# Share your CPUZ Benchmarks!



## Cartel (Oct 15, 2015)

AMD 1090T 3.8Ghz











*4Ghz*




DOWNLOAD http://www.cpuid.com/downloads/cpu-z/cpu-z_1.74-en.zip



*CPUZ 1.74 x64*


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 15, 2015)

5820K @ 4.5 GHz


 



EDIT:
Fiddled with RAM and CPU cache clocks and timings with virtually no gains. So I clocked them back to stock  My RAM is at 2400MHz 15-15-15-35.

And an overclock at 4.8 GHz


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 15, 2015)

It would nice to see RAM speeds also mates.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 15, 2015)

Xeon X5670 stock 2.93ghz





is that the point of this thread ?


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 15, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Xeon X5670 stock 2.93ghz



Okay, and where is the bench?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 15, 2015)

Ferrum Master said:


> Okay, and where is the bench?



wheres yours?


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 15, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> wheres yours?



I am work now well... later I will gladly edit my post. I find these things useful, to compare CPU/RAM settings and see if there are no errors and anomalies when seeing other PC's.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 15, 2015)

I am not being shitty, i enjoy these things, I just want to conform to the rules.........


----------



## Cartel (Oct 15, 2015)

You may need the latest CPUZ to use the new benchmark.
My poor 1090....


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 15, 2015)

Cartel said:


> You may need the latest CPUZ to use the new benchmark.
> My poor 1090....



My Work PC is even more shit than yours


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Oct 15, 2015)




----------



## AhokZYashA (Oct 15, 2015)

welp, 
something is awfully wrong here


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 15, 2015)

Gotta get single threaded over 2000 and multithreaded over 10.000. I like nice round numbers  I'll try bumping up the multi a bit...


----------



## Hugis (Oct 15, 2015)




----------



## natr0n (Oct 15, 2015)




----------



## cadaveca (Oct 15, 2015)




----------



## cdawall (Oct 15, 2015)

Do I win?


----------



## peche (Oct 15, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Xeon X5670 stock 2.93ghz
> 
> View attachment 68519
> 
> is that the point of this thread ?


please update CPU-Z ... there is no bench tab there!

here is my old i7 870 humble info & bench!















the bench !




Second bench!







Regards,


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 15, 2015)

@cadaveca
Isn't your score a bit low for the given CPU? Is it stock or overclocked? I mean I basically get that much on 5820K which is the lowest model. If it's on stock though, then it's pretty good.


----------



## peche (Oct 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> @cadaveca
> Isn't your score a bit low for the given CPU? Is it stock or overclocked? I mean I basically get that much on 5820K which is the lowest model. If it's on stock though, then it's pretty good.


check the posts... so far is the highest bench ... of all below posts...


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 15, 2015)

I will not go without a fight!


----------



## Toothless (Oct 15, 2015)

UPDATE: a little OC.





Last OC run, Seems like 4.6 and 4.8 don't do a whole lot.


----------



## gazzyk1ns (Oct 15, 2015)

Here's mine ( HT deliberately tunrned off).


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 15, 2015)

My home turf


----------



## vnl7 (Oct 15, 2015)

cdawall said:


> Do I win?



No way.


----------



## gazzyk1ns (Oct 15, 2015)

It would be genuinely brilliant (and I mean that seriously) if someone still has a 386SX or something similar that they could run CPU-Z on! I suppose the latest version (i.e. with the benchmark feature) probably wouldn't run on literally a 386, though.

Separately: Quad-channel RAM obviously creates multi-threaded heaven. Although like I said, I have HT switched off 99% of the time. I don't game and I do BOINC "compute" tasks.


----------



## Toothless (Oct 15, 2015)

vnl7 said:


> No way.
> View attachment 68547 View attachment 68548


You don't win either.


----------



## BiggieShady (Oct 15, 2015)

My Ivy Bridge i5 3570K at 4GHz compared to Devils Canyon i7 at the same clock


----------



## cadaveca (Oct 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> @cadaveca
> Isn't your score a bit low for the given CPU? Is it stock or overclocked? I mean I basically get that much on 5820K which is the lowest model. If it's on stock though, then it's pretty good.


Our CPUs are no different except stock speeds. So at the same clock, there should be no difference between our scores.


----------



## Capitan Harlock (Oct 15, 2015)

My Xeon w3520 XD 4ghz
EDIT: Here i was with steam open and other stuff 
version 1.73 64bit




Redone the bench 2 times with all things closed and i got this 2 results Multi thread with different results version 1.74 64bit


----------



## Devon68 (Oct 15, 2015)

After seeing other peoples scores now I have to check mine. Be right back

Here it is my stock FX-6100 :




Here is the new result in ver 1.74. While opening cpu-z I get a strange error message:










and here is my old Pc still rocking 11 years later with some minor upgrades :


----------



## cdawall (Oct 16, 2015)

vnl7 said:


> No way.
> View attachment 68547 View attachment 68548



Interesting that, that looses, admittedly mine is overclocked.

My Athlon X3 435 doesn't do very hot either lol it has however been running this speed for going on 6 years now however.


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 16, 2015)

Ok, how about 5820K at 4.8 GHz


----------



## Outback Bronze (Oct 16, 2015)

4Ghz, 5960x.


----------



## AhokZYashA (Oct 16, 2015)

i have to try this with my dual Xeon E5-2650v3


----------



## Jetster (Oct 16, 2015)

I didn't know CPUZ did benchmarks


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 16, 2015)

I found it few weeks ago. It has a benchmark button and stress button, so you can also use it for OC stability testing.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 16, 2015)

The funny thing in this thread... there are either ultra performance master race machines or abysmal low end peasant machines 

seconds, I dunno why the x86 and x64 versions output different bench results.


----------



## tabascosauz (Oct 16, 2015)

I'm flying the H81 SFF banner here, so I don't blame my 4790K for falling short of toothless' scores. Respectable.


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 16, 2015)

Ferrum Master said:


> The funny thing in this thread... there are either ultra performance master race machines or abysmal low end peasant machines
> 
> seconds, I dunno why the x86 and x64 versions output different bench results.


Certain workloads can actually be run faster using x64 due to the extra instructions it provides in addition to supporting more addressable memory space. It's also entirely possible that the compiler used different optimization flags for 32-bit versus 64 as there may be some optimizations that work only 64-bit processes. For example, you can assume that all CPUs running 64-bit have SSE3 extensions, 32-bit on the other hand might not so you can't compile it to use it unless you have checks to see if its available and what not, which is sometimes more work than it's worth (to the developer and/or company.)

I think I'll just leave this here.


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 16, 2015)

Ferrum Master said:


> The funny thing in this thread... there are either ultra performance master race machines or abysmal low end peasant machines
> 
> seconds, I dunno why the x86 and x64 versions output different bench results.



I have two peasants under my roof as well  One AMD E-450 (Dual Core) and one Intel Atom Z3740 (Quad Core). I'll give them a go in the evening.


----------



## Toothless (Oct 16, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> I'm flying the H81 SFF banner here, so I don't blame my 4790K for falling short of toothless' scores. Respectable.
> 
> View attachment 68565 View attachment 68566 View attachment 68567


Mmm dat stock which in all honesty is still speedy.


----------



## uuuaaaaaa (Oct 16, 2015)

My oldschool socket 478 P4 3.4 Gallatin Extreme Edition


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 16, 2015)

Skylake fun @ 4.5Ghz with DDR4-2750 (they are g.skill 2800Mhz modules but 2800Mhz doesn't like my gigabyte mobo for some reason at 125Mhz BCLK.)












Lulz, I beat @RejZoR in single threading anyways...  at least on his daily driver overclock.


----------



## KainXS (Oct 16, 2015)

my ol 3770k 4.5Ghz






and I really thought bay trail would score higher


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Oct 16, 2015)

Here's my X5670 comfortably coasting at 4.2GHz





Judging by the single thread score of 591 points of the OP's X6 1090 @ 4.0GHz, it looks like this benchmark favors Intel CPUs as my Xeon from the same era scores twice as much (1200 points) at pretty much similar speed and from what I remember, back in 2010 Bloomfield/Gulftown/Westmere CPUs had an average of 35% IPC advantage over Deneb/Thuban-based AMD processors.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 16, 2015)

Well that's interesting. If anyone is curious how AMD's low power stacks up...I am honestly surprised it beats my Athlon X3 in both single and multithreaded.






EDIT: just noticed I didn't record ram speeds


----------



## agent00skid (Oct 16, 2015)




----------



## buildzoid (Oct 16, 2015)

My broadwell powered laptop. I miss my 3960X I had to leave it behind.


----------



## xvi (Oct 16, 2015)

HP Pavilion, Memphis-B motherboard.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 16, 2015)

Toothless said:


> You don't win either.




Toothless, put that thing down.  I mean, that multithreading score is lower than it's single threaded.  It's like, "please... kill me."

Seriously, we are just CPU cycle gluttons.  I've been amazed at what simple net tasks even an atom can still do "ok."


----------



## Kanan (Oct 16, 2015)

cdawall said:


> Well that's interesting. If anyone is curious how AMD's low power stacks up...I am honestly surprised it beats my Athlon X3 in both single and multithreaded.


Yeah, because it has the Jaguar-core (entirely different microarchitecture) not the crappy FX-cores. 
Also funny how small the 1st gen i7 wins compared to a good Phenom II X4 (seen on page 1) or the X6 in the 1st post. And of course there's always someone with a xtreme 8 core that wins overall. But that's only CPU-Z benchmarks, it doesn't mean the world. ^^

here's mine:


----------



## Jetster (Oct 16, 2015)




----------



## Toothless (Oct 17, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> Toothless, put that thing down.  I mean, that multithreading score is lower than it's single threaded.  It's like, "please... kill me."
> 
> Seriously, we are just CPU cycle gluttons.  I've been amazed at what simple net tasks even an atom can still do "ok."


T'was a free netbook for building a desktop two years ago. Am happy with it even if it can't a video without having a seizure every three seconds.


----------



## buildzoid (Oct 17, 2015)

Toothless said:


> T'was a free netbook for building a desktop two years ago. Am happy with it even if it can't a video without having a seizure every three seconds.



You and your netbook are capable of making my day. It almost makes me wish you weren't stuck using however then I realize that if you weren't stuck with it you couldn't make my day.


----------



## Toothless (Oct 17, 2015)

buildzoid said:


> You and your netbook are capable of making my day. It almost makes me wish you weren't stuck using however then I realize that if you weren't stuck with it you couldn't make my day.


It's one of four computers that I own, since my desktop is in the system specs, my laptop is in my sig, the netbook was posted and the chromebook is a dual-core that I almost want to see if I can bump the memory pool on it.

It's not a bad thing though, I mean if I ever wanted to see how few FPS a game can get then I'll just use the little thing.


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 17, 2015)

I got meh 125Mhz bclk strap back thanks to little bit of patience and a BIOS update. Just for starters:


----------



## buildzoid (Oct 17, 2015)

Aquinus said:


> I got meh 125Mhz bclk strap back thanks to little bit of patience and a BIOS update. Just for starters:
> View attachment 68588


Apply 1.55V core and 40X multiplier. It will probably be stable enough to finish the benchmark if the chip doesn't overheat.


----------



## johnspack (Oct 17, 2015)

Poor ol hexy....


----------



## cdawall (Oct 17, 2015)

Well I have taken out most of the Phenom II based stuff...This thing is pretty beast mode wish the board allowed some more voltage.


----------



## LightningJR (Oct 17, 2015)




----------



## Jborg (Oct 17, 2015)




----------



## RejZoR (Oct 17, 2015)

I wonder how my old Core i7 920 would stack up when OC-ed. Never tested it with CPU-Z


----------



## R00kie (Oct 17, 2015)

They've updated the app just today, along with the bench tab, gotta redo all the benches yet again...


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 17, 2015)

This bench is actually a very good indication of single threaded performance (IPC) as well as the performance of multi-threading (intercore communication). There is quite some big difference between multicores despite having around the same single thread performance and same core/thread count.


----------



## Cartel (Oct 17, 2015)

gdallsk said:


> They've updated the app just today, along with the bench tab, gotta redo all the benches yet again...


ya mine  went up!


----------



## tabascosauz (Oct 17, 2015)

Interesting. Scores just went up by a fair bit.



 



It's strange that my single thread scores seem to be on the low side every time. If the H81I is dialing back the 4790K's clocks, it should be during the multi-threaded test, not the single-threaded test. By contrast, my multi-threaded scores are rather strong for stock.


----------



## N1GHTRA1N (Oct 17, 2015)

This is my first time ever running this. Not bad for a CPU that's almost 7 years old. i7 920 @ 3.88GHz


----------



## N1GHTRA1N (Oct 17, 2015)

People keep telling me to upgrade my CPU but I haven't because the 1366 platform has been so good. Even after looking through these benchmarks I'm not enticed to just run out and order a bunch of new stuff. I'm eyeing a x99 and 5820k but also considering a z170 and 6700k. It won't be until December for sure and I'm hoping more will be released on Broadwell-E by then, maybe I'd wait a little longer at that point. My current CPU and MB hails from January 2009. This is the longest time I've ever had the same CPU and MB but 3 years at least. Best PC investment I ever did.


----------



## zsolt_93 (Oct 17, 2015)

I guess an i5 at stock clocks and 2/3 of the TDP of Nehalem chips is a pretty good reason if one could take this bench seriously. It seems to me that it does not really scale well with overclocking though.


----------



## peche (Oct 17, 2015)

i guess DDR4 on skylake and X99 may bring some more numbers... since its a bench...


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Oct 17, 2015)

This is how I roll. Bench while crunching.


----------



## Jborg (Oct 17, 2015)




----------



## agent00skid (Oct 17, 2015)

agent00skid said:


> View attachment 68580



Update with new version of CPU-Z


----------



## KainXS (Oct 17, 2015)

3770k 4.5Ghz on new version


----------



## F-Zero (Oct 17, 2015)

I7-4790K 4800 Mhz

Pentium 4 1354 Mhz


----------



## natr0n (Oct 17, 2015)

http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html#version-history

Improved CPU benchmark
AMD Carrizo APUs
eDRAM detection on Slylake CPUs
Skylake logos
I tested it and gives a huge boost in score, but the install seems to have issues.
The error code 0x241 occurred during blah blah.


----------



## sasamkd (Oct 17, 2015)

Those were the days...


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 17, 2015)

I find it funny how the faster clocked Pentium 4 LOOSES to the lower clocked Pentium III.

Shows how much serious suckage Netburst was.


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Oct 17, 2015)

Looks like the new version of CPU-Z (1.74.0) brings around 25% of performance boost over the 1.73.0

*1.73.0 x64*




*1.74.0 x64*


----------



## POLJDA (Oct 17, 2015)

1.74 cpu z
AMD FX 8320 OC 4940 ghz
ST 1444
MT 9421


----------



## Capitan Harlock (Oct 17, 2015)

kniaugaudiskis said:


> Looks like the new version of CPU-Z (1.74.0) brings around 25% of performance boost over the 1.73.0
> 
> *1.73.0 x64*
> View attachment 68604
> ...



I have redone mine too because i was using steam open for my first try with the 1.73 and with all closed but with the 1.74 version i got better result( posted in my first post) with 2 different results in the multi thread score.
So yes can be a performance boost too XD.


----------



## Devon68 (Oct 17, 2015)

Well I guess I'll have to redo mine again Thanks for the info.
I will edit my original post with the new results soon.


----------



## peche (Oct 17, 2015)

updated:
stock



compared to 4790K




tests were runing while cpu was crunching... some tabs open, desktp remote conection,  itunes and shit ....


----------



## Devon68 (Oct 17, 2015)

Can someone confirm this. I tried running cpu-z and got a single threaded score about 680-690 ish but when running the bench as the same time as listening to a song in winamp my score climbed to around 715-720.


----------



## BiggieShady (Oct 17, 2015)

Indeed 18.63% increase for me:

*1.73.0 x64


 

1.74.0 x64*
*

 *


----------



## peche (Oct 17, 2015)

doing nothing at all...




Compared to 4790k


----------



## LightningJR (Oct 18, 2015)

My multi threaded score went through the roof in 1.74, almost 50% higher.


----------



## R00kie (Oct 18, 2015)




----------



## Capitan Harlock (Oct 18, 2015)

Devon68 said:


> Can someone confirm this. I tried running cpu-z and got a single threaded score about 680-690 ish but when running the bench as the same time as listening to a song in winamp my score climbed to around 715-720.


I was doing nothing when i made my last 2 bench with nothing open and i got 2 different multi thread result so could be some program running in background for me too XD.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 18, 2015)

I guess I need to push my 9370 up. I have a really nice ln2 pot I should break in....


----------



## Underdog (Oct 18, 2015)

Hello people. My first post on any forum, please forgive any faux-pas on my part.
My fx-9370. Been running this for about 3 years.


----------



## Bansaku (Oct 18, 2015)

i7 3770K stock speed:



 

Not too shabby.


----------



## Steevo (Oct 18, 2015)

Woo?


----------



## vnl7 (Oct 18, 2015)

4790k @ 4,4


----------



## Underdog (Oct 19, 2015)

Does anybody know what the bench uses? (instructions, etc)

edit: 9370 5.0ghz 1 core per module. (Affinity mask 55)


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Oct 19, 2015)




----------



## GoldenX (Oct 19, 2015)

Poor old Deneb...


----------



## PCGamerDR (Oct 19, 2015)

a10-6800k stock volts and multiplier but 111mhz base clock because "he" doesn't like it when i increase his multiplier. RAM @2368Mhz CL10.


----------



## agent00skid (Oct 19, 2015)

Athlon 860K@4,5GHz NB@2GHz.


----------



## Hnykill22 (Oct 19, 2015)

Intel Core i7 5820K @ 4.2 Ghz


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Oct 19, 2015)

Not OC'd yet.

















Sorry trying different styles, which one looks most readable?
Link: Validation Page


----------



## AhokZYashA (Oct 19, 2015)

after the newest update, 
it looks a lot better now,


----------



## Underdog (Oct 19, 2015)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> Not OC'd yet.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


M8 we have the same MB and cpu. 1.56v for stock is insane. set LLC to ultra high and try 1.35-1.375v.
FYI for 5.0ghz I use 1.52v (cpu vid) LLC set to high.
NB/HT 2.4ghz. Cpu/NB volts 1.25-1.3
Phase control: EXTREME
Probe set to current.
C6/C1/amd-v/epu/APM: Disabled
HPC mode. Enabled
Turbo disabled
Also a further note about ram, after much testing TRAS (cycle time) causes a memory stumble in sandras ram test unless it is between 21-24 clocks??????


----------



## xvi (Oct 20, 2015)

gdallsk said:


> They've updated the app just today, along with the bench tab, gotta redo all the benches yet again...





Cartel said:


> ya mine  went up!


Mine did too. Considerably! Comparing results are going to be rather annoying now.


 



Old results in this post:
Single: 1364
Multi: 5162


xvi said:


> HP Pavilion, Memphis-B motherboard.
> 
> View attachment 68585 View attachment 68584


----------



## Blue-Knight (Oct 20, 2015)

Spoiler: Off topic






DeathtoGnomes said:


> Sorry trying different styles, which one looks most readable?


I think the second is most readable.


----------



## AhokZYashA (Oct 20, 2015)

its my laptop now,
it shows how slow is Haswell-ULT compared to an 8 years old desktop CPU.


----------



## stoggs1 (Oct 20, 2015)

not too bad for my xeons


----------



## XSI (Oct 20, 2015)

Somehow this benchmark show that its really capable  e8400@3.4 ghz vs I7 6 core  
85 points difference with single core performance  that's some strange diferrence, way too small. or is it?


----------



## Frick (Oct 20, 2015)

How about making some nice tables with the results?


----------



## Toothless (Oct 20, 2015)




----------



## BarbaricSoul (Oct 20, 2015)

Outback Bronze said:


> 4Ghz, 5960x.
> 
> View attachment 68557




3930k at 4 GHz for comparison


----------



## hat (Oct 20, 2015)

^^Notice the 5960x and 3930k both scored 1518 single threaded. what


----------



## Toothless (Oct 20, 2015)

hat said:


> ^^Notice the 5960x and 3930k both scored 1518 single threaded. what


Watch the 5960x be a uber beefed 3930k that Intel has kept secret.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Oct 20, 2015)

hat said:


> ^^Notice the 5960x and 3930k both scored 1518 single threaded. what



yeah, I noticed that too. Hmmm, so how long will this thing stay relevant performance wise?


----------



## P4-630 (Oct 20, 2015)

i7-4700HQ @ 2.8Ghz


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Oct 20, 2015)

BarbaricSoul said:


> 3930k at 4 GHz for comparison


Nice, my Xeon does about the same, but at 4.2GHz. Can you push your CPU higher?


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Oct 20, 2015)

kniaugaudiskis said:


> Can you push your CPU higher?



Easily, I've had it as high as 4.8 GHz, and can probably do more.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 20, 2015)

XSI said:


> View attachment 68682 View attachment 68683
> 
> Somehow this benchmark show that its really capable  e8400@3.4 ghz vs I7 6 core
> 85 points difference with single core performance  that's some strange diferrence, way too small. or is it?



It would show how little per-core IPC has increased with intel. That result makes me curious what its benching.


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Oct 20, 2015)

cdawall said:


> It would show how little per-core IPC has increased with intel. That result makes me curious what its benching.


