It is currently Fri Dec 19, 2014 11:21 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:10 am
Posts: 385
Is Furmark a good load generator? AFAIK both AMD and nV drivers detect Furmark and throttle the card.
And SPCR is using it...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 7:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 166
Location: London
Other than the standard throttling that would happen when reaching the TDP im not aware of application detection being built into graphics drivers, would you have a link to such info please ?

_________________
Case: P182, Fans: 4xNF-P12@800Rpm, MoBo: GA-EX58-UD4, CPU: i920, GPU: GV-N670OC-2GD, PSU: Seasonic 760 platinum, HDD: HD203WI, SSD: VTX4-25SAT3-128


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 7:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:10 am
Posts: 385
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4008/nvid ... gtx-580/17

Quote:
As for FurMark, due to NVIDIA’s power throttling we’ve had to get a bit creative. FurMark is throttled to the point where the GTX 580 registers 360W, thanks to a roughly 40% reduction in performance under FurMark.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 166
Location: London
Yea looking into it some more it does seem they did throttle the GPU based on what is running and the power draw...

http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2857

Im still looking into if this is the same with newer GPU's, maybe someone can enlighten us :!:

EDIT: it would seem even newer card do the same, but it seems EVGA makes something similar to Furmark http://www.evga.com/ocscanner/ also couldn't you just rename the Furmark .exe to something else to avoid the driver from detecting it ?

Not that i would want to test that :lol: But it does raise the question that you initially raised about why is SPCR still using Furmark ? or maybe it doesn't matter for testing the thermal load or acoustics of a GPU's cooling solution.

_________________
Case: P182, Fans: 4xNF-P12@800Rpm, MoBo: GA-EX58-UD4, CPU: i920, GPU: GV-N670OC-2GD, PSU: Seasonic 760 platinum, HDD: HD203WI, SSD: VTX4-25SAT3-128


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:10 am
Posts: 385
Maybe the performance of Furmark should be included to such that throttling is noticed and the performance / W ratio can be calculated. Power by itself is kinda meaningless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1255
Location: UK
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
Maybe the performance of Furmark should be included to such that throttling is noticed and the performance / W ratio can be calculated. Power by itself is kinda meaningless.

Furmark already reads the temperature for cards so it would also sound sensible to read the frequencies, plot them on screen and then you could see when throttling was taking place. It you look at RivaTuner it has real time frequency display for both NVIDIA and ATI.

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 166
Location: London
From what i have read it seems if the drivers detects Furmark or OCCT running it wont do anything until the power regulator comes under load, as soon as that happens it will underclock the card by %50 and regulate the power so you cant fry your card.
Also from what i gather you can disable the card from doing this but you would more than likely end up with a toasted card :shock:

I think that its a safe guard as in normal use the power regulator circuitry will sometimes over power the GPU, but im guessing this is for a short time where as these programs can overpower the GPU very quickly and for a long time.
So its almost like they are lowering the limit that the power circuitry regulates the power at IF the driver detects one of these programs running.

_________________
Case: P182, Fans: 4xNF-P12@800Rpm, MoBo: GA-EX58-UD4, CPU: i920, GPU: GV-N670OC-2GD, PSU: Seasonic 760 platinum, HDD: HD203WI, SSD: VTX4-25SAT3-128


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:51 am
Posts: 70
Location: USA
Furmark is a waste in my opinion. Its just asking you to fry your card. I've seen water cooled GPUs have trouble keeping temps down when running Furmark.

If you're looking to test your GPU for stability before or after an OC, then get 3DMark(http://www.futuremark.com) or Unigine (http://unigine.com/) and run those. Use GPU-Z while running either of the previously mentioned programs and you'll have all the information you need.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:10 am
Posts: 385
Spoon Boy wrote:
From what i have read it seems if the drivers detects Furmark or OCCT running it wont do anything until the power regulator comes under load, as soon as that happens it will underclock the card by %50 and regulate the power so you cant fry your card.

Why would it have to detect Furmark before it'd do that? Sounds like a good idea to do anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2013 2:42 pm 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 77
I undervolted my 7870. Got it down to 1.03 V with Furmark. Passed Furmark many times but then noticed driver crashes in game. Ran Windows index experience and the driver would crash as well (at the same point) . Upped it to 1.07V. No issues after that. Conclusion. Furmark is a very poor test for system stability. It might be ok to test max temperature readings but beyond that I'd use other tests.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1255
Location: UK
Immortals wrote:
Conclusion. Furmark is a very poor test for system stability. It might be ok to test max temperature readings but beyond that I'd use other tests.

This will vary from card to card. On your Radeon this happens to be the case but on other cards it may be different. Remember that Furmark is OpenGL whereas the Windows test and games you may have run would have been DirectX.

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 1:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 166
Location: London
I'm not %100 sure but i think this started to be the case from Nvidia 500 series and AMD 6000 series onwards, its really just a safety feature AFAIK.

_________________
Case: P182, Fans: 4xNF-P12@800Rpm, MoBo: GA-EX58-UD4, CPU: i920, GPU: GV-N670OC-2GD, PSU: Seasonic 760 platinum, HDD: HD203WI, SSD: VTX4-25SAT3-128


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:31 pm
Posts: 47
EVGA's PrecisionX stability test is popular on a lot of overclocking forums. Catches errors in compute that you don't see in Furmark.

_________________
FT02W | 3x AP180 | 1x NF-S12B | NH-U12 SE2, 2x NF-P12 | Seasonic S12D 850 | MSI P55-GD80 | i5-760 3.8ghz + turbo | GTX 470 SLI + "The Mod" Kuhler 620 - NF-P12, NF-B9 X2 | 8GB Ripjaws X DDR3 1600 c8 | 2x 64GB SSD | 1TB SpinPoint F3 | CM Spawn | CM QuickFire Rapid (MX Brown) | ASUS VW246H + Neo-Flex| Sennheiser HD280


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:10 am
Posts: 385
See http://www.anandtech.com/show/6774/nvid ... nveiled/15 for example

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6774/53412.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6774/53413.png

In BF3, the 7970GE is much quieter than the Titan.
In Furmark, they're close.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 4:39 pm
Posts: 26
The Unigine 'Heaven' bench seems more useful for simulating a gaming load than Furmark.

http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/21 ... k_3.0.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 3:29 am
Posts: 1240
Location: UK
The Heaven benchmark has recently been updated to version 4.0 and can be downloaded direct from Unigine. The newer version shows additional information on screen including the GPU temperature.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 5:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:51 am
Posts: 70
Location: USA
gdr wrote:
The Unigine 'Heaven' bench seems more useful for simulating a gaming load than Furmark.

http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/21 ... k_3.0.html

Correct, though the best way to test a new OC is still through a gaming session.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Furmark: a good load generator?
PostPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Posts: 528
Location: 128.0.0.1
Cod wrote:
Correct, though the best way to test a new OC is still through a gaming session.

Exactly. Furmark is not even 'worst case' or such.

My GTX 670 with ghetto mod Accelero S1 (had to bend the rear part to fit it in the case) and a Scythe Gentle Typhoon does not pass Furmark. It always reaches >95°C, even with the fan at 1250 rpm, at which point I stop the benchmark. Playing Crysis 3 however, 2560x1440, high details, 30-odd FPS, I max out at 83°C with the fan at 800rpm.

I have no idea what Furmark is supposed to do. If you're a silent freak, it just makes you waste effort for a never-occuring scenario.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group