is this normal? feels like it's under-preforming extremely.

>>61654677

It's hitting 60fps, so that's enough.

>>61654677
Furmark is a gpu killer, srsly dont use it, it can literally kill some gpus.

>>61654918

Only AMDs, actually.

>>61654918
If the piece of hardware can be operated in a way that the vendor considers normal (like OpenGL commands to the Windows drivers) but it destroys itself, the hardware is faulty.

>>61654918
Yeah, there's no "software X" destroys GPUs.

There's only "GPU X" can be destroyed by software.

The GPU is at fault here, not the software.

File: AMD.png (30KB, 388x510px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 388x510px

:)

File: AMD2.png (30KB, 388x510px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 388x510px

>>61654677

>>61654946
Bullshit. Any GPU with uncooled VRMs, for example, cheapest Palit cards.

>>61656553
>>61656535
Why are you on 15.8?

>>61654677
Both nvidia and amd claimed they put a code into their drivers to detect furmark usage and when it does, it downclocks cards and make sure it will not explode.

So yeah, we need something like furmark 2 which will get undetected for a while.

>>61654677
Furmark is throttled by some drivers, especially if you use the "original" furmark. Try benching with MSI afterburner, and check your cooling.

>>61656591
any higher version and OC'ing fucks me because the memory controller can't handle clocking the memory up all the time with the newer driver, so I just sit at 15.8.

It causes display corruption.

>>61656591
blame wattman

>>61656593
>>61656616
They don't downclock, they only do that to protect the cards when you do something stupid.

eg, try to OC with a low power limit for what you're trying to do then furmark bench.