TrueCrypt 7.1 Benchmark

TrueCrypt is a software application used for on-the-fly encryption (OTFE). It is free, open source and offers full AES-NI support. The application also features a built-in encryption benchmark that we can use to measure CPU performance. First we test with the AES algorithm (256-bit key, symmetric).

TrueCrypt AES

Core for Core, clock for clock, the Xeon E5 - which also supports AES-NI - is about 30% faster than the best Opteron (Xeon E5-2660 vs Opteron 6276). At a similar pricepoint (Opteron 6276 vs Xeon E5-2660 6C) however, the Opteron and Xeon E5 perform more or less the same, with a small advantage for the latter.

We also test with the heaviest combination of the cascaded algorithms available: Serpent-Twofish-AES.

TrueCrypt AES-Twofish-Serpent

The combination benchmark is limited by the slowest algorithms: Twofish and Serpent. This one of the few benchmarks where the Opteron 6276 is able to keep up with the Xeon E5.

It is important to realize that these benchmarks are not real-world but rather are synthetic. It would be better to test a website that does some encrypting in the background or a fileserver with encrypted partitions. In that case the encryption software is only a small part of the total code being run. A large performance (dis)advantage might translate into a much smaller performance (dis)advantage in that real-world situation. For example, eight times faster encryption resulted in a website with 23% higher throughput and a 40% faster file encryption (see here).

7-Zip 9.2

7-zip is a file archiver with a high compression ratio. 7-Zip is open source software, with most of the source code available under the GNU LGPL license

7-zip

Compression is more CPU intensive than decompression, meanwhile the latter depends a little more on memory bandwidth. When it comes to load/stores and memory bandwidth, the Xeon E5-2660 is about 13% faster than AMD's flagship. Compression is for a part determined by the quality of the branch predictor. The new and improved Sandy Bridge branch predictor is one of the reasons why a 2.2 GHz 6-core 2660 is able to keep up with a 2.93 GHz (!) Xeon 5670, which is also a six-core processor. The Opterons get blown away in the compression benchmark: each core of Xeon E5 is about twice as efficient in this task. The overall winner is thus once again the Xeon E5.

HPC: LSTC's LS Dyna Conclusion
POST A COMMENT

81 Comments

View All Comments

  • Kjella - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    Of course, I'm guessing Q1 2013 before we'll see those but we already know from all the leaked SB -> IB details roughly what SB-Xeon to IB-Xeon will be like. All AMD has on their roadmap for 2013 is the "Abu Dhabi" with the "Piledriver" core promising 10-15% performance boost but still on 32nm. So you can see the punch coming a year away, but I don't think AMD has the capability to do anything about it. Reply
  • saharadusud - Saturday, January 07, 2017 - link

    http://clashroyalehacke.com/
    Do you want unlimited gems, gold and elixirs without spending money? You can enjoy free gems by using the Clash Royale Hack with the latest version, easy to use with proxy support. With such a feature, you can truly enjoy yourself in the game and complete things you want without much trouble. This will make your time spent playing either less hard work and more fun. This is why we recommend our tool for all enthusiasts of the video game.
    The good news is that this tool works well with any Android phone, iPad, PC and iPhone. What's even better is the fact that this tool is free to use for any player who wants to take full advantage of its features. This is the Clash Royale Hack tool that can be used to generate Clash Royale gems easily and for free. This works in a secure manner, which will allow you to remain reassured in the integrity of your account if you use our tool. Sit down and relax as you continue to generate free gems for you.
    Reply
  • BSMonitor - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    My question as well.

    What is the Intel roadmap for Ivy Bridge in this arena. Would be the same timeframe as IVB-E I would guess.

    Wondering if my Intel dividends will pile up enough for me to afford one! Haha
    Reply
  • devdeepc - Friday, September 02, 2016 - link

    Based on the paper specs, AMD's 6276, 6274 and Intel's 2640 and 2630 are in a neck-and-neck race. Reply
  • fredisdead - Saturday, April 07, 2012 - link

    From the 'article' .....

    'The Opteron might also have a role in the low end, price sensitive HPC market, where it still performs very well. It won't have much of chance in the high end clustered one as Intel has the faster and more power efficient PCIe interface'

    Well, if that's the case, why exactly would AMD be scoring so many design wins with Interlagos. Including this one ...

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2394515,00.as...

    http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/Cray-Ti...

    U think those guys at Cray were going for low performance ? In fact, seems like AMD has being rather cleaning up in the HPC market since the arrival of Interlagos. And the markets have picked up on it, AMD stock is thru the roof since the start of the year. Or just see how many Intel processors occupy the the top 10 supercomputers on the planet. Nuff said ...
    Reply
  • iwod - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    And not find a single comment on how and why "making this CPU quite a challenge, even for Intel."

    In my view It seems Intel is now using Server Market and Atom / SoC for their 32nm capacity when ever they introduce a new node in consumer products.
    Reply
  • extide - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    A large part of Intel's long-term strategies include keeping the fabs occupied.

    Latest gen fabs (currently 22nm) produce bleeding edge cpu's, usually in the consumer space

    One gen back (32nm) produces server/workstation/mobile cpus

    two gens back (45nm) produces other things like chipsets, and possibly itanium chips

    even three gens back (65nm) probably still exists in some places making some chipsets as well.

    Their goal is to as much use as possible from their investment into building the fabs themselves.
    Reply
  • Kevin G - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    65 nm is still used for Itanium, though the Poulson chip is due sometime this year made on a 32 nm process. If you want to compare die sizes, the 65 nm Tukwila design is 699 mm^2 in size.

    The main reason why 32 nm Sandybridge-E has been released so close to the release of 22 nm Ivy Bridge chips is that the initial Ivy Bridge chips are consumer centric. Intel performs additional testing on its server centric designs. This is particularly true as Sandybridge-E is not just replacing the dual socket Westmere-EP chips but some of the quad socket Westmere-EX market. RAS demands jump from going from dual to quad socket and that is reflected in additional testing. Implementing PCI-E 3.0 and QPI 1.1 also contributed to the time for additional testing.

    Though you are correct that Intel does uses its older process nodes for various chipsets and IO chips. However, as Intel is marching toward SoC designs, the actual utility of keeping these older process nodes in action is decreasing.
    Reply
  • meloz - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    >And not find a single comment on how and why "making this CPU quite a challenge, even for Intel."

    Because it is such a massive die? 416 mm²? Large dies usually have a lower yield, and Intel's 32 nm process is still cutting edge (if only for a few more weeks, heh).

    Look at how TSMC, Global Flounderings et al are struggling. An impressive achievement by Intel.
    Reply
  • MrSpadge - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    A significant amount of functionality has been added to the SB cores, and Intel can't afford mistakes in such CPUs. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now