# CF OFFICIAL 3DMARK (2013) Leaderboard



## Okedokey

Sorry for taking so long guys!











Information required is outlined below.  Anything missing = invalid post and leaderboard will not be updated.

Please provide a screenshot of:


Two (2) instances of CPU-Z(Memory and CPU Tabs)
GPU-Z, 
ORB site with your score showing
An open copy of Notepad with the *date *and your *computerforum *username


In the post include:

Driver version
CPU/Clockspeed/GPU Model/Number of GPU Cores/GPU Core Clock/GPU Memory Clock


Download 3DMark (available February 4 2013)

RULES:

NO AMD vs nVidia bollocks
NO unsubstantiated claims without references/links
NO lame crap


----------



## turbobooster

are still coming to 3d mark 11 if i click on the link.


----------



## Okedokey

http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?p0=1440&iso=20130204T18&msg=3DMark launch


----------



## turbobooster

oke thanks.


----------



## Virssagòn

30 min to go


----------



## Gooberman

Downloading now


----------



## Virssagòn

? getting an error when I click "more" on the new 3dmark...


----------



## Gooberman

I just hit download 3dmark then go to 3DMark Download mirrors and select one


----------



## Virssagòn

Gooberman said:


> I just hit download 3dmark then go to 3DMark Download mirrors and select one



Jup, the server was overload for a moment, installed already. Testing later.


----------



## turbobooster

just came homo downloading no.
very long download server slo haha


----------



## Gooberman

Hope I did this right 





http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/7884/3dmark2013.png

Catalyst 13.2 beta
3570k/4.5GHz/7950/1792/1175/1600


----------



## Virssagòn

Beating you on cloud gate at stockspeed 
Hd7950 900/1375 (no boost)
i7 2600k @ 4.4ghz


----------



## Virssagòn

Goober, when I'm using Trixx, it's the VDDC I need to raise for overvolting right?
What VDDC do you use for getting 1175?


----------



## Gooberman

1175 i believe is what I use(yours could be better) I like how it's the same as the gpu clock. The only reasons you beats me with that is your ht! xD


----------



## Virssagòn

Gooberman said:


> 1175 i believe is what I use(yours could be better) I like how it's the same as the gpu clock. The only reasons you beats me with that is your ht! xD



I think so too 

Btw, my stock VDDC is 1069, so maybe I'll be able to do it with less voltage since I can get 1140 with that


----------



## Gooberman

Most likely, and don't worry i plan on upgrading again this year


----------



## Virssagòn

Gooberman said:


> Most likely, and don't worry i plan on upgrading again this year



To? You'll npt find much stronger as that overclocked hd7950, unless you're going with 2 cards. Anyway, the hd8970 will be pretty awesome too. It's just an hd7970 with everything 15-20% more in quantity.


----------



## Gooberman

Still deciding i'll probably sell my 7950 to my friend and get something nice for myself. Still haven't decided


----------



## turbobooster

so first score for me


----------



## Virssagòn

For the ones interested, I read some of the first reviews. And it seems the amd cards beat their nvidia equivalent by 5-15% in this bench, for dual gpu setups it's even a difference of 10-25% (even saw somewhere 33% lol..)


----------



## Gooberman

AMD power!


----------



## kdfresh09

all my results are saying "invalid" and are in orange instead of green.. i click on details and it says that my drivers arnt apporoved.  im running nvidia driver version 310.90.


----------



## Shane

Mine says "Result has problems" for some reason,But anyhow heres my results.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## Okedokey

So how are we doing this?  Adding up all three scores?


----------



## Virssagòn

bigfellla said:


> So how are we doing this?  Adding up all three scores?



Yeh, make a total of the 3 and also separated? No apart ATI/nvidia, that'd take too long lol.
If you don't have the time, just do total score.


----------



## FuryRosewood

i7 3820 @ 3.6ghz

GTX680 DCII TOP @ 1137/1502/1202

DDR3 1333 @ 667mhz

-I think that covers all the bases?


----------



## Okedokey

Can you guys with huge pics, go in and resize them to smaller pls.


