Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

GTX 670 FTW 3D mark results

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Gtx
  • World Of Warcraft
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 21, 2012 5:42:01 PM

Hello, I'm wondering if this score is right for my card. I upgraded from a GTX 560 SC to the 670 ftw and when I installed it yesterday it really hasn't seemed like much of a upgrade =/ I run WoW around the same as I did on my 560 Sc granted I know wow is more cpu dependent but I would think I'd gain a very noticeable boost from a near $400 GPU that being said I ran Company of Heroes and again didn't seem like a big jump in performance. On battlefield 3 now it did stay above 60+ at pretty much all times on all settings being ultra but I still wasnt sure that the card is performing at what it should so I ran a 3D mark directx11 test on it and seeing I used the basic edition of it running its at 1280x720 because it wouldn't let me do 1920x1080 because its the free version of the software but after all the tests it ran wasn't as high as most people it seems. Now Id figure at 1280x720 this card would destroy the scores but from looking at the graph it really didn't. my monitor is 1920x1080 by the way :)  so any help would be great not sure if the card is faulty or not. I also set the settings in the invidia control panel for it to be max performance so that shouldn't be causing it not to score as well as others and it is factory OC'ed I haven't tried to push it any further didn't think I would need to for a few years to be honest seeing from everything I'd read from reviews on it their isnt a big difference between it and the 680 in performance. so again any help would be great! thank you very much :) 


http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/5001150

More about : gtx 670 ftw mark results

November 21, 2012 5:49:18 PM

GTX 670 should almost double the performance of the GTX 560. I suggest run GPUZ and take a look at your GPU usage while gaming. It could be a driver issue or something else that it bottlenecking your system...
m
0
l
November 21, 2012 5:56:44 PM

disolitude said:
GTX 670 should almost double the performance of the GTX 560. I suggest run GPUZ and take a look at your GPU usage while gaming. It could be a driver issue or something else that it bottlenecking your system...


That's what I would figure but right now it hasn't seemed that way I'm gonna download GPU-Z and see I'm running the newest drivers and cleared out my old 560 drivers. I would think for a Card that cost this much that it would make older games fps look like a joke especially when I read a guys benchmark on it for COH that he has 140+ fps at all times max settings and my max was 70 with a avg of like 58.
m
0
l
Related resources
November 21, 2012 5:59:52 PM

My MSI 660ti card gets 9300+ in Graphics Score, so it does sound like there's a problem. You should be closer to 10.000. Having BF3 on Ultra and 1920x1080 and getting 60+ fps is not bad though, but as Disolitude said, it would be a driver og bottleneck issue. Have you tried re-installing your drivers?

Edit: we were typing at the same time, just ignore the parts you already answered :) 
m
0
l
November 21, 2012 6:05:43 PM

jarlsuki said:
My MSI 660ti card gets 9300+ in Graphics Score, so it does sound like there's a problem. You should be closer to 10.000. Having BF3 on Ultra and 1920x1080 and getting 60+ fps is not bad though, but as Disolitude said, it would be a driver og bottleneck issue. Have you tried re-installing your drivers?

Edit: we were typing at the same time, just ignore the parts you already answered :) 


haha yea I used driver sweeper cleaned out the drivers actually twice did it again this morning and did a fresh install of them. I'm running BF3 at the moment in campaign watching GPU-Z it has the core clock going up to 1162 and memory clock going up to 1552 max GPU load at 99%.
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 21, 2012 6:15:38 PM

The 3dmark11 score shows a proper score for your setup. It even says your system is performing normally. I don't see where the concern is.

When looking at the scores between the 2 different cards, focus only on the Graphics score. The total score (the one with the P in front) includes both CPU and GPU performance, and the CPU did not change with the upgrade.
Share
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 21, 2012 6:19:15 PM

bystander said:
The 3dmark11 score shows a proper score for your setup. It even says your system is performing normally. I don't see where the concern is.

