bad Benchmark score HELP!

Discussion in '2015+ Alienware 13 / 15 / 17' started by FaTT, Nov 21, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. FaTT

    FaTT Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    24
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    41
    hey don I believe you might be right about the bottle neck, attached are the SS from watchdogs 2, ultra everything, and at 1440p this is the only game I have seen this on so far, I'm only using like 1/2 the vram so I'm guessing that maybe the other titles are giving a false reading? or something that doesn't allow it to use the power of the card? I'm completely stumped, what should I do? return it and go for a 1070 ti instead?
     

    Attached Files:

    • wd1.png
      wd1.png
      File size:
      954.6 KB
      Views:
      479
    • wd2.png
      wd2.png
      File size:
      1.7 MB
      Views:
      530
    Vasudev likes this.
  2. gschneider

    gschneider Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    248
    Messages:
    568
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Using an external monitor really does help. Also at 1080p your 1080Ti will get bottlednecked buy your CPU.

    The higher the load on the GPU the less FPS it outputs, which in turn means the CPU can keep up easier.

    I game at 3440x1440p on my ultrawide.
     
  3. FaTT

    FaTT Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    24
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    41
    okay guys so I got a external 1080P tv, and the benchs are better but still below expectations of a 1080

    heres the first from user benchmark

    INFO: Current software signature: [3a59cc774253802f5096b53dc3842ede]
    INFO: Checking for updates on UserBenchmark.com
    INFO: Version check passed
    INFO: Benchmark engine running
    INFO: Checking OS support
    INFO: Checking CPU power status
    INFO: Starting CPU tests
    INFO: Launching CPU benchmark suite
    INFO: Running 1 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 1Core Int total throughput: 98.3
    INFO: 1Core Float total throughput: 104.9
    INFO: 1Core Mixed total throughput: 102.4
    INFO: Running 2 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 2Core Int total throughput: 191.3
    INFO: 2Core Float total throughput: 200.9
    INFO: 2Core Mixed total throughput: 192.7
    INFO: Running 4 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 4Core Int total throughput: 338.4
    INFO: 4Core Float total throughput: 363.9
    INFO: 4Core Mixed total throughput: 348.7
    INFO: Running 8 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 8Core Int total throughput: 484.5
    INFO: 8Core Float total throughput: 542.3
    INFO: 8Core Mixed total throughput: 490.4
    INFO: Running 64 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 64Core Int total throughput: 482.1
    INFO: 64Core Float total throughput: 547.1
    INFO: 64Core Mixed total throughput: 512.9
    INFO: Exiting CPU benchmark suite
    INFO: Completed CPU benchmarks
    INFO: Starting RAM tests
    INFO: Launching RAM benchmark suite
    INFO: Checking RAM configuration
    INFO: Running 1 core RAM benchmark ...
    INFO: 1Core Read total throughput: 15.5
    INFO: 1Core Write total throughput: 25.3
    INFO: 1Core Mixed total throughput: 20.9
    INFO: Running 2 core RAM benchmark ...
    INFO: 2Core Read total throughput: 20.1
    INFO: 2Core Write total throughput: 26.6
    INFO: 2Core Mixed total throughput: 22
    INFO: Running 16 core RAM benchmark ...
    INFO: 16Core Read total throughput: 26.3
    INFO: 16Core Write total throughput: 25.8
    INFO: 16Core Mixed total throughput: 20.9
    INFO: Running system latency tests ...
    INFO: 1KB memory latency: 1.45 ns
    INFO: 2KB memory latency: 1.39 ns
    INFO: 4KB memory latency: 1.34 ns
