72 replies to this topic

[mitch_de]

http://unigine.com/products/valley/

I have not tested already but for sure interesting, like new Heaven (4.0) Benchmark.


To ALL: Please submit at LEAST once the PRESET BASIC result! (AMD GPUS if problems, preset BASIC without AA).
Otherwise your results cant be compared to others - and if someone wants to compare he has to run same settings. Takes time & not all users (tft restricted) can use 1600+ resolutions!
You are free to submit also other , custom setup results if you posted BASIC preset.
AMD (hackintosh users with non official AMD 6xxx/7xxx) may disable AA*2 to avoid artifacts, as in heaven 4.0.

Results:

AMD  Radeon HD 7870 (no AA!) : 81fps windowed

GTX 580, BASIC(no AA!) : 80,3 fps fullscreen

AMD 6870 12D68, BASIC(no AA!) : 78,7 fps, 1920x1080 (no AA) = 48,7 fps

AMD Sapphire Radeon HD 7970 (no AA!) : 77,8 fps fullscreen (windowed mode gave minimal less fps)

AMD Radeon 6870 BASIC : 73,1 fps (no AA!)

AMD Radeon 6850 BASIC : 62,4 fps (no AA!)

Gigabyte GTX 650 Ti, BASIC: 55 fps

EVGA GTX 660 2GB, BASIC ; 43,2 fps,

Asus GTX275, BASIC: 28,5 fps

Nvidia 9600 GT, BASIC : 17 fps
Nvidia GT 430, BASIC : 15,2 fps

 Bildschirmfoto 2013-02-15 um 23.07.19.jpg   81.66K   79 downloads

EDIT: Some GPUs testet running Windows (test german HW magazine) - preset EXTREME HD

 Bildschirmfoto 2013-02-19 um 01.09.47.jpg   142.27K   105 downloads

[robertx]

my results,

 valley.png   135.43K   51 downloads

[gils83]

[Wayang-NT]

1280x720 / 1920x1080 no AA Medium Windowed .... AMD 6870 12D68

[Gringo Vermelho]

EVGA GTX 660 2GB, 304.00.05f02 driver on 10.8.2

Basic Preset - 10.8.2
 Valley Basic GTX 660.png   54.5K   6 downloads

Ultra, 1280x1024 full screen, 2xAA
 Valley Ultra GTX 660.png   55.86K   6 downloads

This doesn't make much sense, the Ultra result should be slower...?!

I'm probably CPU bottlenecked.

Basic Preset OpenGL - Windows 7
 Valley_Windows_Basic_GTX_660.png   54.61K   2 downloads
Max FPS seems locked to my refresh rate even though vsync is disabled.

Ultra, 1280x1024 full screen, 2xAA, OpenGL - Windows 7
 Valley_Windows_Ultra_GTX_660.png   46.34K   1 downloads

lol, OS X scores higher than Windows with the same settings.
GPU temps read the same on both OS - it slowly climbs to 82 degrees celsius and stays there.

[mitch_de]

I dont think your cpu is the bottleneck. If cpu load is < 50% (mine is max 35% on slower C2D).

You tested second (Quality Ultra) in fullscreen (same res). Try windowed. Sometimes windowed vs fullscreen gives different fps even same res!
Also, you have very  much VRAM. Quality setting does (normaly): Polygon count, Textures and Shaders.
If it does mostly / only changing texture res, then only VRAM usage is much more - if you have enough VRAM than no fps difference like it would use more poligones or more usage of shaders.

[gils83]

[Regi Yassin]

Gigabyte GTX 650 Ti, 10.8.2 w/ official driver from nvidia
full specs, see signature

Attached Files

•  Screen Shot 2013-02-17 at 02.13.55.png   793.32K   63 downloads
•  Screen Shot 2013-02-17 at 02.18.33.png   867.89K   55 downloads

[gils83]

GT 610 1024

[Cok]

Asus GTX275

Attached Files

•  Untitled2.png   62.94K   0 downloads

[bbeepp]

Here are mine. Windows 7 scores a little better better. (Radeon 6850)

Attached Files

•  ungineValleyBasic.png   63.78K   1 downloads
•  uniValleyWin.png   48.87K   2 downloads

[skinmunster]

Ok, just another ATI 6870 (XFX Dual Fan), but running only on  x8 PCIe 2.0 slot.Basic, with disabled AA:Cheers!
 Valley.jpg   75.83K   0 downloads

Ok, additional values with the oclBandwidthTest-Tool (Thanks, mitch!)

Running on...

