Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Low 3DMark11 score on homebuilt 2500K/GTX-570 rig

Last response: in Systems
Share
January 29, 2012 4:08:03 AM

Greetings,

My system:

Processor - i5-2500K @4.5GHz
Motherboard - ASUS P8Z68-V Pro
RAM - 8GB (2 x 4) DDR3 RAM (1333)
Hard Drive - Samsung 7200 RPM HDD
Power Supply - 650 Watt Antec Earthwatts PSU - 2 x 12v rails @38A each
Graphics (just installed today) - EVGA GTX-570 HD 2560 MB RAM

I just installed the video card today (had been getting by with the Intel HD3000 graphics), installed a free, basic-only version of 3DMark11, and ran it. My system handled all the scenes pretty well, and didn't crash. However, when the test had finished, it said there were two issues - "Graphics card is not recognized", and "Graphics driver is not approved". Also, I got what I think is a dismal score of P5730. What is weird is that 3DMark11 lists the Intel graphics under the primary as "unknown VGA adapter", and my new GTX-570 under Secondary Graphics. Now, I know the GTX was working during the test, because I was monitoring with CPUID Hardware Monitor, and the max temps on the GPU were 80deg C, with the fan spinning at 2220 max rpm. Could the integrated graphics have also been running at the same time, and interfered with the operation of the discrete card? I installed all the newest drivers from Nvidia's site for the discrete card, but if there is a way to disable the integrated graphics from coming online at all, I have not done it.

Why was my score so low, especially with my processor overclocked, and the new video card being what it is?
January 29, 2012 4:24:45 AM

Well, I guess it's decent. All those you linked to were using Core2 Quads, so my Physics score was significantly better; the one guy beat my overall score on account of having his GPU overclocked. So, the greater VRAM of my card does not mean as much to the 3DMark11 performance as the core clock? It would be nice to compare scores of 2500K/GTX-570 users
Related resources
a b B Homebuilt system
January 29, 2012 4:37:17 AM

Those benchmarks I'm sure are out there, google 2500k 570 3dmark11.
January 29, 2012 5:38:16 AM

If you are using beta drivers you will have the errors you listed from 3dmark benchs. Also as it is a 570 with upped ram from the original reference, I'm not completely sure but there is a good chance 3dmark is a little behind on updating their software to recognize it.

As for your p score, for a 570 looks pretty good to me.
January 29, 2012 4:11:18 PM

I'm using driver version 285.62, straight from Nvidia's website (I let the website "auto-detect" my GPU). They had a newer one that was beta that I did not download. What about the HD3000 drivers? Do those automatically uninstall when the discrete GPU is detected? The GTX-570 is the only one that is detected when I run GPU-Z, and when I go into the ASUS bios, I can no longer see the integrated graphics to adjust clock speed, voltage, etc. (except the GTX-570 does not show up in the ASUS BIOS either). I am wondering even though everything shows the 570 as having taken over, might there be some residual driver clutter from the HD3000 hanging around?
January 29, 2012 4:40:35 PM


That driver should be recognised, so not sure what is the problem there, unless it is the extra vram on your card as another pointed out.

When you install a discrete video card on the Z68 board, the iGPU will be disabled so that should explain why you no longer see it.
January 29, 2012 4:55:48 PM

Not a terrible score but your definitely having driver issues.
I have a P6000 3DMark 11 with an i7-930 @ 4.0Ghz pushing a 570 @ 905.

January 29, 2012 10:44:52 PM

570 @ 905 on the core is a very hefty overclock. The intel drivers should be a dead driver as your system is registering the nvidia chip on your 570 as primary. If you had upgraded from a previous nvidia card I might suspect driver issues, though and judging from your p score your actually running pretty well. That's a real decent score..

Reference this:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-570-review/11
January 30, 2012 12:26:14 AM

lothdk said:
That driver should be recognised, so not sure what is the problem there, unless it is the extra vram on your card as another pointed out.

When you install a discrete video card on the Z68 board, the iGPU will be disabled so that should explain why you no longer see it.



I suppose I am fine with the score, it just had me worried when I looked at other scores with more or less comparable systems and they are either significantly higher (due to overclocking the GPU I am sure), or they are around the same or a little lower, and 3DMark11 is alerting them that "danger, danger, this computer scores lower than others in the same build type, there must be something wrong...." :pt1cable: 

What sort of concerns me is why 3DMark11 seems to want to "see" both graphic devices when it runs its analysis, and raise a red flag when it doesn't find the drivers for the Intel HD3000, when every other diagnostic tool tells me that it was a smooth hand-off to the 570.
January 30, 2012 12:29:44 AM

....3DMark11 sees my GTX-570, but it places it as the "secondary" graphics adapter.
January 30, 2012 12:47:15 AM

lemlo said:
570 @ 905 on the core is a very hefty overclock. The intel drivers should be a dead driver as your system is registering the nvidia chip on your 570 as primary. If you had upgraded from a previous nvidia card I might suspect driver issues, though and judging from your p score your actually running pretty well. That's a real decent score..

Reference this:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-570-review/11



Except the processors used in those benchmarks were older dual-core, ran at 1.8GHz. I would have expected to beat the 5300 score for the 570 by more than a few hundred, considering my CPU is a newer gen. quad core at 4.5GHz.
January 30, 2012 3:55:36 PM

umm no, those tests were done with a i7 965 at 3.7ghz.

edit: you were reading the minimum system requirements i think.
January 30, 2012 4:08:04 PM

Oh, yeah. I was just reading the one page with the minimum requirements. That makes more sense. It's just a benchmark anyway, I guess I am over analyzing it.
!