    INFO: 8KB memory latency: 1.39 ns
    INFO: 16KB memory latency: 1.35 ns
    INFO: 32KB memory latency: 1.4 ns
    INFO: 64KB memory latency: 2.63 ns
    INFO: 128KB memory latency: 3.93 ns
    INFO: 256KB memory latency: 3.76 ns
    INFO: 512KB memory latency: 9.51 ns
    INFO: 1MB memory latency: 13.06 ns
    INFO: 2MB memory latency: 14.72 ns
    INFO: 4MB memory latency: 20.82 ns
    INFO: 8MB memory latency: 47.67 ns
    INFO: 16MB memory latency: 62.11 ns
    INFO: 32MB memory latency: 68.07 ns
    INFO: 64MB memory latency: 72.1 ns
    INFO: 128MB memory latency: 72.94 ns
    INFO: 256MB memory latency: 76.35 ns
    INFO: Exiting RAM benchmark suite
    INFO: Completed RAM benchmarks
    INFO: Gathering drive info
    INFO: Starting drive benchmark on D:\\
    INFO: Running sequentialRead test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialWrite test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4kRead test ...
    INFO: Slow device detected, reducing IO load
    INFO: Waiting for 1 pending IOs
    INFO: Waiting for 0 pending IOs
    INFO: Running 4kWrite test ...
    INFO: Slow device detected, reducing IO load
    INFO: Waiting for 1 pending IOs
    INFO: Waiting for 0 pending IOs
    INFO: Running 4kMixed test ...
    INFO: Slow device detected, reducing IO load
    INFO: Waiting for 2 pending IOs
    INFO: Waiting for 1 pending IOs
    INFO: Waiting for 0 pending IOs
    INFO: Completed drive benchmark on D:\\
    INFO: Starting drive benchmark on E:\\
    INFO: Running sequentialRead test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialWrite test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4kRead test ...
    INFO: Running 4kWrite test ...
    INFO: Fast 4K write detected
    INFO: Running 4kMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrRead test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrWrite test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrMixed test ...
    INFO: Completed drive benchmark on E:\\
    INFO: Starting drive benchmark on C:\\
    INFO: Running sequentialRead test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialWrite test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4kRead test ...
    INFO: Running 4kWrite test ...
    INFO: Fast 4K write detected
    INFO: Running 4kMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrRead test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrWrite test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrMixed test ...
    INFO: Completed drive benchmark on C:\\
    INFO: Checking GPU configuration
    INFO: Found 2 graphics card(s) and 1 active display(s)
    INFO: Starting GPU Benchmarks
    INFO: Launching NGPU detection
    INFO: NGPU Name: GeForce GTX 1080
    INFO: NGPU Driver: 388.31
    INFO: NGPU Bios: 86.04.17.00.11
    INFO: NGPU Total RAM MB: 8192
    INFO: NGPU Max C MHz: 1949
    INFO: NGPU Max M MHz: 2502
    INFO: Launching AGPU detection
    INFO: Completed GPUStats successfully
    INFO: Bench NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 @(NS-19E720A12) on display(1) = main
    INFO: GPU score on Plane = 386.7 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Cube = 379.7 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Stones = 394.8 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Swarm = 240.8 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Galaxy = 385.8 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Sphere = 217.1 FPS
    WARN: skipping Intel(R) HD Graphics 530 - unable to locate attached display
    INFO: Completed GPU benchmarks
    INFO: Completed all benchmarks in 145 s
    INFO: Shutting down benchmark engine
    INFO: Results sent sucessfully
    INFO: Your report is available online at:
    INFO: http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5949547

