A few months ago I launched something we quickly titled "Bench". The idea behind AnandTech Bench is that it's a publicly accessible version of the database of benchmarks we've run internally.  You can currently compare 34 AMD CPUs and 36 Intel CPUs in the engine across 18 benchmarks.  I'm working on adding power data as well.

You can access Bench at its own URL: http://www.anandtech.com/bench  

Currently Bench only has CPU data in it but there are plans to expand it to storage and GPUs in the future, the former being far easier than the latter due to constantly changing drivers. The data used in bench is the same data used in our reviews, but it has to be entered in manually after a new CPU launches. If you ever see a chip get reviewed on AT but don't see its data in Bench, drop me a line and I'll make sure it gets in there. 

Today I added in data for the Atom 230 and 330 processors using Intel's D945GCLF and D945GCLF2 motherboards so you can see exactly how both single and dual-core Atom stack up to modern day desktop microprocessors. 

I'm also considering running data on an older CPU. In my recent Zotac Ion review I included performance results from a single-core Northwood Pentium 4 2.66GHz processor, which inspired me to want to run a whole slew of older P4 numbers for inclusion in bench. I don't think it's wise to spend several weeks rerunning every single old CPU out there, but I figured one or two couldn't hurt. 

Any suggestions from the crowd? Is a single-core Pentium 4 good enough or would you like to see some dual-core P4 stuff? What about anything from the Athlon 64 days? Respond in the comments and come to some sort of reasonable agreement and I'll see about getting the data in there :)


View All Comments

  • mino - Monday, May 25, 2009 - link

    You may still print the results but the score shall be allways normalized for easy visual comparizon.

    I.e. 0% to 100% where the faster CPU gets 100%

    This will remove a lot of initial confusion as with real numbers as bar sizes every second score has a different meaning (lower/higher is better).

    Another, imediate, option is to group the lower-is-better and higher-is-better.
    That way the visual info would be much more usable without going to the small print...
  • Skiprudder - Monday, May 25, 2009 - link

    I know World of Warcraft isn't a particularly demanding game, but it is the most popular game in the world currently. It has also had some significant updates with two expansions and several major patches. This has included implementation of multi-core cpu support and significant graphical enhancements.

    It's hard to find benchmarks that reflect either these changes in performance demands or benchmarks that rate the game on recent hardware. Due to its MMO nature WoW also places different demands on CPU and memory usage when compared to many other games. It would be nice to have a reference where one could see exactly what one could get say upgrading from an older CPU to a Phenom II, for example.
  • 91TTZ - Monday, May 25, 2009 - link

    I've always had to manually look at the comparisons from years past to figure out how my new component would compare to my old ones. If you wanted to compare your old CPU "A" to the new one of "C", you couldn't find it all in one review since reviews usually don't include products from older generations. You'd have to read through the review archives to see how A compares to B, then how B compares to C. Finally you could figure out how A compared to C.

    This idea is great.
  • cfaalm - Monday, May 25, 2009 - link

    This is just what the doctor ordered. Excellent work. It will be so much easier to determine the overall performance of a cpu. The additions would be some older stuff indeed: Athlon XPs and P4 (nonHT/HT, Northwood/Prescott) and the first dual cores of AMD (X2) and Intel (Pentium D). Any other x86 chip like VIAs Nano would be nice too. Reply
  • Crassus - Friday, May 22, 2009 - link

    I think it would be good to get some mainstream CPUs from the past days in there - Athlon 64 3000+ and 4200+ come to mind, some Northwoods, certainly the 1GHz Tualatin and maybe the 600MHz Katmai :) Reply
  • abnderby - Friday, May 22, 2009 - link


    Hey quick question, Why is it that CPU comparisons never have xeons or opterons? It is nice that you have all of these desktop and laptop processors, but all of the sites seem to forget that many of us out here have bought and use many dual cpu systems. I use 2 dual xeons for desktops and many of my friends and co-workers do also. Just look at ebay dual xeons sell like hot cakes. It would be nice to know how our systems stack up to the latest and greatest. I have seen several of the motherboards used in your drive tests are ones that I have used and or are using.

