CPU Legacy Tests

Our legacy tests represent benchmarks that were once at the height of their time. Some of these are industry standard synthetics, and we have data going back over 10 years. All of the data here has been rerun on Windows 10, and we plan to go back several generations of components to see how performance has evolved.

All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.

3D Particle Movement v1

3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores. This is the original version, written in the style of a typical non-computer science student coding up an algorithm for their theoretical problem, and comes without any non-obvious optimizations not already performed by the compiler, such as false sharing.

Legacy: 3DPM v1 MultiThreadedLegacy: 3DPM v1 Single Threaded

CineBench 11.5 and 10

Cinebench is a widely known benchmarking tool for measuring performance relative to MAXON's animation software Cinema 4D. Cinebench has been optimized over a decade and focuses on purely CPU horsepower, meaning if there is a discrepancy in pure throughput characteristics, Cinebench is likely to show that discrepancy. Arguably other software doesn't make use of all the tools available, so the real world relevance might purely be academic, but given our large database of data for Cinebench it seems difficult to ignore a small five minute test. We run the modern version 15 in this test, as well as the older 11.5 and 10 due to our back data.

Legacy: CineBench 11.5 MultiThreaded

Legacy: CineBench 11.5 Single Threaded

Legacy: CineBench 10 MultiThreaded

Legacy: CineBench 10 Single Threaded

x264 HD 3.0

Similarly, the x264 HD 3.0 package we use here is also kept for historic regressional data. The latest version is 5.0.1, and encodes a 1080p video clip into a high-quality x264 file. Version 3.0 only performs the same test on a 720p file, and in most circumstances the software performance hits its limit on high-end processors, but still works well for mainstream and low-end. Also, this version only takes a few minutes, whereas the latest can take over 90 minutes to run.

Legacy: x264 3.0 Pass 1

Legacy: x264 3.0 Pass 2

The 1950X: the first CPU to score higher on the 2nd pass of this test than it does on the first pass.

Benchmarking Performance: CPU Office Tests CPU Gaming Performance: Civilization 6 (1080p, 4K, 8K, 16K)
POST A COMMENT

347 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ian Cutress - Thursday, August 10, 2017 - link

    We didn't post gaming performance for Ryzen at launch either, for similar reasons. Reply
  • bongey - Thursday, August 10, 2017 - link

    Stop lying , you commented on gaming performance in your conclusion, without even benchmarking it in gaming.
    That is much worse.
    Reply
  • Adul - Thursday, August 10, 2017 - link

    How is that lying? They did not post gaming benchmarks. That is what he said.What was mention in conclusion was not part of his statement. Reply
  • Integr8d - Thursday, August 10, 2017 - link

    It's called lying by omission... Reply
  • James S - Friday, August 11, 2017 - link

    Ian did not lie even by omission. They clearly stated in the Ryzen conclusion and clearly stated in the Skylake-x conclusion why they didn't test gaming.

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time”
    Reply
  • just4U - Saturday, August 12, 2017 - link

    I think it's pretty ignorant of someone to state that Ian is lying in his own comments about articles he has written.... Reply
  • alysdexia - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link

    Omission isn't lyging; it's self-censorship. Reply
  • Gothmoth - Thursday, August 10, 2017 - link

    intel pays good money for advertising at anandtech.... Reply
  • Nfarce - Thursday, August 10, 2017 - link

    Listen to you fanyboy crybabies. Tom's and Guru3D did gaming benches too. Go find a Reddit AMD fanboy forum that will give a 100% glowing review of your precious Threadsnapper. You won't find a single credible tech site out there doing it. It's called impartiality. Oh and one more thing ladies: you all are aware that AMD sent the major tech review sites the EXACT same hardware kit for review, right? Reply
  • tuxRoller - Thursday, August 10, 2017 - link

    ThreadSNAPPER? If this was intentional, I assume it's meant to be derogatory, but I'm not sure what it is meant to imply. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now