    So I ran Gpu tweak II and used the game booster

    INFO: Current software signature: [3a59cc774253802f5096b53dc3842ede]
    INFO: Checking for updates on UserBenchmark.com
    INFO: Version check passed
    INFO: Benchmark engine running
    INFO: Checking OS support
    INFO: Checking CPU power status
    INFO: Starting CPU tests
    INFO: Launching CPU benchmark suite
    INFO: Running 1 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 1Core Int total throughput: 104.1
    INFO: 1Core Float total throughput: 101.8
    INFO: 1Core Mixed total throughput: 96.7
    INFO: Running 2 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 2Core Int total throughput: 181.4
    INFO: 2Core Float total throughput: 205
    INFO: 2Core Mixed total throughput: 199.8
    INFO: Running 4 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 4Core Int total throughput: 363.6
    INFO: 4Core Float total throughput: 387.7
    INFO: 4Core Mixed total throughput: 373.5
    INFO: Running 8 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 8Core Int total throughput: 485.6
    INFO: 8Core Float total throughput: 540.7
    INFO: 8Core Mixed total throughput: 521.7
    INFO: Running 64 core CPU benchmark ...
    INFO: 64Core Int total throughput: 484.4
    INFO: 64Core Float total throughput: 546.9
    INFO: 64Core Mixed total throughput: 522
    INFO: Exiting CPU benchmark suite
    INFO: Completed CPU benchmarks
    INFO: Starting RAM tests
    INFO: Launching RAM benchmark suite
    INFO: Checking RAM configuration
    INFO: Running 1 core RAM benchmark ...
    INFO: 1Core Read total throughput: 15
    INFO: 1Core Write total throughput: 25.4
    INFO: 1Core Mixed total throughput: 21.6
    INFO: Running 2 core RAM benchmark ...
    INFO: 2Core Read total throughput: 20.7
    INFO: 2Core Write total throughput: 26.6
    INFO: 2Core Mixed total throughput: 23.1
    INFO: Running 16 core RAM benchmark ...
    INFO: 16Core Read total throughput: 26.6
    INFO: 16Core Write total throughput: 27.7
    INFO: 16Core Mixed total throughput: 21.1
    INFO: Running system latency tests ...
    INFO: 1KB memory latency: 1.34 ns
    INFO: 2KB memory latency: 1.36 ns
    INFO: 4KB memory latency: 1.36 ns
    INFO: 8KB memory latency: 1.34 ns
    INFO: 16KB memory latency: 1.36 ns
    INFO: 32KB memory latency: 1.37 ns
    INFO: 64KB memory latency: 2.51 ns
    INFO: 128KB memory latency: 3.1 ns
    INFO: 256KB memory latency: 3.52 ns
    INFO: 512KB memory latency: 9.09 ns
    INFO: 1MB memory latency: 11.93 ns
    INFO: 2MB memory latency: 13.57 ns
    INFO: 4MB memory latency: 16.57 ns
    INFO: 8MB memory latency: 40.25 ns
    INFO: 16MB memory latency: 61.13 ns
    INFO: 32MB memory latency: 67.65 ns
    INFO: 64MB memory latency: 70.81 ns
    INFO: 128MB memory latency: 72.45 ns
    INFO: 256MB memory latency: 76.64 ns
    INFO: Exiting RAM benchmark suite
    INFO: Completed RAM benchmarks
    INFO: Gathering drive info
    INFO: Starting drive benchmark on D:\\
    INFO: Running sequentialRead test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialWrite test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4kRead test ...
    INFO: Slow device detected, reducing IO load
    INFO: Waiting for 1 pending IOs
    INFO: Waiting for 0 pending IOs
    INFO: Running 4kWrite test ...
    INFO: Slow device detected, reducing IO load
    INFO: Waiting for 1 pending IOs
    INFO: Waiting for 0 pending IOs
    INFO: Running 4kMixed test ...
    INFO: Slow device detected, reducing IO load
    INFO: Waiting for 2 pending IOs
    INFO: Waiting for 1 pending IOs
    INFO: Waiting for 0 pending IOs
    INFO: Completed drive benchmark on D:\\
    INFO: Starting drive benchmark on E:\\
    INFO: Running sequentialRead test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialWrite test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4kRead test ...
    INFO: Running 4kWrite test ...
    INFO: Fast 4K write detected
    INFO: Running 4kMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrRead test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrWrite test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrMixed test ...
    INFO: Completed drive benchmark on E:\\
    INFO: Starting drive benchmark on C:\\
    INFO: Running sequentialRead test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialWrite test ...
    INFO: Running sequentialMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4kRead test ...
    INFO: Running 4kWrite test ...
    INFO: Fast 4K write detected
    INFO: Running 4kMixed test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrRead test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrWrite test ...
    INFO: Running 4k64thrMixed test ...
    INFO: Completed drive benchmark on C:\\
    INFO: Checking GPU configuration
    INFO: Found 2 graphics card(s) and 1 active display(s)
    INFO: Starting GPU Benchmarks
    INFO: Launching NGPU detection
    INFO: NGPU Name: GeForce GTX 1080
    INFO: NGPU Driver: 388.31
    INFO: NGPU Bios: 86.04.17.00.11
    INFO: NGPU Total RAM MB: 8192
    INFO: NGPU Max C MHz: 1949
    INFO: NGPU Max M MHz: 2502
    INFO: Launching AGPU detection
    INFO: Completed GPUStats successfully
    INFO: Bench NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 @(NS-19E720A12) on display(1) = main
    INFO: GPU score on Plane = 403.7 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Cube = 378.6 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Stones = 400.5 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Swarm = 252 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Galaxy = 404.2 FPS
    INFO: GPU score on Sphere = 232.3 FPS
    WARN: skipping Intel(R) HD Graphics 530 - unable to locate attached display
    INFO: Completed GPU benchmarks
    INFO: Completed all benchmarks in 142 s
    INFO: Shutting down benchmark engine
    INFO: Results sent sucessfully
    INFO: Your report is available online at:
    INFO: http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5949588
    INFO: Opening report in default browser
    Completed

    now it says its running correctly, but when I run Heaven Benchmark it gives me a lower score then I had on my laptop monitor, now watch dogs 2 at 1080p ultra, is a little over 6gb of vram with 50-75% ish sometime jump to 90+% gpu useage, that gives me an average of 90 running fps but constantly changes between 80-120 with drops every once and again to 59 fps and all 4 of my processors range from 75%-98% useage but never hit 99% but 98 frequently now correct me if I am wrong but I believe that to be the start of the bottleneck, so I'm guessing the 6700hq is only capable of a little over 6gb vram before it starts bottlenecking? any thoughts? I have read that there are system with a 6700HQ and gtx 1070 and 1080 so I'm guessing the aga is the bottle neck?
     
