3DMark Time Spy Benchmark

Please post scores only, any off topic conversation will result in a warning from here on out. -Ethrem

All,
New benchmark, new scores to beat! Here is my run below with a little overclocking. Def beat a stock GTX1080! I will work on overclocking further tonight.Post your benchmarks!

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13271961?

 

timespy can be found here also

https://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/2744/futuremark-3dmark-timespy-v2-1-2852

 

3DMark Time Spy DX12 GTX 1070 Vs AMD RX 480 Vs GTX 970 Benchmark

 

Damn, I had to install to a separate SSD a windows 10 to just see my very low score;
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13226211



It felt it is running on the IGP, so I am not quite sure...

 

4710MQ (stock)+ FirePro M6100 (On latest Crimson drivers)

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13317566

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13335486

I pity any 965m owners trying to beat that score.....broke 2300 and 2195 on gpu

420/440 0.85v

 

Little OC to the mix on the gpu
1370 (GPU - 1237)

 

Stock 980M + i7-3740QM
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/48687

For some reason 3DMark website displays my GPU as running at non-stock clocks, but this is incorrect. I do not OC my GPU (it's undervolted at 1.0V and it doesn't overclock).

 

3037 with 970m

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13359651?

 

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13333499

Spoiler: 4796

 

980M SLI stock UV - TDR'd the first time, second time 5183 total, 5535 graphics - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13369529?

Kind of ticks me off I have to drop another 5 bucks to add this benchmark to 3DMark Adv that I already paid for but the score is decent and I unlocked the "Future Proof" badge in Steam lol.

 

Some results from me with a variety of hardware:

P750DM-G: i7-6700K (-50mv) + 970M (+220mhz/+200mhz/+37.5mV). My now "solid" with Prema v2 vBIOS. This thing can push 300mhz+ core offsets though but yet to put the time in.
Total: 2833
GPU: 2364
CPU: 4967
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/21631

Desktop: i7-2600K @ 4.4ghz + 980Ti Hybrid (+60mhz/+200mhz/+20mv). Mild OC's here that it runs on all the time as it's my primary gaming and music production rig.
Total: 5125
GPU: 5501
CPU: 3696
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/76115

HTPC VM (yes, it's a virtual machine): 4 threads of an i7-2600, ASUS 750Ti Strix (overclocked, forgot the exact offsets)
Total: 1348
GPU: 1266
CPU: 2144
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/75970

Once AIB cards arrive, gonna drop an RX480 in for the HTPC VM.

 

My scores:

My Stock 970m w/ 3610QM Drivers v368.39
GPU: 2222
CPU: 3240
Total: 2331
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/31867

Overclock 970m +243 core, +543VRAM +25mV Drivers -same as above
GPU: 2731
CPU: 3272
Total: 2800
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/32068

Overclock 970m +300core, +543VRAM +62mV Drivers - same as above
GPU: 2808
CPU: 3208
Total: 2861
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/32918

The initial overclock is very stable and I use it mostly for gaming etc, but as seen even pushing the core up to 300 doesn't seem to net much of a difference.

 

Stock 970m w/ 6700 Drivers v368.39
GPU: 2194
CPU: 4787
Total: 2388
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13199407

Overclock 970m +225core, +350vram +50mV Drivers v368.39
GPU: 2655
CPU: 4871
Total: 2849
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13344020?

Apparently CPU score has no impact on this test...

 

Single 200W 980... 6700K @ 4.7GHz, GPU 1478 core / 1950 memory

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/87779

 

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/74276

 

Single 200W 980 at 1500 core 1965 memory, 6700K @ 4.8GHz. System pulled a peak of 462W on my UPS digital meter with this OC.

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/95134



Might as well toss this in here also, since I used it to confirm my CPU overclock was dialed in for Time Spy. Tied with 8c/16t Xeon reference score.

 

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13438692

 

My stable gaming overclock with stock NVIDIA 980M VBIOS (still haven't dabbled in Prema VBIOS yet).

