The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X vs Core i5 Review: Twelve Threads vs Four at $250
by Ian Cutress on April 11, 2017 9:00 AM ESTBenchmarking Performance: CPU Web Tests
One of the issues when running web-based tests is the nature of modern browsers to automatically install updates. This means any sustained period of benchmarking will invariably fall foul of the 'it's updated beyond the state of comparison' rule, especially when browsers will update if you give them half a second to think about it. Despite this, we were able to find a series of commands to create an un-updatable version of Chrome 56 for our 2017 test suite. While this means we might not be on the bleeding edge of the latest browser, it makes the scores between CPUs comparable.
SunSpider 1.0.2 [link]
The oldest web-based benchmark in this portion of our test is SunSpider. This is a very basic javascript algorithm tool, and ends up being more a measure of IPC and latency than anything else, with most high performance CPUs scoring around about the same. The basic test is looped 10 times and the average taken. We run the basic test 4 times.
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 [link]
Kraken is another Javascript based benchmark, using the same test harness as SunSpider, but focusing on more stringent real-world use cases and libraries, such as audio processing and image filters. Again, the basic test is looped ten times, and we run the basic test four times.
Google Octane 2.0 [link]
Along with Mozilla, as Google is a major browser developer, having peak JS performance is typically a critical asset when comparing against the other OS developers. In the same way that SunSpider is a very early JS benchmark, and Kraken is a bit newer, Octane aims to be more relevant to real workloads, especially in power constrained devices such as smartphones and tablets.
WebXPRT 2013 and 2015 [link]
While the previous three benchmarks do calculations in the background and represent a score, WebXPRT is designed to be a better interpretation of visual workloads that a professional user might have, such as browser based applications, graphing, image editing, sort/analysis, scientific analysis and financial tools. Web2013 is the older tool, superceded by Web2015, however both still are highly relevant for high-performance web applications today.
254 Comments
View All Comments
Outlander_04 - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
The information is out therehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VvwWTQKCZs
vladx - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
That wasn't my point, readers shouldn't go elsewhere to compare with CPUs that are excluded due to bias.Meteor2 - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
What relevance has a $340 CPU got to a $250 CPU review?vladx - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
I'd say a ton more than the $499 Ryzen 7 1800x which didn't get excluded.psychobriggsy - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
Yes, it's in the same product line, so people can see how it compares.Which seems to be roughly around 80% of the 1800X, for around half the price.
vladx - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
And 7700k is more relevant for gaming which was the subject at hand so there you go.Meteor2 - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
You didn't answer my question...vladx - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
I just did, 7700k is more relevant than a 1800X in gaming benchmarks and as the competition it should've been included if a $499 CPU from AMD is included.psychobriggsy - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
7700K is at a different price point, it rightly was compared in the Ryzen 7 reviews.Regardless, it would lose in the multithreaded benchmarks still, whilst having a small extra advantage in the gaming results.
vladx - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link
Ryzen 1800X is even more expensive than 7700k and yet got included in the gaming benchmarking, ironically considering 7700k is much more relevant for gaming.Sorry, but the bias and double standards are obvious in the article.