CPU Tests: Legacy and Web

In order to gather data to compare with older benchmarks, we are still keeping a number of tests under our ‘legacy’ section. This includes all the former major versions of CineBench (R15, R11.5, R10) as well as x264 HD 3.0 and the first very naïve version of 3DPM v2.1. We won’t be transferring the data over from the old testing into Bench, otherwise it would be populated with 200 CPUs with only one data point, so it will fill up as we test more CPUs like the others.

The other section here is our web tests.

Web Tests: Kraken, Octane, and Speedometer

Benchmarking using web tools is always a bit difficult. Browsers change almost daily, and the way the web is used changes even quicker. While there is some scope for advanced computational based benchmarks, most users care about responsiveness, which requires a strong back-end to work quickly to provide on the front-end. The benchmarks we chose for our web tests are essentially industry standards – at least once upon a time.

It should be noted that for each test, the browser is closed and re-opened a new with a fresh cache. We use a fixed Chromium version for our tests with the update capabilities removed to ensure consistency.

Mozilla Kraken 1.1

Kraken is a 2010 benchmark from Mozilla and does a series of JavaScript tests. These tests are a little more involved than previous tests, looking at artificial intelligence, audio manipulation, image manipulation, json parsing, and cryptographic functions. The benchmark starts with an initial download of data for the audio and imaging, and then runs through 10 times giving a timed result.

We loop through the 10-run test four times (so that’s a total of 40 runs), and average the four end-results. The result is given as time to complete the test, and we’re reaching a slow asymptotic limit with regards the highest IPC processors.

(7-1) Kraken 1.1 Web Test

Google Octane 2.0

Our second test is also JavaScript based, but uses a lot more variation of newer JS techniques, such as object-oriented programming, kernel simulation, object creation/destruction, garbage collection, array manipulations, compiler latency and code execution.

Octane was developed after the discontinuation of other tests, with the goal of being more web-like than previous tests. It has been a popular benchmark, making it an obvious target for optimizations in the JavaScript engines. Ultimately it was retired in early 2017 due to this, although it is still widely used as a tool to determine general CPU performance in a number of web tasks.

(7-2) Google Octane 2.0 Web Test

Speedometer 2: JavaScript Frameworks

Our newest web test is Speedometer 2, which is a 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 repeat over the benchmark for a dozen loops, taking the average of the last five.

(7-3) Speedometer 2.0 Web Test

Legacy Tests

(6-3a) CineBench R15 ST(6-3b) CineBench R15 MT(6-4a) 3DPM v1 ST(6-4b) 3DPM v1 MT

CPU Tests: Encoding CPU Tests: Synthetic
Comments Locked

339 Comments

View All Comments

  • madymadme - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    Going to buy
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X,
    Gigabyte B550 AORUS PRO AC,
    Noctua NH-D15 Dual 140m Fans,
    G.skill Trident Z RGB Series 16GB (2x8GB) 4000 MHz DDR4 Memory F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB

    is corsair CV550 watt ok with the above spec ? & I have Quadro K2000D graphic card
    is this specification ok ? & which ram to get please help a little & thanks for reading & replying
  • Spunjji - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link

    All I can say is your PSU should be more than enough for that setup :)
  • Vik32 - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    AMD is now the leader in single threaded performance!
    When will the iphone 12 review ?
  • Spunjji - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    Loving the substantial review detail, as always! Quite the triumph for AMD 😁

    Only one minor criticism - the sum-up of the gaming results buries the lede a little, which is to say that the performance is excellent across AMD's new range, meaning that the 5600X frequently outperforms some of Intel's best processors. I will be *very* interested to see if overclocking makes any difference there - with some relaxed power limits and the potential for higher clocks, it could be THE gaming chip to buy.

    That's a small gripe, though. Just pleased to see a result this unequivocal. Between this and the US election result, it'll be tears before bedtime for several of the trolls on this site 🤭
  • Solidstate20 - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    Zen question: If a CPU has awesome performance but is out-of-stock in every shop, does it really have awesome performance?
  • Spunjji - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link

    lol
  • Agent Smith - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    Where are the new x590 motherboards to support the 5000 series CPU's?

    The B550 boards are good value but are PCIe 4.0 limited and rely on shared ports.
    The older x570 boards are good but are several years old now so lacking newer features like 2.5Gb LAN and front facing USB-C ports for mini & micro ITX.
  • Qasar - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    i dont think there will be unless the mobo makers release them on their own.

    "The older x570 boards are good but are several years old now " huh ? try barely 1.5 years old. x570 was released in July 2019, how is that several years ? the strix e gaming board i have has 2.5g lan, as long as the board has the usb 3 header, wouldnt front facing usbc be more of a case feature then the board ?
  • Spunjji - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link

    I think the USB-C front ports have a different connector at the motherboard end. I still don't get why this is a big deal, though.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Tuesday, November 10, 2020 - link

    It really isnt. I dont know anyone who actually uses front USB C right now, usually they plug into the back because the back port will be 10gb/20gb/thunderbolt, but the front is only 5gb

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now