Well, it also depends on wheter or not benchmark results of a similar version of the CPU-Z are being taken into consideration, because the latest version of 1.74.0 has shown a ~25% performance increase over 1.73.0, which is quite significant when it comes to synthetics.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 20, 2015)

kniaugaudiskis said:


> Well, it also depends on wheter or not benchmark results of a similar version of CPU-Z are being taken into consideration, because the latest version of 1.74.0 has shown ~25% performance increase over 1.73.0, which is quite significant when it comes to synthetics.



It probably just isn't updated numbers for their baseline. 25% per clock increase should be a little low, but that could be in setup.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 20, 2015)

Also got a boost @4,8GHz in 1.74


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Oct 20, 2015)

Underdog said:


> M8 we have the same MB and cpu. 1.56v for stock is insane. set LLC to ultra high and try 1.35-1.375v.
> FYI for 5.0ghz I use 1.52v (cpu vid) LLC set to high.
> NB/HT 2.4ghz. Cpu/NB volts 1.25-1.3
> Phase control: EXTREME
> ...



I was playing around forgot to set the voltage back. It's a new build (first AIO) so I'm gonna wait to OC until I got the temps locked down. When I do OC, its only gonna be a mild OC, so hopefully these setting you give me will work nice at 4.6 or 4.7.

I dread messing with the memory settings I know so little about them. With a mild OC, maybe I wont have to.


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 20, 2015)

Now that I managed to get my 125Mhz BCLK strap to work again, I've started tweaking some things. I've brought memory up from 2000Mhz up to 2333Mhz by slightly lowering tRFC to 108 from 125, bumped the CL latency by 1 cycle and tRAS by 2 cycles. Hitting 2400Mhz requires loosening the timings a little more but, 2333Mhz is more than enough.




I'm about to see if I can get 4.75 stable using boot and additional boost voltage on top of the already defined offset.

Attempt at 4.625Ghz:


 

Attempt at 4.75Ghz:


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 20, 2015)

Aquinus said:


> Now that I managed to get my 125Mhz BCLK strap to work again, I've started tweaking some things. I've brought memory up from 2000Mhz up to 2333Mhz by slightly lowering tRFC to 108 from 125, bumped the CL latency by 1 cycle and tRAS by 2 cycles. Hitting 2400Mhz requires loosening the timings a little more but



How much Vtt and Vccsa are you using? Mine is a bitch. It cannot boot to 2400MHz from cold boot, if I boot 2133 then pull up to 2400 it works.

Never used bus straps tough... They seem odd to me.


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 20, 2015)

Ferrum Master said:


> How much Vtt and Vccsa are you using? Mine is a bitch. It cannot boot to 2400MHz from cold boot, if I boot 2133 then pull up to 2400 it works.


Without touching the BCLK strap, I can run 2133Mhz without even touching the VTT or VCCSA voltage (even though the XMP profile calls for higher VTT voltage.) 2400Mhz wasn't too bad either given the timings. I started having trouble going past 2450Mhz but, it has been some time since I tried pushing them that hard. I've never needed to mess with those two voltage too often. I'm not sure what the exact numbers are in the BIOS.


Ferrum Master said:


> Never used bus straps tough... They seem odd to me.


Ugh... they are but, it's the only away I can get past 4.4Ghz on the 3820. It's probably the only reason why I might consider replacing the CPU, just to make OC'ing a little easier (and maybe 2 extra cores if the price was right.) The downside is that is seems that power saving features are simply disabled regardless of their settings when the BCLK strap is selected. So my machine eats an extra 20-30 watts at idle when I use it where while using just Boost, I can underclock stock vid levels and beef up the boost voltage but, I can only do that up to 4.4Ghz on my CPU.

That screenshot at 4.75Ghz wasn't completely stable either. At clocks that high, any number of settings could be the culprit and I don't plan on spending too much more time thinking about it, so I'm just going to settle with 4.625Ghz for now.


----------



## hat (Oct 21, 2015)

BarbaricSoul said:


> yeah, I noticed that too. Hmmm, so how long will this thing stay relevant performance wise?


The 3930k? 6-core SB-E over 4GHz has to be relevant for some time. Even the best mainstream chips are still quad cores. The best x99 chip is 8 core, but it's prohibitively expensive and uses minimal. I don't think we will see core count, clock speed or IPC jump up for a long time... at least with desktop chips.

I think if anything, the best reasons to upgrade will be for newer chipsets. If you jumped to x99 or Z190 right now, you would get M.2 slots, SATA Express, PCI-E 3.0, DDR4... the list goes on. There is more CPU performance to be had there, but how much? Not worth getting too excited over. Unless you went for the 5960x and did a lot of heavily multithreaded stuff.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 21, 2015)

This info needs categerization/ tabulation or it is worthless.
Are we not geeks?


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Oct 21, 2015)

Ferrum Master said:


> How much Vtt and Vccsa are you using? Mine is a bitch. It cannot boot to 2400MHz from cold boot, if I boot 2133 then pull up to 2400 it works.
> 
> Never used bus straps tough... They seem odd to me.


Bootstraps are made from leather?


----------



## xvi (Oct 21, 2015)

Dell PowerEdge R710, Dual Xeon E5520, stock freqs
Getting very inconsistent results. Couldn't get more than ~6300 multi until I restarted CPU-z. Getting ~6900 now. Rebooting now.


----------



## KainXS (Oct 21, 2015)

Z3736 on 1.74






not much better than before it seems.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 21, 2015)

4790K @ 4.4GHz.


----------



## uuuaaaaaa (Oct 21, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> This info needs categerization/ tabulation or it is worthless.
> Are we not geeks?



Spot on!


----------



## levima43 (Oct 21, 2015)

Good ol' i5 2500k @ 4.5GHz.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 21, 2015)

Xeon X 5670 running a moderate o/c   







EDIT

@Toothless  thankyou for my 3000th thanks


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 21, 2015)

Q6600 running a generous o/c


----------



## cdawall (Oct 21, 2015)

Here have some old school bone stock work PC goodness. DDR2 and all.


----------



## chuck216 (Oct 22, 2015)

Here is my AMD FX-8320 at both stock speed and overclocked to the maximum on air:

@3.5 Ghz







@4.7 Ghz


----------



## ultraex2003 (Oct 22, 2015)

6700k @ 4.9 mem 3.0


----------



## Tralalak (Oct 23, 2015)

*VIA QuadCore E C4650 2.0GHz (Isaiah - CNR, 2MB L2 cache) 
*

* CPU Single Thread: 468*
* CPU Multi Thread: 1757*
* 



source: http://forum.cnews.cz/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=27768



Intel Core i3 2367M 1.4GHz (Sandy Bridge, 512KB L2 cache, 3MB L3 cache)
*

* CPU Single Thread: 514*
* CPU Multi Thread: 1059*
* 



*



*VIA QuadCore U4650E 1.0+GHz (Isaiah - CNQ, 4MB L2 cache, @1.2GHz PMON - adaptive overclocking)*


*CPU Single Thread: 280*
*CPU Multi Thread: 880*


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 23, 2015)

Tralalak said:


> *VIA QuadCore E C4650 2.0GHz (Isaiah - CNR, 2MB L2 cache)
> *
> 
> * CPU Single Thread: 468*
> ...



That's a lot better than I would have expected from a VIA CPU. That's not too shabby to be honest.


----------



## hilpi (Oct 23, 2015)

Skylake


----------



## Vlada011 (Oct 23, 2015)

I forgot that CPU-Z have benchmark...
i7-5820K 4.0GHz - 3.0GHz Uncore


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 23, 2015)

I7 920 @ 4,3 GHz. If i just had water cooling i think 4,5 GHz or more is possible whit this CPU.


----------



## Underdog (Oct 23, 2015)

Does the intel single thread score use HT??


----------



## Outback Bronze (Oct 23, 2015)

hat said:


> ^^Notice the 5960x and 3930k both scored 1518 single threaded. what



I'm running version 1.73 to his 1.74...

Here, my 1.74 @ 3.5 no HT


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Oct 24, 2015)

Underdog said:


> Does the intel single thread score use HT??


No.


----------



## yotano211 (Oct 24, 2015)

Time for some laptop power, move aside, move aside. 

http://valid.x86.fr/hqf9wf


----------



## RandomSadness (Oct 24, 2015)




----------



## Capitan Harlock (Oct 24, 2015)

Tomgang said:


> I7 920 @ 4,3 GHz. If i just had water cooling i think 4,5 GHz or more is possible whit this CPU.


How you manage to get 4.3ghz without overheat? 
What i mean is that i have a Xeon w3520 that is the xeon copy of your cpu but with ecc memory support and if i go over 4 ghz and add voltage my max temps goes over 80°C when right now is 75°C max.


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 24, 2015)

Capitan Harlock said:


> How you manage to get 4.3ghz without overheat?
> What i mean is that i have a Xeon w3520 that is the xeon copy of your cpu but with ecc memory support and if i go over 4 ghz and add voltage my max temps goes over 80°C when right now is 75°C max.



My CPU does get hot. Whit a prime95 stress test it hits 78°C on the hottes core. But for every day use its never getting that hot any way.

Your cooling, airflow and outside temperature also have alot to say about cpu temperature.
I use a thermalright ultra-120 extreme cpu cooler whit 2 fast spinning 120MM fans (it brings more noise, but keep the cpu cool) inside a Antec Twelve hundred case for good airflow and outside temperature where i live is about 14°C right now.
So it is not a hot summer day. In summer time i keep my cpu at 4 GHz also to prevent overheat. I mean critical temperature for at i7 920 whit also shut be for your xeon is around 85-90°C.


----------



## Vlada011 (Oct 24, 2015)

This CPU-Z show us that i7-3770K overclocked to 4.5-4.6GHz is same as default i7-6700K, i7-6700K overclocked give fantastic results, i7-5820K overclocked to 4.0GHz is same as i7-5960X on default in multi (we saved 600e), but i7-5960X overclocked become monster and all users both him with plan to keep on 4.0GHz at least, not to keep on default.
i7-5820K little overclocked follow nicely new 4 core processors on default in single threaded applications.
Someone ask how is i7-3930K same as i7-5960X in single threaded ap... 
Probably because 300-400MHz higher Turbo and Intel didn't improve speed of core something special. Almost 20 models are pretty similar power and very strong. I mean 20-30% difference in single applications, some of them overclocked, some of default, but no 50-60-70% stronger models. Only if you compare i7-6700K with first generation.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 24, 2015)

Some very lazily overclocked FX9370 goodness. Ignore the ram that's my timings for 2400mhz, but I have the memory clocked down for normal use. Something about not wanting to run 1.7v 24/7


----------



## RandomSadness (Oct 24, 2015)

Some wild overclock on my 5820k


----------



## Vlada011 (Oct 24, 2015)

4.9GHz it would be nice to have completely stable... Immediately to sell on Silicon Lottery and replace for 5930K or even some 5960X.
I saw models stable on 4.7GHz worth more than new i7-5930K. But completely stable.


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 24, 2015)

RandomSadness said:


> Some wild overclock on my 5820k


Your temps must be pretty brutal with a 22nm CPU at 1.45v.


----------



## RandomSadness (Oct 24, 2015)

Vlada011 said:


> 4.9GHz it would be nice to have completely stable... Immediately to sell on Silicon Lottery and replace for 5930K or even some 5960X.
> I saw models stable on 4.7GHz worth more than new i7-5930K. But completely stable.


Completely stable at 4.7Ghz. Crashes after 15 minutes at 4.9Ghz .


Aquinus said:


> Your temps must be pretty brutal with a 22nm CPU at 1.45v.


About 93°C .


----------



## Ebo (Oct 24, 2015)

All at stock speed, 2400Mhz ram, same speeds as #2, funny mine is faster even if his is OC'ed.


----------



## RandomSadness (Oct 24, 2015)

Ebo said:


> All at stock speed, 2400Mhz ram, same speeds as #2, funny mine is faster even if his is OC'ed.


Not sure why his score is so low, maybe because it is on 1.73.


----------



## Vlada011 (Oct 24, 2015)

RandomSadness said:


> Completely stable at 4.7Ghz. Crashes after 15 minutes at 4.9Ghz .
> 
> About 93°C .



On 4.7GHz is stable? Silicon Lottery sell one for 530$ stable on 4.7GHz.
I would sell for similar price and bought i7-5930K on your place.


----------



## broken pixel (Oct 24, 2015)

Oh snap! When did CPUz add a benchmark tool? Nice!


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 25, 2015)

RandomSadness said:


> About 93°C .


That's a bit too hot IMHO and is asking for degradation. I always try to aim for under 70*C for a daily driver 75*C as an upper bound and 80*C as no man's land. More temps, more problems.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 25, 2015)

Aquinus said:


> That's a bit too hot IMHO and is asking for degradation. I always try to aim for under 70*C for a daily driver 75*C as an upper bound and 80*C as no man's land. More temps, more problems.


Agreed, tone down those temps or else the CPU will do the slow burn.


----------



## RandomSadness (Oct 25, 2015)

Aquinus said:


> That's a bit too hot IMHO and is asking for degradation. I always try to aim for under 70*C for a daily driver 75*C as an upper bound and 80*C as no man's land. More temps, more problems.


I run it at 3.6Ghz 0.960v on a daily basis(48°C max) and at 4.5Ghz 1.285v(69°C max) when I want it overclocked. That's with a low RPM because I can't stand noise. Unfortunately a lot voltage is required to get stable a higher clocks: 1.31v at 4.7Ghz - 1.4v at 4.8Ghz and ~1.45v at 4.9Ghz to boot. I just like pushing my hardware to its limits to see how far it can go. It obviously is not a 24/7 model.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 25, 2015)

Ok, as long as you understand the risks involved. 
It's your hardware.

These latest Intel CPUs are too expensive to bake when you're on a retirement income.


----------



## PHaS3 (Oct 25, 2015)

Heres mine  ::






EDIT:: Scores changed after update :/


----------



## cdawall (Oct 26, 2015)

990FX-UD5






890FX-GD65


----------



## broken pixel (Oct 26, 2015)




----------



## RealNeil (Oct 26, 2015)

My FX-9590 run.
I've noticed that my FX doesn't have the single core performance that my i7-4790K does.





But I'm not complaining. The FX was free and the i7 was not. LOL!


----------



## chuck216 (Oct 26, 2015)

RealNeil said:


> My FX-9590 run.
> I've noticed that my FX doesn't have the single core performance that my i7-4790K does.
> 
> View attachment 68786
> ...



Interesting your 9590 has very similar numbers as to when I'm at a 4.7 Ghz overclock on my 8320.


----------



## Jborg (Oct 26, 2015)

chuck216 said:


> Interesting your 9590 has very similar numbers as to when I'm at a 4.7 Ghz overclock on my 8320.



Essentially the same processors.... The 9*** FX processors just have a 200+ TDP  - always kept me away from them. Imo, the 8350 does a great job.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 26, 2015)

Jborg said:


> Essentially the same processors.... The 9*** FX processors just have a 200+ TDP  - always kept me away from them. Imo, the 8350 does a great job.



Why did it keep you away? An overclocked 83x0 will pull just as much wattage as a 9370/9590.


----------



## Jborg (Oct 26, 2015)

cdawall said:


> Why did it keep you away? An overclocked 83x0 will pull just as much wattage as a 9370/9590.



Basically for the reason you stated above.

I had my fx8350 @ 4.5 on stock volts being cooled by a 212 Evo. Anything beyond 4.7 would require more cooling.. And I wasn't looking to get an aio cooler. (Explains why my computer put out so much heat before I swapped to my i5, literally if I kept my bedroom door shut and played for a few hours, it would be noticeably hotter in my room compared to the temp of the house)

Furthermore, a 9370 would not enable better single core performance, and since I mainly game on my rig, it was only practical to grab an i5 and OC it a bit.

The FX 8350 / 6300 / 4350 I have all still work great and are used in other rigs in my house.


----------



## mcraygsx (Oct 26, 2015)

Toothless said:


> UPDATE: a little OC.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Here is my 4790K, Stock on Asus Maximus VII HERO.

For some reason my scores are quite a bit higher then yours. I have not done any type of OC since I like to have cool running system.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 26, 2015)

RealNeil said:


> These latest Intel CPUs are too expensive to bake when you're on a retirement income.



Hey... I saw some VIA cpus here too.... for the khremm krehmm retirees 



mcraygsx said:


> For some reason



Do you see that the CPU-Z versions differ? That's the reason why.


----------



## mcraygsx (Oct 26, 2015)

Ferrum Master said:


> Hey... I saw some VIA cpus here too.... for the khremm krehmm retirees
> 
> 
> 
> Do you that the CPU-Z versions differ? That's the reason why.



Quite right I am running 1.74 while he has 1.73


----------



## cdawall (Oct 26, 2015)

Jborg said:


> Basically for the reason you stated above.
> 
> I had my fx8350 @ 4.5 on stock volts being cooled by a 212 Evo. Anything beyond 4.7 would require more cooling.. And I wasn't looking to get an aio cooler. (Explains why my computer put out so much heat before I swapped to my i5, literally if I kept my bedroom door shut and played for a few hours, it would be noticeably hotter in my room compared to the temp of the house)
> 
> ...



Ah that makes sense. There is a massive volt wall on all of these chips hitting 5ghz so air cooling even on the 4xx0's seems rough.


----------



## Toothless (Oct 26, 2015)

mcraygsx said:


> Here is my 4790K, Stock on Asus Maximus VII HERO.
> 
> For some reason my scores are quite a bit higher then yours. I have not done any type of OC since I like to have cool running system.


Look at the CPU-Z versions.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 26, 2015)

Jborg said:


> Essentially the same processors.... The 9*** FX processors just have a 200+ TDP  - always kept me away from them. Imo, the 8350 does a great job.



I had an 8350 in the house already when I won the 9590 CPU, CoolerMaster AIO Cooler, and Gigabyte 990FX Mainboard. 
Essentially, the 9590 does at stock, what the 8350 did when overclocked. 
It uses more power, but it's more stable than the 8350 was at higher clocks.


If you look at the photo of the system that I posted above, you can see that I got rid of the Corsair case fans and the CoolerMaster AIO fans. I went with all Cougar 120mm and 140mm PWM fans throughout.
Airflow is much better this way and temps are well within what I like to see.


----------



## Compgeke (Oct 28, 2015)

Xeon X5560 in my T3500 (aka desktop).





i7 2670QM in the L502x.





i5 520M in my laptop.


----------



## Mercennarius (Oct 29, 2015)

Lenovo D20 - X5690(x2) - stock clocks


----------



## cdawall (Nov 1, 2015)

We got a Lenovo PC on a stick....Ummm wow.


----------



## Cartel (Nov 8, 2015)

I'm pretty disappointed in AMD....pretty sad performance.
A 3770K would kick the shit out of their best offerings....and the dont even have PCI-E 3.0 for their "best" socket, AM3+


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Nov 8, 2015)

Cartel said:


> I'm pretty disappointed in AMD....pretty sad performance.
> A 3770K would kick the shit out of their best offerings....and the dont even have PCI-E 3.0 for their "best" socket, AM3+


Wow  have you even looked at any of these? In single thread yes the don't get a good score but in multi thread do do pretty good.


----------



## mcraygsx (Nov 8, 2015)

I upgraded to 6700k and I must admit this CPU runs very cool. Far better then any of my previous CPUs I have ever used.






I have used my Noctua NH-D14 in past with 3 CPU's ( 4770k, 5920, 4790k) and never had such low Temperatures. For the first time I am beginning to appreciated my two years old Noctua.

Idle temps are around 28c and loaded temps are 51c. But VCORE is pretty high as it reaches 1.39v on stock settings with power saving features turn on, Anyone have an idea ?


----------



## cdawall (Nov 9, 2015)

ThE_MaD_ShOt said:


> Wow  have you even looked at any of these? In single thread yes the don't get a good score but in multi thread do do pretty good.



In multithread the only Intel CPU's winning have 6+ cores or are the 6X00 series. AMD in multithreading is doing quite well IMO.


----------



## CrackerJack (Nov 9, 2015)




----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Nov 9, 2015)

cdawall said:


> In multithread the only Intel CPU's winning have 6+ cores or are the 6X00 series. AMD in multithreading is doing quite well IMO.


Yuppers I totally agree.


----------



## Cartel (Nov 9, 2015)

Real life is mostly single thread though.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 10, 2015)

Cartel said:


> Real life is mostly single thread though.



No poorly done programming is single threaded. You already see games moving to multithreading, video editing has been multithreaded since the P4/A64 played around, hell even your browser can take advantage of multiple cores.


----------



## Cartel (Nov 10, 2015)

I'm getting off topic but try this page and see if you are using 1 core.
http://map.norsecorp.com/


----------



## Pill Monster (Nov 10, 2015)

Cartel said:


> I'm pretty disappointed in AMD....pretty sad performance.
> A 3770K would kick the shit out of their best offerings....and the dont even have PCI-E 3.0 for their "best" socket, AM3+











Cartel said:


> Real life is mostly single thread though.


 Played many DX11 games?


----------



## vnl7 (Nov 14, 2015)

Amazing perf.


----------



## Pill Monster (Nov 14, 2015)

Cartel said:


> I'm getting off topic but try this page and see if you are using 1 core.
> http://map.norsecorp.com/



FYI I checked out your link.   Number of cores in use= 6.

So there you go.....




vnl7 said:


> Amazing perf.


Wow, I'm having flashbacks.  What board is that?


----------



## vnl7 (Nov 14, 2015)

Pill Monster said:


> FYI I checked out your link.   Number of cores in use= 6.
> 
> So there you go.....
> 
> ...



http://www.motherboard.cz/mb/asus/A7V8X-MX.htm

just needed this pc today to write an eeprom using ponyprog.