    Like now I run flawlessly 64-Bit Vista/Windows 7 on the following:

    Intel SE7525RP2
    Dual Xeon 3.00 GHz 64-Bit 800 FSB 2MB L2
    8GB DDR2 ECC
    AMD HD 3870 512MB PCI-E
    2 Dell FP1800 18" flat panels 1280x1024
    X-FI Sound Blaster
    Adaptec SA-2610 RAID 5 with 6 320GB WD

    I play Crisis at max settings without stutter. But if I had to go by what is listed it would seem like i run a junk system. It is old but it runs great. So without really being able to see how I stack against newer systems I find it hard to justify buying into a whole new rig. I have nothing to compare to. As this is the problem for many of us out here.

    Just like adding the Intel V8 would be nice etc...

    Does anyone else agree?

    Duane abnderby@yahoo.com
  • Lazlo Panaflex - Friday, May 22, 2009 - link

    If possible, could you guys please add a few of the older 1st gen Quads (Extreme/non extreme) to the mix?

    Was also curious where the QX6700 would end up (~Q9400?)?

    Thanks much!
  • aj654987 - Friday, May 22, 2009 - link

    I would love to see some tests done on a few p4's or especially athlon xp era systems.

    I am wanting to replace my current athlon xp laptop with one of the dell 12" atom netbooks because funds are low and I cant get anything else near the price that will run 5+ hours on battery life.

    I really want to see the performance difference. Even the sempron is killing the atom in all the tests so it would be nice to see exactly what an atom is comparable to in performance.
  • BushLin - Friday, May 22, 2009 - link

    I've only just upgraded from an Athlon XP-M @ 2.7Ghz and apart from a couple of applications I've been underwhelmed by Core2 @ 4Ghz, would be interesting to see what the benchmarks make of the XP at stock.

    BTW, if you do this, please run the benches on an Nforce2, I can't remember a better chipset for the Athlon.
  • FlameDeer - Friday, May 22, 2009 - link

    Thanks for providing this useful & convenient interactive CPUs Bench with regular update.

    Here are few suggestions:
    1. Increase View Comparison function to compare up to 5 CPUs each time. Comparison for 2 to 5 CPUs, let users choose from drop down list the number of how many CPUs want to compare at a time.

    2. Adding bench data of Intel Pentium Dual Core E5300 from the review here.
    http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3562...">Zotac Ion mini-ITX Ion Board - Page 7
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">Athlon X2 7850 vs Pentium E5300 - Page 3

    3. Adding bench data of Intel Atom 330 (Zotac Ion) from the review here.
    http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3562...">Zotac Ion mini-ITX Ion Board - Page 7

    4. Adding non standard reference platform bench data section, using grey chart bar. Suitable for old CPUs tested in different platforms & drivers, also for partially tested CPUs with only few benchmark results. Just like the Intel Pentium 4 2.66 GHz data use here and other old CPUs that plan to test later.
    http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3562...">Zotac Ion mini-ITX Ion Board - Page 5

    5. Let users choose with a drop down list of bench data sections like below.
    - "Standard Reference Platform" (data using now, show with blue chart bar)
    - "Non Standard Platform" (for old CPUs or partially tested CPUs, show with grey chart bar)
    - "Show All Results" (display all CPUs results regardless platforms or sections)

    6. Concerntrate on desktop CPUs for this interactive CPUs Bench. Only try to create mobile CPUs or server CPUs bench data as different tools in future, because with different functionality & platforms involved, needed different sets of test software.

    7. Highly anticipated the storage & GPUs bench data interactive tools. Here also can use the approach mention at point 5 above, create different sections - standard, non standard & show all. This can help to increase the number of items covered while easier to update & maintain.

    8. Changing Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 frequency to 2.53 GHz for review chart drawing bench data in future use.
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">Athlon X2 7850 vs Pentium E5300 - Page 3
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition - Page 8

    These are the few suggestions that I can think of & find out. Thanks Anand, take care.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now