Benchmarking Performance: 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 Single ThreadedLegacy: 3DPM v1 MultiThreaded

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 MultiThreadedLegacy: CineBench 11.5 Single ThreadedLegacy: CineBench 10 MultiThreadedLegacy: 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 1Legacy: x264 3.0 Pass 2

Benchmarking Performance: CPU Office Tests GPU Tests: Civilization 6
Comments Locked

111 Comments

View All Comments

  • Oxford Guy - Thursday, June 14, 2018 - link

    Welcome to marketing — land of emotion.
  • twtech - Tuesday, June 12, 2018 - link

    It seems like the only good reason to buy this processor would be for the preferential binning - it's kind of like a manufacturer official version of Silicon Lottery.
  • xpto - Thursday, June 14, 2018 - link

    New Vulnerability hits Intel processors - Lazy FP State Restore

    https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-c...
  • jarf1n - Thursday, June 14, 2018 - link

    well i know and few more that anatech are and clear long time amd support and cant make test without raise amd gpus and cpus someway better.
    sad...
    but we are not idiots
    its clear that both 6-core cpus 870k0 and 8086 are much better cpus than amds 8-core ryzen 2700x. that is clear fact

    2700x is 8-core and still loose 3dmarks what is historical.. bcoz never bfore cpu that own more cores LOOSE cpu wich have less them.
    its tell clear that ryzen 2700x is weak and also mem problem show it.
    2700x cant handle high timing and hertz,

    2700x is better and really shod be for mathematic apz,but as i say ITS 8-CORE CPU.

    still it loose many test.

    and for thouse importants games and 3dmarks its loose and clear.

    when intels ALSO 8-core cpu guess 9700k release we really see how bad 2700z is.
    i can say that 8-core 2700x loose clear for intels 9700k 8-core cpu.

    ok..then 6700k vs 8086 cpu

    well its clear that 8086 is better than 8700k,bcoz 8086 is hand picket cpus and oc'd better than 8700k.

    so its mean 8086 ov'c higher,running lower heat ...exmaple all 8086 ov'd easily 5ghz, many 8700k not. only best.. and i took 24/7 use.

    sure if you get good 8700k its different,but if different is example anatech saying 75$ that i can get good cpu i pay it for joy!

    if you want best gaming rig buy:

    asus hero x
    2x8gb 4000mhz cl17 mem
    8086 or 8700k cpu and ocäd it about 5ghz
    buy more nvidia gtx 1080 ti

    then u have gaming rig that amd cant beat near 2 years...think about it...

    gtx 1080 ti is old shit and amd vega only few month old still no chance.
  • xpto - Monday, June 18, 2018 - link

    https://www.amd.com/en/campaigns/threadripper-exch...
  • alpha754293 - Tuesday, June 19, 2018 - link

    FYI - On the overclocking CPU page - GeekBench MT chart is a duplicate of the CineBench MT chart.
  • sarahberard - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link

    Hello I am so delighted I located your blog, I was watching on google for something else, great
  • sarahberard - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link

    Your site fantastic, superior quality succeed... http://best-penis-pump.com/">.
  • none12345 - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link

    I wasnt expecting much out of the 8086k over the 8700k... but this is truely underwhelming. Only a single core turbo boost? I was expecting all the boost tiers to be higher. And same tdp....so there goes it doing anything more at stock.

    I wasnt going to buy one anyway....so i guess it doesnt matter. I completely agree that intel could have and should have done more.
  • Thests - Sunday, November 17, 2019 - link

    Ich frage mich, wie schnell der technologische Fortschritt voranschreitet. Der nächste Schritt ist das Streamen von einem Online-Casino, beispielsweise über https://casinoonlineschweiz24.com/software/merkur-... Es wird für alle Glücksspielenthusiasten mega aufregend sein

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now