The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.
 Next page →

    GTX 980M Benchmarks thread

    Discussion in 'Gaming (Software and Graphics Cards)' started by naldor, Oct 12, 2014.

  1. naldor

    naldor Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    162
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Hello everyone,

    Since people are obtaining the highly wanted GTX 980M, a new fresh thread for the performance doesn't seem so bad. So I made one(instead of spamming the official release page).
    Lets obtain here all kind of benchmark results/ frames on new games.

    I will get started with the request for the OC GTX 980M(MSI 8GB/GT72 dominator pro).

    +135Mhz on core
    +50 Mhz on memory(I didnt feel like messing with the memory yet).
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7-4710HQ,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-1781
    10340 Graphic score!!!
    GPU temperatures maxed out at 73. Most of the time it barely hit the 69.

    I can test FPS with OC later today on request, also other benchmarks. Writing this from the train atm :).
     
  2. sa7ina

    sa7ina Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    543
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Amazing score for a single mobile GPU!
    [drooling icon]
     
  3. TBoneSan

    TBoneSan Laptop Fiend

    Reputations:
    4,460
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    5,798
    Trophy Points:
    681
    Looking good :) Can you also do a 3dmark 11 benchmark.
    Thanks :thumbsup:
     
  4. naldor

    naldor Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    162
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Sure, I can this evening :), working some things out during my 2,5 houre train trip hahaha.

    edit: also gonna check for memory OC but dont think it can go high, and will barely increase frames.
     
    TBoneSan likes this.
  5. tio

    tio Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    57
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Cloudfire, Cakefish and massixline like this.
  6. Cloudfire

    Cloudfire (Really odd person)

    Reputations:
    7,279
    Messages:
    10,304
    Likes Received:
    2,878
    Trophy Points:
    581
    1553MHz on the VRAM is extremely good. It means we can easily get memory bandwidth you find on desktop GPUs.

    I propose you rename the thread to "GTX 980M Benchmark thread" BTW. I thought it was just another Maxwell discussion thread :)
     
    Cakefish likes this.
  7. Robbo99999

    Robbo99999 Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    4,346
    Messages:
    6,824
    Likes Received:
    6,112
    Trophy Points:
    681
    Excellent, 120% performance increase compared to my GPU - holy moly! I guess +135Mhz on the core is the max allowable overclock - hopefully svl7 or somebody will make a modified vBIOS to remove this limit. Also, it'll be interesting to see what kind of memory overclock you can get & also how that will effect your 3DMark score.
     
  8. naldor

    naldor Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    162
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    41
    I Will try to bump up the memory clock. I Will post 3D Mark with max core oc and with a high memory oc. Also a firestrike core and memory oc maxed out all includimg temperaturea.

    Alsof managers yo extract vbios :) keep you guys up to date. Stil traveling so respondimg from phone, apologize for this poorly writtrn reply.

    Will post all these scenarios output tonight.
     
    Robbo99999 likes this.
  9. Meaker@Sager

    Meaker@Sager Company Representative

    Reputations:
    9,431
    Messages:
    58,194
    Likes Received:
    17,901
    Trophy Points:
    931
  10. J.Dre

    J.Dre Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    3,700
    Messages:
    8,323
    Likes Received:
    3,820
    Trophy Points:
    431
    That will be fun...
     
  11. deadsmiley

    deadsmiley Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    1,147
    Messages:
    1,626
    Likes Received:
    702
    Trophy Points:
    131
    I will be sure to run that on my 880M with 8BG VRAM. Ha!
     
  12. naldor

    naldor Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    162
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    41
  13. Robbo99999

    Robbo99999 Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    4,346
    Messages:
    6,824
    Likes Received:
    6,112
    Trophy Points:
    681
    Not all cards are going to overclock the same, it's luck of the draw, so the guy you were talking about might have gotten lucky with his card. Anyway, all you can do is find your maximum memory overclock and leave it at that, what is your final highest stable memory overclock?
     
  14. IKAS V

    IKAS V Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,073
    Messages:
    6,171
    Likes Received:
    535
    Trophy Points:
    281
    WOW this card is just insane!
    Would love to see the performance between the 4GB VS 8GB GTX 980M.
    Is there any advantage to having 8GB's of VRAM at 1080p, I know more is useful when you increase screen res or use more than 1 monitor but I would love to see some hard numbers.
     
  15. naldor

    naldor Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    162
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Not sure right now, I am workign on my upcomming midterms, since the guy used like 1553mhz I jumped right off to 1300 and 1400 which runned stable for me, went up to from smaller stabs up to 1414mhz. 1414mhz runs stable. If you go higher(Yolo jump to 1500mhz(im unpatient hahaha)). Frames start dropping randomly. Also GPU use drops aswell randomly. I will experiment more tomorrow/this evening. And hopefully get some higher clocks(1450 mhz plssss). When I went to 1500mhz I got the lowest firestrike score ever hahahaha.

    edit: I foudn my score on higher clocks http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4349303

    It is lower then my 1414mhz overclock
     
  16. naldor

    naldor Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    162
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    41
    8gb is only usefull for bad PS4 ports right now, and more monitors barely increase the use in vram(so does resolution). But 8gb vram is really future proof :) considerign these badly optimized games and engines.
     
  17. Robbo99999

    Robbo99999 Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    4,346
    Messages:
    6,824
    Likes Received:
    6,112
    Trophy Points:
    681
    Yeah, that's good, looks like you've pretty much arrived at your max memory overclock. GDDR5 is error correcting, so the more you overclock it, it's possible that it ends up producing worse performance because the number of errors that require correcting starts to impact performance negatively. You'll want to stop where you get your highest score, and I think you're probably almost at that point with your 1414Mhz - as you say maybe 1450Mhz might be stable & better, but not by a big amount given that 1500Mhz saw a performance drop.
     
  18. Robbo99999

    Robbo99999 Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    4,346
    Messages:
    6,824
    Likes Received:
    6,112
    Trophy Points:
    681
    8GB VRAM is not going to improve performance on games that don't require 8GB VRAM, VRAM only really matters when you run out - at which point you get severe stuttering and big fps drops, you just need to make sure you have enough. 8GB is better than 4GB for some current games (as well as future games), but it wouldn't stop me buying a 4GB version if everything else about that laptop was better or better value.
     
  19. J.Dre

    J.Dre Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    3,700
    Messages:
    8,323
    Likes Received:
    3,820
    Trophy Points:
    431
    And as HTWingNut said earlier, you will benefit a little more from that extra VRAM with high frequency RAM. So, having a ton of VRAM is pointless if your RAM is just going to bottleneck it. That's partially why these new X97/X99 boards support up to 2800MHz memory because GPU's are starting to have more and more VRAM. Having anymore than 4GB's at this point is unnecessary, but I would get something with at least 4GB's (or more) VRAM if you plan to keep it longer.

    P.S. I'm pretty sure HT said something along these lines. Might have interpreted it wrong, but yeah... Don't quote me on this.
     
  20. Robbo99999

    Robbo99999 Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    4,346
    Messages:
    6,824
    Likes Received:
    6,112
    Trophy Points:
    681
    I haven't heard anything with regards to system RAM speed and VRAM amount on the GPU, is that what you're saying? I can't think there would be a correlation between the two, sounds a bit suspect to me! ;-)

    (The only context of system RAM speed having an effect on gaming performance where GPU VRAM amount is concerned is if you don't have enough VRAM, at which point textures and information has to be swapped from system RAM to VRAM - this is where fast system RAM might help in this relationship, but probably wouldn't help a great deal. Just important to have enough VRAM really.)
     
    octiceps likes this.
  21. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,147
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,194
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Yep, GDDR5 is up to 8 GHz now. Typical DDR3 and DDR4 speeds are, what, a quarter of that? LOL
     
  22. J.Dre

    J.Dre Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    3,700
    Messages:
    8,323
    Likes Received:
    3,820
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Yeah, as I said in the post, I don't know the exact details he was referring to. That's just what I took away from the discussion. It's buried in some thread with 100+ pages, lol.

    So, again, don't quote me on any of that.
     
  23. bluefox94

    bluefox94 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    1
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Hey Naldor, what do you use to get 135mhz on core OC result. I mean do you use a program or do you do it with vbios? I am a noob at OC but I am eager to learn and start with small steps. Thanks!
     
  24. maxheap

    maxheap caparison horus :)

    Reputations:
    1,244
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Fast GPUs at fast trains :)

     
  25. jaug1337

    jaug1337 de_dust2

    Reputations:
    2,135
    Messages:
    4,862
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Nice spotted

    on-topic. this GPU is sick!!! my god
     
  26. HTWingNut

    HTWingNut Potato

    Reputations:
    21,580
    Messages:
    35,370
    Likes Received:
    9,877
    Trophy Points:
    931
  27. maxheap

    maxheap caparison horus :)

    Reputations:
    1,244
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    131
  28. HTWingNut

    HTWingNut Potato

    Reputations:
    21,580
    Messages:
    35,370
    Likes Received:
    9,877
    Trophy Points:
    931
    It's kind of odd watching the combined test run fluidly.
     
    Cakefish likes this.
  29. maxheap

    maxheap caparison horus :)

    Reputations:
    1,244
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Is this a sager?? Do you have any reviews upcoming??

    EDIT: Just saw hardware info, when will you be reviewing it?? :)
     
  30. J.Dre

    J.Dre Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    3,700
    Messages:
    8,323
    Likes Received:
    3,820
    Trophy Points:
    431
  31. n=1

    n=1 YEAH SCIENCE!

    Reputations:
    2,544
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Got my Gigabyte 970s back, here's a stock Firestrike run just for comparison:

    [​IMG]

    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7-4930K,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. X79-DELUXE

    And here's one with +120/140 core and +400 vram; actual boost was 1506MHz and mem was 7800MHz: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3056349

    I used an older driver (344.11) while HT used the latest one (344.48). Also HT is running Win8 while I'm running Win7, so slight advantage to HT. Interestingly HT's graphics score is actually higher than mine LOL
     
    deadsmiley and massixline like this.
  32. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,147
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,194
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Hmmm scaling seems sub-optimal. Driver issues or CPU bottleneck? Your Gigabyte 970's at stock (1329/7000 amirite?) should do quite a bit better than 980M SLI, overclocked or otherwise.
     
  33. maxheap

    maxheap caparison horus :)

    Reputations:
    1,244
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    131
    You have an amazing desktop replacement and an amazing desktop?!
     
  34. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,147
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,194
    Trophy Points:
    431
    I believe he deprived himself for a decade and then went all-out to make up for time lost. :D
     
  35. n=1

    n=1 YEAH SCIENCE!

    Reputations:
    2,544
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Driver. There have been reports of up to 30% gains in benchmarks when using 344.48 compared to 344.11 or 344.16.

    I'm 99.9% certain a 4930K @ 4.5GHz is not going to bottleneck 970 SLI lol.

    Laptop was amazing, now it's just alright. Desktop I'd call it "better than average" tbh, definitely does not deserve the "amazing" description.

    More or less. See this is what happens when you get a real job and realize you can do whatever you want with your own money. :D
     
    Ningyo likes this.
  36. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,147
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,194
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Oh, didn't see that your 4930K was overclocked. I thought it was at stock.

    Also keep in mind that Fire Strike favors Windows 8 greatly.

    P.S. is 4930K a bad overclocker or you're just unlucky? Both you and vulcan have 4.5 GHz @ ~1.4V which is very middling. That's like Haswell-E numbers LOL.
     
  37. n=1

    n=1 YEAH SCIENCE!

    Reputations:
    2,544
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    Trophy Points:
    231
    That's what I've been trying to find out lately, just how much does Firestrike favor Win8, and whether it only manifests in graphics score, or physics score, or both. Maybe we should ask Mr. Fox, but IIRC it was not more than 10% overall score difference.

    As for the cards themselves, these were actually replacements I got after I RMA'd the old ones because of ridiculous coil whine. (no that's my rig nor is that my video, but my cards sounded exactly like that, now imagine having 2 of those in your rig :mad2::cry :) These ones still whine (UGH), but they're much better, and I actually can't hear them while gaming unless it's a dead silent quiet scene. And at least I found somewhere between 80-90 frames they stop whining, and below 80 FPS they're completely silent. So a workaround for now is to cap the FPS at 80, or push settings so high average frames drop below 80.
     
    Mr. Fox likes this.
  38. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,147
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,194
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Yeah, 10% sounds about right, about the same difference between W7 and W8 in BF4 IIRC.
     
    Mr. Fox likes this.
  39. maxheap

    maxheap caparison horus :)

    Reputations:
    1,244
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Dude your better than average desktop beats 99% of the scores submitted to FireStrike :D Still kudos for amazing systems! You should change your name to n=4 (number of gpus!)

     
  40. n=1

    n=1 YEAH SCIENCE!

    Reputations:
    2,544
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    Trophy Points:
    231
    @octiceps: My 4930K is a pile of bovine excrement, probably in the bottom 10%. Needs about 1.37-1.4V fore 4.5GHz (using offset voltage for overclocking), and IMC appears to have degraded to the point it now flat out refuses to to run 2133 ram. Well it posts and I can boot into Windows and do light tasks just fine, but try gaming and the system locks up and crashes in 10 minutes. Thought about using my overclocking warranty (PTPP) and sending to Intel for replacement, but decided I'm going to let it run as it is now until end of year and see how it holds up until then. Bottom line is I'm going to keep adding volts to keep a 4.5GHz OC, even if it means going up to 1.5V. If it dies it dies period.