----------



## Okedokey

Im getting screwy results hey.  They range all over the place.  Not sure what is going on.


----------



## Okedokey

Yep, this is undercooked.  Nothing close to consistent.  I suggest we wait a bit for the rankings.  My results go from super high to super low for no apparent reason, e.g. same system, no restart, nothing changed.

Bloody benchmarks...


----------



## FuryRosewood

Resizing that thing smaller would be a pain, when i do the bench again ill just do it with one monitor, just was midnight and kept mucking it up with layering of windows x.x


----------



## turbobooster

new score. max overclock my club3d 7870 xt jokercard. without voltage.






hope to see more 7870,s


----------



## spirit

Driver Version 13.1

Core i5 2500K @ 4327MHz (4.3GHz)

Sapphire Radeon HD 5870 @ Stock
850MHz Core Clock, 1200MHz Memory Clock
1600 Cores


----------



## turbobooster

spirit said:


> Driver Version 13.1
> 
> Core i5 2500K @ 4327MHz (4.3GHz)
> 
> Sapphire Radeon HD 5870 @ Stock
> 850MHz Core Clock, 1200MHz Memory Clock
> 1600 Cores



top for the old card, lol.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Driver Version 13.1
> 
> Core i5 2500K @ 4327MHz (4.3GHz)
> 
> Sapphire Radeon HD 5870 @ Stock
> 850MHz Core Clock, 1200MHz Memory Clock
> 1600 Cores



Install the latest 13.2 beta, it really smooths the gameplay in everything. You won't get much higher fps, the frame latency is just fixed in that version


----------



## spirit

I'm not a fan of beta drivers, I'll wait until it gets officially released I think before I install it. 13.1 is working fine for me anyway.


----------



## claptonman

bigfellla said:


> Im getting screwy results hey.  They range all over the place.  Not sure what is going on.



Yeah, a 670 with a 3570k is beating a 3820 with a 680, and by a wide margin. Unigine heaven usually gets stable results for me.


----------



## Virssagòn

claptonman said:


> Yeah, a 670 with a 3570k is beating a 3820 with a 680, and by a wide margin. Unigine heaven usually gets stable results for me.



Yea, but it seems only nvidia that got problems with it...
Also all scores from nvidia got this error: there is a problem with the result.


----------



## FuryRosewood

I think im going to wait a bit for them to settle things, as this feels like a beta as its freaking out about drivers that are released but too new for their program.


----------



## Okedokey

FuryRosewood said:


> I think im going to wait a bit for them to settle things, as this feels like a beta as its freaking out about drivers that are released but too new for their program.



Yes, agreed.  Continue to test lads, ill update the leaderboard once drivers have been officially released and updated 3DMark, as it stands, the comparison is pointless in my opinion.


----------



## CrazyMike

question:

Are you all using the free version of 3DMark?


----------



## FuryRosewood

Right now yes. May purchase with pay but not sure, kinda strapped for funds atm.


----------



## CrazyMike

FuryRosewood said:


> Right now yes. May purchase with pay but not sure, kinda strapped for funds atm.



My results page just looks completely different than the rest of you guys. Maybe i clicked the wrong 3DMark install... 3DMark11?


----------



## FuryRosewood

its just called 3D mark, available on steam.


----------



## CrazyMike

I think I am going to try it again lol... damn....

EDIT:

Not much different but a little better i guess.


----------



## spirit

CrazyMike said:


> question:
> 
> Are you all using the free version of 3DMark?



Yeah I use the free version.


----------



## turbobooster

new score


----------



## turbobooster

and again, not very much more but oke.


----------



## Virssagòn

pretty nice gpu score over there! 
I'll maybe make a new thread for unigine valley, new gpu bench and it's pretty nice.


----------



## turbobooster

good i will join


----------



## turbobooster

today i tested my system with a asus 7850

here is the fire score


----------



## turbobooster

so this is the max for my videocard with no voltage tweaking.
1200/1575
this is the score with cpu on 4.5ghz mayby i a few days see what more we can do.


----------



## Shane

Wheres the leaderboard?


----------



## spirit

Nevakonaza said:


> Wheres the leaderboard?



I think some people have found a few bugs with this release of 3DMark so Bigfella is holding off with the leaderboard until the bugs have been fixed.


----------



## Virssagòn

The new 3dmark is used in pretty much reviews and it seems they don't really have stability issue. So, maybe we can start now?
Heard unigine valley is also a nice bench, or catzilla.


----------



## Okedokey

Ill set it up soon.


----------



## turbobooster

sinds a few days i have a new prossesor and mobo.
so this is the score of my intel prossesor on 4.0
what a difference compared to the amd fx 8320 at 4.5


----------



## FuryRosewood

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/402082?

Not sure if this will work, just reran, may try again tomorrow, results seem better?


----------



## Okedokey

Nevakonaza said:


> Wheres the leaderboard?



Its up.


----------



## Virssagòn

Okedokey said:


> Its up.



I don't think that scoreboard is realistic. I beat Neva by a good amount of points in the 2 heaviest tests, when avg I'm loosing because the high scaled points from the simple test.
I think you should better scale them...


----------



## spirit

How is my 5870 beating a 680 and a 660 Ti? It's not even overclocked!


----------



## wolfeking

Could be as simple as Nvidia has not yet got their drivers in line. 

Would generally say look at CPU and RAM speeds, but you are likely at 1600 and 4.3 still, so the i7s should be kicking your arse at the bench.


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> Could be as simple as Nvidia has not yet got their drivers in line.
> 
> Would generally say look at CPU and RAM speeds, but you are likely at 1600 and 4.3 still, so the i7s should be kicking your arse at the bench.



Look what I said, and then watch the scoreboard.
I think it's better to list only firestrike.


----------



## spirit

wolfeking said:


> Could be as simple as Nvidia has not yet got their drivers in line.
> 
> Would generally say look at CPU and RAM speeds, but you are likely at 1600 and 4.3 still, so the i7s should be kicking your arse at the bench.



Yep I'm at 4.3GHz and 1648MHz and the other guys have faster processors and GPUs than me.

Weird.


----------



## wolfeking

I would be willing to bet it is the drivers then.


----------



## FuryRosewood

Something is kooky, I think their software is still a beta, im not blaming the drivers. I try to run 3D mark standard and it has some sort of hissy and fails to run.


----------



## turbobooster

today at tested a bit with my new msi gtx 660 ti power edition


----------



## Okedokey

SmileMan said:


> Look what I said, and then watch the scoreboard.
> I think it's better to list only firestrike.



I can do that if you want?

Happy to lads.  It is very weird, but remember, they're aimed at different hardware.  So yes, an average is useful, but FS is probably all thats interesting.

CHANGING THE RULES!
Instead of all the photos, we are going to trust each other.  Just post your number for Firestrike and have your hardware in the signature.

Don't bother putting up all the screenshots, its annoying and if we don't believe you, we will ask you for proof.  Agreed?


----------



## turbobooster

Okedokey said:


> I can do that if you want?
> 
> Happy to lads.  It is very weird, but remember, they're aimed at different hardware.  So yes, an average is useful, but FS is probably all thats interesting.
> 
> CHANGING THE RULES!
> Instead of all the photos, we are going to trust each other.  Just post your number for Firestrike and have your hardware in the signature.
> 
> Don't bother putting up all the screenshots, its annoying and if we don't believe you, we will ask you for proof.  Agreed?



agreed, but i just posted the score


----------



## Okedokey

Thats cool man.  I updated the scoreboard.


----------



## Okedokey

Shows the 8350 is bottled.


----------



## turbobooster

what do you mean, 8320 is bottled.
now i,m running at a 2600k and its lower in firestrike in combo with a msi 660ti power edition


----------



## spirit

turbobooster said:


> today at tested a bit with my new msi gtx 660 ti power edition


How many graphics card do you get through man? Could have sworn yesterday you had a 7870 and then something else before that.