----------



## Pill Monster (Nov 14, 2015)

vnl7 said:


> http://www.motherboard.cz/mb/asus/A7V8X-MX.htm
> 
> just needed this pc today to write an eeprom using ponyprog.


I had VIA too, a GA-7VAXP KT-400.     Eventually it was upgraded to an Abit AN7.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 18, 2015)

If anyone is curious how a lightly overclocked 6820HK does. Stock voltage etc.






and a 4300


----------



## cant_be_farkt (Nov 19, 2015)

Cartel said:


> I'm pretty disappointed in AMD....pretty sad performance.
> A 3770K would kick the shit out of their best offerings....and the dont even have PCI-E 3.0 for their "best" socket, AM3+


----------



## jboydgolfer (Nov 19, 2015)

my old 2nd Generation Sandy bridge still holding her own  @4.5Ghz


----------



## CK011885 (Nov 20, 2015)

My trusty i5-2500k@4.2GHZ 1588/6198 if the bench numbers are hard to read.


----------



## silentbogo (Nov 20, 2015)

Xeon X5650 on air. Had to bump my VCore past something I'm comfortable with for the reasons seen on a HWMonitor screen.


----------



## mcraygsx (Nov 22, 2015)

Fresh build 5930K @stock default bios and VCORE offset of -0.040 to keep it cool.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 23, 2015)

Oh man pushing that envelope lol


----------



## councilior (Nov 23, 2015)

Core i3 4330 3.5 GHz





 



Core i3 4030U 1.9 GHz





 



Pentium G3220 3GHz


----------



## councilior (Nov 24, 2015)

Core i3 3120M 2.5 GHz





 



It would be great to create a table to store all the bench result together. Or what about an online database?


----------



## MoltoMiller (Nov 24, 2015)

mcraygsx said:


> Fresh build 5930K @stock default bios and VCORE offset of -0.040 to keep it cool.


Armored Warfare! Nice tank. What rank and tank?


----------



## MoltoMiller (Nov 24, 2015)

Upgraded my work build to run heavy 3D CAD.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Nov 25, 2015)

Got these saved, but no memory tab...


----------



## mcraygsx (Nov 25, 2015)

MoltoMiller said:


> Armored Warfare! Nice tank. What rank and tank?



That is a British Main Battle Tank, Challenger I. There is only one map in this game where all 5 out of six cores are used by my 5930K and rest of the maps use 1-2 cores. Thus far game seems pretty decent built on a solid Engine.


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Nov 29, 2015)




----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Dec 9, 2015)

My 4770k at 4.6


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 9, 2015)




----------



## mcraygsx (Dec 9, 2015)

cadaveca said:


>



That is very impressive. How are the temps normal load ?


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 9, 2015)

About 65c under a Corsair H90 for normal loads. 1.3V for 4.7 GHz is pretty low apparently, as some chips have this voltage at stock (this one is 1.240V). I can go higher, but can't be bothered.

Combined with MSI GAMING GT980's in SLI, I got a powerful and silent rig that pulls less than 550W from the wall. Lately I've become fixated with getting the most compute power for the least electrical power.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Dec 9, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> About 65c under a Corsair H90 for normal loads. 1.3V for 4.7 GHz is pretty low apparently, as some chips have this voltage at stock (this one is 1.240V). I can go higher, but can't be bothered.
> 
> Combined with MSI GAMING GT980's in SLI, I got a powerful and silent rig that pulls less than 550W from the wall. Lately I've become fixated with getting the most compute power for the least electrical power.



God damn skylake is quick with multi-threading.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 9, 2015)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> God damn skylake is quick with multi-threading.



First generation to beat AMD in multi-threaded efficiency...You know my beliefs, but skylake honestly has impressed me and I can't wait to see what LGA 2011 brings to the table I maybe transitioning back finally. Last Intel rig I ran was bloomfield.


----------



## xvi (Dec 9, 2015)

cdawall said:


> skylake honestly has impressed me


+1
I've got a laptop running a Skylake CPU that I've been thoroughly impressed with, seems to give my overclocked, power hungry 8350 a run for its money. Of course I realize the Skylake CPU is _much_ newer, but it's still Intel's latest-gen offerings vs AMD's latest-gen offerings.


----------



## xvi (Dec 9, 2015)

Welp, this on stock cooling with slight OC beats my FX-8350 with heavy(ish) OC.


----------



## Platon (Dec 9, 2015)

My fx-4300


----------



## Shikatok (Dec 13, 2015)

Still killing it with 5 year old hardware  Need to upgrade the 770 SLI soon and get a bigger ultrawide. I kinda feel bad when I see people who just paid $1500 plus for Skylake builds (because the Chips are soo overpriced right now) are still not coming close to me.


----------



## xvi (Dec 14, 2015)

I've really liked Westmere CPUs. Great value on the used market.


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 14, 2015)

5820K, 4.2GHz core and 4.0GHz cache. RAM speed at 2800.


----------



## PCGamerDR (Dec 14, 2015)

PCGamerDR said:


> a10-6800k stock volts and multiplier but 111mhz base clock because "he" doesn't like it when i increase his multiplier. RAM @2368Mhz CL10.
> View attachment 68644 View attachment 68646View attachment 68645



Updating my noob score as i made my CPU to like it's multiplier changed, same CPU OC'd to 4,700GHz with Memory running at it's rated speed of 2,400MHz and NB Clock up to 2,700MHz. Loved that bump in score .


----------



## tttony (Dec 14, 2015)

Now my turn...


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 14, 2015)

Terrible OC'er, but still, not bad for an old Xeon:


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Dec 14, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> Terrible OC'er, but still, not bad for an old Xeon:
> 
> View attachment 70015


Oh my, can't you really go any higher than this? What motherboard are you using? Maybe your RAM or/and QPI speeds are too high?


----------



## c2DDragon (Dec 14, 2015)

My little contribution to this thread.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 14, 2015)

kniaugaudiskis said:


> Oh my, can't you really go any higher than this? What motherboard are you using? Maybe your RAM or/and QPI speeds are too high?



It was a QPI speed issue.  My board (DX58SO2) has a confusing bios.  Just got it past 4GHz, dropping back to 4 though because it wants to drink voltage past there...  lol


----------



## Narval (Dec 16, 2015)

My old Intel Core i7 980x @3.80 GHz (Engineering Sample A0 Stepping @2.40 GHz) seems to be even better than newer i7-3960X:


----------



## cdawall (Dec 16, 2015)

Finally got the AM1 rig running and 1.74 cpuz.


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Dec 16, 2015)

Narval said:


> My old Intel Core i7 980x @3.80 GHz (Engineering Sample A0 Stepping @2.40 GHz) seems to be even better than newer i7-3960X:
> 
> View attachment 70094



Nice CPU you've got there, this must be one of the "Core i9" ES chips from exactly 6 years ago (2009) and which could have been had 3 months prior the Gulftown official release  By the way, is it fully stable at 3.8GHz with 1.216v as the CPU-Z indicates?


----------



## Narval (Dec 16, 2015)

kniaugaudiskis said:


> Nice CPU you've got there, this must be one of the "Core i9" ES chips from exactly 6 years ago (2009) and which could have been had 3 months prior the Gulftown official release  By the way, is it fully stable at 3.8GHz with 1.216v as the CPU-Z indicates?



Yep, it is a Core i9. I have it running on an Alienware Aurora R1 and I am not able to make it run faster and fully stable at more than 3.80 GHz. I'm pretty sure that the reason is my Alienware mobo because temps are really cool (never more tan 70ºC with prime95). I have tried all: increasing vcore, boosting multiplier x30... no way to run it faster. But I know this chip could get over 5 GHz running on water cooling and on a better motherboard. 

I am very happy with the performance of this CPU. Is really awesome. I can score over 900 points in CINEBENCH R15 and over 10.000 points on PerformanceTest.


----------



## Razor12911 (Dec 19, 2015)

My old 2007 Core 2 Extreme QX9650, Default clock 3.0GHz and OC 3.5Ghz and that is what it got.


----------



## xvi (Dec 19, 2015)

I'm really surprised how many new members we see make their first post here. Thanks for the science!


----------



## Pegadroid (Dec 20, 2015)




----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 21, 2015)

Wife's old 720QM


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 21, 2015)

Razor12911 said:


> My old 2007 Core 2 Extreme QX9650, Default clock 3.0GHz and OC 3.5Ghz and that is what it got.




Ahhh I miss my old pal QX9650. These chips are amazing. Mine was able to reach 4GHz without any sweat!


----------



## F-Zero (Dec 21, 2015)

Here is a I5-760 @ 3.471 Mhz


----------



## Bones (Dec 23, 2015)

OK - I'll play.

FX-4300:


 
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2616873

3770K:


 
http://valid.canardpc.com/kfqv7i


----------



## Arctucas (Dec 23, 2015)




----------



## Narval (Dec 23, 2015)

Arctucas said:


>



Wow! That i7 950 is still giving some nice benchmark. Pretty good vcore. How good are temperatures? Is it completly stable 24/7?


----------



## Arctucas (Dec 23, 2015)

Narval said:


> Wow! That i7 950 is still giving some nice benchmark. Pretty good vcore. How good are temperatures? Is it completly stable 24/7?



I just recently upgraded to 12GB of RAM, still tweaking the settings.

Not sure if it is LinX 50 rounds stable yet, but for normal usage and gaming, it is good so far.

A quick 3 round LinX run, to get an idea of temperature:


----------



## PCGamerDR (Dec 23, 2015)

Bones said:


> OK - I'll play.
> 
> FX-4300:
> View attachment 70307
> ...



And the benchmarks ?


----------



## Countryside (Dec 23, 2015)




----------



## Bones (Dec 24, 2015)

PCGamerDR said:


> And the benchmarks ?



You just had to ask right? 
Here's a couple from the 4300. Not the best but I'm not setup to really run with the LN2 guys either.

http://hwbot.org/submission/2336158_bones_superpi___1m_fx_4300_14sec_812ms

http://hwbot.org/submission/2336163_bones_wprime___1024m_fx_4300_6min_14sec_359ms

Now here's a few from other sockets.

http://valid.canardpc.com/ewhq0m
 


http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2238028


----------



## PCGamerDR (Dec 24, 2015)

Bones said:


> You just had to ask right?
> Here's a couple from the 4300. Not the best but I'm not setup to really run with the LN2 guys either.
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/2336158_bones_superpi___1m_fx_4300_14sec_812ms
> ...



This thread is about the CPU-Z built-in benchmark xD! we want to see that one  and yes i actually want to see how that 4300 performs in it :O.


----------



## Arctucas (Dec 24, 2015)

@Bones,

Use the 1.74 version of CPU-Z for the benchmark.

http://download.cpuid.com/cpu-z/cpu-z_1.74-en.zip


----------



## Bones (Dec 24, 2015)

I'll do that when I get it setup again for some sub-zero benching.


----------



## hrp32 (Dec 24, 2015)

Ferrum Master said:


> My Work PC is even more shit than yours
> 
> View attachment 68523






 


Still using this machine for some programming and web browsing but fan noise is killing me.  making me underclock and undervolt it most of the time.


----------



## budozero (Dec 24, 2015)

OC to 4Ghz, rest stock afaik


----------



## huntedjohan (Dec 25, 2015)

Her is my first benchmark score. cpu is not using any OC so far.

reason that i started with this, is the fact that i get wierd problems with my pc suddenly, so i have to figure out what causes the freezes 

using cpu-z and gpu-z while monitoring the sensors could be a first step.


----------



## Shengli (Dec 26, 2015)

5820k @ 4700mhz - 1.3v watercooled.


----------



## Narval (Dec 26, 2015)

Shengli said:


> 5820k @ 4700mhz - 1.3v watercooled.



Awesome CPU. Impressive benchmark scores!


----------



## budozero (Dec 26, 2015)

Shengli said:


> 5820k @ 4700mhz - 1.3v watercooled.



hmmm, now I have to push mine  What temps do you get on load?


----------



## Shengli (Dec 26, 2015)

65+  with 2 x 360mm, d5 pump everything at absolute minimum speed


----------



## NELT (Jan 2, 2016)

4.7GHz 1.295v


----------



## Razor12911 (Jan 4, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> Ahhh I miss my old pal QX9650. These chips are amazing. Mine was able to reach 4GHz without any sweat!


Don't know how you did that, 3.5GHz is a barrier over here, I tried playing around with core multiplier and only succeeded in renaming the processor according to CPU-Z.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jan 4, 2016)

Razor12911 said:


> Don't know how you did that, 3.5GHz is a barrier over here, I tried playing around with core multiplier and only succeeded in renaming the processor according to CPU-Z.




 

My QX9650 was 2nd hand. Bought from another member from EVGA forum. I was using ASUS Maximus Formula with 8GB of DDR2-1000 RAM.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 11, 2016)

My new laptop


----------



## Narval (Jan 11, 2016)

cdawall said:


> My new laptop



Impressive single thread benchmark. Those 1432 points are awesome for a laptop.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 11, 2016)

Narval said:


> Impressive single thread benchmark. Those 1432 points are awesome for a laptop.



I thought the same it is a zippy little laptop I don't understands peoples dislike of these i7 u series chips.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 13, 2016)




----------



## R00kie (Jan 16, 2016)

Got upgraded again


----------



## EntropyZ (Jan 17, 2016)

Core 0, 1@ x38 Turbo, Core 2, 3@ x34: I could do 4GHz but that would require some FSB tweaking.


----------



## HummelMD (Jan 19, 2016)

Here are my results.


----------



## Jadawin (Jan 19, 2016)

Here's mine. Not done overclocking yet, still waiting for my watercooling setup to arrive.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 19, 2016)

Jadawin said:


> View attachment 71202
> 
> 
> Here's mine. Not done overclocking yet, still waiting for my watercooling setup to arrive.


 
thats a nice overclock at a nice vcore.. 

trog


----------



## Jadawin (Jan 19, 2016)

Yes, I hope this CPU can break the magical 5 GHz barrier with watercooling


----------



## Jadawin (Jan 20, 2016)




----------



## kNOZEl (Jan 26, 2016)

My Q6600


----------



## wildone (Jan 27, 2016)

Here I didn't see any kaveri benchmarks.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 27, 2016)

This is at 4.5ghz stock volts


----------



## kNOZEl (Jan 27, 2016)

Another benchmark q6600 3,1 GHz. Lol this time 3800 pts...


----------



## PCGamerDR (Jan 27, 2016)

wildone said:


> View attachment 71470 View attachment 71471 Here I didn't see any kaveri benchmarks.




1.45v for that chip/speed seems rather high, have you tried lowering volt a bit?


----------



## kNOZEl (Jan 28, 2016)

One more benchmark from my Q6600 this time 4000 pts


----------



## tomkaten (Jan 29, 2016)

My Xeon:


----------



## Cartel (Feb 3, 2016)

maybe a tiny bit better with 1.75




Big difference with the 32bit version of CPUZ....1090T with the win


----------



## cdawall (Feb 4, 2016)

Just barely getting anywhere with this thing.

Edit:


----------



## YautjaLord (Feb 6, 2016)

A bit higher score than 4.0GHz i7 4790K in multi thread. Have any of you used Stress CPU? If did, for how long? 1h? 2h?


----------



## UnRPhOeNiX (Feb 7, 2016)




----------



## GenieGOR (Feb 17, 2016)

Hello everyone. I build computers and sell them as a hobby. I just wanted to share. I always used the 4790 or 5930 in top end builds. I was skeptical over the skylake when it was announced. This shows skylake is definitely stronger than the 4790. I have never seen a 4790 even close to 10,500 in multicore, or single core score of 2400+. The best results I ever could squeeze out of a 4790 was around 2200 single, and 9300 multi core. I remember when someone else who works at my distributor said that the 6700k will never even get close to the 5930. Yea, well here it is.


----------



## CiprianRO (Feb 21, 2016)

Hi Everyone, this is my benchmark.


----------



## Makaveli (Feb 21, 2016)




----------



## jorj02 (Feb 26, 2016)

is my processor good ? i5 2500k 4.4ghz


----------



## Schmuckley (Feb 26, 2016)

http://valid.canardpc.com/llyyjn


----------



## dustinclark07 (Feb 26, 2016)

Is this good for this cpu? The pc is about 5 or so years old.


----------



## TeddyPawsWolf (Feb 28, 2016)

Weird,the scores shouldn't be such low like this.
Close with the 7850K


----------



## dustinclark07 (Feb 28, 2016)

TeddyPawsWolf said:


> View attachment 72466 View attachment 72467 View attachment 72468
> 
> Weird,the scores shouldn't be such low like this.
> Close with the 7850K


Yeah that doesn't look right. Is it overheating and protecting itself?


----------



## Fouquin (Feb 29, 2016)

I have scores from the QuadFather system too, but I need to pull it over and plug it in to get the images off. I'll do that later.


----------



## stealth83 (Feb 29, 2016)

First is stock, then @4.69 and @5.0


----------



## Olma (Feb 29, 2016)

for statistics
[FONT=arial, sans-serif]

 [/FONT]


----------



## TRWOV (Feb 29, 2016)

My daily grinder


----------



## TeddyPawsWolf (Feb 29, 2016)

dustinclark07 said:


> Yeah that doesn't look right. Is it overheating and protecting itself?


No,everything looks fine.Temp is around 40C underload


----------



## Sempron Guy (Feb 29, 2016)

My daily clock for my Phenom II X4 960T w/ 5th core unlocked.


----------



## Rasp (Feb 29, 2016)

First Generation i7 920 (from 2009) with c0/c1 stepping @3ghz (air). It appears to keep up with most for being so old. I may oc to 3.3-3.5 soon.


----------



## Fouquin (Feb 29, 2016)

Sempron Guy said:


> View attachment 72491
> 
> My daily clock for my Phenom II X4 960T w/ 5th core unlocked.



I miss my 960T. Such a great chip.


----------



## Ascaris (Mar 2, 2016)

Hi everyone!  I've browsed here from time to time, but when I saw this thread, I had to register to post mine.

My main PC:





My Asus F8SP laptop (2008):


----------



## Filip Georgievski (Mar 2, 2016)

My trusty I5 750 OCed to 3.3 with a 1600Mhz RAM Memory Speed.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 2, 2016)

YautjaLord said:


> Have any of you used Stress CPU? If did, for how long? 1h? 2h?




I use it often, the longest i used it for is about 6 hours.

Its a really handy tool, i run it with HWMonitor to see if theres any throttling going on.


----------



## Sempron Guy (Mar 2, 2016)

Fouquin said:


> I miss my 960T. Such a great chip.



yeah I got it cheap too bad the 6th core's defective


----------



## Fouquin (Mar 2, 2016)

Sempron Guy said:


> yeah I got it cheap too bad the 6th core's defective



That's too bad. They don't make bad quad-core chips though since they overclock about the same as a 955 if you're lucky. Plus they get the turbo core feature like the 650T and 840T, which on some boards you can keep enabled even when overclocked. Handy to get an extra 100MHz boost over your 24/7 OC for single-threaded load apps.


----------



## Hargon (Mar 5, 2016)

*
Stock:*






*OC:*


----------



## hrsh91 (Mar 7, 2016)

Not bad for an Fx 4300 @ 4.2 ghz (oc method, NB fqcy and fsb 2400mhz multiplier 21x200=4200


----------



## TheUnbrained (Mar 8, 2016)

My CPU-Z score with than fckin OP-intel core i5 xD (no rly... this thing has much more power than my lovely phenom 2 x6 1100t)

well, its funny to see,that a 5960X is only 9P higher in single thread 0_o

(Edit: needless to say, that this thing is oced to 4ghz xD)


----------



## TheHunter (Mar 8, 2016)

Ram DDR3 2133MHz CL9, OC'ed @ 2400MHz CL10-12-12-31-1T
Cache 4.2GHz






Cache @ 4.4 Ghz did some minor difference by multi score (but its not so consistent, on next run it was ~ 9230 again), 
this time Ram @ stock 2133MHz, thought it would make a difference by single threaded, but not really.


----------



## PCGamerDR (Mar 8, 2016)

TeddyPawsWolf said:


> View attachment 72466 View attachment 72467 View attachment 72468
> 
> Weird,the scores shouldn't be such low like this.
> Close with the 7850K



Close any monitoring apps that u may have running in the background like fraps, hwinfo, cputemp and try again.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 8, 2016)

TRWOV said:


> My daily grinder
> 
> View attachment 72489



This really makes me wish Asrocks version had more voltage adjustment or asus had a slot for a laptop wifi card. I am stuck at 2.4ghz thanks to the board limitations.


----------



## Scirron (Mar 8, 2016)




----------



## nedooo (Mar 8, 2016)

Olma said:


> for statistics
> [FONT=arial, sans-serif]View attachment 72484 [/FONT]


Same as mine i54670k at 4,5ghz


----------



## DeXa (Mar 9, 2016)

Lenovo T440s





Unfortunately the 3.7Ghz is only on one core. Multicore is limited to 3.4Ghz.
After looking back in the thread ... it seems that the per-core performance is pretty much the same in all new CPUs. If only it was possible to run it on multiplier above 37 it could easily reach 4.5Ghz.

This is stock just for reference (33 one core, 30 both cores)


----------



## valyamd (Mar 9, 2016)




----------



## Tomgang (Mar 10, 2016)

I know i have posted before but that image dosent work any more and after some tweaking of the old junk the score has also being improved a bit.

So here is what the 7 year old first gen core i7 920 performs at stock and with OC.

Stock is alright but nothing special.






At 4 GHz running 24/7 and the sweet spot for this CPU on air cooling.