+135 core/+270 memory

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13484237?

 

I just cleaned up the entire thread. Please post benchmarks only and take discussion elsewhere. This is the second time I've asked to keep it on topic and I will start handing out warnings from here on out. We have forums and threads for every single branch of the off topic conversation that occurred, there was no need for 60 posts of garbage.

 

I found out I have enough Arctic Silver for a repaste, since the last one sucked, and used a little paper to add pressure to the heatsink and it worked great! Temps have dropped!

So TBoneSan, beat your 2818 GPU score

New score: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/131384

GPU: 2824

+310core +543VRAM +50mV Same drivers.

Not fined tuned overclock but still an improvement.

 

Another update:

Overall: 2887
GPU: 2,845

Link: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/142385


+345core +565VRAM +100mV same drivers.

I have found TimeSpy to be really consistent with its scores. And it kinda sucks because the two graphics runs are around one minute, instead of thirty seconds like Firestrike, so temps keep going up and on this run i actually hit 91C on the second run.

Lastly I am getting a high pitch whine from the GPU area now with these high overclocks?!? Its audible enough to be hear over the fans at 100%. Anyone have that before??

 

Again, just stick in a cheapo Watt-a-Meter to determine your powerdraw to be certain.

 

970m - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13654710?

GPU = 2931
CPU = 5698

@anassa

 

I had that too on my 970M, probably best to stop trying to push it at that point!!

 

Stock Gtx980 with 369.00 http://www.3dmark.com/spy/162444
I really hate the way 3Dm Suite is now. + My very crippled download speed Have the M$ Morons helped Futuremark with the whole design of this UGLY not useful user interface? I think so Is this new bench a beta? Or need I a new clean Windows?

 

Good idea! Thanks! I will look for one, and update when I get one.

Ya... kinda thought that too .. . but I still need to beat your Firestrike score and TBoneSan's TimeSpy score

Ouch . . . that is going to be hard to beat, with my last score I hit 91C so I gotta do something more extreme about my cooling, I got some ideas though.

 

Try the new 369.00 drivers - they seem pretty good. I actually ran lower clocks than my previous best score and still got that higher score.

 

For sure I will give it a try this weekend, it seems that in TimeSpy just 100points is really hard to get when compared to Firestrike. I can't run over 1400Mhz core without throttling, so I need to get that figured out. I can run the same as previous settings and do a direct score comparison though.

Damn ~1min graphics tests. . . . .

 

Don't cry when you kill your 970M or laptop

Get some proper thermal paste and pads.. AS5 is junk... Literally some new paste will help so much!

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

 

My card hits a max of 69 degrees. To be honest I'm not too interested in this fluffy benchmark. But I'm having fun sparring with my buddy here in the light weight league.
Time spy passes with clocks that aren't stable for 3dmark11 and many other benchmarks by a long shot.
Benchmarking on Maxwell is abit of a PITA if I'm honest. Push too much and a black screen 9 times out of 10 ends up needing a reboot. Kepler never did that and always recovered far better.

 

Lol, how much did you cry when your 970m died? lol

AC5 is currently working fine thank you. =) (And yes.. i have mentioned I will be changing thermal paste brand later down the road to compare, it will be interesting!)

I guessed I don't have the current thermal/power headroom to get black screens, I get driver crash and then resets and within 10sec I am running again. ( P870DM-G vs P150EM )

Honestly for me personally, I like to see how far I can push in one theoretical graphical environment (Firestrike/TimeSpy ) compare with fellow 970m's and then actually take it to stress testing and see if I can actually use some of those actual Mhz for my gaming profile. And if its just thermal throttling maybe I can do some modding to make the potential OC to real world gaming.


Update:

Its wierd, I never payed attention to throttling, I just ran the benchmark and if it didn't crash I was happy, now that I am paying more attention to clocks and how it throttles my OCing seem to suck. I really need to find out if I am throttling due to power.