----------



## turbobooster

haha i week ago i had a 7870 xt, after that 1, i had a evga 670, and now the msi power edition, and maybey next week a 7970


----------



## turbobooster

so here is the score with a gtx 670


----------



## Geoff

Can't wait to get my new rig so I can benchmark


----------



## Virssagòn

WRXGuy1 said:


> Can't wait to get my new rig so I can benchmark



You can already with your old 
I see you listed your new one already in your sign?


----------



## Geoff

SmileMan said:


> You can already with your old
> I see you listed your new one already in your sign?


No I can't actually, not even 3DMark2011, because my video card doesn't support DX11 

Yup


----------



## turbobooster

WRXGuy1 said:


> No I can't actually, not even 3DMark2011, because my video card doesn't support DX11
> 
> Yup



time for the upgrade than, lol.


----------



## Geoff

turbobooster said:


> time for the upgrade than, lol.


I can still run 3DMark06


----------



## Virssagòn

WRXGuy1 said:


> No I can't actually, not even 3DMark2011, because my video card doesn't support DX11
> 
> Yup



Aah lol yea. Didn't saw your gpu in your sig. Vantage is something you can run too? Also try valley (need to finally make a scoreboard though), it supports DX9 too, Idk or it's effective on the score or not.


----------



## voyagerfan99

I ran it, but don't understand what number you're looking for.


----------



## FuryRosewood

new graphics drivers came out for nvidia, not sure if it will solve some issues, but im willing to try




New Score, Drivers updated, set power management to performance and let her run, that seemed to solve the stumbleyness i was having, but i think i can get more out of the gpu if i overclock.


----------



## turbobooster

today i got my self a new pc, that means new prossesor and new videocard.
the cpu is a i5 3570k, and the gpu is a gainward gtx 670 phantom.
here,s the first score of my card in fire strike.

cpu at 4.2
gpu at 1056,boost 1135 stock is 1006

6360

graphics score 7254
physics score 7973
combined score 2856


----------



## Virssagòn

Here are my score with an oc on stock clocks, somehow my score is held back when I up my voltage?


----------



## turbobooster

SmileMan said:


> Here are my score with an oc on stock clocks, somehow my score is held back when I up my voltage?



same problem here with mine 670
for the rest very nice score.
i onley get 50 on the core more.


----------



## FuryRosewood

voltage increases latency, which is why i try to avoid voltage


----------



## Okedokey

FuryRosewood said:


> voltage increases latency, which is why i try to avoid voltage



What do you mean?


----------



## FuryRosewood

increasing voltage increases the peak voltage between signals, it takes longer for signals to settle, may not seem like much but i always 'felt' a difference when i ran a vcore increased machine vs one that didnt have voltage added. just slows things down.


----------



## Spesh

Forceware 314.07
Intel i7 2600k @ 4.8Ghz
GTX 680
2 Cores
1228Mhz / 3506Mhz memory


----------



## Virssagòn

Okey guys, THIS is weird...
Running 1065/1500, and I got more then my previous 1140/1500 score.
Or it's an unstable overclock, or 3dmark is just not really a stable bench itself.


----------



## Geoff

So is the score only the fire strike test?

I know I didn't follow the rules, but once I start overclocking I'll post the required stuff.


----------



## spirit

You got your new system!

Pictures!


----------



## Geoff

spirit said:


> You got your new system!
> 
> Pictures!



Yup!  

I only have photos from my phone at the moment, but it's still awesome!


----------



## spirit

Looking great!  Looks like you were halfway through the build there though.


----------



## Geoff

spirit said:


> Looking great!  Looks like you were halfway through the build there though.


I was actually all done, I'm just missing the video card which came in the next day


----------



## spirit

WRXGuy1 said:


> I was actually all done, I'm just missing the video card which came in the next day



Was wondering where your graphics card and box were.


----------



## CrazyMike

WRXGuy1 said:


> Yup!
> 
> I only have photos from my phone at the moment, but it's still awesome!



Pretty Nice Man! Why the 32GB of memory? I believe that is the Half-x isn't it? Why that case?


----------



## PCunicorn

Well, because the case is awesome . However, that is a whole lot of ram.


----------



## Gun

I'm a N00B. What do we actually download here, CPU-Z and GPU-Z or 3dmark?


----------



## CrazyMike

S3AnD3 said:


> I'm a N00B. What do we actually download here, CPU-Z and GPU-Z or 3dmark?



All.... need 2 cases of CPU-Z (showing your cpu and memory, so opened twice with one on the CPU tab and the other on the memory tab). 1 case of GPU-Z (showing your GPU specs), 3DMARK results page along with notepad with your forumn name.


----------



## spirit

CrazyMike said:


> Pretty Nice Man! Why the 32GB of memory? I believe that is the Half-x isn't it? Why that case?



Geoff buys stuff just because he can. That's why he's got a Canon 5D MkIII too. 

I also believe he does a lot of editing, so 32GB is useful.


----------



## xxmorpheus

do multi gpu setups count? gtx 690 quad sli here


----------



## Okedokey

xxmorpheus said:


> do multi gpu setups count? gtx 690 quad sli here



Yeah that counts.  I reckon you'd be hitting the top of that CPU though?  Do the cards saturate PCIe 2.0?


----------



## FuryRosewood

also the new nvidia drivers seem to improve boost speeds on the 6xx cards, that improved my score 500 points, will overclock and try again soon.


----------



## Geoff

CrazyMike said:


> Pretty Nice Man! Why the 32GB of memory? I believe that is the Half-x isn't it? Why that case?


I do a lot of photo editing, and I figured this way I'd be set for a while   And yes, it is the HAF X.  I loved the whole setup of the case, makes for easy installation and looks great!



PCunicorn said:


> Well, because the case is awesome . However, that is a whole lot of ram.


Yup 



spirit said:


> Geoff buys stuff just because he can. That's why he's got a Canon 5D MkIII too.
> 
> I also believe he does a lot of editing, so 32GB is useful.


Hehe, that I do!


----------



## Spesh

xxmorpheus said:


> do multi gpu setups count? gtx 690 quad sli here



Just out of interest, what's the rationale behind having a pair of 690's? A single 690 is already limited enough by it's lack of video memory.

I don't see how a second card would provide any performance increase at all, apart from in synthetic benchmarks. Would it not have been more sensible to got for two or three 680 4Gb cards?


----------



## turbobooster

today a new card, the Asus 7950 dc2/v2

i post the hole score.


----------



## spirit

Getting jealous of all you guys with your nice new cards. My 5870 is still hanging on in there I guess.


----------



## turbobooster

spirit said:


> Getting jealous of all you guys with your nice new cards. My 5870 is still hanging on in there I guess.



still the 5870 is a good card.


----------



## spirit

turbobooster said:


> still the 5870 is a good card.



It isn't bad at all. For me, it's more than good enough.


----------



## turbobooster

oke, yes if you are not a gamer, or a gamer how whants the best quality then its enough.
with some games its not normal what card you need to play at the best quality.


----------



## turbobooster

oke new score fire strike.


----------



## turbobooster

the last i,m happy with it.


----------



## turbobooster

the last score, this it is.
cant go higher before driver crash.


----------



## spirit

turbobooster said:


> oke, yes if you are not a gamer, or a gamer how whants the best quality then its enough.
> with some games its not normal what card you need to play at the best quality.



It's still perfectly fine for gaming. I can max Just Cause 2, NFS Hot Pursuit and Dirt 3 out at 1080p with it and achieve good FPS.

I would probably upgrade if I had the money and the need to upgrade, and I'd probably get an NVIDIA card because CUDA would help with my video and photo editing.


----------



## turbobooster

spirit said:


> It's still perfectly fine for gaming. I can max Just Cause 2, NFS Hot Pursuit and Dirt 3 out at 1080p with it and achieve good FPS.
> 
> I would probably upgrade if I had the money and the need to upgrade, and I'd probably get an NVIDIA card because CUDA would help with my video and photo editing.



yes cuda helps a lot for editing.
and yes if you can max out the games that you play, why upgrade.
the newer games are more heavyer but almost every card will have problems with crysis 3 or farcry 3 max out.


