There are a few things I've like to point out:
1) it is a good practise highly suggestly by me, that having screenshots with cpu-z, realtemp & gpu-z when posting a screenshot to show others. I make it much easier for others to understand one's system detailed config. Good stuff!
2) Nvidia's GPU drivers will enable PhysX By default (you can see on GPU-Z that physX is checked). Also, 3Dmark Vantage's CPU benchmarks will run it on GPU if you have physX enabledGPUs. Therefore, what you did is running the CPU benches on the GPU by cuda cores. So for sure, it will give you much better performance than CPU. Also, I pretty sure the people you are comparing to did the same. In overclocking scene & competitions, physX enable runs are not aprroved (ie. by HWbots), I personally think it doesn't give a good perspective how fast a system is rated. I personally only judge any brand of cards using physX disabled runs, for a fair comparison, and that's benchmarks are for.
3) Score wise, PhysX disabled runs you should get about 24k CPU score on a 4Ghz i7 920. My 980X @4ghz gets about 36k cpu score. and I posted another rig I had, which is the 2nd screenshot, It is physX run (GPU-Z has bug) can gets me a CPU score of 49k ppd. Even though your benchmark is a physX run, the CPU score is lower than normal. Definitely have to look into that
4) Vcore you got there is too high, i7 920 D0 will need about 1.3V or less. That is dangerously
high and have you run stress test on it?
Current rig no physX:
Old rig with physX enabled: