(Tested) 3DMARK11 DX11 Battle: GTX 580 vs GTX 480 vs HD 6870 vs HD 5870 vs GTX 460 vs HD 5770

3DMARK11 Test Index

3 – 3DMARK11 Extreme mode (1920×1080)

Extreme preset (X): puts a very heavy load on the graphics hardware. The benchmark runs at 1920×1080. Scores are prefixed with X like P1254. The Extreme preset extends the lifetime of the benchmark by representing the loads that will be used in high end games in years to come.

3DMARK11 - DirectX11 battle, test

X2020 – EVGA GeForce GTX 580 SC
X1672 – EVGA GeForce GTX 480
X1565 – MSI R5770 Hawk 2-way CrossFire
X1565 – ATI Radeon HD 5870
X1399 – SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6870
X947 – MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5 OC
X875 – ATI Radeon HD 5770

3DMARK11 Test Index

26 thoughts on “(Tested) 3DMARK11 DX11 Battle: GTX 580 vs GTX 480 vs HD 6870 vs HD 5870 vs GTX 460 vs HD 5770”

  1. iPristy

    Yes two 5770 are about half the price of 480 and about 10% slower and saves 40W i guess.


    P6317 Was My Score With A ATI 5970 – Not Overclocked And Intel i7 930 CPU – Not Overclocked. I Know Its A Dual Gpu Card, But im Pleased With The Score, Has There Is Loads Of Headroom For Beating That Score, Anyway i Like The Benchmark

  3. Psolord

    First impressions from the benchmark are good. I bought it.

    I like the fact that they stick to standard 16:9 resolutions, ie 1270X720 and 1920X1080 and not those “strange” 16:10 ones.

    Handy tool, easily configurable and gives 100% gpu load on both my 5850s even with the cpu, a core i7 860 at stock clocks.

    The problem is that I am having problems with my ATI system on the physics part. The benchmark just stays there. I hear that many people are experience this problem. My GTX 460 system run it fine though.

    Hey Jego, were your ATI systems fine throughout?

  4. Psolord

    Oh, btw, my Q9550+460@850 scored P3845

    It’s a real pity I cannot evaluate my 5850 crossfire rig. It seemd to run like 2-2.5X faster than the single 460 rig, with the cards at 1Ghz!

    Also, the physics benchmark did run, just once though, and from what I saw, the Core i7 860 was like 50% faster than the Q9550, both at 4.0Ghz, but let be get back to that, once the benchmark gets fixed, or new drivers get released, resolving the physics issue.

  5. WacKEDmaN

    i had a few issues on the physics part aswell, first few runs they crashed..

    i found the problem is that the window looses focus (due to that annoying ‘do you want to disable aero’ popup) when the cpu gets fully loaded

  6. Zibri

    In detail:

    Preset: Performance

    GraphicsTest1: 30.753293991088867 FPS
    GraphicsTest2: 29.933479309082031 FPS
    GraphicsTest3: 40.46759033203125 FPS
    GraphicsTest4: 20.953060150146484 FPS
    PhysicsTest: 28.0898857 FPS
    CombinedTest: 22.7228203 FPS

    3dMarkScore: P6656
    GraphicsScore: 6649
    PhysicsScore: 8848
    CombinedScore: 4885

  7. jammer

    With Core i5-661@3,3GHz & Radeon 5970 (CF enabled):

    3DMark Score P5139
    Graphics score 6663
    Physics Score 3162
    Combined Score 2893
    GraphicsTest1 37.57 FPS
    GraphicsTest2 34.44 FPS
    GraphicsTest3 40.7 FPS
    GraphicsTest4 17.29 FPS
    PhysicsTest 10.04 FPS
    CombinedTest 13.46 FPS

    Looks like CPU is the bottleneck here…

  8. Psolord

    A temporary work around for the physics tests hanging is to untick ‘scan systeminfo’ in the help tab of the 3D Mark 11. Tested it myself and it works.

    You cannot post your results online but oh well.

    So…performance update.

    Q9550@4.0 Ghz + GTX 460@850Mhz
    P 3845, Graphics 3686, Physics 5437

    Core i7 860@4.0 Ghz + 5850 @1Ghz
    P 4606, Graphics 4239, Physics 8669


    Core i7 860@4.0 Ghz + 5850 @1Ghz crossfire
    P 8192 (<-that's a nice round number lol), Graphics 8308, Physics 8462

    It seems the Core i7 kicks ass, as it scored around 60% more.

    Also the crossfire 5850 system gave 96% scaling in the graphics score, which is just crazy!

    Futuremark can sure do their AFR!


    X2458 With XFX5970 (not overclocked)
    and Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.80ghz (not overclocked)
    im well pleased with this score, Has i know that the 5970 is a underclocked graphics card and its easy to put the cpu @ 4.0ghz. my motherboard Asus Gene 2. Im So Glad i got this card and when the prices drop, due to new graphic cards that get released, i will get another and crossfire the beast, just hope my tagan 900w psu can handel it…lol

  10. Psolord

    Dude, you don’t use more than 2 gpus on any reasonable system, unless you want to be the King of diminishing returns!


    –scores with XFX5970 (NO OVERCLOCK) + INTEL CORE I7 930 @ 2.80GHZ 4GB DDR3 1333 REAPER AND ASUS GENE 2

  12. Pingback: AMD Radeon HD 6970 and HD 6950: Complete Specs and 3DMark11 Scores - 3D Tech News, Pixel Hacking, Data Visualization and 3D Programming - Geeks3D.com

  13. JeffreyQC

    2 x GTX480 SLI (265.90) I7 930 @ 4.2 GHZ Mem Corsair Dominator GT @ 2000 Mhz




  14. Mark

    Wow my 5970 with standard clocks beats a superclocked 580 GTX on a low resolution bench. Nice!

    P6459 with non-overclocked i7 930 CPU and 5970.

  15. Alireza

    Hi every one
    I don’t know why but these are the corresponding amazing scores I can get with 2 HD 5770’s 1GB in crossfire configuration:
    my full system configuration:
    CPU: Intel Core i5 760 2.80 Stock
    MoBo: MSI P55-GD80 (2*8x PCIE)
    Sapphire HD 5770 *2 CrossfireX
    4GB XMS3 Corsair DDR3 1600 of RAM
    HDD: 1Tb Hitachi
    PSU: Memonex EX 600W, low noise series
    These results are even better than MSI hawk 5770’s have been tested in this topic while I’ve not overclocked anything!!.these results are far better than HD 5870 and really close to GTX480 I think. This configuration is very better than what I was hoping for! Thumps up AMD!!! But I’ve heard from a friend of mine that 3DMark 11 is more optimally designed for AMD cards than NVIDIA ones!!

Comments are closed.