----------



## Geoff

turbobooster said:


> the last score, this it is.
> cant go higher before driver crash.


That's awesome, I can't wait to start overclocking mine.


----------



## turbobooster

WRXGuy1 said:


> That's awesome, I can't wait to start overclocking mine.



yep it was a suprise for me to.

asus 7950 dc2top rocks, hahaha


----------



## WeatherMan




----------



## G80FTW

Just ran this and got 6675 but forgot to turn off speedstep so Im going to run it again and overclock my 680 this time, and for the first time 

It appears to me that the test seems to run better on ATi cards? I dont remember the 7950 outperforming the 680 in any games, even the 7970 struggles to keep up with the 680 in some games. But, maybe its just able to make use of the ATi cards better than games do. The 7950 does have alot more raw power than the 680 afterall...

But anyway, will post my results shortly.


----------



## Gooberman

my 7950 had a 375 MHz overclock on the core and 400 MHz overclock on the memory of course it would beat a stock 680 xD


----------



## G80FTW

Gooberman said:


> my 7950 had a 375 MHz overclock on the core and 400 MHz overclock on the memory of course it would beat a stock 680 xD



I OCed my 680, ontop of the stock OC, and still didnt come close:


----------



## Gooberman

Well that's weird, maybe cpu? lol

EDIT i looked at the scores and i was getting more fps so this is weird.


----------



## FuryRosewood

i got about 6900 with my 680 with the newest bios and boost clocks going, so i dunno. It may be cpu but it may not be.


----------



## turbobooster

firestrike score for a 6990 is 6425
graphic score is 7409


----------



## turbobooster

today a bought a new videocard, the gigabyte gtx 770 wf 3 oc.
the firestrike score is 7022 combined with a i7 2600 at stock, also the card is stock.
the card runs at 1137 with a boost to 1189 for the core and 1753 for the memory.

the graphics score is 8094


----------



## turbobooster

overclock to 1202 on the core. boost to 1254
mem stock 1703/overclock to 1803


----------



## Geoff




----------



## claptonman

Sorry for the large picture.


----------



## turbobooster




----------



## Geoff

Anyone else notice that my score is a lot higher than claptonman in the two other tests, but lower in Fire Strike?


----------



## turbobooster

not onley that youre phisics score and combined score is also higher then claptoman in fire strike.


----------



## claptonman

WRXGuy1 said:


> Anyone else notice that my score is a lot higher than claptonman in the two other tests, but lower in Fire Strike?



I'm guessing Firestrike does not rely on the CPU at all.


----------



## Gooberman

Yeah, the first two claptonman was probably cpu bottlenecked


----------



## turbobooster

i7 2600k 4.6
gtx 680






you can read a revieuw of my card here.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_geforce_gtx_680_twinfrozr_iii_oc_review,1.html

the card described in this revieuw is the card i realy have.


----------



## turbobooster

yes i know the voltage is high, was just for benchmarking not yet tested with lower voltage, for any stabilitie


----------



## turbobooster

the make a topic for the benchmark 2013 and the don't update, then DONT make the topic.


----------



## WeatherMan

Here's me


----------



## Okedokey

Im expecting 10K on Firestrike when I get round to testing, anyone hit that yet?



turbobooster said:


> the make a topic for the benchmark 2013 and the don't update, then DONT make the topic.



Wow, get over it.  Your score is no where near the top anyway, and all you do in this thread and others is bitch at me.  lol.

As I said, when I started this thread I had every intention of updating it, however very quickly (at least at the beginning ) it became evident that the benchmark was bollocks, with clearly better hardware getting worse scores than others... not worth the effort.  Now that its matured, then yeah, im more interested...

But really, how hard is it to have a running score?  

Ill update it when I get a chance.  Moaner.


*EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO BE IN THE LEADERBOARD  - PM ME YOUR SCORE, CPU and GPU and the link to your results.*

OR

*conversely Turbo, if you want to be in charge of keeping the leaderboard updated, you do that, send me the text to upload and I will.  Satisfied?*

so turbo if you could please go through the 4 pages of posts, extract each top score, validate and list in order , ill update the leaderboard on a weekly basis.  Up to you.


