? Why is nV always getting special treatment with special render paths added for their hardware and that is never the case for AMD? Why does everyone find it OK to upgrade to a card that will be times more obsolete than Maxwell when Volta is out? It will be because that is the model than is being dictated right now, slowly give people minor increments to make more money, and WE are rewarding that behaviour instead of pushing it away? I get it, you'll buy the next big card and won't care about the past, but why not buy the better hardware to change the incremental model being used to milk you? God, this hobby is beginning to take its toll. I find no point in buying either a Pascal or a Vega this generation if this is how things play out, and I would feel the same way after those archs if this is a sign of things to come.
Snappy
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790K 1.428V 4900MHz GA-Z97X-Gaming G1 WIFI-BK Sapphire R9 Fury X Corsair CMD16GX3M4A2133C9 Dominator Platinum 16... 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
Sandisk Extreme Pro 240GB Corsair H110i GT Seasonic Platinum SS-760XP2 Cooler Master Storm Stryker 
MouseMouse Pad
Razer Mamba 4G 2012 Edition Genesis Soft Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
Snappy
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790K 1.428V 4900MHz GA-Z97X-Gaming G1 WIFI-BK Sapphire R9 Fury X Corsair CMD16GX3M4A2133C9 Dominator Platinum 16... 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
Sandisk Extreme Pro 240GB Corsair H110i GT Seasonic Platinum SS-760XP2 Cooler Master Storm Stryker 
MouseMouse Pad
Razer Mamba 4G 2012 Edition Genesis Soft Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
post #402 of 772
been described earlier that 3dmark doing different type of Async (that meets nvidia's standard)so dont see full blown performance improvements with async on AMD cards like we can seen on doom.

Still, getting good performance on older cards so no complaints from me.

edit: if AMD steps in with futuremark and pushes async harder to improve the bench for AMD cards while letting Nvidia cards keep their gains, also no complaint from me smile.gif
haswell-e build
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 5820k GA-X99-UD4 r9 290x r9 290x  
GraphicsRAMHard DriveHard Drive
r9 290x  crucial DDR4 samsung evo  WD caviar blck 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Custom loop Win 8.1  dell 2311 dell 2311 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
dell 2311  Logitech G110 1xcorsair hx1050 HAF stacker 945 
AudioOtherOther
x-fi fatal1ty pro corsair tx750 haf stacker 915r 
  hide details  
Reply
haswell-e build
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 5820k GA-X99-UD4 r9 290x r9 290x  
GraphicsRAMHard DriveHard Drive
r9 290x  crucial DDR4 samsung evo  WD caviar blck 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Custom loop Win 8.1  dell 2311 dell 2311 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
dell 2311  Logitech G110 1xcorsair hx1050 HAF stacker 945 
AudioOtherOther
x-fi fatal1ty pro corsair tx750 haf stacker 915r 
  hide details  
Reply
post #403 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomdude View Post

I am very displeased with this benchmark. Doesn't anybody else find it weird that AMD gains 60% with Doom, but gets ~10-15% with a synthetic benchmark SShould it not be the other way around IF the benchmark would actually make use of the capabilities of. the card? Since when have synthetics displayed smaller gains than games? Why is this not being questioned by everyone? Why is nV always getting special treatment with special render paths added for their hardware and that is never the case for AMD? Why does everyone find it OK to upgrade to a card that will be times more obsolete than Maxwell when Volta is out? It will be because that is the model than is being dictated right now, slowly give people minor increments to make more money, and WE are rewarding that behaviour instead of pushing it away? I get it, you'll buy the next big card and won't care about the past, but why not buy the better hardware to change the incremental model being used to milk you? God, this hobby is beginning to take its toll. I find no point in buying either a Pascal or a Vega this generation if this is how things play out, and I would feel the same way after those archs if this is a sign of things to come.

 

Mahigan did a fairly detailed write-up on some reasons why the synthetic is showing different gains than those seen in games.