    On a brighter note, these dom plats can manage 1866 @ 8-8-9-20 with tREF maxed out (32.767 us), so at least the ram is solid.

    @maxheap: Yeah but only because I'm using the latest technology. Just wait until the 980/970 shortage dies down and you'll see it slowly crawl back. Also I refuse to call my desktop "amazing" because of the above reasons.
     
  41. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,147
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,194
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Yeah the silicon lottery is a female dog.
     
    moviemarketing likes this.
  42. n=1

    n=1 YEAH SCIENCE!

    Reputations:
    2,544
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Ok so my Firestrike score is definitely not what it should be due to borked drivers. I present you this: Result

    One result belongs to cards that had comparable ASICs (66% vs 64%), care to guess which is which?



    So it turns out this has to do with the driver not being to compensate for overly large differences in ASIC quality leading to different VDDCs. One of my cards has an ASIC of 74.1%, and only needs 1.156V to run a stable boost of 1366MHz under load. The other card has an ASIC of 66.1%, and needs 1.206V to do 1366MHz boost. The problem is the driver either can't, or doesn't know how to compensate for this VDDC difference, so scaling gets completely messed up. In fact, to get the cards to match boost and volts, I actually have to make it so the lower VDDC card runs 20MHz behind the higher VDDC card when OCing. More details in this thread so I won't go into it, but I will add my own results from testing.

    With SLI disabled and +120 core and +300 mem on the lower VDDC card, boost increased to 1524MHz, while voltage also jumped to 1.225V when running Firestrike. Now keep in mind this lower VDDC card is 20MHz behind the higher VID card. At +140 core/+300 mem, boost further increased to 1545MHz and voltage stayed put at 1.225V.

    So what this means is that if everything were to have worked properly, SLI should give a boost of 1524MHz in Firestirke. But it doesn't, and instead with SLI on boost only goes up to 1506MHz, and the reason for that is because the lower VDDC card is downvolting to 1.200V from 1.225V, so it simply does not have enough juice to eek out another boost bin or two. Even with the exact same OC, the cards that had comparable ASICs and voltages worked much better. Clearly the "mismatched set" is losing about 40MHz of core clock in Firestrike (1506 vs 1545) even though on paper everything looks to be the same, and this would certainly explain the discrepancy in score.

    On the bright side, +120/+140 core and +300 mem (=1506 boost 7600 mem) is completely game stable without even touching volts, and cards stay at 1.200V/1.206V. So basically stock 980 level performance without needing to add any juice for this new set of Gigabyte 970s. I guess I really shouldn't complain.

    Sadly 344.48 does NOT seem to fix this, so still need to wait for more mature drivers. nVidia, get your **** together and unbork these drivers plz kthx.
     
    moviemarketing and Ningyo like this.
  43. HTWingNut

    HTWingNut Potato

    Reputations:
    21,580
    Messages:
    35,370
    Likes Received:
    9,877
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Actually, no. +135 on core and 5900MHz vRAM. 6000MHz causes some texture flashing.
     
  44. maxheap

    maxheap caparison horus :)

    Reputations:
    1,244
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    131
    I am still coughing :D 20k FireStrike on a laptop... tech is evolving fast indeed :)

     
  45. n=1

    n=1 YEAH SCIENCE!

    Reputations:
    2,544
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    Trophy Points:
    231
    In light of what I found about ASIC quality and VDDC, could you check what the ASIC and VDDC for each 980M is?
     
  46. Mr. Fox

    Mr. Fox BGA Filth-Hating Elitist

    Reputations:
    37,235
    Messages:
    39,340
    Likes Received:
    70,660
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Fire Strike favors Windows 8 on the graphics score a little bit, but it is lower on the physics score. This is the case with Windows 8 for almost everything relating to physics performance. Windows 8 totally sucks at physics performance and unless they fix it, Windows 10 is looking like it will have very similar problems. It is that way for both machines that I am testing Windows 10 on. I don't know what Micro$haft is doing to screw up CPU performance after Windows 7, but I wish they would fix their mess.

