CPU Performance: Web and Legacy Tests

While more the focus of low-end and small form factor systems, web-based benchmarks are notoriously difficult to standardize. Modern web browsers are frequently updated, with no recourse to disable those updates, and as such there is difficulty in keeping a common platform. The fast paced nature of browser development means that version numbers (and performance) can change from week to week. Despite this, web tests are often a good measure of user experience: a lot of what most office work is today revolves around web applications, particularly email and office apps, but also interfaces and development environments. Our web tests include some of the industry standard tests, as well as a few popular but older tests.

We have also included our legacy benchmarks in this section, representing a stack of older code for popular benchmarks.

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

Speedometer 2: JavaScript Frameworks

Our newest web test is Speedometer 2, which is a accrued test over a series of javascript frameworks to do three simple things: built a list, enable each item in the list, and remove the list. All the frameworks implement the same visual cues, but obviously apply them from different coding angles.

Our test goes through the list of frameworks, and produces a final score indicative of ‘rpm’, one of the benchmarks internal metrics. We report this final score.

Speedometer 2

Google Octane 2.0: Core Web Compute

A popular web test for several years, but now no longer being updated, is Octane, developed by Google. Version 2.0 of the test performs the best part of two-dozen compute related tasks, such as regular expressions, cryptography, ray tracing, emulation, and Navier-Stokes physics calculations.

The test gives each sub-test a score and produces a geometric mean of the set as a final result. We run the full benchmark four times, and average the final results.

Google Octane 2.0

Mozilla Kraken 1.1: Core Web Compute

Even older than Octane is Kraken, this time developed by Mozilla. This is an older test that does similar computational mechanics, such as audio processing or image filtering. Kraken seems to produce a highly variable result depending on the browser version, as it is a test that is keenly optimized for.

The main benchmark runs through each of the sub-tests ten times and produces an average time to completion for each loop, given in milliseconds. We run the full benchmark four times and take an average of the time taken.

Mozilla Kraken 1.1

3DPM v1: Naïve Code Variant of 3DPM v2.1

The first legacy test in the suite is the first version of our 3DPM benchmark. This is the ultimate naïve version of the code, as if it was written by scientist with no knowledge of how computer hardware, compilers, or optimization works (which in fact, it was at the start). This represents a large body of scientific simulation out in the wild, where getting the answer is more important than it being fast (getting a result in 4 days is acceptable if it’s correct, rather than sending someone away for a year to learn to code and getting the result in 5 minutes).

In this version, the only real optimization was in the compiler flags (-O2, -fp:fast), compiling it in release mode, and enabling OpenMP in the main compute loops. The loops were not configured for function size, and one of the key slowdowns is false sharing in the cache. It also has long dependency chains based on the random number generation, which leads to relatively poor performance on specific compute microarchitectures.

3DPM v1 can be downloaded with our 3DPM v2 code here: 3DPMv2.1.rar (13.0 MB)

3DPM v1 Single Threaded3DPM v1 Multi-Threaded

x264 HD 3.0: Older Transcode Test

This transcoding test is super old, and was used by Anand back in the day of Pentium 4 and Athlon II processors. Here a standardized 720p video is transcoded with a two-pass conversion, with the benchmark showing the frames-per-second of each pass. This benchmark is single-threaded, and between some micro-architectures we seem to actually hit an instructions-per-clock wall.

x264 HD 3.0 Pass 1x264 HD 3.0 Pass 2

CPU Performance: Encoding Tests CPU Performance: Synthetic Tests
Comments Locked

220 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, May 26, 2020 - link

    To be sure, it's GTX 1080. IGP is the name of the setting.
  • F123Nova - Saturday, May 23, 2020 - link

    I am trying my best to be nice, but this article has the most dubious set of benchmarks I have seen, and the omission in the charts of Intel competition in certain charts where the competition is better makes me wonder why this article smells of a cash handout. Cant say for sure if this is another "Just buy it" piece, but it sure smells foul. I expected more from Anandtech...
  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, May 26, 2020 - link

    Hi Nova,

    As has been the case for the past 23 years, we always strive to have accurate reporting, to the best of our abilities.

    Given that we're in the process of rolling out some new benchmarks (such as the Crysis software render), we haven't yet had a chance to backfill in results for a number of processors. Unfortunately that's going to take some time. But in the meantime, was there any specific benchmark(s) you were concerned about? That might at least help us better prioritize what to backfill first.

    And to be sure, there's no cash handout. That's not how we operate. (Selling out for anything less than an incredibly comfortable retirement isn't very helpful for our future employment prospects)
  • tvdang7 - Wednesday, May 27, 2020 - link

    why couldnt AT use a 3800x instead of a 3700x.
  • pcgpus - Friday, July 10, 2020 - link

    Nice review. 10600K might be a new king in games (for fair price).

    If you want to compare this article with other services You have to go on this link:
    https://warmbit.blogspot.com/2020/06/intel-core-10...

    There are results from 9 services from 32 games!

    After page load please pick up your language from google translate (right side of page).
  • pcgpus - Friday, July 10, 2020 - link

    Nice review. 10900K is the new king in games!

    If you want to compare this article with other services You have to go on this link:
    https://warmbit.blogspot.com/2020/06/intel-core-i9...

    There are results from 9 services from 35 games!

    After page load please pick up your language from google translate (right side of page).
  • Meteor2 - Wednesday, July 15, 2020 - link

    A new microarchitecture doesn’t require a new process. When PAO immediately went south, I don’t understand why Intel didn’t just implement a new microarchitecture on 14 nm. Surely Ice Lake hasn’t taken four years to develop?
  • Meteor2 - Wednesday, July 15, 2020 - link

    *Sunny Cove. God Intel’s code-names are dumb
  • miss5tability - Saturday, August 8, 2020 - link

    i just discovered this INTEL SCAM, now i dont freaking understand how those 10 gen cpu works i wanna buy i3 10300 and what im reading this is not 65W chip? what is real f@#%$@ power draw for those cpus
  • damian101 - Monday, August 10, 2020 - link

    As far as I know Intel never used a single bidirectional ring bus on CPUs with more than 10 cores.
    On Intel Ivy Bridge CPUs with 12 and more (15) cores, Intel used three unidirectional ring buses. There were also no Sandy Bridge CPUs with more than 10 cores, and Intel used two bidirectional ring buses connected with buffered switches for their high core count Haswell CPUs.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now