TBoneSan - I ran the same clocks : +345 +565 +100Mv with 369.00 drivers, and I got a lower score:
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/172527

GPU: 2815

But I also noticed heavy throttling, I am not sure how heavy the throttling was with pass before but not as bad as this time apparently.

Update 2:

TBoneSan you mentioned you max at 79C, I dropped my clock +265 +565 +37.5mV to get a max of 80C on TimeSpy, I definitely need to work on my cooling!

Of course the results dropped too:
Link: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/172659
GPU:2772

 

My 970M died due to some shenanigans of WIndows 10 thanks.. And it's not funny... I can tell you this, AS5 is JUNK! I can have @Mr. Fox , @Papusan , @TBoneSan and @Phoenix all agree on this.. It's not bad, just totally obsolete.. Get IC Diamond and you'll see a 5-10C drop easily..

 

I have to agree ic diamond ftw. I would not be able to have such high clocks without it.

Edit. Some people in here think the 960m is within 20 percent of 965m.. How do you figure i scored 2200 on gpu.

 

AS5 and MX4 isn't Thermal paste!! More like peanut butter
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...t-testers-needed.789322/page-75#post-10304418
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...t-testers-needed.789322/page-75#post-10304392
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...t-testers-needed.789322/page-74#post-10304334
And http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...x-980-overheating.789202/page-5#post-10218939

 

@anassa

I'm surprised your score dropped. But if you're throttling, there's your answer. Look into getting some OSD's set up.
My temps are 69 degrees (not 79) using gelid which is pretty decent. I'd go with that or Diamond ultra short of CLU. If you're really keen to push CLU metal is the stuff.

 

Then my temps and OCing can't be too bad using peanut butter! I just remembered AS5 from like 6ish years ago when I was building PC's for friends and playing with my first laptops, its been a few years so I am out of the loop with the latest and greatest!

On idle it gets down to 32C too! I will definitely look into some good pads/ Thermal paste in the following month and see what I get.

Woops my bad, read your temps wrong.

I will post up when I get some good thermal paste . . . . but that will be in when I am back in the U.S. so gotta wait a month still. Don't worry I will give you some more competition with that TimeSpy score !

 

@anassa just give IC Diamond a try! You win't be dissapointed! A drop of at least 5-10°C out of the box is nothing to ignore! And changing TIM is fairly easy when warmed up a bit under warm water.

 

i just checked the highest 960m score and i got 57 percent faster performance and the top score...still cant figure out why people think the 965m is in the same range as 960m 860m

 

Link or it didn't happen. You've been caught with your pants down already.

 

pulled my pants up here:

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/72984/spy/19917

 

I don't know why people are so surprised... The disparity between the 960m and 965m is rather large. The 960m has 640 cores and the 965m has 1024 cores.

 

lol i laughed...

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/56323/spy/72984#

8.9 percent better overall. 9.4 percent better gpu score

looks like 4720hq's are dominating 965m scores, wonder why there is such a big gap between my score and the next top dog. 9 percent is like one voltage level up and 120mhz more overclock

 

Or rather ask what's wrong with Hq processors vs low end socket Mq.
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/72984/spy/59163#

 

Not really like you can go by the physics scores right now anyway, totally FUBAR.

 

With same Oc on graphics would the Mq make the difference. At least if you go for the top 1. I know processor power doesn't count much in Time Spy because the new bench is more like Fire Strike. Normally should higher clocked processor in same i7 family crush the lower clocked cpu.

 

can someone run timespy with 970m 135+ core 300+ mem and post results

curious and it helps people out knowing what the 970m can do under normal overclocking circumstances

why? people dont normally overvolt and have unlocked vbioses they simply dont want to take the risk

now the fun part will it top 2195 gpu or not vote below

 

Can you please knock it off with the 965m bragging? Seriously, it got old a long time ago. Based purely on CUDA count and clock speed of the cores and RAM, I'm sure you're more than capable of estimating which will win yourself and nobody needs to vote on anything.

 

yea ok i guess it is old...not like i started talking about it 2 weeks ago the odd time