But it is not that this cpu not can run higher. If i had water cooling this chip would happily run around 4,3-4,4 GHz maybe even 4,5 GHz 24/7.


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 12, 2016)

TeddyPawsWolf said:


> View attachment 72466 View attachment 72467 View attachment 72468
> 
> Weird,the scores shouldn't be such low like this.
> Close with the 7850K



Definitely a problem with the multi-thread. Here's what an 8320 should be doing at stock speeds:


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 12, 2016)

Not bad for $149.99


----------



## oldtech5670 (Mar 13, 2016)




----------



## silentbogo (Mar 14, 2016)

That's my dream machine right ^^^ there.


----------



## P4-630 (Mar 14, 2016)

i5 6500


----------



## CaptainVeyron (Mar 14, 2016)

Guys I have got a treat for you these are my stable i7-4790k @4.9ghz on air. Sadly 5.0ghz was unstable ;P (e.g. Wouldn't boot without bsoding first. 

 

 




EDIT: I have the voltage now to 1.265V stable and it gets temps of around 76*C


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 14, 2016)

silentbogo said:


> That's my dream machine right ^^^ there.



I used to like you.....





@oldtech5670  your single threaded score is pretty low compared to mine and multithreaded is significantly higher....what actual clocks did you run?


----------



## Grings (Mar 14, 2016)

from the look of it 3.3 ghz, did you not notice it has 2 cpu's?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 14, 2016)

Grings said:


> from the look of it 3.3 ghz, did you not notice it has 2 cpu's?




Doh !

Edit, i will have to try it on my 2P...i havent got 2 X5670's though....


----------



## fmasins (Mar 14, 2016)




----------



## jaggerwild (Mar 14, 2016)

Nice Oldtech5670, Dual socket board? Like to know what board it is?


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 14, 2016)

PSychoTron said:


> Not bad for $149.99


 I know it isn't Intel so it is junk.


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 14, 2016)

CaptainVeyron said:


> Guys I have got a treat for you these are my stable i7-4790k @4.9ghz on air. Sadly 5.0ghz was unstable ;P (e.g. Wouldn't boot without bsoding first. View attachment 72909 View attachment 72910 View attachment 72911
> 
> 
> EDIT: I have the voltage now to 1.265V stable and it gets temps of around 76*C


----------



## jaggerwild (Mar 15, 2016)

PSychoTron said:


> I know it isn't Intel so it is junk.


 How is it junk, looks good to me. probably go way higher with a good water cooler.


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 15, 2016)

jaggerwild said:


> How is it junk, looks good to me. probably go way higher with a good water cooler.


 Getting watercooling soon


----------



## oldtech5670 (Mar 15, 2016)

jaggerwild said:


> Nice Oldtech5670, Dual socket board? Like to know what board it is?



Hi!

An old s5520ur on a very old sr1600urhs chasis.


----------



## CaptainVeyron (Mar 15, 2016)

@PSychoTron Post your cinebench scores, I am aware that for some reason the cpuz benchmark favours an fx8350 for some reason.


----------



## R-T-B (Mar 15, 2016)

CaptainVeyron said:


> @PSychoTron Post your cinebench scores, I am aware that for some reason the cpuz benchmark favours an fx8350 for some reason.



Probably due to it not using modern x86_64 extensions as much, which AMD tend to suck at and multimedia benchmarks love...  just a guess.


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 15, 2016)

CaptainVeyron said:


> @PSychoTron Post your cinebench scores, I am aware that for some reason the cpuz benchmark favours an fx8350 for some reason.


Intel compilerbench then I will run Sysmarks next.I think amd paid cpu z off.


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 15, 2016)

PSychoTron said:


> Intel compilerbench then I will run Sysmarks next.I think amd paid cpu z off.



No it's just that intel is just that much weaker in multithreaded tasks.

The problem is that Intel is making 4 cores do the work of 8 where AMD has 8 dedicated cores. Though the 6 core (12 thread) haswells and the Skylakes do get higher scores  simply because of more threads.


----------



## CaptainVeyron (Mar 15, 2016)

@chuck216 I think your picture says it all... (Also look at the difference between my 4 core and the 6 core 3930k only 100 and the difference between AMDs 8 cores is that they are weak and intel can get away with 4 stronger ones.)
And @PSychoTron run cinebench as a far as I know it is unbiased  Also unfortuneately i was getting hanging in cinebench at 4.9ghz (Though I am on air) So I have turned it down to 4.8 and 1.285 CoreV The 889 score is on stock.


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 15, 2016)

CaptainVeyron said:


> @chuck216 I think your picture says it all... (Also look at the difference between my 4 core and the 6 core 3930k only 100 and the difference between AMDs 8 cores is that they are weak and intel can get away with 4 stronger ones.)
> And @PSychoTron run cinebench as a far as I know it is unbiased  Also unfortuneately i was getting hanging in cinebench at 4.9ghz (Though I am on air) So I have turned it down to 4.8 and 1.285 CoreV The 889 score is on stock.View attachment 72931



How about a cinebench result showing  the multi-thread result also, we all know Intel is faster in single thread.


----------



## CaptainVeyron (Mar 15, 2016)

@chuck216 you do realise that cinebench only does multi-thread

It shows your 8 threads rendering a piece each before moving onto the next one.


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 15, 2016)

CaptainVeyron said:


> @chuck216 you do realise that cinebench only does multi-thread
> 
> It shows your 8 threads rendering a piece each before moving onto the next one.



Actually it does single thread also.. actually meant to say  show single thread also. didn't realize he posted the multithread at first until I opened my cinebench to run a test which I'm doing right after I post this.


----------



## CaptainVeyron (Mar 15, 2016)

@chuck216 Are you using R15? If you have trouble launching just hold ctrl+shift at the same time as opening the program sometimes it has an error for me and this solves it.


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 15, 2016)

CaptainVeyron said:


> @chuck216 Are you using R15? If you have trouble launching just hold ctrl+shift at the same time as opening the program sometimes it has an error for me and this solves it.


Yep running R15 and here are my results @4.7 ghz:


----------



## CaptainVeyron (Mar 15, 2016)

Why are you on single core? But why is your GPU so slow???

EDIT I can see your multi core is 687


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 15, 2016)

chuck216 said:


> Yep running R15 and here are my results @4.7 ghz: Wonder why my 4.7 is higher then yours


----------



## CaptainVeyron (Mar 15, 2016)

@PSychoTron and @chuck216 Those results seem more comparable than the CPU-Z benchmark. As you put it @PSychoTron


> 'I think AMD paid cpu z off'


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 15, 2016)

Guys... (or gals) click file. advanced benchmark in C15 and run it let's see the MP ratios. 

As for why mine seems a bit slower might be because I was doing a software OC through Overdrive for a quick run I normally run at stock speeds 24/7. 

BTW here's my C15 at stock 3.5 ghz. :


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 15, 2016)

CaptainVeyron said:


> @PSychoTron and @chuck216 Those results seem more comparable than the CPU-Z benchmark. As you put it @PSychoTron


But that's not the point of this thread is it?I see Cpu z benchmark's in the title not Intelbench in the title.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 15, 2016)

chuck216 said:


> No it's just that intel is just that much weaker in multithreaded tasks.
> 
> The problem is that Intel is making 4 cores do the work of 8 where AMD has 8 dedicated cores. Though the 6 core (12 thread) haswells and the Skylakes do get higher scores  simply because of more threads.



Not as of the 6th generation. Scaling meets/exceeds AMD now. There are no 6 core skylakes BTW they are 4 core.


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 15, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Not as of the 6th generation. Scaling meets/exceeds AMD now. There are no 6 core skylakes BTW they are 4 core.



I meant 6 core haswells and 4 core skylakes with HT


----------



## CaptainVeyron (Mar 15, 2016)

@chuck216 Here is my mp ratio lower than yours though that is to be expected, as I only have four physical cores. My score in my multiplier should be as near to 4 as possible and yours should be as near to 8 as possible as that would be perfect scaling. The first picture is with hyper-threading on and this actually means my cores combined into 8 separate threads are worse at scaling than your 8 physical cores. Expected. However the second picture shows my scores without hyper-threading and my four cores still beat your 8 cores so better single core performance expected. AND the multiplier on my cpu without hyper-threading is 3.65. So nearer to 4 than yours is to 8 so mine has better scaling on the cores too. If we multiply mine by two I have a multiplier of 7.3 compared to your 6.35 so if my processor was 8 core in theory it would have better scaling.


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 15, 2016)

CaptainVeyron said:


> @chuck216 Here is my mp ratio lower than yours though that is to be expected, as I only have four physical cores. My score in my multiplier should be as near to 4 as possible and yours should be as near to 8 as possible as that would be perfect scaling. The first picture is with hyper-threading on and this actually means my cores combined into 8 separate threads are worse than your 8 physical cores. Expected. However the second picture shows my scores without hyper-threading and my four cores still beat your 8 cores so better single core performance expected. AND the multiplier on my cpu without hyper-threading is 3.65. So nearer to 4 than yours is to 8 so mine has better scaling on the cores too. If we multiply mine by two I have a multiplier of 7.3 compared to your 6.35 so if my processor was 8 core in theory it would have better scaling.
> View attachment 72935
> View attachment 72936


That Cpu z benchmark result sure did get your goat.Better go run it in safe mode now.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 16, 2016)

chuck216 said:


> I meant 6 core haswells and 4 core skylakes with HT


Skylake has 8 threads same as amd and it scales As good if not better than the fx chips. I'm sorry unless amd whips something out of their ass with zen skylake officials beats and in all things.


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 16, 2016)

Dam the i7 6700k is $10 cheaper then the i7 5820k wow.Can image the what the price of the new 2011 cpu's will be.


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 16, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Skylake has 8 threads same as amd and it scales As good if not better than the fx chips. I'm sorry unless amd whips something out of their ass with zen skylake officials beats and in all things.



You're right  but at anywhere from twice to five times the price of current FX 8 core chips the skylakes had better outperform them running the same amount of threads.

In fact the whole difference in performance is a performance per dollar thing. Both 2 core i3's with HT and 4 core i5's w/o HT run quite a bit faster than FXs at around the same pricepoint as the FX's on a clock for clock basis. However
the FX's pull away when multutasking simply because of more cores, this is true of both 6 core AMD's and 8 cores.

Now the 4 core i7's with HT do get close to matching the FX 8 cores clock for clock  when running all threads but, and this is a big but they have a much higher pricepoint. 

But then again AMD is it's own worst enemy here in a way because my $140 FX-8320  can easily be Overclocked to 4.7 Ghz stable on an 8 year old discontinued top down air cooler and match a $230 FX-9590 at it's stock speeds.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 16, 2016)

chuck216 said:


> You're right  but at anywhere from twice to five times the price of current FX 8 core chips the skylakes had better outperform them running the same amount of threads.
> 
> In fact the whole difference in performance is a performance per dollar thing. Both 2 core i3's with HT and 4 core i5's w/o HT run quite a bit faster than FXs at around the same pricepoint as the FX's on a clock for clock basis. However
> the FX's pull away when multutasking simply because of more cores, this is true of both 6 core AMD's and 8 cores.
> ...



This coming from a guy with two 12 core opterons at 4.6. My 5820k can nearly equal every single thing the Opteron setup does with 1/4th the cores and half the threads. The skylake i5's are pissing on amd even multithreaded.


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 16, 2016)

No Intel for me.Not after Pentium 4 Willamette.


----------



## noface0711 (Mar 17, 2016)

That's my dream machine right ^^^ there.


----------



## Underdog (Mar 21, 2016)

Can I play too?
24/7


----------



## SystemViper (Mar 21, 2016)

chuck216 said:


> You're right  but at anywhere from twice to five times the price of current FX 8 core chips the skylakes had better outperform them running the same amount of threads.
> 
> In fact the whole difference in performance is a performance per dollar thing. Both 2 core i3's with HT and 4 core i5's w/o HT run quite a bit faster than FXs at around the same pricepoint as the FX's on a clock for clock basis. However
> the FX's pull away when multutasking simply because of more cores, this is true of both 6 core AMD's and 8 cores.
> ...





cdawall said:


> This coming from a guy with two 12 core opterons at 4.6. My 5820k can nearly equal every single thing the Opteron setup does with 1/4th the cores and half the threads. The skylake i5's are pissing on amd even multithreaded.



Damn !


----------



## cdawall (Mar 22, 2016)

SystemViper said:


> Damn !



Never thought you would see that out of me did you haha


----------



## SystemViper (Mar 22, 2016)

yOUR THE MAN!


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 22, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Never thought you would see that out of me did you haha


You deserve Internet medal


----------



## Fouquin (Mar 24, 2016)

Decided to have some fun with FM1. I wanted to get a feel for how a shrunk K10 would handle.



 

Hardly stable, which is a shame. I now have it locked in at 3.5GHz with the memory pushed to 1866. Good response time but not a lot of performance to respond with.


----------



## edgarss (Mar 27, 2016)

Hi! New here. My 10 years old CPU still got it!


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 28, 2016)

Just bought this Pc for $120.00
It has a Msi 970 gaming motherboard Amd Fx 8320 8 Gb of Wintec 1600 mhz ram amd radeon 7870 Corair H 80i Corair tx 750 watts Ocz 120 gb SSD Western digtal  500 gb harddrive.
Asus VE205T .20"1600 x 900 Monitor


----------



## xkm1948 (Mar 28, 2016)

My Lab computer:


----------



## jaggerwild (Mar 28, 2016)

Underdog said:


> Can I play too?
> 24/7
> View attachment 73103



Yeah it says CPU-Z not Cinabench


----------



## Grings (Mar 29, 2016)

PSychoTron said:


> Just bought this Pc for $120.00
> It has a Msi 970 gaming motherboard Amd Fx 8320 8 Gb of Wintec 1600 mhz ram amd radeon 7870 Corair H 80i Corair tx 750 watts Ocz 120 gb SSD Western digtal  500 gb harddrive.
> Asus VE205T .20"1600 x 900 Monitor



Nice find, bargain


----------



## xkm1948 (Mar 29, 2016)

PSychoTron said:


> Just bought this Pc for $120.00
> It has a Msi 970 gaming motherboard Amd Fx 8320 8 Gb of Wintec 1600 mhz ram amd radeon 7870 Corair H 80i Corair tx 750 watts Ocz 120 gb SSD Western digtal  500 gb harddrive.
> Asus VE205T .20"1600 x 900 Monitor
> View attachment 73351



That is a great price!!


----------



## AsRock (Mar 29, 2016)




----------



## Underdog (Mar 29, 2016)

jaggerwild said:


> Yeah it says CPU-Z not Cinabench


Page 4. Also read page 14. btw cinEbench.


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 29, 2016)

Underdog said:


> Page 4. Also read page 14. btw cinEbench.


What's your point, it's still a CPU-z benchmark thread. 
Perhaps we should have another thread just for Cinebench.


----------



## Underdog (Mar 29, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> What's your point, it's still a CPU-z benchmark thread.
> Perhaps we should have another thread just for Cinebench.


CaptainVeyron wanted Cinebench scores, i am not trying to be an ass.
He is convinced AMD payed cpu-z off, and Cinebench would be a better benchmark.


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 29, 2016)

It might be better, i'm not stressing over it. Pretty sure I posted mine in some random thread...


----------



## PSychoTron (Mar 29, 2016)

The cinebench score are on here because CaptainVeyron had something to prove because his i7 4790k got beat by a fx amd 8350 in the Cpu z benchmark. I still find it hilarious.


----------



## Underdog (Mar 30, 2016)

Thread quantum set too 94ms. 10 extra single core points and 200 multi points.


----------



## avenger001 (Mar 30, 2016)

Hello everyone, this is my first post here. These are my CPU bench results with a 4790k oc'd


----------



## scevism (Mar 30, 2016)




----------



## Gaetan77 (Apr 1, 2016)

Hi, this is my first post here! 

Intel Pentium 4 HT 3.00 Ghz socket 478:

ST *157*
MT *229*





Overclock at 3900 Mhz (FSB 260 Mhz) with Intel stock cooler e V-Core= 1.45V:

ST *209*
MT *299*


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Apr 7, 2016)

Here is an "older Intel CPU" in case anyone is interested.

http://ark.intel.com/products/39107/Intel-Core2-Quad-Processor-Q8300-4M-Cache-2_50-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB




 

its in here


----------



## puma99dk| (Apr 7, 2016)

My i7 haven't oc'ed it, just enabled X.M.P. in bios on my Asus Z170i Pro Gaming.


----------



## sn2x (Apr 15, 2016)

Didn't see anything for the 5775C yet so here are my results.


----------



## puma99dk| (Apr 16, 2016)

sn2x said:


> Didn't see anything for the 5775C yet so here are my results.



If u fill out ur System Specs i would help on mobo, ram and all that u can't see what frequency ur ram is running at


----------



## Grings (Apr 16, 2016)

sn2x said:


> Didn't see anything for the 5775C yet so here are my results.



Nice, does it show anything extra for the L4/128mb bit in the caches tab?


----------



## sn2x (Apr 16, 2016)

puma99dk| said:


> If u fill out ur System Specs i would help on mobo, ram and all that u can't see what frequency ur ram is running at





Grings said:


> Nice, does it show anything extra for the L4/128mb bit in the caches tab?



Yeah the cache was at 1.8 GHz at stock but I decided to OC that to 2.0 GHz just because, not sure what it does though.


----------



## de.das.dude (Apr 16, 2016)

Check my siggy!


----------



## broken pixel (Apr 16, 2016)

5930k Multi T 14095


----------



## NucLeaR (May 8, 2016)




----------



## Narajujo (May 8, 2016)

here's my Q6600 with a bit of OC, I run this cpu since 2008


----------



## babbage78 (May 10, 2016)

Here's my 6700K at a 4.5 Ghz overclock


----------



## MrGenius (May 10, 2016)

i5-3570K @ 4.8GHz










Core 2 Duo E8600 @ 3.33GHz


----------



## biffzinker (May 10, 2016)




----------



## MrGenius (May 10, 2016)

*EPIC low* score for my Northwood-128 Celeron @ 2.0GHz


----------



## biffzinker (May 10, 2016)

Wow, that's indeed a low score, congratulations


----------



## R-T-B (May 10, 2016)

How does that thing multithread so bad?  I mean it's only got one core, but still...  Lol.


----------



## MCanalog (May 10, 2016)




----------



## BiggieShady (May 10, 2016)

i5 3570K @4.2 GHz


----------



## MrGenius (May 11, 2016)

Ok so the time limit to edit posts is < 48 hours. I wanted to edit my previous post with a score update. Oh well. Here goes.

*ULTRA LOW* score from my Northwood-128 Celeron @ 2.0GHz with 256MB DDR200 3-4-4-6










Looks like I can't score 0 in CPU Multi Thread. There's almost no hope with that CPU at least.


----------



## Makaveli (May 13, 2016)

lol wow celeron northwood haven't seen one of those in many years.

i would rather a Amd Duron chip


----------



## JrockTech (May 13, 2016)

Stable clock. Cannot get 5Ghz stable


----------



## NucLeaR (May 13, 2016)

JrockTech said:


> Stable clock. Cannot get 5Ghz stable


Man you core voltage critical 1.644v !!! Max 1.55v in air cooling. And ours motherboards low VRM 4+1 phase for overclock too bad 
ps: my system working stable at 4.0Ghz(see profile). and normaly working 4.5Ghz, but linx bench or render video - freze 3-5mins.


----------



## JrockTech (May 13, 2016)

NucLeaR said:


> Man you core voltage critical 1.644v !!! Max 1.55v in air cooling. And ours motherboards low VRM 4+1 phase for overclock too bad
> ps: my system working stable at 4.0Ghz(see profile). and normaly working 4.5Ghz, but linx bench or render video - freze 3-5mins.



I'm on H100 liquid I should update profile. Temps stay below 70. You are right though, voltage is very high. I am cooling VRM area and North bridge with added fans. 

We will see how long it lasts for


----------



## NucLeaR (May 13, 2016)

JrockTech said:


> I'm on H100 liquid I should update profile. Temps stay below 70. You are right though, voltage is very high. I am cooling VRM area and North bridge with added fans.
> 
> We will see how long it lasts for



Corsair H100 nice


----------



## TommyT (May 13, 2016)




----------



## Enterprise24 (May 13, 2016)




----------



## MrGenius (May 13, 2016)

3570K @ 4.9GHz


----------



## Caring1 (May 14, 2016)

That's some crazy voltage you have going in that CPU.


----------



## MrGenius (May 14, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> That's some crazy voltage you have going in that CPU.


That's nothing. My last 3570K ran stable @ 5.0GHz w/ 1.656V. I can clock this one @ the same, but it's not stable in the least. I'm no pussy when it comes to volts. I did learn not to take a 3570K too far over 2.0V...the hard way.  That being said, I'm taking it much easier on this one. I haven't tried much more than 1.8V with it. I'm satisfied @ 4.8GHz w/ 1.504V stable. And that's only for benching. 4.6GHz w/ 1.336V 24/7. Anyhow Intel says 1.52V is safe. 1.55V max on water.



 








EDIT: Just realized that 4.9GHz CPU-Z screeny in my previous post says "Multiplier x 49.0 (16-*48*)" . Which is weird. It never used to say that.


----------



## JrockTech (May 14, 2016)

MrGenius said:


> That's nothing. My last 3570K ran stable @ 5.0GHz w/ 1.656V. I can clock this one @ the same, but it's not stable in the least. I'm no pussy when it comes to volts. I did learn not to take a 3570K too far over 2.0V...
> 
> View attachment 74561 View attachment 74562



Nice to see others out there who crank their voltage too


----------



## m0nt3 (May 14, 2016)

Its the FX system in my sytem specs, but running in a virtual machine with VGA passt-hrough on my arch linux install.


