Legacy and Synthetic Tests

At AnandTech, I’ve taken somewhat of a dim view to pure synthetic tests, as they fail to be relatable. Nonetheless, our benchmark database spans to a time when that is all we had! We take a few of these tests for a pin with the latest hardware.

Cinebench R10

The R10 version of Cinebench is one of our oldest benchmarks, with data going back more than a few generations. The benchmark is similar to that of the newest R15 version, albeit with a simpler render target and a different strategy for multithreading.

Cinebench R10 - Single Threaded Benchmark

With high frequency in tow, the Core i3-7350K makes its mark.

Cinebench R10 - Multi-Threaded Benchmark

When more threads come to play, the Core i5-7400 and Core i7-2600K battle it out in terms of four cores and IPC vs hyperthreading. The Core i3-7350K sits around ~25% behind.

Cinebench R11.5

CB11.5 has been popular for many years as a performance test, using easy to read and compare numbers that aren’t in the 1000s. We run the benchmark in an automated fashion three times in single-thread and multi-thread mode and take the average of the results.

Cinebench 11.5 - Single Threaded

Cinebench 11.5 - Multi-Threaded

Similar to CB10, the single thread results show that a 4.2 GHz Kaby Lake is nothing to be sniffed at. In the multithreaded test, CB11.5 is more able to leverage the hyperthreads, showing that a Core i7-2600K will run rings around the low end Kaby i5, but is bested by the higher frequency Kaby i5-K. The Core i3 still has that dual core deficit.

7-zip

As an open source compression/decompression tool, 7-zip is easy to test and features a built-in benchmark to measure performance. As a utility, similar to WinRAR, high thread counts, frequency and UPC typically win the day here.

7-zip Benchmark

The difference between the i3-7350K and the i5-7400 shows that 7-zip prefers cores over threads, but the Core i7-2600K results show it can use both to good effect, even on older microarchitectures, scoring almost double the i3-7350K.

POV-Ray

Ray-tracing is a typical multithreaded test, with each ray being a potential thread in its own right ensuring that a workload can scale in complexity easily. This lends itself to cores, frequency and IPC: the more, the better.

POV-Ray 3.7 Beta RC4

POV-Ray is a benchmark that is usually touted as liking high IPC, high frequency and more threads. The i7-2600K, despite having double the resources of the Core i3-7350K, is only 30% ahead. 

AES via TrueCrypt

Despite TrueCrypt no longer being maintained, the final version incorporates a good test to measure different encryption methodologies as well as encryption combinations. When TrueCrypt was in full swing, the introduction of AES accelerated hardware dialed the performance up a notch, however most of the processors (save the Pentiums/Celerons) now support this and get good speed. The built-in TrueCrypt test does a mass encryption on in-memory data, giving results in GB/s.

TrueCrypt 7.1 Benchmark (AES Performance)

Professional Performance on Windows Gaming: Alien Isolation
Comments Locked

186 Comments

View All Comments

  • cknobman - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    I definitely think they should have at least included those results.
  • fanofanand - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Some people purchase a "K" processor for the binning, not to overclock it.
  • JackNSally - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Ok. So exclude those that buy it to overclock?
  • fanofanand - Sunday, February 5, 2017 - link

    I was responding to the comment saying the only reason to get a k was to overclock.
  • WithoutWeakness - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Absolutely should have included overclocking. Sandy Bridge chips had very conservative stock clocks and great overclocking potential. At the time you were almost guaranteed 4.4GHz-4.7GHz on air and and there were lucky users reaching 4.8-5GHz (and more under water). My 2600K has been running stable at 4.6GHz (a 35% overclock) for six years now at 1.35v. Those single-threaded charts would look much different if you included overclocks and the multi-threaded charts would seriously widen the gap.

    I'm glad Intel has opened the gates for overclocking i3's but this review really just shows how small Intel's gains have been in the last six years. I'm hoping Ryzen brings some serious performance to the table (especially at the high end) and lights a fire under Intel's asses. Better iGPUs and lower power consumption are great for laptops and and basic users's needs but there has been no innovation in the HEDT market for many years unless you're willing to shell out $1700 for the 10-core Extreme Edition.
  • CaedenV - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Yep! Sandy Bridge was/is good tech!
    I got the non-K i7 Sandy Bridge, and even that overclocked easy to 4.2GHz. It was an artificial limit, but I didn't need to spend the $50 premium to get a potential 3-500MHz out of it. Been humming along for 6 years now and hasn't missed a beat!
    At this rate I will probably be 'upgrading' my game rig to a tiny little i3, and recycling my i7 as a home server for storage and VMs.
  • eldakka - Sunday, February 5, 2017 - link

    "(and more under water)"

    Shocking.
  • dragosmp - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Agreed, Ian might have posted them. Still, read between the lines: there is a statement the 2600K does 4.8-5GHz. At 20% higher clock speed, the 2600K destroys the OCed i3 7350K, no contest. It may consume 4x the power, but dunno, do you care when the GPU consumes 5x more anyway?
  • CaedenV - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Ya, not too useful on the gaming charts as even the non-K chips kept up with the GPUs just fine. But getting to see what it does for productivity tasks would be interesting.
    Actually, stock vs OC i3, i5, i7, and i7 Sandy would be very interesting to me.
  • dave_the_nerd - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Too much individual variation. Non-overclocked performance is the guarantee. Everything else is up to chance in the silicon lottery.

    Also potential for abuse: say, the manufacturer sends reviewers some golden sample that hits 5.1GHz on air. Hah! GPU makers used to pull stunts like that.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now