When looking at the scores between the 2 different cards, focus only on the Graphics score. The total score (the one with the P in front) includes both CPU and GPU performance, and the CPU did not change with the upgrade.
+1 i agree
m
0
l
November 21, 2012 6:23:18 PM

To give u an idea my stock gtx 670 scores 8800 3d mark 11.So your FTW version should score about 9000.8800 is about the stcok score of gtx 670 according to reviews.
m
0
l
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 21, 2012 6:29:04 PM

ridd21 said:
Anyway to test it? because I do not own Crysis warhead
no sorry
m
0
l
November 21, 2012 6:32:46 PM

bigcyco1 said:
no sorry


I got this card to run games like Crysis 3 hopefully maxxed doubt that will happen but ya know kinda the next Gen stuff with what is coming out with the new Unreal engine and such. I'm just wanting to make sure that I will be ok for a few years. :) 
m
0
l
November 21, 2012 6:43:32 PM

I did the same upgrade went from evga gtx 560 sc 2gb to 670 ftw and I can tell a big difference all three crysis games played much better frame rates and I replayed witcher 2 and metro 2033 again much better frames was worth the upgrade
m
0
l
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 21, 2012 6:46:28 PM

ridd21 said:
I got this card to run games like Crysis 3 hopefully maxxed doubt that will happen but ya know kinda the next Gen stuff with what is coming out with the new Unreal engine and such. I'm just wanting to make sure that I will be ok for a few years. :) 
Yeah i know what you mean that is why i bought two 670's :lol: 
m
0
l
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 21, 2012 9:49:16 PM

http://www.overclock.net/t/1265110/the-gtx-670-overcloc... Try this tutorial, it goes over everything needed for GTX 670, and takes into account that each chip is different. I followed this and got great results.My best so far with one card

1418 Mhz
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 21, 2012 9:55:14 PM

RussK1 said:
I'd say something is wrong...

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm11/5001150/3dm11/49941...

My result isn't valid because my drivers aren't approved (12.11 beta)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4994165

Extreme:

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4994259


I don't know if those are doctored, something with the newest beta drivers or you have extreme OCing, but those are WAY higher than you should get.

Go around and look at the reviews with 3Dmark11 scores, and in the high 7000's to low P8000's is all you find with that card.

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/his_hd7...
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
http://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/powercolor_pcs_hd_...
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/AMD_...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 1:04:17 AM

bystander said:
I don't know if those are doctored, something with the newest beta drivers or you have extreme OCing, but those are WAY higher than you should get.

Go around and look at the reviews with 3Dmark11 scores, and in the high 7000's to low P8000's is all you find with that card.

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/his_hd7...
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
http://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/powercolor_pcs_hd_...
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/AMD_...


Nothing doctored... default values in CCC and OC'd to 1000/1450... maybe it's the new Virtu.




m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 1:55:32 AM

bigcyco1 said:
WTF!How does a 7950 beat a 670 your score is higher then mine :heink: 


I think he has some settings in the CCC turned down, personally. I cannot find anyone with scores in that range with out crossfire. Those Heaven 3.0 scores are 50% higher than a 680. Those 3Dmark11 scores are also way higher than normal. Either those beta drivers turned on some serious power never present before, or there are some setting changes in the CCC.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 2:02:11 AM

bystander said:
What do you mean by Virtu?


Lucidlogix -----> GPU Virtualization Software

Maybe offloads some of the workload onto the IGP. Also repeatedly beats a 6990 (mine) in every test... same settings, everything.

Funny, the first thing that comes to peoples minds is cheating... no doubt ones with nVidia hardware.

Quote:
or there are some setting changes in the CCC.


Which one's? There aren't many atleast not like all the messy odds and ends in the nVidia control panel. Needless to say, everything is set to "application controlled" and Catalyst AI and Texture Filtering is set to high quality... AA method is set to MSAA.