----------



## TwelveSouth (May 15, 2016)




----------



## wtfskilz (May 16, 2016)

My 6700K;  You can try to tell me a 6-8 core Haswell is better all you want. I will never believe you


----------



## wtfskilz (May 16, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> View attachment 74621 My 6700K;  You can try to tell me a 6-8 core Haswell is better all you want. I will never believe you


Can anyone tell me how they tested the reference CPU's ? I want to know if they used boost or not? I also want to know what ram settings were used.


----------



## wtfskilz (May 16, 2016)

MrGenius said:


> 3570K @ 4.9GHz
> That's impressive, I my self have been very skeptical about voltages, what do you think the safe limit is on a 6700K ? I've been thinking about adding one more OC 4848Mhz, but I have to run at about 1.456+ volts, my temps are good, but I don't know if the voltage is too much.


----------



## wtfskilz (May 16, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Skylake fun @ 4.5Ghz with DDR4-2750 (they are g.skill 2800Mhz modules but 2800Mhz doesn't like my gigabyte mobo for some reason at 125Mhz BCLK.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...





puma99dk| said:


> My i7 haven't oc'ed it, just enabled X.M.P. in bios on my Asus Z170i Pro Gaming.
> 
> View attachment 73592


Did you disable boost? or leave that setting alone?


----------



## wtfskilz (May 16, 2016)

JrockTech said:


> Stable clock. Cannot get 5Ghz stable


Wow can you game at that OC? those are pretty good results for a 6 core AMD


----------



## puma99dk| (May 16, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> Did you disable boost? or leave that setting alone?



everything else is stock even boost but when the cpu ain't under load of anything it underclocks bcs of Intel's speedstep


----------



## wtfskilz (May 16, 2016)

View attachment 73592[/QUOTE]


puma99dk| said:


> My i7 haven't oc'ed it, just enabled X.M.P. in bios on my Asus Z170i Pro Gaming.



Default CPU settings, i'm not using XMP, because it can't boot with XMP 
so custom ram timings.
Our clock for clock timings are quite close


----------



## TheGuruStud (May 16, 2016)

Idk how you guys get good clocks on haswell. These chips are just junk! Lucky bastards.


----------



## RandomAxe (May 16, 2016)

Not bad for a 120$ CPU eh?
P.S. Don't judge me for my wallpaper...
My second run with less programs running, less single core, more multi core
3rd pic is 4.7ghz stable, I can do 5.1 stable, but it runs too hot for me to feel comfortable, so i keep it at 4.4 until i get a beefier cooler


----------



## wtfskilz (May 16, 2016)

babbage78 said:


> Here's my 6700K at a 4.5 Ghz overclock
> 
> View attachment 74368 View attachment 74369 View attachment 74370



Hey I thought I would run a couple of tests at 4.5Ghz with my 6700K to compare with yours, I ran with two different ram settings.
Test 1:









Test 2


----------



## cdawall (May 16, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> View attachment 74621 My 6700K;  You can try to tell me a 6-8 core Haswell is better all you want. I will never believe you



You only beat the chip at stock setting in single core with a sizable overclock...


----------



## 50eurouser (May 16, 2016)




----------



## brandonwh64 (May 16, 2016)

cdawall said:


> You only beat the chip at stock setting in single core with a sizable overclock...



LOL I was just thinking the same way. Just imagine that chip at the same clocks as his and it would be a a HUGE gap.


----------



## cdawall (May 16, 2016)

brandonwh64 said:


> LOL I was just thinking the same way. Just imagine that chip at the same clocks as his and it would be a a HUGE gap.








Mild overclock on an AIO. Weird how much it wins in multithreading. Bet if I disabled two cores I could get the single core to tie as well...


----------



## Ruyki (May 16, 2016)

Here's how fast my 4790k is at 4Ghz (turbo boost is turned off since that's how I use it):


----------



## MrGenius (May 16, 2016)

MrGenius said:


> Ok so the time limit to edit posts is < 48 hours.


Must be < 24 hours(or less) apparently. Just went to edit the link to my 4.8GHz score I screwed up in my previous post from yesterday and I couldn't. So fine!!! F U then!!! Let me waste another post so I can fix it in this one. Stupidest F'ing rule I've EVER heard of!! Why not make the edit limit < 5 minutes like PMs? Or just make editing posts impossible altogether? Makes just about as much sense. Whoever thought this stupid shit up needs shot. You've done NOTHING but make this site worse!! 


MrGenius said:


> I'm satisfied @ 4.8GHz w/ 1.504V stable.


----------



## JrockTech (May 16, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> Wow can you game at that OC? those are pretty good results for a 6 core AMD



Yes. Gaming is stable. Prime95 has only been tested for an hour but it passed all tests. 

I really want 5Ghz, but no matter what I do I cannot get it Prime95 stable. I think it would be possible if I still had my ASUS ROG mobo.


----------



## wtfskilz (May 17, 2016)

..





cdawall said:


> Mild overclock on an AIO. Weird how much it wins in multithreading. Bet if I disabled two cores I could get the single core to tie as well...





cdawall said:


> You only beat the chip at stock setting in single core with a sizable overclock...



Who cares... it does great in gaming, and out does the 6+ core CPUs in DX12, BTW I bet if I disable HT I can get another 300 points or so in single threaded myself


----------



## cdawall (May 17, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> ..
> 
> 
> Who cares... it does great in gaming, and out does the 6+ core CPUs in DX12, BTW I bet if I disable HT I can get another 300 points or so in single threaded myself



It only out does chips when you can't multithread. At the end of the day an i3 can easily equal you in single threading so in 2016 it's a bit mute.


----------



## wtfskilz (May 17, 2016)

cdawall said:


> It only out does chips when you can't multithread. At the end of the day an i3 can easily equal you in single threading so in 2016 it's a bit mute.


There are many games that take advantage of multithreading with 6-8 threads, NBA 2k15-16, FO4, Farcry 3-4, MGS 5, MGS phantom pain, GTA V, dream fall chapters, Dying light, ARMA 3, Battlefield 3+,Watch Dogs etc... and for games that don't take advantage of this,  like Pillars of Eternity, StarCraft 2, Wasteland 2, Dragon age Origins, Witcher 1 and 2, benefit highly from single threaded
There aren't really any games that take advantage of 12 full threads right now in 2016, it's just a waste of money.


----------



## cdawall (May 17, 2016)

Which of those games does the 6700k show a performance increase at 3840x2160?


----------



## Enterprise24 (May 17, 2016)

i5-6500 @ 4.9Ghz Vcore 1.408V


----------



## Enterprise24 (May 17, 2016)

5Ghz 1.46V will try 5.1Ghz when have time to delidded


----------



## wtfskilz (May 17, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Which of those games does the 6700k show a performance increase at 3840x2160?



All of them


----------



## cdawall (May 17, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> All of them



I'm going to call bs unless you play purely games with no gpu limitation at all...


----------



## wtfskilz (May 17, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I'm going to call bs unless you play purely games with no gpu limitation at all...



Well you never specified which GPU's, but yes if your using OCed dual Titan X / 980 TI in SLI at 4k there is slightly better results. I myself game at 1440P so the results are even better.


----------



## MrGenius (May 17, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> See post #410


I'm sorry. I didn't realize you'd quoted me there. Or rather were directing a question at me. I don't really know the answer to that at the moment. I've never owned a 6700K. And I haven't done much reading(none that I can recall) about how many volts are safe with it. So your guess is as good as mine.

Oh and thanks for the compliment. I don't find it that impressive myself. Since it doesn't even make the CPU-Z top 15 list for a 3570K. I'd need to get to at least 5834.14MHz for that.
http://valid.x86.fr/search/search.p...537304b20435055204020332e343047487a&sort=freq


----------



## ivanbass1 (May 17, 2016)

Stable at this voltage, max temp on stress test 63c(it's on the stock cooler right now, gonna change that soon but case has got good ventilation)


----------



## cdawall (May 18, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> Well you never specified which GPU's, but yes if your using OCed dual Titan X / 980 TI in SLI at 4k there is slightly better results. I myself game at 1440P so the results are even better.



You would get better results on x99 more pcie lanes...not to mention if you are talking any good game it will be gpu bound and it won't matter if you have an i3 or an i7


----------



## wtfskilz (May 18, 2016)

cdawall said:


> You would get better results on x99 more pcie lanes...not to mention if you are talking any good game it will be gpu bound and it won't matter if you have an i3 or an i7



There is a reason why the 6700K comes on top above the 5960X in SLI, and crossfire bench tests. It's because what little advantage the PCI-E 3.0 X16 has over X8 is too insignificant to make a difference.

Good games are not based off of being GPU bound, or being coded extremely well... There are plenty of games that are not GPU bound that were excellent games. Pillars of Eternity, Dreamfall Chapters, Arma 3. If a game is fun, I don't care if it didn't have a 100$million dollar budget, I won't let that stop be from enjoying it


----------



## Caring1 (May 18, 2016)

Take your discussion elsewhere, this is a benchmark thread, we want pictures.


----------



## Fouquin (May 18, 2016)

From my daily use laptop, this was the CPU it came with, A6-5350M.



 

And this is the CPU I "upgraded" to, the A10-5750M.



 

Can't seem to sustain the full 3.5GHz turbo in this laptop, it's an HP ProBook 645 G1 14" so that kinda makes sense. The extra modules and 40% graphics performance is the whole reason for upgrading, little machine games incredibly well at only 47W system usage.


----------



## cdawall (May 18, 2016)

wtfskilz said:


> There is a reason why the 6700K comes on top above the 5960X in SLI, and crossfire bench tests. It's because what little advantage the PCI-E 3.0 X16 has over X8 is too insignificant to make a difference.
> 
> Good games are not based off of being GPU bound, or being coded extremely well... There are plenty of games that are not GPU bound that were excellent games. Pillars of Eternity, Dreamfall Chapters, Arma 3. If a game is fun, I don't care if it didn't have a 100$million dollar budget, I won't let that stop be from enjoying it


Overclock them... They perform basically the same in shitty coded comes and better in well coded games...


----------



## MrGenius (May 20, 2016)

I decided to turn the fans up and see if I could finally rip one off @ 5.0GHz. It worked...

3570K @ 5.0GHz












What the hell...you only live once right?


----------



## JrockTech (May 20, 2016)

Picked up an 8320 and a 990fx combo to do me over while 8350 and ROG is in RMA. 5ghz stable-ish. Working on getting it prime stable.


----------



## Qstik (May 20, 2016)

Just built this brute for work-related number crunching... dual Xeons


----------



## Enterprise24 (May 20, 2016)

This CPU is epic. Delid it and finally hit 5.1Ghz at 1.52V. Insane bank for buck ratio.


----------



## JrockTech (May 20, 2016)

Enterprise24 said:


> This CPU is epic. Delid it and finally hit 5.1Ghz at 1.52V. Insane bank for buck ratio.



And only 65watt TDP. That's really good. How much did you pay for that chip?


----------



## Enterprise24 (May 20, 2016)

I bought it second hand for 185$. It is only used for 2 month. 
i5-6500 in my country cost around 210$.


----------



## xkm1948 (May 22, 2016)




----------



## EvOlViOlEnCe (May 22, 2016)

Just a quick oc. I normally run it at 4.4 ghz with only 1.1v.


----------



## Enterprise24 (May 23, 2016)

EvOlViOlEnCe said:


> Just a quick oc. I normally run it at 4.4 ghz with only 1.1v.
> 
> View attachment 74872



This CPU should hit 5Ghz stable easily at around 1.35V-1.4V if you have sufficient cooling.


----------



## Schmuckley (May 23, 2016)

Doh! was 32-bit


----------



## Schmuckley (May 25, 2016)




----------



## dj-electric (May 28, 2016)

Its uhh.... overclocked


----------



## dj-electric (May 31, 2016)

JK, its the core i7 6950X
Now i can say that, phew


----------



## Ferrum Master (Jun 8, 2016)

Just for the lulz


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 8, 2016)

Ferrum Master said:


> Just for the lulz
> 
> View attachment 75319



Still outperforms my 1.6Ghz Atom in singlethreaded, lol:


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Jun 9, 2016)

Overclocked i7 2700k


----------



## Deleted member 163934 (Jun 21, 2016)

x2 4000+ stock



 



x2 5400B stock



 

 

x4 640 stock



 



g3260 stock



 



I'm surprised about the fact that the g3260 scores better than the x4 640 in multi thread.

Think I have an sempron 145 somewhere, but I'm too lazy to look after it and I don't have any spare ddr2/ddr3 for it.


----------



## Recon-UK (Jun 21, 2016)

Don't know how good this is? had the PC up and running since 4 hours a go, a quick and dirty stable OC. Chip is at 4ghz with all power saving states enabled.


----------



## Hargon (Jun 23, 2016)




----------



## Recon-UK (Jun 24, 2016)

Well then..... matching a stock 5960X in single core... not bad eh?

For gawd knows what reason my memory timings changed on their own from 8-9-9 to 8-10-10, but at 1603mhz.. whatever the case it's working like butter dream


----------



## Recon-UK (Jun 25, 2016)

Back on Windows 10 fully activated and my multi thread score is a good amount higher than on Windows 7, similar single thread scores.

I guess that lower overhead on Win 10 pays off.


----------



## janaxhd (Jul 6, 2016)

Good old Core2Quad


----------



## SpiteofCerberus (Jul 6, 2016)




----------



## Robert Dunlop (Jul 6, 2016)

Your score seems low Toothless.


----------



## SpiteofCerberus (Jul 7, 2016)

overclocked my fx 6300


----------



## Tomgang (Jul 7, 2016)

My trusty old I7 920 @ 4,4 GHz.

For reference stock cpu first.






4.4 GHz


----------



## Soijai (Jul 8, 2016)

This is on a stock dual Xeon "QEY6" setup.  The QEY6 is supposedly an engineering sample of the E5-2695 v3 and they are cheap on Ebay compared to the high end production Xeons.  In my setup a single QEY6 benches on Passmark at a little less than 90% of the benchmarks I have seen for the 2695 v3.  The system has 32 GB of DDR4 2400 RDIMMs.


----------



## Soijai (Jul 10, 2016)

Here's another dual CPU system.  I meant to build this initially instead of the system above, but ended up with a 2011 v3 motherboard and ended up keeping it and building out the system in the message above and this one.

Anyways, this is a dual Xeon E5-2670.  The difference between Schmuckley's single thread number and this one is interesting as my number is significantly lower.  I think part of that is due to this system running Windows server 2016 preview 5.  I noticed that the overall score for Passmark was noticeably lower when in Server 2016 v. Windows 10.  I am currently trying out server 2016 because the Super Micro dual 2011 motherboard I am using runs Windows 10 ok until you try to do a restart, then it hangs in the restart process.  Apparently some other 2011 boards had the same issue and it was fixed with a BIOS update.  Unfortunately, the last BIOS for my board is dated 2013.

There is also the Non Uniform Memory Access issue with dual CPU MBs.  Each CPU its own memory, which is shared between the CPUs, but accessing the other CPU's memory is not as fast.  Despite the single thread number being low, the multi thread number still was pretty good.


----------



## TeslaMaxwell (Jul 21, 2016)




----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 22, 2016)

My fastest score yet.

This is 4.46ghz, RAM overclocked to 1700mhz.


----------



## ajb101 (Jul 27, 2016)

Ferrum Master said:


> My home turf
> 
> View attachment 68546




I'm looking at this old post where a 3960X is giving a bench of over 9000, I've been looking at my own 3970X which according to the reference value, should be benching around 12000, yet mine is only giving just over 5000! Does anyone have any ideas as to why I'm having this problem on the multi-thread side of things?





Cheers,
A


----------



## basco (Jul 27, 2016)

this is with 4800mhz overclock!!!
so a 3960x standard should give 1250\7600
so yes your multithread score is off?? but your singlethread score is higher(and that with 800mhz lower oc)! maybe older benchmark software 15.01beta and his old score is on 15.00
and 1 window says 32bit+other 64bit?
but you really should get 200points more on multi?

and i just downloaded 1.73cpu-z and get lower scores all around.


----------



## ajb101 (Jul 27, 2016)

I'm not sure where you're seeing the 32Bit reference, which screen is that on?


----------



## basco (Jul 27, 2016)

on the attachment you posted-only bench window is 64bit-dont know if that means something.
sorry stupid question is there no nb frequenzy on socket 2011? or only qpi
ok got -no there is not


----------



## ajb101 (Jul 27, 2016)

basco said:


> on the attachment you posted-only bench window is 64bit-dont know if that means something.
> sorry stupid question is there no nb frequenzy on socket 2011? or only qpi
> ok got -no there is not



Hi again,

I'm still not fully seeing any reference to 32 Bit anywhere, the version of CPU-Z is suffixed with x64, there is only reference to 32nm lithography and 32gig of ram, that's all I can see.

Yeah, sorry, I don't know a great deal on this subject so no idea why there is no North Bridge frequency.

I just don't know what is causing my multi-thread drop off in performance, and I wonder if this is having a knock on affect in other areas, such as my SLi doesn't seem to be performing as well as I'd hoped it would on some titles.  I know this is GPU tech but I'm wondering if my mobo is defective, or my voltages and CAS timings are all to pot.


----------



## basco (Jul 27, 2016)

on which windows version are ya?
best is fill out your systems specs
and open a new thread with your problems because we are derailing the thread


----------



## ajb101 (Jul 27, 2016)

OK you're right, I've posted the thread here: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/cpu-not-performing-as-expected.224476/

Cheers,
A


----------



## Melvis (Aug 14, 2016)

Does this score seem low or is it just me?View attachment 77899


----------



## Recon-UK (Aug 14, 2016)

Melvis said:


> View attachment 77900 Does this score seem low or is it just me?View attachment 77899



Nice 


Actually i'm sure my old laptop with 2.2ghz core 2 duo would fail to run this bench at all lol.


----------



## Caring1 (Aug 14, 2016)

Melvis said:


> Does this score seem low or is it just me?


It does seem low to me, as your Processor is 70% faster clock rate.


----------



## Melvis (Aug 14, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> It does seem low to me, as your Processor is 70% faster clock rate.



Thats what I was thinking unless thats the CPU clock speed at idle? and just not showing the true clock speed when clocked up? 

Anyone else got a CPU around the same as mine to test?


----------



## Komshija (Aug 16, 2016)

Hello to everyone.

Here we go. My CPU-Z scores, Intel Core i7 6700K, stock, XMP enabled. RAM: 2x8GB G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4 3000 MHz (CL 15-16-16-35 2N 390T).


 

OC'ed to 4,6 GHz@1,34V, XMP enabled. RAM: 2x8GB G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4 3000 MHz (CL 15-16-16-35 2N 390T).


----------



## Komshija (Aug 16, 2016)

Another system. Six and a half years old laptop... 

Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 @ 2,663 GHz:


----------



## Peteln007 (Aug 20, 2016)

* Why is my computer such a piece of shit?*


----------



## dieselcat18 (Aug 21, 2016)

A mild OC of 4.2gHz


----------



## ivanbass1 (Aug 23, 2016)

4.3 ghz fx-6300


----------



## manhattan222 (Aug 25, 2016)

Big ol' Lynnfiled for the win! Lolz

I7 875K / 12GB DDR3 1600 RAM (2x2GB Corsair XMS3 + 2x4GB G-Skill RipjawsX) / Asus P7P55D-PRO / Radeon 7970 1160/1600 1.18v GELID ICY Vision-A


----------



## Enterprise24 (Aug 26, 2016)

Look like CPU-Z benchmark don't benefit from memory overclocking.


----------



## FireFox (Aug 26, 2016)

Which is better low or high score?


----------



## Komshija (Aug 26, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> Which is better low or high score?


Are you kidding?   Higher, of course. 

However, CPU-Z is not exactly accurate since numbers can variate. If you run tests a couple of times, you'll see.
For instance, highest multi-thread I got with my i7 6700k (stock frequency + XMP enabled) was 9128 and lowest 8991, so result I posted (9054 points) would be somewhat in the "middle ground". Single thread has less variations - my i7 varies anywhere from 2104-2112, but in 90% tests it's exaclty 2110 or 2109. Stock frequencies, of course.


----------



## FireFox (Aug 26, 2016)

Dual Socket Machine.


Xeon X5677 CPU #1                                                                                                                              

Xeon X5677 CPU #2


----------



## Fouquin (Aug 26, 2016)

E5-2660 V3 ES.


----------



## Poepzak130 (Aug 27, 2016)

AMD Athlon x4 750K @4.5ghz


----------



## Univocal (Aug 31, 2016)

Still a capable CPU for it's age


----------



## Hnykill22 (Aug 31, 2016)

i7 5820K @ 4.4Ghz. still one of the high rollers. aging well.


----------



## FYFI13 (Aug 31, 2016)

Did somebody said lower scores - better?


----------



## ahujet (Sep 1, 2016)

FX-8320 @ 4.6 GHz.


----------



## Dragos (Sep 8, 2016)

Im happy when my multi-core beats a 3960X(and single core) and a 6700k


----------



## Arctucas (Sep 8, 2016)




----------



## Azot2033 (Sep 9, 2016)




----------



## dantz (Sep 11, 2016)

i7 6700 non-k


----------



## Soviet7783 (Sep 11, 2016)

VIA X3 L4500@1.4GHZ    single 122  multi 380


----------



## Pierluigi (Sep 13, 2016)

dual e5-2683  v3 qs


----------



## Recon-UK (Sep 14, 2016)

Pierluigi said:


> View attachment 78754
> 
> dual e5-2683  v3 qs



Be sure to stop by at the XEON owners club if interested 

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/xeon-owners-club.211143/


----------



## HummelMD (Sep 25, 2016)

Here is my result from a Xeon E5-2698 v4. 
No optimizations, just installed, booted, & ran the benchmark. 
I will be using 2x, once my new motherboard arrives.