    Anyhow, for some reason Fire Strike all but ignores the physics results when calculating the overall score. You can have a really horrible CPU and low physics score and still get what looks like an impressive result with Fire Strike if you have great GPU(s). I guess Fire Strike was only intended to be a GPU benchmark and the physics result is just there to look at all by itself. 3DMark 11 better reflects overall system performance because a low physics score will put the hurt on the overall score in a big way. For DX10, 3DMark Vantage is the best test of overall system beast-factor.

    I would like to see more 3DMark 11 scores from some of these new Ultrabooks that have 980M paired up with crippled low-TDP HQ i7 CPUs. So far I can only find one example of a good 3DMark 11 score for 980M SLI, and while the Graphics score is nice, the Physics score is not very good. That's with 4800MQ, so the HQ results will probably be even worse. It will be interesting to see what my 3DMark 11 score looks like if or when I upgrade my M18xR2 to 980M SLI.

    Comparison of 3DMark 11 Results
     
    TBoneSan and Ningyo like this.
  47. n=1

    n=1 YEAH SCIENCE!

    Reputations:
    2,544
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Had a go with DSR and it is pretty awesome. With a 1506 core 7600 mem OC on my desktop Gigabyte 970s, at a DSR of 2.25x (effectively 2880x1640 downsampled to 1080p), I could consistently get 65-85 FPS in Watch Dogs on Ultra with SMAA. (this is vanilla Watch Dogs with no mods or optimizations outside of Ubisoft's own patches)

    Gameplay felt smooth with minor stuttering only during extremely action packed scenes (think 3 cars exploding at the same time with lots of people running and multiple enemies shooting at me). vRAM usage peaked at 3.55GB as well, so these desktop 970 cards appear to be powerful enough to push 60 frames @ 3K with a moderate OC.

    Going by HT's results, 980M SLI OC could probably match desktop Gigabyte 970 G1 at stock. As expected these cards are overkill for 60 FPS at 1080p, and requires you to really crank up the AA (or play a poorly optimized title :p) if you don't want a CPU bottleneck.

    I'd say 980M SLI OC is likely enough to pump a steady 60 FPS at 1440p for most titles, and for less demanding DX10 games you could probably even run them at 3K.

    EDIT: Played Far Cry 3 for 40 minutes at 2.25x DSR on max settings with 2x MSAA. 75-110 FPS with an average of about 90 FPS. Experimenting with AA showed that each 2x increase in AA resulted in a loss of 15-20 average FPS. 4x MSAA was still smooth, but 8x MSAA definitely induced stuttering. Still pretty impressive considering this is basically 3K downsampled to 1080p.
     
    Tonrac and Ningyo like this.
  48. jaug1337

    jaug1337 de_dust2

    Reputations:
    2,135
    Messages:
    4,862
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    Trophy Points:
    231
    W8 sucks for benchmarking - period.

    Old news but still... never again W8, never again.
     
  49. Vitor711

    Vitor711 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    156
    Messages:
    654
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Copied from the main thread:

    Shadow of Mordor

    imgur: the simple image sharer

    Max Temp of 75 degrees which is a good 10 degrees less than my 880m. Decent. Avergae of 55FPS in the benchmark with everything maxed. Ignore the minimum FPS reading - that's where the FPS starts off at the initial load of the level, the actual bench dropped to 42 during a bunch of explosions.

    Max Payne 3

    imgur: the simple image sharer

    Never went above 61 degrees, remained at a constant 60 at those settings.

    Ryse

    Only the forest level has weird stuttering. Every other level sticks between 50-60FPS. This is at 1080 with all settings maxed. I could barely maintain a solid 30 with the 880m. That's a huge leap.

    Crysis 3

    imgur: the simple image sharer

    See above settings for a rock solid 60FPS at 1080. If I turn shading/post processing or object to very high, things drop to the low 50s/high 40s. AA is at SMAA x2.

    Crysis

    http://i.imgur.com/of3LgvQ.jpg?1

    Everything at Very High and 8x AA at 1920x1080. Average of 60FPS. Drops down to 50 once you're in the more taxing areas and stays in the low 70s when things are less busy. That 8x AA is just ludicrous though and super taxing, not practical and no difference over 4x so not worth it outside of benchmarking! And yes, my afterburner is now showing stock clocks as 540Mhz which is wrong.
     
  50. kroez

    kroez Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    6
    This is my benchmark of Shadow of mordor https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dla7ZsuUm8 why i have almost above 5 FPS more?
    Does it means every piece have a different performance? Nearly 9 percent is a bit too much imo.

    I am asking because i had to send my lappy for RMA and they gave my money back so i need to buy a new one.
     
 Next page →