Also, don't you think 3DMark would know if it settings had been over-ran? Disable tessellation via control panel and the score will be void due to tessellation modification.
m
0
l
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 2:04:40 AM

bystander said:
I think he has some settings in the CCC turned down, personally. I cannot find anyone with scores in that range with out crossfire. Those Heaven 3.0 scores are 50% higher than a 680. Those 3Dmark11 scores are also way higher than normal. Either those beta drivers turned on some serious power never present before, or there are some setting changes in the CCC.
o.k. that makes sense.
m
0
l
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 2:06:05 AM

RussK1 said:
Lucidlogix -----> GPU Virtualization Software

Maybe offloads some of the workload onto the IGP. Also repeatedly beats a 6990 (mine) in every test... same settings, everything.

Funny, the first thing that comes to peoples minds is cheating... no doubt ones with nVidia hardware.
I never said you cheated :pfff: 
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 2:06:32 AM

RussK1 said:
Lucidlogix -----> GPU Virtualization Software

Maybe offloads some of the workload onto the IGP. Also repeatedly beats a 6990 (mine) in every test... same settings, everything.


Well then that means your system isn't something the OP can compare. That is not a 7950, that is some sort of hybrid not at all the same, though from what I've read on that software, it was rarely giving benefits, but at times gave large ones. It would be interesting on how it behaves in a game by game analysis, maybe they've got it working a lot better than a few months ago.

Anyways, this is off topic and really of no value to the OP's non-problem. His scores are the same or higher than anything I found online and 3dmark11 says his scores are normal, and future mark don't give easy passes.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 2:08:29 AM

RussK1 said:
Funny, the first thing that comes to peoples minds is cheating... no doubt ones with nVidia hardware.


I doubt anyone would think those are normal, and they aren't as you already confessed. You can't fine a single benchmark with the 7950 setup you professed with scores approaching those. Everyone would question it, rightfully so.
m
0
l
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 2:10:54 AM

I agree with bystander we are getting off topic so let's just drop it.P.S. I own two 670 and one 680 and a 7950 so i am not a fanboy.Those scores are not avg so excuse me for questioning it.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 3:54:23 AM

bystander said:
I doubt anyone would think those are normal, and they aren't as you already confessed. You can't fine a single benchmark with the 7950 setup you professed with scores approaching those. Everyone would question it, rightfully so.



Professed to what? Virtu?... that is just something I threw out there to make you feel better and I'm not surprised you quickly shrugged it off as it being the case. Do I think benchmarks are benefiting from Virtu? Hell no. Those are the scores I'm getting - period. Once the drivers are approved I can crank up the OC and hit the X5100 extreme score validated, with a 7950.

Anyway, whether it's a mix of PCIe 3.0, Ivy Bridge, Z77, Virtu, fresh OS install, etc, who knows (I believe it's the drivers). But the OP's system is more comparable to my system than to any of yours and simply think he should be getting better scores. I know nVidia makes flawless drivers but that's what he should be messing with (since his board has Virtu as well).
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 4:19:35 AM

RussK1 said:
Professed to what? Virtu?... that is just something I threw out there to make you feel better and I'm not surprised you quickly shrugged it off as it being the case. Do I think benchmarks are benefiting from Virtu? Hell no. Those are the scores I'm getting - period. Once the drivers are approved I can crank up the OC and hit the X5100 extreme score validated, with a 7950.

Anyway, whether it's a mix of PCIe 3.0, Ivy Bridge, Z77, Virtu, fresh OS install, etc, who knows (I believe it's the drivers). But the OP's system is more comparable to my system than to any of yours and simply think he should be getting better scores. I know nVidia makes flawless drivers but that's what he should be messing with (since his board has Virtu as well).


We'll have to agree to disagree, as I can't find anything with google that is comparable. Maybe it is the new drivers, but I would think others would be seeing similar scores, though the OP is using a 670. It could be CCC settings, an OC (though you said you were at stock settings), or your Virtu, but it's not the motherboard, PCIe 3.0, Ivy Bridge, or the fresh install, as all the benchmarks online would also show something close. Just a few here:

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/his_hd7...
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
http://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/powercolor_pcs_hd_...
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/AMD_...

Here is a 7970 Ghz with 12.11 drivers on an IB i7 clocked to 4.5ghz: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...

