Unigine Valley Benchmark Scores Thread + SUPERPOSITION ***Over 1000 Submissions!***

[Techicolors]

17 minutes ago, Droidbot said:

what the fuck? I have 1070 SC and I got this:

 

 

not sure what's going on here or how you're 300 points ahead.. have you manually OC'd your card?

(4670k isn't at 4.6, instead 4.0 atm, should maybe turn that back up)

yea it's overclocked. plus it has an AIO cooler on it, so helps stabilize the overclock a little bit 

[Droidbot]

Just now, Technicolors said:

yea it's overclocked. plus it has an AIO cooler on it, so helps stabilize the overclock a little bit 

Ah, makes sense. What cooler/bracket? 

Next upgrade may be a 1080 to really push pixels lmao. Also updating gave me 21 more points, try that

[Techicolors]

3 minutes ago, Droidbot said:

Ah, makes sense. What cooler/bracket? 

Next upgrade may be a 1080 to really push pixels lmao. Also updating gave me 21 more points, try that

evga 1070 hybrid

[ultim8m]

MSI Gaming X 1070 

 

Afterburner setup

+60% core voltage

126 power limit

+140mhz core clock

+400mhz Memory clock

[DildorTheDecent]

13 hours ago, Remixt said:

My card is actually EVGA 1080Ti, but I flashed the Asus Strix Bios on there. Not sure if that matters to you.

 

Doesn't matter. As long as you're going fast that's all. 

[Catalonia]

EDIT:

 

Removing the post. Didn't follow the rules when benchmarking.

 

 

[Masada02]

9 hours ago, Simon771 said:

Well this benchmark is interesting ... I had to put +250MHz on core, to get max frequency of my GTX 1070 and even then it wasn't 2101 like it should be.

But when I opened my game with +250MHz on core, my GU instantly crashed. I know that my GPU is only stable on +237 on core, so not sure why it does work on +250 in Superposition.

And if you ask me, we should run high preset for 1080p, because as you can see, we get higher FPS from 4K bench.

Running 1080p high preset I get around 11k score, and for extreme I can't even get 4000k score.

 

Just my opinion on this kinda bugged benchmark

Your GPU is probably being taxed harder than before on the Valley benchmark. This one actually maintains 100% usage throughout the entire test where Valley did not.

 

I agree the High preset would probably work better now (especially for people with lower end setups), but down the line when everything is much more powerful it's going to end up like Valley: ie super easy to run and now a CPU bench. If we start now with the most difficult settings the benchmark and results stay relevant for longer.

 

That's also why I think the 4K preset is useless. It's easier than the 1080p Extreme and really serves no purpose. If we follow the presets that are available (which is a lot less complicated to do), the 1080p Extreme and 8K Optimized are the best 2 options. At least the 8K one is harder to run than 1080p Extreme.

[Simon771]

6 minutes ago, Masada02 said:

Your GPU is probably being taxed harder than before on the Valley benchmark. This one actually maintains 100% usage throughout the entire test where Valley did not.

 

I agree the High preset would probably work better now (especially for people with lower end setups), but down the line when everything is much more powerful it's going to end up like Valley: ie super easy to run and now a CPU bench. If we start now with the most difficult settings the benchmark and results stay relevant for longer.

 

That's also why I think the 4K preset is useless. It's easier than the 1080p Extreme and really serves no purpose. If we follow the presets that are available (which is a lot less complicated to do), the 1080p Extreme and 8K Optimized are the best 2 options. At least the 8K one is harder to run than 1080p Extreme.

Well when you say it like this it makes more sense. It would be better for now, but after 1-2-3 years, GPUs will dominate 1080p high preset from superposition and no1 will even use it

[done12many2]

8 minutes ago, Masada02 said:

I agree the High preset would probably work better now (especially for people with lower end setups), but down the line when everything is much more powerful it's going to end up like Valley: ie super easy to run and now a CPU bench. If we start now with the most difficult settings the benchmark and results stay relevant for longer.

 

Agreed. Are you going to change the spreadsheet to reflect? 

[Masada02]

3 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

Agreed. Are you going to change the spreadsheet to reflect? 

I can't decide whether I should remove the 4K preset tab or just leave it in for people that would like to submit scores for it. 

 

The two that will stay are the 1080p Extreme and 8K Optimized as they are the 2 hardest preset options. There's always the ability to run custom settings, but I think that's more trouble than it's worth when extreme and 8K are very difficult to run.

 

I'd like to hear y'alls opinion on this though.

[done12many2]

16 minutes ago, Masada02 said:

I can't decide whether I should remove the 4K preset tab or just leave it in for people that would like to submit scores for it. 

 

The two that will stay are the 1080p Extreme and 8K Optimized as they are the 2 hardest preset options. There's always the ability to run custom settings, but I think that's more trouble than it's worth when extreme and 8K are very difficult to run.

 

I'd like to hear y'alls opinion on this though.

 

It's not that the 4K Optimized is too easy, it's that there's something screwy with the 1080p Extreme.  Min, Ave, and Max FPS for the 1080 Extreme aren't even remotely close to what anyone would expect even out of the toughest of GPU demands.  4K optimized and 8k framrates make sense.

 

I personally think 1080 High and 4k or 8k.  

[McHox]

 4790k @4.5ghz

[DildorTheDecent]

I hardly have the VRAM for 4 or 8k  

[Masada02]

15 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

It's not that the 4K Optimized is too easy, it's that there's something screwy with the 1080p Extreme.  Min, Ave, and Max FPS for the 1080 Extreme aren't even remotely close to what anyone would expect even out of the toughest of GPU demands.  4K optimized and 8k framrates make sense.

 

I personally think 1080 High and 4k or 8k.  

I wouldn't expect it to be realistic compared to current gaming loads. Their "Extreme" shaders seem to be the most taxing, and I assume that's what turns on their crazy ray-tracing and lighting tech. Manually enabling those shaders on 4K kills framerates too. Watch the poly counts during the benchmark too, there's so many. 

 

I think I prefer the hugely taxing nature of the benchmark. It is a benchmark you know  

[PCGuy_5960]

CPU:Intel Core i7 5820K (stock)

GPU:Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming (OC Mode)

[LeStringMan]

Lul FX-8300 at 4.1ghz and MSI Armor RX 470, which seemed to stay in the 1280 core clock range for most of the bench.

[xAcid9]

"Stock".

 

[Simon771]

7 hours ago, ultim8m said:

MSI Gaming X 1070 

 

Afterburner setup

+60% core voltage

126 power limit

+140mhz core clock

+400mhz Memory clock

You also need to provide screenshot of your GPU-Z, like others did in this thread

[Cheddle]

my second card is now under water

[VagabondWraith]

[VagabondWraith]

Any reason why OpenCL and PhysX is unchecked in GPU-Z?

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

Any reason why OpenCL and PhysX is unchecked in GPU-Z?

Reinstall drivers and/or GPU-Z?

[VagabondWraith]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

Reinstall drivers and/or GPU-Z?

I could try that. I just installed the creators update so that might have something to do with it.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, VagabondWraith said:

I could try that. I just installed the creators update so that might have something to do with it.

Reinstall GPU-Z and see if the issue is fixed, if not, I assume that this has to do with the Creator's Update.

[VagabondWraith]

@PCGuy_5960 reinstalled the driver. Works now.

 

Bit higher score. Was able to get 2063MHz core with no voltage added.