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 25, 2016)




----------



## Deleted member 163934 (Sep 30, 2016)

thedukesd1 said:


> Think I have an sempron 145 somewhere, but I'm too lazy to look after it and I don't have any spare ddr2/ddr3 for it.







took me "only" a couple of months . gonna be used in my Linux pc to compile stuff )

it failed to unlock from the start (it goes past the bios screen but it fails to load vista or newer (it boots in win xp but fails prime95 on second core really fast) and linux gets a kernel panic, the funny part is that it can pass memtest no matter how long i let it run, something regarding the core that is disabled is clearly broken no clue what; it doesn't matter the voltage i push in it second core (even tried 1.65V without luck)is still not stable)


----------



## biffzinker (Oct 1, 2016)

RealNeil said:


> View attachment 79219


Does your 4790K need 1.36 for the Core voltage @ 4.6 GHz? Seems excessive on a Haswell chip.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 1, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> Does your 4790K need 1.36 for the Core voltage @ 4.6 GHz? Seems excessive on a Haswell chip.



It's an auto overclock done with the Gigabyte Z97's BIOS. It's stable and runs pretty cool.


----------



## biffzinker (Oct 1, 2016)

RealNeil said:


> It's an auto overclock done with the Gigabyte Z97's BIOS. It's stable and runs pretty cool.


That amount of voltage would get me 4.9 GHz but if it's working out for you then never mind.


----------



## ahujet (Oct 1, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> Does your 4790K need 1.36 for the Core voltage @ 4.6 GHz? Seems excessive on a Haswell chip.


My i5-4670k needs 1.35V to reach 4.4 GHz


----------



## TeddyPawsWolf (Oct 3, 2016)

PCGamerDR said:


> Close any monitoring apps that u may have running in the background like fraps, hwinfo, cputemp and try again.


Sorry for such lately relay after a few months. Yes you're right the FRAPS was the main issue that bothering my scores,here's the real scores:


 

 


Overclocked to 4GHz 
By the way,thanks.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 3, 2016)

^^good score^^


----------



## Shao (Oct 5, 2016)

Based on this, it was worth the money.



 

My best setup / achievement so far!


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 5, 2016)

@Shao 

welcome 
check this thread for overclocking merriment.

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/xeon-owners-club.211143/


heres my X 5670 for comparison


----------



## hertz9753 (Oct 5, 2016)

I can show you a stock 3770k.


----------



## Shao (Oct 5, 2016)

@CAPSLOCKSTUCK That is interesting, and thanks!

I feel like my vcore is a little bit overkill, but that must be due to the Base Clock and the GHz itself.

Otherwise why not 200MHz? Would it be that having a lower base clock be more beneficial hence why they are often seen lower with vcore while the multiplier is maxed like in your results? Or is it just a solution for enabling turbo and while the CPU occurs to be boosted to the 4.6GHz? I am quite intrigued, never really thought of that solution before, my focus was mainly to max out the ram speed.

Plus, is LLC enabled? If I may recall properly, I was able to achieve 4.4GHz in a similar range of vcore, but needed LLC enabled, otherwise the vdrop would demand me to set the vcore extremely high during load.


----------



## Kliim (Oct 9, 2016)




----------



## HammerON (Oct 10, 2016)




----------



## bobalazs (Oct 10, 2016)

i5 3470 in a giga z68 board 38-39-40-40 turbo clocks


----------



## nomdeplume (Oct 11, 2016)

Great thread, spent a good 15 minutes laughing at the competition to show off the smallest and most ineffectual bench.  This is a bit better than single digit scores but not much.


----------



## qynqy (Oct 11, 2016)




----------



## Tomgang (Oct 11, 2016)

I7 920 results coming right up stock aswell as oc.

Stock as a rock. Not so powerful any more, but its reliable power even after all these years.






4 GHz daily 24/7 running






Hold your horses for now its going fast or as fast as a nearly 8 year chip can do it at 4.4 GHz.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 13, 2016)

Rubbish Pegatron board running.


----------



## Thimblewad (Oct 17, 2016)

I have two! CPU I use in my "gaming" PC:


 

 

And then I have this gem in my "retro gaming" PC


----------



## Durvelle27 (Oct 17, 2016)




----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 17, 2016)

Durvelle27 said:


>


Very impressive.
Will it run R 15 at that speed?


----------



## Durvelle27 (Oct 17, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Very impressive.
> Will it run R 15 at that speed?


Never tried 

The highest I ran Is 4500MHz


----------



## argon (Oct 18, 2016)

hello!

my new not so much tuned 6800k 

I have only oc'ed the ram ... and got 4.2 for 1.31v (cant get more  it need 1.45 for 4.3/4.4 )


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 18, 2016)

Just for a comparison old vs new....here is my 12 threads @ 4.2 ghz


----------



## argon (Oct 18, 2016)

That sick man ! You made me cry .. . .    but what about temperature ? I've reached all full load @ 50° after lots of hours of prime95 on air





I'll tune to archive at least 4.4 :/  This is inadmissible that my chip is so weak and need 1.45+ to get at 4.4....

btw , I've got some team group ram are soo lucky, and I have payed just like a cheap supper (37€) . . I can get 3200 @ 14 16 16 1.45v ,, but i prefer 2400 @ 12 12 12 1.35v .. quick tips : don't pay other to overclock your ram , do it yourself and save a lot !


unfortunately I dont have bench of my old platform 1090t @ 3.8 , I have only on cinebench ... and that very weak ... for me a good upgrade.!


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 18, 2016)

argon said:


> what about temperature ?




Im hitting 75 on the hottest core but i've got an AMD cooler just sitting on my cpu.....not clamped down. I run it daily at 4.4ghz...i clocked it back to do the comparison.....


My fastest bench was @ 4.54 ghz  , not bad for a £60.00 chip
http://hwbot.org/submission/3095126_capslockstuck_cinebench___r15_xeon_x5670_1035_cb/


----------



## argon (Oct 18, 2016)

soo good, I would suggest to new users , to avoid 6800k for overclock ... they are weak , they need soo much voltage to get stable ... :/


----------



## HarvesterOfSorrow (Oct 19, 2016)

4670k 4.3GHz 1.229V


http://imgur.com/a/kGSyT

How do you get picture like straight to site, i have always upload to imgur, because when i try to post picture straight it show image with red x on it.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 21, 2016)




----------



## sensation45 (Oct 22, 2016)

i7 3820 corsair h105


----------



## i7Baby (Oct 22, 2016)

i7 3930k @ 4.2


----------



## nomdeplume (Oct 26, 2016)




----------



## argon (Oct 26, 2016)

I think that 1300pt can still keep every gpu nowaday (1080p60) , even the gtx1080... good processor!!


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 26, 2016)

My latest:


----------



## backwoods (Oct 26, 2016)




----------



## SonicBlaster (Oct 26, 2016)

i7-3770K@4500


----------



## HarvesterOfSorrow (Oct 26, 2016)

ahujet said:


> My i5-4670k needs 1.35V to reach 4.4 GHz


My 4670k needs 1.3V to get 4.4GHz, and 1.23V to get 4.3GHz


----------



## backwoods (Oct 26, 2016)

HarvesterOfSorrow said:


> 4670k 4.3GHz 1.229V
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/kGSyT
> ...



Try...More Options, Upload a File, close out and go back to More Options then you should see your Uploaded file at the bottom, now you can Preview what you want to post and Reply to Thread

it took me awhile too with that image with red x on it.....good luck


----------



## DR4G00N (Oct 26, 2016)

X5670 @ Stock because I'm too lazy to oc it.


----------



## ahujet (Oct 27, 2016)

HarvesterOfSorrow said:


> My 4670k needs 1.3V to get 4.4GHz, and 1.23V to get 4.3GHz


Stay strong brother, we didn't win the silicon lotery


----------



## SonicBlaster (Oct 30, 2016)

i7-4930K@4700


----------



## blysk (Oct 30, 2016)

FX 8350 with M4A89TD


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 30, 2016)

@blysk 
thats interesting.

I just set my X5670 @3.6 and the single thread score is the same as yours. My multithread is down because i have h/t off.


----------



## blysk (Oct 30, 2016)

*@CAPSLOCKSTUCK*
Thanks.
Why do you have disabled hyper-threading?

Sorry - my english is not good.
When FX reaches a temperature over 60 degrees under a load, the timing and the voltage drops. In this beta BIOS there is no option to disable this protection. Power section is not hot (is cooled). When I held unlocked and overclocked Phenom X2 to X4 is a drop timing is not happen.
I posted a screenshot for proof that the Asus 890GX chipset is possible stable operation of the processor FX 8350.
This is the maximum that can be achieved in terms of overclocking, at least for me.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 30, 2016)

blysk said:


> Why do you have disabled hyper-threading?



I was playing GTA and my CPU was hitting 68 degrees. Ive been using it at stock since i broke my AIO but decided to set it @ 3.6ghz and turn H/T off to lower temps a bit.

As it happens ive got a stock cooler off a FX 8350 sitting on my chip at the moment.....its bloody loud.

Can you add your specs here please.
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/account/specs


----------



## cdawall (Oct 30, 2016)

blysk said:


> *@CAPSLOCKSTUCK*
> Thanks.
> Why do you have disabled hyper-threading?
> 
> ...



890GX supports FX series parts, but the VRM sections are known to throttle due to the fact that they are not as strong as what you will find in the higher end 990FX stuff. They were only designed for the 6 core thuban based chips which consume a lot less power under load. Even if the PWM section is cool it does not mean it is not throttling due to wattage. The controller is smart enough to know it is over wattage.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 30, 2016)

Sorry folks but i like these comparisons.

@blysk

Heres my X5670 @ 4.5ghz h/t off






and heres yours cos its on a different page now and they are easier to compare like this.







Mine @ 4.5ghz h/t on


----------



## blysk (Oct 30, 2016)

Thanks for reply* cdawall*
How do you think? Should I remove this FX and install Phenom X6 1100T to this mainboard?
I do not want change this mainboard.
AND I know thats INTEL CPU'S are better than AMD CPU'S

This is good comparison* CAPSLOCKSTUCK*.
From 6759 multi thread score to 10273 is a big difference.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 30, 2016)

blysk said:


> AND I know thats INTEL CPU'S are better than AMD CPU'S



that wasnt the point of my comparison. The last build i completed (last weekend) was a Phenom ii and the one before that was a FX 8350 with GTX 970.


----------



## cdawall (Oct 30, 2016)

blysk said:


> Thanks for reply* cdawall*
> How do you think? Should I remove this FX and install Phenom X6 1100T to this mainboard?
> I do not want change this mainboard.
> AND I know thats INTEL CPU'S are better than AMD CPU'S
> ...



Just leave it be and upgrade the whole rig at once.


----------



## blysk (Oct 30, 2016)

*@cdawall*
If I will have much more money I will do this, and many other things...
Thank you. I understand - Investing in this technology is wasting of money in my case.

*CAPSLOCKSTUCK*
FX 8350 and GTX 970? 
You made computer with good perfomance for present games like witcher 3


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 30, 2016)

It was for a friend, his brother chose the parts and he asked me to build it. He mainly plays modded Skyrim.


----------



## redmaster (Nov 1, 2016)

Just registered here to show how the G3250 beats most of hi-Tech CPU-s in single-threaded operations, of course, overclocked  
Got 4.4Ghz with stock Cooler, and 1.38v aaaaaand yes, on B85 Board


----------



## EmbeddedGenius (Nov 6, 2016)




----------



## Recon-UK (Nov 6, 2016)

Needs more flux capacitor.


----------



## Recon-UK (Nov 6, 2016)

The 1366 XEON's.







Enthusiast driver behind the wheel  =


----------



## panther030 (Nov 8, 2016)

Is this OK ?


----------



## nomdeplume (Nov 9, 2016)

I've been averaging 1280 single thread and 4300 multi thread since I posted mine for some reason.  If I bench a second time scores similar to yours show up.  No ideas.


----------



## Grings (Nov 10, 2016)

was at 4.8 but it needed 1.38v, this is at 1.33v


----------



## er557 (Nov 10, 2016)

Xeon FTW;      nuff said...


----------



## cdawall (Nov 10, 2016)

er557 said:


> View attachment 80954
> 
> Xeon FTW;      nuff said...



I'm so close to that with 8 cores lol


----------



## er557 (Nov 10, 2016)

stock man, stock !   i dont fry eggs on my 0.6v vcore , NOTHING is overclocked except some tweaks on the gpus


----------



## cdawall (Nov 10, 2016)

er557 said:


> stock man, stock !   i dont fry eggs on my 0.6v vcore , NOTHING is overclocked except some tweaks on the gpus



I was just impressed how close it was getting in the mutlithreading. I have a fancy Xeon as well, but it is only a 12 core for my plex server. I think turbo is broken on the ES chip however, it only seems to bump up to 2.4 in stead of the 2.9ghz it is spec'd for.


----------



## er557 (Nov 10, 2016)

That's any ES chip, they are all clocked /turbo lower than retail, and who knows what other feature may be incomplete. what i looked for was the QS stepping, which is same as retail spec/clock/feature/any other way, just marked qualification sample still(officially). hence price goes down, and bang for buck goes up


----------



## cdawall (Nov 10, 2016)

er557 said:


> That's any ES chip, they are all clocked /turbo lower than retail, and who knows what other feature may be incomplete. what i looked for was the QS stepping, which is same as retail spec/clock/feature/any other way, just marked qualification sample still(officially). hence price goes down, and bang for buck goes up



This was cheap enough that I am not really that worried about it. Good value and it stepped me into broadwell-e which clock for clock seems to hold its own against yours single cored


----------



## watageek (Nov 29, 2016)

24/7, +0.125 offset vcore, pretty conservative @ 3.7Ghz HT ON
PROCHOT OFF


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Nov 29, 2016)

@watageek 

For comparison X5670 @ 3.6 H/T off


----------



## watageek (Nov 29, 2016)

@CAPSLOCKSTUCK

HT OFF

Roughly, only one Generation between the cpu...


----------



## Recon-UK (Nov 29, 2016)

Same uarch, Westmere is just far more efficient.


----------



## Komshija (Dec 2, 2016)

New bench. Standard settings with enabled XMP, no additional optimization.


----------



## watageek (Dec 2, 2016)

@redmaster

Comparable result...

You can lower your cache speed to improve the voltage on the chip. overvolting Vring is a must.
I run cache @4ghz

It's the older kid's PC but I actually own the overclock.

Stock cooler too in a shitty Acer T180 case


----------



## Komshija (Dec 3, 2016)

Results with OC'ed i7 6700K @ 4,7 GHz / 1,365V (1,368V in OS). System is stable during standard operations and gaming, but unstable during stability tests such as Prime95, unless I increase the voltage to 1,375V. No additional optimizations.


----------



## Komshija (Dec 8, 2016)

Squeezing a little bit more out of my CPU, just for a small test. The settings with 46x multiplier, 105 FSB and 1,38V failed to boot, so I had to remove the CMOS battery.  
The settings below are 4,8 GHz@1,385V with "adaptive mode" (in OS CPU VID reached up to 1,41 V on two cores and 1,39V on other two cores acording to HWiNFO).


----------



## HarvesterOfSorrow (Dec 10, 2016)

Anyone else get lower multi thread score on latest version ?  Mine dropped about 100


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 11, 2016)




----------



## forallatlantis (Dec 12, 2016)

I have a i7 4790 and I compared it with a i7 4790K and even it it should not be great differences I can see that on Multi Thread is a difference of 7 times smaller than it should be.
Can anyone help me please with any advice what can I do with my PC in order to make it faster on Multi Thread computing?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 12, 2016)

quit cpuz, reload it and run task manager and hwmonitor when you rerun the bench.


----------



## forallatlantis (Dec 12, 2016)

When Multi Thread test is made, the CPU cores are not working on 100%


----------



## erixx (Dec 12, 2016)




----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 12, 2016)

forallatlantis said:


> View attachment 81875
> 
> When Multi Thread test is made, the CPU cores are not working on 100%




As you know, it should look like this





 

Have you tried a different benchmark?

Observe your cpu voltages when you run it.


----------



## forallatlantis (Dec 12, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> As you know, it should look like this
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes I already tried different benchmarks and works properly with expected results and CPU at 100%.
Any idea why CPU-Z can't use 100% of CPU for testing Multiple Threads?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 12, 2016)

try the previous version
http://www.cpuid.com/downloads/cpu-z/cpu-z_1.77-en.exe


----------



## forallatlantis (Dec 12, 2016)

Same lower results.
I tried even with 1.73 ... 
Who can I ask in order to find a possible answer?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 12, 2016)

what happens with task manager  when you run the stress test?




you might get a bigger audience if you start a thread about it

i7 4790 multi threaded cpuz benchtest anomaly" ..............or something like that

fill in your specs here
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/account/specs


----------



## Locksmith (Dec 12, 2016)




----------



## argon (Dec 14, 2016)

forallatlantis said:


> Yes I already tried different benchmarks and works properly with expected results and CPU at 100%.
> Any idea why CPU-Z can't use 100% of CPU for testing Multiple Threads?


I Think that you have Hyper Threading  disabled ... check it out on bios..


----------



## Doothe (Dec 14, 2016)

AMD 8350 4.7GHz 1.404V


----------



## patriotaki (Dec 14, 2016)

*i7 5930k @ 4.6GHz   -- 1.310V*

*

 

 

 *


----------



## forallatlantis (Dec 15, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> what happens with task manager  when you run the stress test?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thank you very much for help and suggestions


----------



## forallatlantis (Dec 15, 2016)

argon said:


> I Think that you have Hyper Threading  disabled ... check it out on bios..



I checked and Hyper Threading is enabled in BIOS


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 15, 2016)

Have you made any progress with it?


----------



## forallatlantis (Dec 15, 2016)

If you asked me, not yet, but I'll post it immediately on this forum with your subject suggestion.
The odd thing was that I wrote to CPU-Z support and no answer from them.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 15, 2016)

forallatlantis said:


> If you asked me, not yet, but I'll post it immediately on this forum with your subject suggestion.
> The odd thing was that I wrote to CPU-Z support and no answer from them.



add your specs to your profile please
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/account/specs


----------



## mr jocs (Dec 28, 2016)

Im running old school, Core 2 Quad Processor:

@ 4080 mhz


----------



## Tomgang (Dec 28, 2016)

Just for the fun of it i testet my new baby i got today. it is one of those new HDMI PC dongle and the one i got is called ASUS VivoStick TS10 and it is powered by an Intel Atom X5 Z8350 (Cherry Trail) cpu. So how powerful is it. Not that powerful but have desent power to most daily work and streaming and very light gaming.


----------



## cleggy999 (Dec 29, 2016)

Heres my new 3930k @ 4.8GHz


----------



## DR4G00N (Dec 29, 2016)

My Delidded X5670 @ 4.2GHz with my new X58 Classified 3 mobo. Haven't tried pushing the Uncore or mems yet.


----------



## moomeacow (Dec 31, 2016)

my machine that I use for hyperv


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 31, 2016)

DR4G00N said:


> My Delidded X5670 @ 4.2GHz with my new X58 Classified 3 mobo. Haven't tried pushing the Uncore or mems yet.
> 
> View attachment 82530


----------



## mouseTT (Jan 4, 2017)

Hey guys, i got a prob. I got i5 6600k and asus z170-p (stock 3.500 gghz) and made it to 4500. But every time i make "bench" test in CPU-Z i got very strange numbers. Screens uploaded. How i can fix it and get my normal bench test ?


----------



## mouseTT (Jan 4, 2017)

also got 1.280 voltage @ bios. Is it fine or i must increase/decrease


----------



## FR9 (Jan 5, 2017)

My Xeon X5460 4.22 GHz (Overclocked) i am definitely very pleased with this cpu's performance. i getting 250+ fps in cs:go competitive. greetings from Turkey


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 5, 2017)

FR9 said:


> My Xeon X5460 4.22 GHz (Overclocked) i am definitely very pleased with this cpu's performance. i getting 250+ fps in cs:go competitive. greetings from Turkey



Welcome to TPU............

Add your specs here
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/account/specs

and come and join us here
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/xeon-owners-club.211143/page-84#post-3580835


----------



## mouseTT (Jan 5, 2017)

what about my problem ? ANybody knows how ti fix it ?


----------



## FR9 (Jan 6, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Welcome to TPU............
> 
> Add your specs here
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/account/specs
> ...



i did thanks


----------



## Flybyderp (Jan 10, 2017)

My OCd 8350 vs the 4790k stock xD


----------



## Caring1 (Jan 10, 2017)

mouseTT said:


> what about my problem ? ANybody knows how ti fix it ?


Start a thread about your issue, not many members will see it hidden here in a benchmark thread, and be specific about what you think the issue is.


----------



## Dbiggs9 (Jan 11, 2017)

Set 3ghz


----------



## argon (Jan 13, 2017)

is that at stock ?


