Visual Studio 2008: Compiler Performance

You guys asked for it and finally I have something I feel is a good software build test. Using Visual Studio 2008 I'm compiling Chromium. It's a pretty huge project that takes over forty minutes to compile from the command line on the Core i3 2100. But the results are repeatable and the compile process will stress all 12 threads at 100% for almost the entire time on a 980X so it works for me.

I don't have a full set of results here but I'm building up the database. The 2600K manages a 12% lead over the previous generation high end chips, but it can't touch the 980X. The 2500K does well but it is limited by its lack of Hyper Threading. The Phenom II X6 1100T beats it.

Visual Studio 2008: Compile Chromium

Flash Video Creation

Sorenson Squeeze Flash Video Creation

Excel Math Performance

Excel Monte Carlo Simulation

Excel Math Operations

File Compression/Decompression Performance Gaming Performance
POST A COMMENT

285 Comments

View All Comments

  • Zoomer - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Score one for intel marketing!

    Oh wait...
    Reply
  • Beenthere - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    I'll stick with my AMD 965 BE as it delivers a lot of performance for the price and I don't get fleeced on mobo and CPU prices like with Intel stuff. Reply
  • geek4life!! - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Exactly what I have been waiting on, time to build my RIG again. Been without a PC for 1 year now and itching to build a new one.

    Game on baby!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Reply
  • Doormat - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    If QuickSync is only available to those using the integrated GPU, does that mean you cant use QS with a P67 board, since they don't support integrated graphics? If so, I'll end up having to buy a dedicated QS box (a micro-ATX board, a S or T series CPU seem to be up to that challenge). Also what if the box is headless (e.g. Windows Home Server)?

    Does the performance of QS have to do with the number of EUs? The QS testing was on a 12-EU CPU, does performance get cut in half on a 6-EU CPU (again, S or T series CPUs would be affected).

    No mention of Intel AVX functions. I suppose thats more of an architecture thing (which was covered separately), but no benchmarks (synthetic or otherwise) to demo the new feature.
    Reply
  • MeSh1 - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Yeah I think this is the case or according the the blurb below you can connect a monitor to the IGP in order to use QS. Is this a design flaw? Seems like a messy workaround :(

    " you either have to use the integrated GPU alone or run a multimonitor setup with one monitor connected to Intel’s GPU in order to use Quick Sync."
    Reply
  • SandmanWN - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    The sad part is for all the great encoding you get, the playback sucks. Jacked up. Reply
  • Doormat - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    I'm not that interested in playback on that device - its going to be streamed to my PS3, DLNA-enabled TVs, iPad/iPhone, etc. Considering this wont be supported as a hackintosh for a while, I might as well build a combo transcoding station and WHS box. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    How do you figure "playback sucks"? If you're using MPC-HC, it's currently broken, but that's an application issue not a problem with SNB in general. Reply
  • Absolution75 - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Thank you so much for the VS benchmarks!! Programmers rejoice! Reply
  • Exodite - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    I'm of two minds about that really.

    I had really set my mind on the 2500K as it offers unparalleled bang-for-buck and real-world testing have shown that Hyper-threading makes little difference in games.

    With the compile tests it's clear there's a distinct benefit to going with the 2600K for me though, which means this'll end up more expensive than I had planned! :)
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now