  4. FaTT

    FaTT Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    24
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Well my 1080ti just showed up such a shame I have to send it back so I ordered a EVGA GeForce GTX 1070 FTW2 GAMING iCX, 08G-P4-6676-KR, 8GB GDDR5, RGB LED, 9 Thermal Sensors, Asynchronous Fan Control, Thermal Display LED System, Optimized Airflow Fin Design, Die Cast/Form Fitted Baseplate/Backplate hopefully it wont bottleneck
     
  5. gschneider

    gschneider Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    248
    Messages:
    568
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Thing with AGS is your always going to slightly less maximum framerate from whatever you have. Going to a 1070ti won't make any difference.

    You need to solve what you get currently. Also no one uses user bench to test things.

    Why don't you try PC mark, 3dmark, heaven use Aida64 as an OSD and use that to track your usage.

    I am Happy to bench my system against yours so you can see what differences appear. That might through up the issue.
    I'm off from work for a week from Monday.
    I can test my system with yours as a 1080ti vs your 1080ti we should have very little Differences
     
  6. FaTT

    FaTT Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    24
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    41
    well heres the thing, on another forum (people didn't reply for days so I looked else where ) I met a user who was experiencing the exact same thing, he told me that he got it from alienware and intel that anything over 1980 cuda cores the 6700HQ cant keep up and it creates a bottleneck, so I cant even go 1070ti (has over 2k cuda cores) I had to go 1070 8gb and because the 1080 I had was running at 1070 speeds ect I am expecting the same performance I get now just with a cheaper price tag I have heaven 4.0 and running it on a external gave me a lower score then on my laptop screen, the fact that my cpu cannot keep up theres no point in shooting for a 1080ti except resell value but I couldn't live with myself if I sold someone a system with a part that could only be used to about 75-80% of its capabilities so I did a ton of research this morning and decided that out of the cards that my cpu wont bottle neck I picked a EVGA GeForce GTX 1070 FTW2 GAMING iCX, 08G-P4-6676-KR, 8GB GDDR5, RGB LED, 9 Thermal Sensors, Asynchronous Fan Control, Thermal Display LED System, Optimized Airflow Fin Design, Die Cast/Form Fitted Baseplate/Backplate because first of all I got it for 429 with 1 day shipping (I paid 750 for the 1080ti) second I can overclock it to just about 1080 speeds, from the research I have done the 1070 and ti are actually underclocked because they were way too close to the benchmarks of a stock1080 when properly oc like 5%or less in fps so I originally bought the ti for longevity, now from all the research I have done I will not be able to run a 1080 but I will be able to reach just about 1080 speeds and have the same longevity of a stock 1080
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2017
  7. gschneider

    gschneider Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    248
    Messages:
    568
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    56
    That's fair.

    Just remember that higher FPS is held back by the CPU if you had a much higher resolution monitor the load on the gpu is higher thus slowing it down. Meaning less FPS so the CPU can keep up.
     
    Vasudev and FaTT like this.
  8. FaTT

    FaTT Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    24
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    41
    well from what I understand its the exact opposite the higher the res/framerate (and idc really about fps as long as it stays above 60 you don't notice too much of a difference our eyes can only pick up 30 something fps anyways) the more the bottleneck because its putting more of a load on the gpu then the cpu can handel
     
  9. pathfindercod

    pathfindercod Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    1,737
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    1,911
    Trophy Points:
    181
    What performance are you expecting? On average the Performance is roughly 10% less when using a graphics amp than what the gpu normally would bench at.
     
  10. FaTT

    FaTT Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    24
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    41
    exactly that 10% less maybe 15, a 1080 running at 1070 speeds is way below that, I finally got 3d mark and heres the SS from the bench totally bottlenecked
     

    Attached Files:

    • 3d1.png
      3d1.png
      File size:
      720.5 KB
      Views:
      471
    • 3d2.png
      3d2.png
      File size:
      358.2 KB
      Views:
      494
    • 3d3.png
      3d3.png
      File size:
      407.8 KB
      Views:
      486
    • 3d4.png
      3d4.png
      File size:
      432.3 KB
      Views:
      490
    • 3d5.png
      3d5.png
      File size:
      468.1 KB
      Views:
      472
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page