----------



## ASOT (Jan 14, 2017)




----------



## exodusprime1337 (Jan 14, 2017)

Here is mine, I7-4790k @ 4.8Ghz 1.315v


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jan 14, 2017)

i5 Kaby 4.6 @ 1.1v


----------



## Vya Domus (Jan 14, 2017)




----------



## petra (Jan 15, 2017)




----------



## khemist (Jan 15, 2017)

7700k 5.0.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 15, 2017)

http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture001-20170110372.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture002-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture003-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture004-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture005-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture006-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture007-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture008-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture009-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture010-20170110.jpg





http://img.techpowerup.org/170110/capture011-20170110.jpg


----------



## petra (Jan 17, 2017)




----------



## petra (Jan 17, 2017)




----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 18, 2017)

petra said:


> View attachment 83140



Combine your post with the previous one.


----------



## mcraygsx (Jan 19, 2017)

Here is my Stock 7700K sitting on ASUS Maximus IX HERO.


----------



## vabeachboy0 (Jan 19, 2017)

4690K 4.8 Ghz insane voltage


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 19, 2017)

vabeachboy0 said:


> 4690K 4.8 Ghz insane voltage
> View attachment 83189



You shouldn't need that for 4.8GHz try lowering the voltage by 1 or 2 marks


----------



## vabeachboy0 (Jan 19, 2017)

eidairaman1 said:


> You shouldn't need that for 4.8GHz try lowering the voltage by 1 or 2 marks



Trust me this cpu does. It overclocks badly lol.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 19, 2017)

vabeachboy0 said:


> Trust me this cpu does. It overclocks badly lol.


Locks up or BSOds?


----------



## vabeachboy0 (Jan 19, 2017)

eidairaman1 said:


> Locks up or BSOds?



BSOD
I just ran it at 4.9 GHz. Put up realtemp to show temps.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 19, 2017)

vabeachboy0 said:


> BSOD
> I just ran it at 4.9 GHz. Put up realtemp to show temps.
> 
> View attachment 83190



You should see my max core and package temps on ryzen at 5.0GHz 1.464 Vcore


----------



## vabeachboy0 (Jan 19, 2017)

eidairaman1 said:


> You should see my max core and package temps on ryzen at 5.0GHz 1.464 Vcore



You have a ryzen cpu already?


----------



## mcraygsx (Jan 19, 2017)

vabeachboy0 said:


> You have a ryzen cpu already?



He is probably messing with your head.

That voltage is pretty intense. Is this your 24/7 machine?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 19, 2017)

vabeachboy0 said:


> You have a ryzen cpu already?






mcraygsx said:


> He is probably messing with your head.
> 
> That voltage is pretty intense. Is this your 24/7 machine?



 I'm not messing with him lol. I just forgot to add Blender Test to the word Ryzen. Check my specs


----------



## vabeachboy0 (Jan 19, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> He is probably messing with your head.
> 
> That voltage is pretty intense. Is this your 24/7 machine?



I run these volts everyday without issue or getting too hot.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jan 19, 2017)

Combine posts.  Please.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 19, 2017)

vabeachboy0 said:


> Lol I was like damn how he get that already, and where did you get it so I can get one lol. I have an FX 8350 in other rig that i ran at 1.6 volts for 4 years at 5.1 ghz and still works fine to this day.



Mine Heats up too much at 5.1GHz at the volts.


----------



## Cartel (Jan 23, 2017)

Just upgraded from my 1090t to a 8350 today...


Why does it suck at 32bit though?











After a few tweaks..


----------



## FYFI13 (Jan 23, 2017)

@mcraygsx Have you done any overclocking yet? Nice to see how it beats my slightly overclocked i7 4790k, right out of the box.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 23, 2017)




----------



## mcraygsx (Jan 24, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> @mcraygsx Have you done any overclocking yet? Nice to see how it beats my slightly overclocked i7 4790k, right out of the box.



Bench with 5.0GHz  & 5.2GHz  on Noctua NH-D14 (no fans installed). This 7700K does that same thing as your Devils Canyon but achieve those results with lower voltage and cooler temps. I plan to spend more time with it over the weekend and tweak adaptive/offset the voltage. Currently 1.344/1.424 seems too high but voltage was auto set by the motherboard, I never had to change it. I am sure it can go achieve higher frequency once I have cooled properly since it did all the benchmarks.

5.0Ghz w/Auto Voltage(passive cooler)





5.2Ghz w/ Auto Voltage (passive cooler)


----------



## F0restgump123 (Jan 27, 2017)

Not bad at all IMO


----------



## LowlightHighsight (Jan 28, 2017)

I fired up the old box,  put some new ram in it (8x8GB == 64GB) and benched it.  Was curious to see how it stacked up against some newer CPUs and came across this thread.  I'd also be interested to see other benches that have the 3930k + x79 MBoards.  I was pretty impressed with the bench that I got.  It far exceeded what I was expecting for such an old box (2013).  One thing to note.  I did NOT bench this with a bare desktop.  I was actually running 2 instances of VMWare,  17 chrome tabs,  and a bunch of other crap.  The benches probably would have been better if my box wasnt so busy (as can be seen in the process graphs).

Overclocking settings that I used can be found here: *   (this is not my video)









*


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 28, 2017)

LowlightHighsight said:


> I fired up the old box,  put some new ram in it (8x8GB == 64GB) and benched it.  Was curious to see how it stacked up against some newer CPUs and came across this thread.  I'd also be interested to see other benches that have the 3930k + x79 MBoards.  I was pretty impressed with the bench that I got.  It far exceeded what I was expecting for such an old box (2013).
> 
> Overclocking settings that I used can be found here: *   (this is not my video)
> 
> ...




welcome to TPU.....heres my 7 year old box for comparison


----------



## jaggerwild (Jan 28, 2017)

My Bad Caps lock I didn't read the title as usual, was just a quick n dirty run. I'm surprised I had all cores on. 
@LowlightHighsight,
 I had my custom water loop, rad out the window in St Paul Minnesota. I'll look for a loaded run, but really only ran certain bench marks. I wouldn't suggest trying to high with a sealed water cooler, there not made for 12 core CPU'S.
 Also only run 2 sticks of memory for benching as the memory controler is on the CPU Die, less stress run more for games and normal.
 My board was a RIVE(RIP) she served me well, sorry for the high jack on with the show......


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 28, 2017)

show us the bench results Dude.


----------



## LowlightHighsight (Jan 28, 2017)

jaggerwild said:


>



What do you get for temps under stress load with something like this?  I only have the A100 closed system cooler.  IDK if it would be wise to try this much voltage but it looks temping


----------



## Tomgang (Jan 28, 2017)

These are result of my 4 cpu i have to play with.

Pentium D 915. Please do not laugh. I`m serious dont. Silence i kill you . Well what can i say, it is stupidity slow 





Intel Atom X5 Z-8350.





Core I7 920. The old CPU i had for al most 8 years as my main cpu. Now it is used for a sekunder gamer pc.





Core I7 980X. Its maybe old but this cpu is my pride and joy


----------



## fullinfusion (Jan 28, 2017)

my 4790K @ 4.9Ghz


----------



## yesyesloud (Jan 28, 2017)

QHQF (i7 6700K ES) @ 4.3GHz


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 30, 2017)

4.7Ghz on G3258 Pentium, didnt even hit 58C  while beating out the 4790K single thread bench.while JUST under 50% the multithread result of the same i7 cpu.V's getting higher than i like for 24/7 tho.


----------



## Stalker563 (Feb 3, 2017)

2x Xeon e5440


----------



## TheUnbrained (Feb 6, 2017)

llano athlon @5,2Ghz xD 
   
and then... there´s my i7...


----------



## Tomgang (Feb 11, 2017)

So after spanking that old I7 980X real good´, she came to sense and clokket to 4.62 GHz and my new score ends up like this. Done with aircooling.


----------



## pyon (Feb 12, 2017)

My 7700K@5.5GHz on Maximus IX formula.


----------



## silkstone (Feb 12, 2017)

My new i7


----------



## The Pack (Feb 12, 2017)

i7 6850K @4.4GHz


----------



## basco (Feb 12, 2017)

@pyon  what cooling if i may ask?

@silkstone   is there a reason for you running 141x24 ?


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 12, 2017)

@pyon 5.5GHz on 1.1V? 
@silkstone 2.2V?

Lads, it's Valentines day coming, not April Fools.


----------



## silkstone (Feb 12, 2017)

basco said:


> @pyon  what cooling if i may ask?
> 
> @silkstone   is there a reason for you running 141x24 ?



Generally because I don't know how to overclock it. 24 seems to be the highest multiplier the board does. It won't let me adjust it any higher for some reason!

I thought about stepping down the multiplier and stepping up to FSB, but it doesn't seem as stable.



FYFI13 said:


> @silkstone 2.2V?



CPUID cannot read the sensor correctly. Everest reports it okay. It's at stock voltage, whatever that is.


----------



## basco (Feb 12, 2017)

cpu turbo is on in bios?
on gulftown cpu´s normally the uneven multipliers work better.
which mainboard ya have? every mobo should do between 150 to 180 bclk whithout changes of volt

ah i see its a mainboard from a shuttle computer-that could be the prob


----------



## silkstone (Feb 12, 2017)

basco said:


> cpu turbo is on in bios?
> on gulftown cpu´s normally the uneven multipliers work better.
> which mainboard ya have? every mobo should do between 150 to 180 bclk whithout changes of volt
> 
> ah i see its a mainboard from a shuttle computer-that could be the prob



I couldn't find a specific option for turbo boost. Just hyper-threading and speed-step, though speed-step has to be disabled to adjust the FSB and multiplier 
I know it supports boost from the blurb on their website, but the documentation online for the board is terrible. The only thing it has is a spec sheet and a quick start guide.


----------



## pyon (Feb 12, 2017)

basco said:


> @pyon  what cooling if i may ask?
> 
> @silkstone   is there a reason for you running 141x24 ?



Thank you for your comments. I have used costum water cooling. Adding max core voltage was 1.568V. And, C1E state was enable for continuously regular use of PC, therefor, the voltage was drifting depending on the cpu load. When the room temp was 12-13 degree C (in this season), I can use my PC without any problems.


----------



## pyon (Feb 12, 2017)

silkstone said:


> Generally because I don't know how to overclock it. 24 seems to be the highest multiplier the board does. It won't let me adjust it any higher for some reason!
> 
> I thought about stepping down the multiplier and stepping up to FSB, but it doesn't seem as stable.
> 
> ...



I think the idea is very nice, because at C1E state, kaby Lake CPU clock down to FSBX8. When the FSB is higher frequency, the performance at C1E state become well and thus the duration time at C1E state becomes long in daliy use, which is keeping away from increasing of the water temp.


----------



## fusionblu (Feb 12, 2017)

Consistent with my current build in System Specs. Did stress CPU before test to avoid results being reduced by underclock caused by general green/ low energy idle settings.
No overclock than the usual turbo boost of 4.4GHz from 4GHz by default automatic settings.


----------



## ahujet (Feb 16, 2017)

i5-4670k @ 4.4 GHz.


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 16, 2017)

ahujet said:


> i5-4670k @ 4.4 GHz.
> View attachment 84125


Yeah, this benchmark doesn't seem to benefit a lot from HT for some reason.


----------



## Enterprise24 (Feb 16, 2017)




----------



## ahujet (Feb 16, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> Yeah, this benchmark doesn't seem to benefit a lot from HT for some reason.


It's about right I think. HT increases performance about 25% or so. And I was running 0.4 GHz higher than i7.


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 16, 2017)

ahujet said:


> It's about right I think. HT increases performance about 25% or so. And I was running 0.4 GHz higher than i7.


For me it's far less than 25%. And 4790k turbo freq. is 4.2GHz, that's only 200MHz difference and about same score.


----------



## ahujet (Feb 16, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> For me it's far less than 25%. And 4790k turbo freq. is 4.2GHz, that's only 200MHz difference and about same score.


Oh, you are right. In cinebench r15 the i7 scores like 150 points more in multi threaded benchmark than my i5. Anyways CPU-Z is not an ideal benching tool, idk how it works, but it benches too fast.


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 16, 2017)

Enterprise24 said:


>


That overclock on i5 6500  I assume you wouldn't use this kind of voltage 24/7 but still damn impressive!


----------



## denixius (Feb 16, 2017)

I think my CPU needs to be cleaned.


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 17, 2017)




----------



## Enterprise24 (Feb 17, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> That overclock on i5 6500  I assume you wouldn't use this kind of voltage 24/7 but still damn impressive!



I have been use this voltage since may 2016.  No issue or sign of degradation at all.


----------



## mcraygsx (Feb 17, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Here is my Stock 7700K sitting on ASUS Maximus IX HERO.




My second machine 6850K@4.6Ghz with Asus X99-A/USB 3.1


----------



## Imsochobo (Feb 17, 2017)

Ivy 10 core 2680 xenon- work pc.
vs ref 10 core 6950.

Memory = Quad, 930 mhz, 32gb.


----------



## oxidized (Feb 17, 2017)




----------



## bobalazs (Feb 17, 2017)




----------



## pyon (Feb 17, 2017)

Maximum core voltage was 1.552V.
CPU Frequency was 100.6MHzX55=5533MHz and Multi Thread score was over 12000, finally.


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 17, 2017)

@bobalazs and @pyon Both take a look at what you've posted and tell me what's wrong with it  

¡¿ʎɔuǝnbǝɹɟ ndɔ ǝɥʇ s,ʇɐɥʍ


----------



## pyon (Feb 18, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> @bobalazs and @pyon Both take a look at what you've posted and tell me what's wrong with it
> 
> ¡¿ʎɔuǝnbǝɹɟ ndɔ ǝɥʇ s,ʇɐɥʍ


Thank you for your reply.
I didn't watch a CPU frequency, which was changing dinamically. I edited my comments.


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 18, 2017)

pyon said:


> Thank you for your reply.
> I didn't watch a CPU frequency, which was changing dinamically. I edited my comments.


Thanks! What cooling you're using? 1.55V and 5.5GHz must be generating tons of heat.


----------



## pyon (Feb 18, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> Thanks! What cooling you're using? 1.55V and 5.5GHz must be generating tons of heat.





Please see the link.


----------



## bobalazs (Feb 18, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> @bobalazs and @pyon Both take a look at what you've posted and tell me what's wrong with it
> 
> ¡¿ʎɔuǝnbǝɹɟ ndɔ ǝɥʇ s,ʇɐɥʍ




 

 

The difference is due to pc restart / some background process isn't using the cpu as much.


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 18, 2017)

bobalazs said:


> View attachment 84207 View attachment 84208
> 
> The difference is due to pc restart / some background process isn't using the cpu as much.


You can always leave another instance of CPU-Z running in stress test mode so CPU stays at max clocks when you take screenshot


----------



## ikeke (Feb 18, 2017)

http://valid.x86.fr/n5ks0v
http://valid.x86.fr/ba7ebc

Dont have screenshots but i guess CPUz validation could be considered the same?


----------



## FireFox (Feb 18, 2017)

ikeke said:


> http://valid.x86.fr/n5ks0v
> http://valid.x86.fr/ba7ebc
> 
> Dont have screenshots but i guess CPUz validation could be considered the same?


 
Let me ask to the Council, we will let you know in 100 years


----------



## FYFI13 (Feb 18, 2017)

ikeke said:


> http://valid.x86.fr/n5ks0v
> http://valid.x86.fr/ba7ebc
> 
> Dont have screenshots but i guess CPUz validation could be considered the same?


That's CPU-Z Benchmark thread and i see no benchmarks in your post/links


----------



## valyamd (Feb 18, 2017)




----------



## ikeke (Feb 18, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> That's CPU-Z Benchmark thread and i see no benchmarks in your post/links


The benchmarks numbers are in the validation, under the screenshot.

Managed to find one i made.
http://valid.x86.fr/jdjgnn


----------



## mcraygsx (Feb 18, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> My second machine 6850K@4.6Ghz with Asus X99-A/USB 3.1



Intel G4560 @3.5Ghz Stock. Great little CPU for $64.


----------



## Tomgang (Feb 18, 2017)

I pushed the old cpu as far as i had the guts to and ended at 4.67 GHz (i had the CPU up at 4.7 GHz, but that is only for at short 3dmark fire strike run and because it needed 1.5 Vcore and it got pretty hot so ditten want risk frying the cpu, so it where a very short boot). But i dit not get a proper screenshot of it, cause i where tired and it is done late at night when i got this score so forgot to get mainboard and memory in the screenshot and that´s why there are 3 CPU-z open just showing the same. To se my ealy bedst score and more detailed screen of settings i refer to #655 in this thread.





Edit: I dit make a 4.7 GHz run as well. Just found it in the trashcan on my pc, i must have been tired since i cut forget that and even throw it in the trashcan . Note to myself: Dont bench when tired and its late a night.


----------



## Deleted member 163934 (Feb 19, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Intel G4560 @3.5Ghz Stock. Great little CPU for $64.



Can you do a test with only 2 Threads (I'm curious how it does with 2 threads)? I find your cpu single thread score a bit lower than expected, I expected to see 1700+ from g4560 (you get with 3,73% more than my g3260 and your g4560 has +200 mhz and newer architecture).


----------



## mcraygsx (Feb 19, 2017)

thedukesd1 said:


> Can you do a test with only 2 Threads (I'm curious how it does with 2 threads)? I find your cpu single thread score a bit lower than expected, I expected to see 1700+ from g4560 (you get with 3,73% more than my g3260 and your g4560 has +200 mhz and newer architecture).
> 
> View attachment 84263View attachment 84258



I ran the CPU-z Bench again with minimal applications running in the background with exception of Asus SUITE. In my previous bench I had IETU/HWmonitor/Afterburner running.

Bench with Hyper Threading OFF 2c2t.





Bench with Hyper Threading ON 2c4t.


----------



## Psychoholic (Feb 19, 2017)




----------



## Tomgang (Feb 20, 2017)

This is the last post of my I7 980X cpu. Pushed it to 4.77 GHz and still with all 6 core and HT on with air cooling. That is as far i dare to go with this CPU. Its litterly burning hot.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Feb 20, 2017)

Long live socket 1366.....


----------



## Tomgang (Feb 20, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Long live socket 1366.....








About your avatar. How does is look like then two badgers are in Crossfire? 

I guess your reaction to this questions is something like this


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Feb 20, 2017)

Warming up for a crossfire session


----------



## Tomgang (Feb 20, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Warming up for a crossfire session


----------



## zygioks (Feb 20, 2017)

FX 6350 @4.3ghz, will test this @4.5ghz later on.


----------



## Psychoholic (Feb 21, 2017)

My secondary System (i7 975@4Ghz)


----------



## 18kaninchen (Feb 23, 2017)

FX-8350 4ghz (Turbo disabled)


----------



## Kyuuba (Feb 23, 2017)




----------



## xkm1948 (Feb 23, 2017)

Welp there is gonna be a lot of RyZen scores soon.


----------



## topkapi (Feb 23, 2017)

Not an expert on this but had a look on an old pc and the cpu benchmarks (on top) seem to be *extremely *low for and old, but still decent, q9550. It is supossed to be 3/4 times bigger in both single and multi thread, isn´t it? If so, which might be the reason for this?


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Feb 23, 2017)

This is my score with my i5 4690K@4.6Ghz,16GB DDR3 2133mhz


----------



## ahujet (Feb 23, 2017)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> This is my score with my i5 4690K@4.6Ghz,16GB DDR3 2133mhz
> 
> View attachment 84460


I'm jelly of that voltage, guess what voltage I use to reach 4.4 GHz on my i5-4670k


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Feb 23, 2017)

ahujet said:


> I'm jelly of that voltage, guess what voltage I use to reach 4.4 GHz on my i5-4670k


I think I might get it work with lower than that  It is a really good chip


----------



## Komshija (Feb 24, 2017)

@Kyuuba: I was honestly expecting a score between 10800-11300 with i7 7700K@4,8 and DDR4-3600. What's your bench for stock frequencies with XMP enabled?
For the comparison, here is my i7 6700K@4,8 GHz with DDR4-3000: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/bench-oc-4-8-jpg.81742/


----------



## Filip Georgievski (Feb 24, 2017)




----------



## wurschti (Feb 24, 2017)

Enterprise24 said:


>


Amazing!


----------



## Kyuuba (Feb 24, 2017)

Komshija said:


> @Kyuuba: I was honestly expecting a score between 10800-11300 with i7 7700K@4,8 and DDR4-3600. What's your bench for stock frequencies with XMP enabled?
> For the comparison, here is my i7 6700K@4,8 GHz with DDR4-3000: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/bench-oc-4-8-jpg.81742/


Probably some bottleneck in my system, sometimes it peaks 10500 and goes back to 10200 mc and sc 2500 but goes back to 2300 mark, didn't bother running multiple test, you can find better scores on the web, wanted to participate no matter which score I get, thanks for participating as well dud.
Edit: I wanted to see if closing some startup programs, asus tools, etc and got this.


----------



## gint87 (Feb 25, 2017)




----------



## Imsochobo (Feb 26, 2017)

gint87 said:


>



That sucker is giving my stock V2 xeon chip multithreading competition (Nearly)

Waiting for the ryzen and lets see what it can do


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 1, 2017)

welcome, thats one hell of a cpu

(if you use the edit button you can merge your 2 posts in to 1.)

Also, members really appreciate it if you add your specs

click here
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/account/specs


----------



## mcraygsx (Mar 2, 2017)

Let me be the first. Default BIOS settings.

RYZEN 1800X w/ Asus CROSSHAIR Hero


----------



## tazire (Mar 3, 2017)

Im getting some really bad results with my 4790k.... it nearly looks like a core and a bit arent running in the multi threaded test. Could this possibly be down to using a Z87 mobo? or the fact that my RAM is fairly slow at 1600Mhz. Anyone got any ideas? Ryzen... Very nice. only bound to get better with time too.