     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4.0 GHz 1.37v o/s  Biostar X370 GT7 Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB HBM2 G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) @ 32... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Biostar M200-240 240GB m.2 SATA SSD (Win) Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (Linux) SanDisk Ultra II 480GB SSD (Games) Seagate 2TB SSHD (Storage) 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD RW Swiftech H220-X2 Swiftech Komodo RX-ECO Vega Water Block XSPC EX240 Rad 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Gentle Typhoon 120mm x4 Ubuntu 17.10 w/ custom kernel Windows 10 Pro Pixio PX277 27" 1440p 144Hz DP-Adaptive Sync w... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
JAR-OWL J1 Rainbow LED Mechanical SeaSonic X-Series 1050w Gold+ Corsair 760T Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Razer Firefly Plantronics Rig 500e Gaming Headset Marantz Pro MPH-1 Monitoring Headphones S.M.S.L SD-793II Audio DAC + Headphone Amplifier 
Other
Xbox One Controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4790k @ 4.6GHz Asrock Z97 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2133 10-10-10-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 530 Series 480GB SSD Seagate 2TB SSHD LG DVD RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 40" Vizio HDTV HP Generic EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650w 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide 300R Logitech Generic HyperX Cloud 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6300 @ 4.3GHz 1.35v Biostar TA970 v5.3 MSI HD 6950 2GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z 16GB (4x4GB) 1600 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Cryorig H5 Ultimate Corsair AF120 (White LED) x3 Corsair AF140 (White LED) x2 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2440L Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 EVGA B2 850w Corsair 300R 
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 300 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4.0 GHz 1.37v o/s  Biostar X370 GT7 Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB HBM2 G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) @ 32... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Biostar M200-240 240GB m.2 SATA SSD (Win) Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (Linux) SanDisk Ultra II 480GB SSD (Games) Seagate 2TB SSHD (Storage) 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD RW Swiftech H220-X2 Swiftech Komodo RX-ECO Vega Water Block XSPC EX240 Rad 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Gentle Typhoon 120mm x4 Ubuntu 17.10 w/ custom kernel Windows 10 Pro Pixio PX277 27" 1440p 144Hz DP-Adaptive Sync w... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
JAR-OWL J1 Rainbow LED Mechanical SeaSonic X-Series 1050w Gold+ Corsair 760T Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Razer Firefly Plantronics Rig 500e Gaming Headset Marantz Pro MPH-1 Monitoring Headphones S.M.S.L SD-793II Audio DAC + Headphone Amplifier 
Other
Xbox One Controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4790k @ 4.6GHz Asrock Z97 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2133 10-10-10-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 530 Series 480GB SSD Seagate 2TB SSHD LG DVD RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 40" Vizio HDTV HP Generic EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650w 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide 300R Logitech Generic HyperX Cloud 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6300 @ 4.3GHz 1.35v Biostar TA970 v5.3 MSI HD 6950 2GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z 16GB (4x4GB) 1600 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Cryorig H5 Ultimate Corsair AF120 (White LED) x3 Corsair AF140 (White LED) x2 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2440L Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 EVGA B2 850w Corsair 300R 
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 300 
  hide details  
Reply
post #404 of 772
Quote:
Doesn't anybody else find it weird that AMD gains 60% with Doom
(1) its not 60%
(2) it looks relatively big in part because AMD was crap in Doom pre-Vulkan
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
post #405 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by comagnum View Post

I have a 1600x900 monitor but I have virtual super resolution turned on. So theoretically, yes.

3DMark always runs internally at the listed resolution, then scales to your Windows desktop resolution.

You could run Fire Strike Ultra (4K) on a 720p monitor, no problem smile.gif
post #406 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagget3450 View Post

This benchmark seems to be exhibiting the same issues i get in DX11 on my Furyx quadfire. First there is still some sort of cpu overhead issue in quadfire furyx that was in dx11(guessing). I am seeing light or bouncing loads on gpus. The same thing is required like in DX11 i have to use a faster cpu(newer) to try to help lessen the load issues. Also, during the test to confirm this i also have similar power usage numbers at the wall as well. It's not using all gpus to the max constantly. The third thing that seems to corroborate the issue is gpu temps are too low as if they aren't really using much power.

So my next question which is probably a resounding no... does this bench not use DX12 multi adapter instead of CF/SLI as well?

Have awaited for someone to notice this.

Multi-GPU on DX12 is still... "needs some work in drivers".

Problem is, with full screen mode, the GPUs end up starved of work. 2 GPUs scales fairly well, 3+ starts to show this.

If you (under custom) run in Borderless Fullscreen, you'll notice interesting things...

Sadly our idea of running the whole test in Borderless Window by default was vetoed due to issues related to performance effects of Windows compositing on different resolution displays (ie. on some vendors, if you have 1080p monitor vs. 4K monitor places considerably different load when Windows composites everything in Borderless Fullscreen)

So for now, 3+ GPU multi-GPU is held back by the way drivers handle this in LDA & exclusive full screen DX12.
post #407 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by CriticalHit View Post

been described earlier that 3dmark doing different type of Async (that meets nvidia's standard)so dont see full blown performance improvements with async on AMD cards like we can seen on doom.

Not true.
post #408 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomdude View Post

I am very displeased with this benchmark. Doesn't anybody else find it weird that AMD gains 60% with Doom

When you compare AMD Vulkan performance to AMD OpenGL performance, you are comparing a working driver to a... umm... tongue.gif
post #409 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hequaqua View Post

Has anyone tried to record either the Demo or Benchmark w/Demo?

I tried Mirillis and it crashes right off. I've tried Shadowplay, and nothing in the folder when I finish recording.

Shadowplay is not DX12 compatible...

We've published official videos in our YouTube page. Easiest way to get a good video would be to have Professional Edition version and using image quality tool to sequentially output every frame at 60fps, but I guess that would be "cheating" biggrin.gif

Not sure what video capture software is compatible with DX12 full screen mode. Anyone know?
post #410 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by guttheslayer View Post

Look like Time Spy is alot more demanding than Firestrike,


At 1440p, time spy actually give similar Firestrike Ultra scores which is rendered at 4K.

Don't compare scores from different tests to each other - they are never comparable. The Time Spy score formula has some constants that "tune" the score so that, at launch, you get 5000 points with a high end gaming PC (I believe a 6700k + 980ti was used).

And yes, Time Spy is way more demanding than Fire Strike (even at Ultra). The scene is just many times more complex. Read up on the details in the Tech guide

http://www.futuremark.com/downloads/3DMark_Technical_Guide.pdf
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Various] Futuremark Releases 3DMark Time Spy DirectX 12 Benchmark