These all match the OP or lower. What I'm trying to do here is help the OP to understand that his system is performing on par or better compared to those with similar setups. You seem to want to confuse the issue with something unusual.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 12:15:46 PM

I removed the card and moved it to a P67 system w/2600K and scores are considerably lower. My conclusion is that it is Virtu... this is a good thing though for those running Z77. Just goes to show, the OP should be getting better framerates being he's running an Extreme 4 w/Virtu. I'd suggest reinstalling Virtu from their website and getting the newest beta nVidia drivers.

If Virtu has such an impact it should be front page news. Now I want to ditch the SB/P67 system for a Z77/IB system.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 3:01:36 PM

RussK1 said:
I removed the card and moved it to a P67 system w/2600K and scores are considerably lower. My conclusion is that it is Virtu... this is a good thing though for those running Z77. Just goes to show, the OP should be getting better framerates being he's running an Extreme 4 w/Virtu. I'd suggest reinstalling Virtu from their website and getting the newest beta nVidia drivers.

If Virtu has such an impact it should be front page news. Now I want to ditch the SB/P67 system for a Z77/IB system.


I'll have to remember that for when I upgrade with Intel's next generation.
m
0
l
November 22, 2012 6:33:53 PM

LOL virtu gives fake score.It is known and well documented by leading tech sites.It falsely shows increased max framerate.In 3d mark site it said in bold virtu result are invalid.

And as for his heaven score.Its same thing when virtu is running it makes fps reading meaningless.Since frame which are not rendered are also counted as rendered frames.I am surprised russK being a silver medalist here doesn't know this or he is intentionally want to cause confusion.

Nothing doctored here guys.Its just virtu giving fake framerate.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5728/intel-z77-panther-po...

detailed here.Read it.

By introducing a level of middleware that intercepts rendering calls, Virtual V-Sync and HyperFormance are both tools that decide whether a frame should be rendered and then delivered to the display. However the FPS counter within a title counts frame calls, not completed frames. So as the software intercepts a call, the frame rate counter is increased, whether the frame is rendered or not. This could lead to many unrendered frames, and an artificially high FPS number, when in reality the software is merely optimizing the sequence of rendering tasks rather than increasing FPS.
Virtu MVP causes many issues when it comes to benchmarking and comparison of systems as well. The method of telling the performance of systems apart has typically been the FPS values. With this new technology, the FPS value is almost meaningless as it counts the frames that are not rendered. This has consequences for benchmarking companies like Futuremark and overclockers who like to compare systems (Futuremark have released a statement about this). Technically all you would need to do (if we understand the software correctly) to increase your score/FPS would be to reduce the refresh rate of your monitor.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 6:42:08 PM

cooldudesubho said:
LOL virtu gives fake score.It is known and well documented by leading tech sites.It falsely shows increased max framerate.In 3d mark site it said in bold virtu result are invalid.

And as for his heaven score.Its same thing when virtu is running it makes fps reading meaningless.Since frame which are not rendered are also counted as rendered frames.I am surprised russK being a silver medalist here doesn't know this or he is intentionally want to cause confusion.

Nothing doctored here guys.Its just virtu giving fake framerate.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5728/intel-z77-panther-po...

detailed here.Read it.

By introducing a level of middleware that intercepts rendering calls, Virtual V-Sync and HyperFormance are both tools that decide whether a frame should be rendered and then delivered to the display. However the FPS counter within a title counts frame calls, not completed frames. So as the software intercepts a call, the frame rate counter is increased, whether the frame is rendered or not. This could lead to many unrendered frames, and an artificially high FPS number, when in reality the software is merely optimizing the sequence of rendering tasks rather than increasing FPS.
Virtu MVP causes many issues when it comes to benchmarking and comparison of systems as well. The method of telling the performance of systems apart has typically been the FPS values. With this new technology, the FPS value is almost meaningless as it counts the frames that are not rendered. This has consequences for benchmarking companies like Futuremark and overclockers who like to compare systems (Futuremark have released a statement about this). Technically all you would need to do (if we understand the software correctly) to increase your score/FPS would be to reduce the refresh rate of your monitor.


