PDA

View Full Version : Cinebench R10 scores...



Evildead666
1st March 2009, 05:15
http://www.maxon.net/pages/download/cinebench_e.html

scroll down a little and click on the "Download Cinebench" button...


CB 1 CPU 3875
CB X CPU 13797
OGL Std 9518

Quad@3.52GHz, 2Gb memory@1056MHz
Radeon@850-3600MHz

J1NG
1st March 2009, 09:53
CB 1 CPU 4741
CB X CPU 19326
OGL Std 5531

Core i7 920 2.66Ghz @ 3.3Ghz
6GB Memory 1600Mhz @ Default
HD4870 1GB @ Default

J1NG

Evildead666
1st March 2009, 11:33
Damn, that cpu score is wicked ;)

I cant believe that the only difference between your 4870 and mine is the core speed.
my memory is at stock speed, and just the core from 750 to 850MHZ...
I am using the latest drivers also...

J1NG
1st March 2009, 12:15
Yeah, totally unmodded that Hd4870 because it has that new Sapphire Cooler on it, so I wasn't sure what to do with it yet or what it could do without changing that cooler which looks non-standard, so...

Everything in CCC was left at medium settings. 9.1 version, and in Vista 64.

Kinda surprised you've got some +45% score over my own one. Must be some OC'ing you're doing there! :p

J1NG

J1NG
1st March 2009, 12:25
Actually, just checked it out, you've got 100Mhz more on the core. And that is producing the +45% odd disparity between our cards?? :eek:

J1NG

Evildead666
12th March 2009, 06:22
All the settings in CCC are set for High Quality, and No AA or AF...

J1NG
12th March 2009, 06:53
Hmm, this is particular, I just looked at the CCC about the gpu and it's only at 500Mhz??

What's that about?? That's probably why there's a 45% odd slower difference between our cards.

:: edit::

Nah, nevermind, found out it's using that different speed thing. But still, a 100Mhz difference on the core giving that big a disparity is amazing...

J1NG

Evildead666
13th March 2009, 08:35
You're now getting me to doubt myself.....lol
I'll look tonight and see if i didn't invert the 5 and the 9.....
I sent all the values to the Cinebench database on the PC so it will be just a case of checking....

Evildead666
14th March 2009, 09:47
Nope, thats the right score.....
Check what number of shaders etc with GPU-z.....
100MHz can't account for a nearly 50% difference....

Put the latest driver and try again i think....

edit: I'm in XP, what OS are you doing this under , Win7..? or an unoptimised x64 driver ?

J1NG
14th March 2009, 11:24
Using Vista 64bit with SP1.

Updating to the latest 9.2 drivers get me up to a maximum so far of 7120. I'm guessing there was some serious changes to the 9.1 and 9.2 drivers then. :o

This new score seems more in line with what your reported score is, considering OS difference.

Still, quite an amazing difference even from this new score and your one. :)

J1NG

J1NG
16th May 2009, 19:01
A bit of a late update, but hey. :)

It appears for some reason on Vista 64 (it might actually be the power settings after a quick thought) the opengl score will "increase" the speeds every time you run it till it reaches the 7000 mark odd for the opengl bit. Very weird, will need to look into it further later.

Well, that wasn't the entire update post :p with a new BIOS (beta), I have now pushed the i7 920 to 3.6Ghz. Scores are as follows:

Single: 4972
Multi: 20236

Too afraid to push it further due to inadequate cooling. But I certainly think this baby could do more. But this 1Ghz Overclock is certainly no slouch! :)

J1NG

ALBPM
12th June 2009, 07:49
Here's mine....

CB 1 CPU 5524
CB X CPU 22385
OGL Std 10118


Core i7 920 2.66Ghz @ 3.7Ghz
12GB Memory 1600Mhz @ Default
HD4890 x 2, 2GB @ 910GPU, 1000 Mem Clock
WIN 7 RC1

Evildead666
12th June 2009, 09:32
Shame the OpenGL didn't use both cards it seems....
Absolutely smashing CPU scores tho ;)

Have to get round to updating the Win7 install to the RC...

ALBPM
12th June 2009, 22:20
It doesn't use both cards????

I uninstalled and re-installed the ATI drivers and it didn't make any difference. Oh well.....

Evildead666
14th June 2009, 04:42
Just read yesterday that the ATi drivers will have optimisations for multi GPU's in OpenGL, but it will be up to the software dev to implement with a patch.
Cinebench should be one of the first to get an upgrade for multi-chip, but then again they didn't have to do it for Nv (afaik), so why for ATi..?

How many OpenGL proggies are there still out there anyway...?
Even the Carmack is starting to see OpenGLhas been left to play by itself for too long...