Unigene Superposition Benchmark

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Prince134, Apr 25, 2017.

  1. Prince134 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    #1
    Being around since last week. Only for windows. My MP 5.1 with Titan X Pascal runs 8k optimized without issue. If I put in slot 1, 8k is not allowed to run. GPU utilization max almost 100%. Anyone tried?

    My score:

    8K optimized: 3969
    4k optimized: 8802


    It's a pleasure to watch the benchmark running.

    Download from the link:
    https://benchmark.unigine.com/superposition?lang=en
     
  2. cube, Apr 25, 2017
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2017

    cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #2
    Win10 x64, i7 6700HQ 2.6GHz 16GiB, GTX 960M 4GiB

    OpenGL: works well, but not on external display above 1080p
    DirectX: lots of tearing, stats mostly offscreen

    1080p Extreme is harder than 4K Optimized

    OpenGL:
    HD Low: 7159 40/53/74 fps
    2K Medium: 2625 16/19/24 fps
    2K High: 1822 11/13/16 fps
    2K Extreme: 686 4/5/6 fps

    DirectX:
    HD Low: 7215 41/53/82 fps
    2K Medium: 2820 17/21/26 fps
    2K High: 1992 12/14/17 fps
    2K Extreme: 763 4/5/6 fps
    4K: 1238 7/9/11 fps
    8K: 515 3/3/4 fps

    DirectX is acceptable at Low, OpenGL is almost acceptable up to High
     
  3. Prince134 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    #3
    image.jpg
    Direct x 1080p extreme: 5655
    OpenGL 1080p extreme: 4805
     
  4. ActionableMango macrumors 604

    ActionableMango

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    #4
    8K? What display are you guys using? Or is it just supersampling?
     
  5. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #5
    I am using a 4K TV (at 30Hz because of stupid Intel graphics).
     
  6. Prince134, Apr 25, 2017
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2017

    Prince134 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    #6
    edited..

    Yes, 8k on my apple LED display. Only bottleneck is the GPU. It's harder (but prettier) than Unigene's previous benchmarks. Currently macOS not available yet. Run in bootcamp see how far your GPU can go. Be careful using custom selections, you will get lost.

    As we've discussed so much about relationship between resolutions and GPU/CPU bottleneck, I'd recommend test the 8K optimized and 4K optimized with DirectX. Therefore, getting better comparison for the potential of your MacPro 4.1/5.1. The results show a robust nature of the MacPro as long as you upgrade your GPUs.
     
  7. Prince134 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    #7
    Do you have a real mac for comparison?
    Do you have a real mac pro running windows for comparison?
     
  8. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #8
    The dGPU in my MBP2011 is dead.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 25, 2017 ---
    The 960M should perform similarly to the Radeon Pro 455.
     
  9. dfritchie macrumors regular

    dfritchie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2015
    #9
    Mine won't do extreme, here are the medium results:
    Superposition_Benchmark_v1.0_3847_1492236899.png

    Superposition_Benchmark_v1.0_4600_1492236576.png
     
  10. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #10
    I have connected it now through the Startech Thunderbolt 2 dock. Even the Intel graphics can output 60Hz through the TB3 port.

    This way:

    OpenGL: can now run the benchmark on the external monitor at 4K and "8K".
    DirectX: There seems to be less tearing and the stats are now fully on screen.

    I fill in the two runs that were missing:

    OpenGL:
    HD Low: 7159 40/53/74 fps
    2K Medium: 2625 16/19/24 fps
    2K High: 1822 11/13/16 fps
    2K Extreme: 686 4/5/6 fps
    4K: 1119 7/8/9 fps
    8K: 304 1/2/3 fps

    DirectX:
    HD Low: 7215 41/53/82 fps
    2K Medium: 2820 17/21/26 fps
    2K High: 1992 12/14/17 fps
    2K Extreme: 763 4/5/6 fps
    4K: 1238 7/9/11 fps
    8K: 515 3/3/4 fps

    In every case I get an insufficient VRAM warning above 1080p. You would want a card with at least 5GiB for 4K and 7GiB for 8K then.
     
  11. Prince134 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    #11
    Mac Pro 5.1 is VR ready under the maximum setting:
    score:7205

    Screen Shot 2017-04-28 at 10.46.34 AM.png
     
  12. Caesar_091 macrumors regular

    Caesar_091

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Italy
  13. Norbert Mikołajczyk macrumors member

    Norbert Mikołajczyk

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    #13
  14. SoyCapitanSoyCapitan macrumors 68040

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2015
    #14
    He's using Windows APIs and Windows drivers. On macOS half the performance if his benchmark was available.

    This benchmark can't be ported fully anyway because it supports certain shaders and features that don't exist in Metal or older OpenGL.
     
  15. Norbert Mikołajczyk macrumors member

    Norbert Mikołajczyk

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    #15
    That's exactly what I want, pro use under the macOS (cuda/ocl) and games under the windows :)
    I know that macOS isn't for gaming and high efficient 3D use, shame on you apple ;)
     
  16. Caesar_091 macrumors regular

    Caesar_091

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Italy
    #16
    Yep, this is what their support answered me: "Unfortunately, we have to technical possibility to release benchmark on macOS due to lack of OpenGL 4.5 Core profile support."
     
  17. Norbert Mikołajczyk macrumors member

    Norbert Mikołajczyk

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    #17
    Embarrassing ;_;
     
  18. Prince134 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    #18
    It is strong, and I don't feel any bottleneck at all during gaming with BF1. Boot camp to windows 10 for gaming, you don't need anything else, 1080 Ti is your great choice. And the onboard power is enough for it. There are lots of discussion about it lately.
     
  19. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #19
    You could still vomit because of fps.
     
  20. Prince134 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    #20
    Well, I think it all depends on how you run it. Running at defult we can get min 61, avg 142, max 298 FPS.


    7205 was decent score for a max setting. At least it's more than capable should one wish to play VR at maximum. ;)



    IMG_1200.JPG
     
  21. Norbert Mikołajczyk macrumors member

    Norbert Mikołajczyk

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    #21
    Is there a chance that you will post some games benchmarks? :)
     
  22. SoyCapitanSoyCapitan macrumors 68040

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2015
    #22
    Problem there is that VR really sucks at medium settings and most titles don't allow you to reduce detail because it would make the game look crap. We have to have highest details and average 90FPS just to make he experience worth it and reduce nausea.

    Just for added reference there is no VR ready system that exists today for the most extreme future level tests in this benchmark.
     
  23. Prince134 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    #23
    Thanks for the comment! That's also what I thought in you last part.
     
  24. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #24
    So much spread. Are you CPU bound now?
     
  25. Norbert Mikołajczyk macrumors member

    Norbert Mikołajczyk

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    #25
    I bet he is, the gpu use is kinda low.
     

Share This Page