ATI Radeon Barts XT Prototype

Quick Mode

Host to Device Bandwidth, 1 Device(s), Paged memory, direct access

   Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)

   33554432 2618.5

Device to Host Bandwidth, 1 Device(s), Paged memory, direct access

   Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)

   33554432 2940.6

Device to Device Bandwidth, 1 Device(s)

   Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)

   33554432 105993.3

[oclBandwidthTest] test results...

PASSED

Attached Files

•  Valley.tiff   152.61K   0 downloads

Edited by skinmunster, 19 February 2013 - 05:17 PM.
converted to jpeg and added your image to post

[Gringo Vermelho]

mitch_de, on 16 February 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

I dont think your cpu is the bottleneck. If cpu load is < 50% (mine is max 35% on slower C2D).

Really? I don't know how to see CPU load while running the benchmark on OS X. I'll try on Windows.

I disagree, it must be a CPU bottleneck...otherwise how could a GTX 650 Ti possibly beat my score by ~500 points?!

[mitch_de]

Small cpu speed diffs (same cpu type but diff in Ghz) should not have an effect on that bench.
For sure C2D vs i7 will give an significant (>10%) fps diff - at least on very fast gpus.

The other with GTX 650 TI (is slower than GTX 660 - normaly, only GTX 660 TI is faster than GTX 660) has i7 cpu 2600k - GHz unknown.

Perhaps some differences in CPU <> PCIe <> GPU bandwidth?

You could compare your OCLbandwidth test (testes also device to device = VRAM bandwidth)
(found yours )

Running on...
GeForce GTX 660
Quick Mode
Host to Device Bandwidth, 1 Device(s), Paged memory, direct access
Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)
33554432 4227.2
Device to Host Bandwidth, 1 Device(s), Paged memory, direct access
Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)
33554432 5542.3
Device to Device Bandwidth, 1 Device(s)
Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)
33554432 81757.6
[oclBandwidthTest] test results...

But i think there is nothing big diff to the GTX 650 TI. Your device<>host values (PCIe) and VRAM speed (81 Gb/s) look good.
In practice max. possible (measured) is about 11 GB/sec for DEV<>HOST (If chipset and GPU type can handle PCIe 3.0).  
But that values (DEV<>HOST) should have no effect for gaming speed (other to VRAM speed!) is its at least above 1 GB/sec - DEV<>HOST speed is  more an bottleneck for gpu computing.

Also AGPM diff (gpu load power management settings) may give differences.

Also you both could compare result with higher "pressure" to the gpu task (less cpu dependence) by setting up AA*8 and higher quality .
Then GPU has much more work - CPU same work = less cpu diff in result.
Dont know if both could handle the other fixed presets (higher res also).

Attached Files

•  oclBandwidthTest.zip   37.46K   4 downloads

[eep357]

dual monitors running as extended desktop seems to make more difference here then usual. will post results in a few

[Rampage Dev]

My main system at 720P

 Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 1.03.50 AM.png   61.59K   6 downloads

My main system on Extreme HD at 720P

 Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 1.11.47 AM.png   46.6K   6 downloads

[BALDY_MAN]

Main system.
Second jpeg full screen

Attached Files

•  File1-Unigine_Valley_Benchmark_1.0_20130219_1223.jpg   50.4K   44 downloads
•  File1-Unigine_Valley_Benchmark_1.0_20130219_1321.jpg   48.17K   39 downloads

[mitch_de]

To ALL: Please submit at LEAST once the PRESET BASIC result! (AMD GPUS if problems, preset BASIC without AA).
Otherwise your results cant be compared to others - and if someone wants to compare he has to run same settings. Takes time & not all users (tft restricted) can use 1600+ resolutions!
You are free to submit also other , custom setup results if you posted BASIC preset.

[eep357]

Basic with AA off. But fullscreen does give about a 100 more points than windowed. Also always at same spot where the boulders are and starting to rain it stutters for half a second dropping min FPS from 30 which is at first startup down to 8 FPS. Tried re-downloading, same thing
 Screen Shot 2013-02-27 at 6.22.24 PM.png   463.09K   36 downloads
Oh, second GPU not a factor here, exact same results either way, only boosts in openCL

[mitch_de]

Yep, fullscreen vs windowed mode can (with same other settings) make sometimes different fps speeds. Depends on GPu and drivers.
Your system, with AMD 7970 gets some really low minimal fps ( around 8 fps ) / massive framedrops compared to other AMD (6xxx) and  GTX 5/6xx gpus with around 30 fps.
Max fps seems to be more equal on the fastest gpus here. Even my old 9600 GT(running on C2D cpu)  with 30 max FPS (BASIC) has 9 fps MIN - so max/min = 3/1. Yours has 120/8 = 15/1. Others here mostly 3/1 .. 10/1.
Perhaps OS X driver in case of new AMD 7xxx isnt already perfect for that bench - which squeezes out every card with high load.