No the 23 fps is from the benchmark ending... how about this one?



What about the use of nearly 3GB of VRAM @ 1080p? When the common claim is 1GB is enough?
m
0
l
November 22, 2012 6:43:25 PM

You are noob.Go back and read that article.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 6:49:39 PM

The good news is that it may still be helpful, but gives incorrect FPS count. FPS count isn't important, other than when comparing results.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 6:59:27 PM

bystander said:
The good news is that it may still be helpful, but gives incorrect FPS count. FPS count isn't important, other than when comparing results.



Exactly.

Quote:
You are noob.Go back and read that article.


You're a special one gizmo. Quick to hurl insults shows the lack of frontal cortex you have.

Are you implying the FPS are fake here because it sure doesn't FEEL" like it:







m
0
l
November 22, 2012 7:59:51 PM

If you are using virtu ,then your fps are fake.FFS read that article.But it doesn't matter as long as you are not comparing your ssytem with other.Which BTW you were doing here.That why you are a noob.And lol canal TDM NOOB.Get skill like me play 64p conquest.Then i will see where your card goes.lool
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/soldier/cooldudesu...
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 8:13:34 PM

cooldudesubho said:
If you are using virtu ,then your fps are fake.FFS read that article.But it doesn't matter as long as you are not comparing your ssytem with other.Which BTW you were doing here.That why you are a noob.And lol canal TDM NOOB.Get skill like me play 64p conquest.Then i will see where your card goes.lool
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/soldier/cooldudesu...


I do appreciate you bringing to light of the FPS inconsistency. I know something wasn't right, but we don't need to bring name calling into this.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 8:25:11 PM

cooldudesubho said:
If you are using virtu ,then your fps are fake.FFS read that article.But it doesn't matter as long as you are not comparing your ssytem with other.Which BTW you were doing here.That why you are a noob.And lol canal TDM NOOB.Get skill like me play 64p conquest.Then i will see where your card goes.lool
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/soldier/cooldudesu...


Aimbot written all over your profile and you like to camp vehicles. Nothing special...

m
0
l
November 22, 2012 8:34:27 PM

xD nice logic noob.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 9:46:06 PM

bystander said:
I do appreciate you bringing to light of the FPS inconsistency. I know something wasn't right, but we don't need to bring name calling into this.


Remember I'm the one who brought up Virtu and was just as puzzled as you. Reason I swapped out parts to get to the bottom of it. In fact I brought it up in another thread.

Doesn't change the fact that the OP has Virtu mvp, why isn't he seeing the "fake" fps as crusty so eloquently put? Besides the point I know, just curious.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
a b Ý World of Warcraft
November 22, 2012 10:12:09 PM

RussK1 said:
Remember I'm the one who brought up Virtu and was just as puzzled as you. Reason I swapped out parts to get to the bottom of it. In fact I brought it up in another thread.

Doesn't change the fact that the OP has Virtu mvp, why isn't he seeing the "fake" fps as crusty so eloquently put? Besides the point I know, just curious.


I realize you mentioned it, he found a good article explaining it. Before that point, we were under the impression that the Virtu gave more FPS, when it was merely reporting more FPS, along some other latency reduction abilities. Which I find to be particularly interesting, as I use a 120hz monitor and go for high FPS, because it reduces latency, which causes me nausea. This Virtu would reduce nausea for me (though atm, 80+ FPS on a 120hz monitor removes it).
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 22, 2012 11:39:08 PM

bystander said:
I realize you mentioned it, he found a good article explaining it. Before that point, we were under the impression that the Virtu gave more FPS, when it was merely reporting more FPS, along some other latency reduction abilities. Which I find to be particularly interesting, as I use a 120hz monitor and go for high FPS, because it reduces latency, which causes me nausea. This Virtu would reduce nausea for me (though atm, 80+ FPS on a 120hz monitor removes it).


I like the technology... improving rendering times by removing unused and/or partial frames is great.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/z77-express-virtu-m...
m
0
l
November 23, 2012 12:20:22 AM

Best answer selected by ridd21.
m
0
l
!