Post yours for a quick comparision. Any CPU welcome.
Please also add your clocks (core, cache, memory) and maybe voltage. I'll start:
>CPU: i7-5820K
>Core clock: 4.3 GHz @ 1.275 V (Adaptive mode)
>Cache clock: 3.6 GHz @ 1.225 V (Adaptive mode)
>Memory clock: 2.66 GHz DDR4 @ 1.2 V (Triplechannel)
I'd love to see some overclocked Ryzens, Coffee Lakes and Threadrippers.
Other urls found in this thread:
cpuid.com
twitter.com
>CPU: i5-4690k
>Core clock: 4.6 GHz @ 1.260 V (Adaptive mode) + 0.005 offset.
>Cache clock: 4.2 GHz @ 1.210 V (Adaptive mode) + 0.005 offset
>Memory clock: 2.13 GHz DDR3 @ 1.57 V Dual channel
Turbo, C states enabled etc.
I remember when Ryzen obliterated Intel even more on the CPUZ benchmarks and it quickly got "fixed".
Meanwhile most benchmarks are still compiled with Intel's gimped compilers.
Ryzen is still pretty strong multicore wise. I get 2300 on 3.6 Ghz with my 1400, almost the score of a 7700K with much higher clockrates.
Correction, Cache is set to 1.205 V.
...
...
Its stock? It seems Coffee Lake isn't as fast as I expected. People told me 30 % advantages. 400 points advantage, and it would be even less if my CPU wasn't such a shit OCer.
>CPU: i7-4790K
>Core clock: 4.4 GHz @ constant 1.200 V (Power states off)
>Cache clock: 4.0 GHz @ Stock everything
>Memory clock: 2133MHz DDR3 @ 1.5 V (double channel)
Flashed it myself with new Haswell 24 microcode a week ago. Stable and didn't lose much performance (2-4%) benches and games are all withing margin of error so I'm happy.
>withing
*within, blame it on beer
Would be ebin if Ryzen+ could do 4.3-4.5!
Oh and 3.8GHz 3333mhz cl14
But why do you have only 4 points more with more cache and clock on the same architecture?
4 points more than what/where? Elaborate please.
What I was trying to show was 4790k patched in OS and BIOS, working under stock conditions with lowered voltage. Not some OC it's almost 4 year old CPU
See
Yes but still good. With more OC you match a 7700K. Even a 2600K performs well still if you get rid of the low clocks.
You're not comparing "IPC" unless every CPU is tested at the same clockspeed, dumbshit.
...
Is this counting as a quick comparison?
ah you mean I should've compared it to rysen or some other CPU.
About higher clocks, mine wasn't exactly a win in silicon lottery, it requires 1.320+V for 4.6 which is only 3.9% more performance for 12 more degrees C and more fan noise.
Thats partly true, you can still divide the results per 100 Mhz. If I asked to run at a certain frequency no one would post.
A lot, but mine doesn't even run 4.6. I can boot but Prime crashes immediately. I tried 4.4 at 1.35 V and 1.4 V, but thats too high.
Not CPUz but not bad. I get the 1700 tomorrow and can't wait to see it encoding H265 4K movies. It doesn't only have cores, it draws less than 100 W. I'll probably undervolt it.
Well it's still pretty decent even in stock so I'll wait a year or two before thinking about upgrading. I'd love to see sub $500 8 core 10 nm 4+GHz consumer CPUs by Intel.
>I get the 1700 tomorrow and can't wait to see it encoding H265 4K movies
Is this how AMD buyers relax or something?
Not too terrible
4.5ghz?
oc it to 5.3ghz
I hope for Ryzen 2. I could switch my 5820K for free but its not really that worth, the higher clocks are better for games.
No. The 1700 draws less than 100 W if you undervolt it while being still faster. This CPU is insane for archiving (decompressing) and encoding. My HTPC now works as a datacenter, with this CPU I can also encode on it, which means I save space and power compared to my primary rig. The 1400 unpacks a 60 GB movie in 2 minutes, my 5820K does it in one minute, I hope the 1700 gets even faster.
1996
wtf, how does this even run this benchmark?
also which cpu
ibm pc server 325, pentium pro 180, win2k3r2
I made this last year when they "fixed" it.
>.jpg artifacts
>pentium pro 180
Based 180mhz
Why would they do this?
okay?
they change the scale on the bench all the time, it was different back in 1.76 too.
Only running at 4.2Ghz currently, but i've stress tested up to 4.6Ghz successfully.
...
>all the time
its been the same since 1.80 aka after ryzen came out
Because it's rare for new CPUs to release, especially completely new architecture. Like Ryzen, so when it did release, the bench obviously needed some tweaking to be accurate.
I've noticed the cache OC got me 10 points more out of it.
stock
...
Sure.
This benchmarks runs entirely in the cache
Nice for benchmarks, useless for pretty much anything you'd actually use it for.
Count your blessings, OP. Some of us are still in the MHz clock speeds.
Each day is painful
>Ryzen 5 1600x, [email protected]
i5-6500 @ 4.5 1.31v
Man the 1700 is like actually shit if you don't overclock it at all.
>comparing against a 8C/16T then against a 10C/20T
You don't really believe the Ryzen could beat any of them in single thread, do you?
What is this shit theme, what the fuck
Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 2,33@3,4GHz
It's on my windows, it fucks up some programs but still better than having the default
5.2ghz all core/4.8 cache
Celeron [email protected]
Nice OC
Windows XP?
>CPU Ryzen 5 1600
>Core clock 3.2 GHz @ 1.248 V (auto)
>Core clock 3.2 GHz @ 1.240 V (auto)
>Memory clock: 3.00 GHz @ 1.2 V (Dualchannel)
No overclock because I use the stock cooler.
check out my meme
lucky processore
@3,9Ghz with 1,28V and stock cooler
sadly slow 2133Mhz ram
This machine is so comfy
Pentium [email protected] btw
so mine is OP
delid?
>CPU: R7 1700x
>Core clock: 4.1 GHz @ 1.375V
>Memory clock: 3200MHz DDR4 @ 1.5V (double channel)
They changed the way of how the score is calculated in 1.78, I think. That's the latest Windows 98 version
this pc "runs" windows 7
What a beast.
Why are you doing this to yourself? I tried running 7 on a Pentium [email protected] and it was a fucking hell. Anyway, post the results of this one
cpuid.com
No, i normally run it at 4.8ghz, it will definitely cause a housefire if I set a fully stable voltage and try to run a real stability test.
...
Sheeeeeeet
atoms of performance
eww
Phenom II x955, everything stock.
"hey lets sell this processor that maybe you can unlock the 4th core if you are lucky"
It's a tablet and does it's job fine
Guess you weren't lucky :^)
I think I had a better one, but ehh
7
wew lad that multithread score
>yield is shit, what can we do?
>*releases 3 core CPU*
I think I got it to do 5800 but not stable, at 4.5ghz.
Kind of want to push it harder, but I'm not sure what is holding it back.