----------



## turbobooster

Okedokey said:


> Im expecting 10K on Firestrike when I get round to testing, anyone hit that yet?
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, get over it.  Your score is no where near the top anyway, and all you do in this thread and others is bitch at me.  lol.
> 
> As I said, when I started this thread I had every intention of updating it, however very quickly (at least at the beginning ) it became evident that the benchmark was bollocks, with clearly better hardware getting worse scores than others... not worth the effort.  Now that its matured, then yeah, im more interested...
> 
> But really, how hard is it to have a running score?
> 
> Ill update it when I get a chance.  Moaner.
> 
> 
> *EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO BE IN THE LEADERBOARD  - PM ME YOUR SCORE, CPU and GPU and the link to your results.*
> 
> OR
> 
> *conversely Turbo, if you want to be in charge of keeping the leaderboard updated, you do that, send me the text to upload and I will.  Satisfied?*
> 
> so turbo if you could please go through the 4 pages of posts, extract each top score, validate and list in order , ill update the leaderboard on a weekly basis.  Up to you.



not bitching, telling the truth, a time a go, you told my that you would by updating, so.
and not at the top, check it then.


----------



## Okedokey

thats fine...

Only recieved one PM from members wanting to the scores updated...  So clearly there isn't a lot of interest in the leaderboard.

If im wrong, let me know and ill update it.

However it wont be for a few days.


----------



## Okedokey

Ok, my sore if anyone cares:

IS: 26915

CG: 28715

FS: 16964


----------



## Okedokey

turbobooster said:


> not bitching, telling the truth, a time a go, you told my that you would by updating, so.
> and not at the top, check it then.



Turbo, can you update the leader board please?


----------



## turbobooster

yes if you can send me the scores, if you have them.
ore else I have to check all the site.


----------



## Geoff

Okedokey said:


> Turbo, can you update the leader board please?


You're the OP...


----------



## Okedokey

WRXGuy1 said:


> You're the OP...



Yes, and as I have said, over and over and over again, I think the benchmark is dumb.  Its faulty, and not representative of anything close to reality.  Clearly higher end hardware, gear that gets better FPS in every other bench, or game, is getting inconsistent or lower scores in 3DMark.  OCAU don't use it coz it sucks and no one takes it seriously, so yeah, as the OP, I started this thread, now it turns out its shit... so yeah, happy for those who care about it to manage, it. Refreshing the first post means absolutely nothing.

Btw, thanks for your captain obvious comment...


----------



## Okedokey

turbobooster said:


> yes if you can send me the scores, if you have them.
> ore else I have to check all the site.



Turbo, I don't have them, otherwise id update them.  It involves you simply going back over the pages and posting a leader board.


----------



## Geoff

Okedokey said:


> Yes, and as I have said, over and over and over again, I think the benchmark is dumb.  Its faulty, and not representative of anything close to reality.  Clearly higher end hardware, gear that gets better FPS in every other bench, or game, is getting inconsistent or lower scores in 3DMark.  OCAU don't use it coz it sucks and no one takes it seriously, so yeah, as the OP, I started this thread, now it turns out its shit... so yeah, happy for those who care about it to manage, it. Refreshing the first post means absolutely nothing.
> 
> Btw, thanks for your captain obvious comment...


Soooo... Then why did you create this thread?


----------



## Okedokey

WRXGuy1 said:


> Soooo... Then why did you create this thread?



Ok, ill speak slowly...

I started the thread, because on the day the 3dmark bench came out I wanted to raise the profile of the CF forum, and get some traffic.  I had no idea that it was a terribly rubbish bench.  Subsequently (if you read the threads rather than comment on something you have no idea about), I and other came to the realisation that the bench made no informative view on anything...

Soooo, I stopped wasting my time.

If other want to.. that is good, go for it.

I have also received various PMs from member agreeing....


----------



## Geoff

Okedokey said:


> Ok, ill speak slowly...
> 
> I started the thread, because on the day the 3dmark bench came out I wanted to raise the profile of the CF forum, and get some traffic.  I had no idea that it was a terribly rubbish bench.  Subsequently (if you read the threads rather than comment on something you have no idea about), I and other came to the realisation that the bench made no informative view on anything...
> 
> Soooo, I stopped wasting my time.
> 
> If other want to.. that is good, go for it.
> 
> I have also received various PMs from member agreeing....


Congrats :good:


----------



## Okedokey

WRXGuy1 said:


> Congrats :good:



Stop trolling mate.  As you said, im the OP.  I asked others to contribute, they didn't.  Pull your head in.


----------



## G80FTW

Okedokey said:


> Stop trolling mate.  As you said, im the OP.  I asked others to contribute, they didn't.  Pull your head in.



Well, at least you are not discriminate about who you are a dick to.  Your probably the first person I have seen ever on this forum to call Geoff a troll haha.


----------



## Geoff

Okedokey said:


> Stop trolling mate.  As you said, im the OP.  I asked others to contribute, they didn't.  Pull your head in.


It goes both ways.  You didn't get much initial response so you stopped updating, so why would people post their results if you hadn't updated it in weeks to months?

You started it.  You should never have started it if you didn't want to follow it through, and just because you find it useless doesn't mean you should abandon it.



G80FTW said:


> Well, at least you are not discriminate about who you are a dick to.  Your probably the first person I have seen ever on this forum to call Geoff a troll haha.


Haha yeah, because I'm obviously a troll


----------



## Okedokey

I asked people 2 weeks ago to provide me with their results and I would update it.  Only one person was complaining, and even then, only one person provided the results.  So yeah, clearly no one cares...


----------



## G80FTW

Okedokey said:


> I asked people 2 weeks ago to provide me with their results and I would update it.  Only one person was complaining, and even then, only one person provided the results.  So yeah, clearly no one cares...



Probably because they provided their results in the thread like everyone else and didnt bother to come back and read that the OP was complaining about updating it (which takes literally 5 mins or less to do). I saw you have 7 people on the chart and at least 11 people posting numbers and of those 11 they posted multiple scores so clearly they cared enough to run the benchmark more than once and post their scores more than once and even complain about it not being updated which looking back multiple people have complained about it. I would have complained myself, however I dont like to complain. 

So you dont want to update the thread you started and wanted to hand it off to someone else, thats fine. Well, not exactly fine but whatever. But to then say you stopped updating it because no one cares its obvious your the only one who doesnt care otherwise this stupid argument would have never started.

And you said you would update the leader board when a new version came out:
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/2242/futuremark-3dmark-2013-v1-10/

So if you nor turbo wants to update the thread I would gladly suggest this one be deleted and I will start a new one using the new version.


----------



## WeatherMan

When this issue gets resolved could someone stick me on the leaderboard. I am also updating my graphics card soon so will have a new score :good:


----------



## turbobooster

G80FTW said:


> Probably because they provided their results in the thread like everyone else and didnt bother to come back and read that the OP was complaining about updating it (which takes literally 5 mins or less to do). I saw you have 7 people on the chart and at least 11 people posting numbers and of those 11 they posted multiple scores so clearly they cared enough to run the benchmark more than once and post their scores more than once and even complain about it not being updated which looking back multiple people have complained about it. I would have complained myself, however I dont like to complain.
> 
> So you dont want to update the thread you started and wanted to hand it off to someone else, thats fine. Well, not exactly fine but whatever. But to then say you stopped updating it because no one cares its obvious your the only one who doesnt care otherwise this stupid argument would have never started.
> 
> And you said you would update the leader board when a new version came out:
> http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/2242/futuremark-3dmark-2013-v1-10/
> 
> So if you nor turbo wants to update the thread I would gladly suggest this one be deleted and I will start a new one using the new version.



hope you will start a new tread.


----------



## Virssagòn

For the ones interested, Kaveri + R7 250 GDDR3 scores a nice 2500 points.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2670499


----------