----------



## Kliim (Mar 4, 2017)




----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 4, 2017)

@Kliim 

X5670 ht off 4.5ghz


----------



## Kliim (Mar 4, 2017)

@CAPSLOCKSTUCK 

 rly nice, would try it too, but it seems, that my mobo (Gigabyte UD4P) doesn't fully support the CPU. Everytime I set the BCLK over 150, it won't start. (srybadengl.)


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 4, 2017)

Kliim said:


> @CAPSLOCKSTUCK
> 
> rly nice, would try it too, but it seems, that my mobo (Gigabyte UD4P) doesn't fully support the CPU. Everytime I set the BCLK over 150, it won't start. (srybadengl.)




has the motherboard got the latest BIOS?


----------



## Kliim (Mar 4, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> has the motherboard got the latest BIOS?



yep. It's like a lock. BCLK >= 151 --> no boot. But for the daily use, its ok for me, especially with regard to power conumption and temperature.


----------



## siriq (Mar 7, 2017)

Checking in with AMD FX 8350@4882 MHz







Ryzen logo benchmark@4.8


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 8, 2017)

stock I7 6700k for now, just ordered a Asus z170 pro gaming board


----------



## jaggerwild (Mar 8, 2017)

i7 6700@4600 memory  2930


----------



## jaggerwild (Mar 8, 2017)

6700K@4700 little bit betta


----------



## siriq (Mar 8, 2017)

jaggerwild said:


> i7 6700@4600 memory  2930



I am just a bit of shy behind of you. Still surprised how well this amd cpu doing in AM3 motherboard with low memory freq.


----------



## jaggerwild (Mar 10, 2017)

DEAD said:


> ahha AMD boy dont forget bout single core performance..............................INTEL's trump........... haha
> during INTEL vs AMD war a lot of software was optimized for INTEL's chips
> specially GAMES
> 
> ...



 Stop baiting people, its a test is all it is. Why don't you post up!


----------



## freakshow (Mar 10, 2017)

My new build been messing around with for couple days.

APU build
AMD A-10 7860k @ 4.6Ghz
16Gb DDR3 1600 @ 2133ish


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 10, 2017)

@DEAD 
use the edit button to add to your posts

Have you posted a CPUZ bench somewhere, i cant seem to find it.


----------



## freakshow (Mar 10, 2017)

DEAD said:


> hello man,why u chooose AMD 4-5 years old chip in modern time........................
> 115.74 €
> AMD A-10 7860k @ 4.6Ghz
> 
> ...



Only reason i choose amd apu build is cause im waiting for ryzen mini itx board to be released. so at that point didnt really care so much if it was amd's apu or intel.


----------



## mcraygsx (Mar 11, 2017)

Ryzen 1800X with Asus Crosshair VI Hero
Running at Default BIOS settings with EPU power saving enabled. I except the performance will improve once Asus released a BIOS update since right now it fails to utilize my higher frequency ram modules from TridentZ. Even with stock settings it easily surpasses 6900K.


----------



## jaggerwild (Mar 11, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Ryzen 1800X with Asus Crosshair VI Hero
> Running at Default BIOS settings with EPU power saving enabled. I except the performance will improve once Asus released a BIOS update since right now it fails to utilize my higher frequency ram modules from TridentZ. Even with stock settings it easily surpasses 6900K.



 The SAD part is its only CPU-Z


----------



## mcraygsx (Mar 11, 2017)

jaggerwild said:


> The SAD part is its only CPU-Z


Hence the Title of this thread. I am not sure what you are expecting here.....


----------



## Killerdroid (Mar 11, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Hence the Title of this thread. I am not sure what you are expecting here.....



Hello!

Do you have benchmarks from any other software?  
I ask because I'm interested in the Ryzen hardware for folding / Crunching.

Thanks.


----------



## mcraygsx (Mar 11, 2017)

Killerdroid said:


> Hello!
> 
> Do you have benchmarks from any other software?
> I ask because I'm interested in the Ryzen hardware for folding / Crunching.
> ...



Sure, just name the software u want it benched on.
There are also plenty of reviews out there which will give u a solid idea.

Welcome.


----------



## Killerdroid (Mar 11, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Sure, just name the software u want it benched on.
> There are also plenty of reviews out there which will give u a solid idea.
> 
> Welcome.




Thanks,

Any decent software will do. Cinebench and the like. 

Yes I've seen the reviews online but they all differ. I'd be more than interested in buying the same kit as you now I know your hardware specs


----------



## mcraygsx (Mar 11, 2017)

Killerdroid said:


> Thanks,
> 
> Any decent software will do. Cinebench and the like.
> 
> Yes I've seen the reviews online but they all differ. I'd be more than interested in buying the same kit as you now I know your hardware specs



Sometime ago I started a thread with random selection of premature benchmarks. I think these are still on par with my current setup.
I am still waiting for Asus to update the BIOS for better Ram compatibility.

Here is the link: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/random-1800x-benchmarks.231186/


----------



## Killerdroid (Mar 11, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Sometime ago I started a thread with random selection of premature benchmarks. I think these are still on par with my current setup.
> I am still waiting for Asus to update the BIOS for better Ram compatibility.
> 
> Here is the link: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/random-1800x-benchmarks.231186/



I'll keep an eye on your updates.

Thanks again,


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 12, 2017)

My new Ryzen 1700X :


----------



## Kakdave (Mar 12, 2017)

Got this chip sold as "not working motherboard combo" with Asus P8P67-M mobo and 8GB Corsair Vengeance for just £50. Hot flash the bios chip and I got these



 
not a bad deal, I think.


----------



## FYFI13 (Mar 12, 2017)

tazire said:


> Im getting some really bad results with my 4790k.... it nearly looks like a core and a bit arent running in the multi threaded test. Could this possibly be down to using a Z87 mobo? or the fact that my RAM is fairly slow at 1600Mhz. Anyone got any ideas? Ryzen... Very nice. only bound to get better with time too.


Your single threaded result is fine, but it looks like there was really low power limit set for CPU. Have you tried to reset BIOS to defaults?


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 13, 2017)

Aircooled FX8320 and TX3/EVO was just trying to get some xtra performance, why not post it. That Ryzen looks good! That will be the next purchase


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 13, 2017)

better with CPU-Z ver. 1.78.3  :S


----------



## jboydgolfer (Mar 13, 2017)

4.8Ghz still havent pushed her to the max yet, but shes pushing 1.3v+....im going to need to switch back to my old Xeon, or get a new CPU soon, as this dual core, as tough as she is, cannot handle GTAV no matter what Freq she reaches  ....the age of the dual core is coming to an end me thinks.

Why is it That Intel chips have such a higher thread ratio over AMD ones?also, i noticed CPUz is rounding up when it should be rounding Down regarding the CPU ratio's.. mine should be 1.93, and the AMD post above mine should be 6.75.... oh CPUz, get some math son!


----------



## mcraygsx (Mar 14, 2017)

Asus released BIOS 0902 for Crosshair VI Hero. Finally decided to OC this 1800X. Multiplayer was set to 40.5 with 1.35Vcore everything else remained at default with EPU enabled.


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 15, 2017)

Changed CPU's, on my other uATX system I had a newer AMD FX-8350 so put it in my M5A97 EVO R2 and did some overclocking. Now it's running Prime95 to test stability.
The FX-8320 (2years old) won't go beyound 4488Mhz but still good. This does little better with lower volts and lower temps.. on 4,6Ghz. BUT WILL IT STAY Stable!? Now just a few workers crashed in Prime95 so..temps going towards 68 degrees. I guess it is not that much better then the 8320


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 16, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Asus released BIOS 0902 for Crosshair VI Hero. Finally decided to OC this 1800X. Multiplayer was set to 40.5 with 1.35Vcore everything else remained at default with EPU enabled.



This just confirmed something for me, Ryzen actually has a higher IPC than Kaby Lake and if clocked at the same speed the Ryzen 7 will blow the pants off a 7700K in single threaded applications.


----------



## johnspack (Mar 16, 2017)

Here's some ancient tech!


----------



## Cartel (Mar 17, 2017)

want a ryzen...


----------



## Cartel (Mar 17, 2017)




----------



## R-T-B (Mar 17, 2017)

chuck216 said:


> This just confirmed something for me, Ryzen actually has a higher IPC than Kaby Lake and if clocked at the same speed the Ryzen 7 will blow the pants off a 7700K in single threaded applications.



Don't let the CPU-Z's select benchmark fool you into believing that is it's actual IPC.  Ryzen does excessively well there.


----------



## Viking73 (Mar 17, 2017)

I was impatient and skeptical about Ryzen so I built this i7-6850K at 4.4 GHz about 4 months ago. This is running on air with a Noctua NH-D15S cooler. Haven't tried to overclock the uncore/cache.

BTW, this chip wasn't stable at 4.4 with Prime or other benchmarks that heavily used AVX instructions. Fortunately, the Broadwell-EP CPU family includes a new 'AVX Offset' configuration setting in the BIOS. I have this set to -400 MHz so AVX heavy compute runs at 4.0 GHz. Now, most code runs at 4.4 while the AVX heavy programs like Prime run at 4.0. Everything is rock solid.

I highly recommend AVX offset to anyone overclocking a 6800K, 6850K, 6900K, or 6950X.


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 17, 2017)

Finally got it Prime95 stable on 4,6Ghz @ Much lower voltage, the board cpu combo does not like high NB and HT value's. Went a little lower on those and I am rewarded with a cool running CPU at 4,6Ghz... on air. CoolerMaster TX3 EVO for cooling. Looks like there might be some more speed to achieve.. For some reason the voltage with this setting showing lower then it is, its around 1,38V at load. In CPUID HW monitor it does show. Cool & Quiet, C6 C1E are enabled so cores do downclock (1,5Ghz)  and park and so very silent.


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 17, 2017)

Cartel said:


> View attachment 85259


Hey Cartel, Lower your NB and HT and I think you should at least hit 4,6ghz with that combo. My board is way cheaper and has less VRM power. With decent cooling the sabertooth should hit 4.7Ghz and beyond. On water cooling you could do 5Ghz.


----------



## Derek12 (Mar 18, 2017)




----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 18, 2017)

Living room PC: Small form factor, but also overclocked. Runs Battlefield smooth with the HD 7950. Little slower than the other one. Also Cooler Master TX3EVO.
With the improved performance on DX12 these setups are still working well with new games like Battlefield 1. BF1 syncs nice to my 75Hz monitor with the R9 290.


----------



## ikeke (Mar 23, 2017)




----------



## mcraygsx (Mar 23, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Asus released BIOS 0902 for Crosshair VI Hero. Finally decided to OC this 1800X. Multiplayer was set to 40.5 with 1.35Vcore everything else remained at default with EPU enabled.



My Main workstation 6900K Overclocked to 4.4Ghz sitting on Asus X99-A. This chip easily push past 4.58ghz but temp seems to rise above 70.


----------



## AntDeek (Mar 23, 2017)




----------



## Kyuuba (Mar 23, 2017)

My signature also contains the initial score back when I overclock this CPU.


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 24, 2017)

Awesome overclock dude!
I think in a few months or so I'll be buying the Ryzen 5 maybe even 7.. waiting for some updated boards/BIOS.
Ryzen is good for Intel fanboy's as well, the prizes are going to be reduced for sure.


----------



## ikeke (Mar 24, 2017)

Spoiler


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 25, 2017)

Here's my Ryzen 1700X @~3.825 Ghz: Edit: typo fixed


----------



## ikeke (Mar 25, 2017)

Looks like typo, screenshot has 3.825


----------



## chuck216 (Mar 26, 2017)

DEAD said:


> 4.825 Ghz:?????


Typo sorry didn't even realize it


----------



## jboydgolfer (Mar 26, 2017)

squeezed another slice outta my G3258 to bring it up to 4.8Ghz. A very impressive Dual core Chip TBH. note the temp it barely broke 53C


----------



## nickthaskater (Mar 29, 2017)

6600K @ 4.4 GHz w/ 2x4 GB Vengeance LPX @ 3.1 GHz 15-15-15-28 1T http://valid.x86.fr/5zfnhi


----------



## zwer54 (Apr 5, 2017)

Ryzen R7 1700 @ 4096 MHz - Ram @ 2933 16-17-17-40-1T - Asus Crosshair VI Hero


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 6, 2017)

chuck216 said:


> Here's my Ryzen 1700X @~3.825 Ghz: Edit: typo fixed


It's 3.817GHz, and that core voltage looks way to low @ 0.392V


----------



## Toothless (Apr 6, 2017)

Caring1 said:


> It's 3.817GHz, and that core voltage looks way to low @ 0.392V


Could have downclocked per power saving and not update the core clocks. Sometimes it does that.


----------



## chuck216 (Apr 7, 2017)

Toothless said:


> Could have downclocked per power saving and not update the core clocks. Sometimes it does that.



Nah Nothing like that, cpu-z always fluctuates Core voltages based on how much the CPU is being stressed. Under load it goes up to 1.45 volts. At idle with nothing actively stressing the CPU (which is when I took the screenshot after finishing the benchmark) it drops voltages to ~0.40 or lower. I still have Vcore set to auto voltage. no need to manually set it if everything is stable.


----------



## phanbuey (Apr 7, 2017)




----------



## infrared (Apr 7, 2017)




----------



## dylricho (Apr 9, 2017)

A8-6600K at stock. (3.90 GHz base / 4.20 GHz ST / 4.10 GHz MT)

This is with a s**t ton of programs running, including Opera with 28 tabs, and whatever else you see in the taskbar.


----------



## Losi (Apr 10, 2017)

I7 4790K @5GHz 102,1*49


----------



## wally_1973 (Apr 15, 2017)

I have not seen any ryzen go beyond 4,1Ghz.. surely it must be possible to go higher with BIOS updates /  Microcode updates.


----------



## infrared (Apr 15, 2017)

There's plenty that can do more than 4.1, but unless you won the silicon lottery you need to be quite harsh on the vcore to get there, and cpuz benchmark isn't worth it really. I can do a run at 4.2 if you want to see.

edit:


----------



## dayathor (Apr 15, 2017)

this is my *fx 6300* @4.3 ghz


----------



## dylricho (Apr 16, 2017)

Now that the Creator's Update has become widespread, the CPU-Z benchmark scores as a whole should be improving slightly***. But remember that this is a simple integer benchmark which uses SSE2. It means absolutely nothing in the real world.

** *For Ryzen


----------



## mcraygsx (Apr 17, 2017)

infrared said:


> There's plenty that can do more than 4.1, but unless you won the silicon lottery you need to be quite harsh on the vcore to get there, and cpuz benchmark isn't worth it really. I can do a run at 4.2 if you want to see.
> 
> edit:
> 
> View attachment 86412



Amazing what are your temps like with 4.1Ghz ?


----------



## infrared (Apr 17, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> Amazing what are your temps like with 4.1Ghz ?


That 4.2ghz was far from stable to be fair 
4.1ghz is about the limit i can reach with 100% load on this particular chip.. at 1.50V it's getting to 70c (cpu diode) after 5 minutes with aida (cpu/fpu/cache selected). That's with a very good custom loop though so I guess the only thing you can take away from this is that heat transfer from die to heat spreader is excellent! For comparison: At 4ghz 1.41v it'll get to 59c with aida.


----------



## mcraygsx (Apr 17, 2017)

infrared said:


> That 4.2ghz was far from stable to be fair
> 4.1ghz is about the limit i can reach with 100% load on this particular chip.. at 1.50V it's getting to 70c (cpu diode) after 5 minutes with aida (cpu/fpu/cache selected). That's with a very good custom loop though so I guess the only thing you can take away from this is that heat transfer from die to heat spreader is excellent! For comparison: At 4ghz 1.41v it'll get to 59c with aida.



AMD did a fantastic job with soldering. Temps are far better then my 6900k setup


----------



## CS85 (Apr 17, 2017)

This is my 3770K@4.6Ghz 
Temps are pretty good-under 70c with Hyper 212, although it is pretty cold in my house


----------



## SonicBlaster (Apr 19, 2017)

i7-7700K@5200 / ASUS ROG MAXIMUS IX HERO


----------



## dylricho (Apr 21, 2017)

I decided to spend more time seeing how much of an overclock I can get out of my A8-6600K. I have produced two graphs with my results; one for single-thread and one for multi-thread. For reference, I have also included many of the results provided in this thread. Credits are below.

CPU-Z single-thread results
CPU-Z multi-thread results

It seems my system doesn't like a BCLK over 113 MHz. All of my results are using an Enermax ETS-T40-TB air cooler, in combination with 16 GB of DDR3-1600 and a Gigabyte GA-F2A58M-HD2 motherboard. The other three mobile processors are systems I have access to in the house.


*Result Credits:*

@dylricho — A8-6600K [stock]; all orange A8-6600K results; Core2 Duo T9300 [stock]; Celeron 250 [stock]; Athlon II P340 [stock].
@Derek12 — Core i3-6100 [stock]; Atom N455 [stock]; Core i7-6600U [stock].
@mcraygsx — Ryzen 7 1800X @ 4050 MHz.
@jboydgolfer — Pentium G3258 Anniversary Edition @ 4800 MHz.
@cdawall — Athlon Neo X2 L310 [stock]; Athlon 5350 [stock]; Athlon 5350 @ 2431 MHz.
@chuck216 — Ryzen 7 1700X [stock].
@vnl7 — Turion 64 X2 TL-60 [stock].
@Toothless — Atom N270 [stock].
@uuuaaaaaa — Pentium 4 HT Extreme Edition 3.40 @ 3834 MHz.
@KainXS — Atom Z3736F [stock].
@agent00skid — Phenom II N830 [stock].
@buildzoid — Core i7-5700HQ [stock].
@LightningJR — A8-4500M [stock].
@Underdog — FX-9370 @ 5017 MHz.
@sasamkd — Pentium III 1.00B [stock].
@F-Zero — Pentium 4 2.67 @ 1355 MHz.
@Steevo — Phenom II X6 1100T @ 4126 MHz.
@PCGamerDR — A10-6800K @ 4551 MHz.
@freakshow — A10-7860K @ 4624 MHz.
All other results are taken from the CPU-Z benchmark baseline list.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 21, 2017)

DEAD said:


> AMD boy u gotta switch to ryzen.............others chips are old crap.........specially in single core power



I'm not bothered. I paid £65 for the entire machine from a friend, including a monitor. And you can see by looking at the T9300, that it's already faster than my previous machine. I will be getting Ryzen at a later date. I make the most of what I have.


----------



## Ithanul (Apr 21, 2017)

i7 5960X @ 4.6GHz


----------



## dylricho (Apr 21, 2017)

I'm considering creating two graphs for the thread as a whole. Or would you prefer a table? Thoughts?


----------



## dylricho (Apr 25, 2017)

CPU-Z got an update. Version 1.7.9.0 now has removed most of the baselines and the benchmark itself appears to have received an update. Broadwell-E now outperforms Summit Ridge.

I will be making graphs for single- and multi-thread results for the thread. All you need to do is post your scores and ensure I can see the _CPU_ tab. I will only accept v1.7.9.× results. 

I'll run my A8-6600K through its previous overclock configurations once again and add the three laptop systems in the house onto the graph. I'll be crediting users on the graph this time. Simpler. 

(Sadly, this does mean we are lacking in the legacy CPU department now.)
(Also, I can't update my previous post with the old benchmark links to change the URLs, so if you need the old results, let me know.)

*# Will update post with new graphs once complete.*


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Apr 25, 2017)

7 year old Xeon X5670

stock speed 2.93ghz overclocked to 4.51ghz  ( a tad over 50% )

Seems the scale has completely changed







heres what the scores were with an older version


----------



## dylricho (Apr 26, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> 7 year old Xeon X5670
> 
> stock speed 2.93ghz overclocked to 4.51ghz  ( a tad over 50% )
> 
> Seems the scale has completely changed



Holy crap, that's one hell of an overclock you have there.  I'll be adding your result to the graphs.


----------



## mcraygsx (Apr 26, 2017)

For sake of updated CPUZ, I ran the Bench again on 1800x w/Corsshair VI (Bios 1002).


----------



## Ithanul (Apr 26, 2017)

With update CPU-Z.
5960X @ 4.6GHz


----------



## Kliim (Apr 26, 2017)

at first sight it seems that the Intel are looking much better now with the new update in comparison to the AMD Ryzen's


----------



## dylricho (Apr 27, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> For sake of updated CPUZ, I ran the Bench again on 1800x w/Corsshair VI (Bios 1002).


Is that thread reading correct? Would it be possible to run the benchmark with SMT enabled?



Kliim said:


> at first sight it seems that the Intel are looking much better now with the new update in comparison to the AMD Ryzen's


Never mind Ryzen, AMD as a whole is suffering. I know the previous benchmark version utilized SSE2 at most. However, I've noticed in my 1.7.9.0 benchmark results that Piledriver struggles to keep up with Intel's Penryn architecture, even with its much higher clock frequency. I'm rather intrigued to find out if the new version is using SSE3, SSE4 or even AVX. Perhaps @Viking73 can help with ruling out the last one, if the benchmark runs under the AVX Offset values? Granted, since Penryn is pretty close to Piledriver now, I would assume that AVX isn't the culprit, even though I see people jump to conclusions all over message boards. 

I can demonstrate the drop that Piledriver (my A8-6600K to be specific) has suffered by using my previous machine. It is equipped with a Core2 Duo T9300 at stock settings (2.50 GHz MT turbo; 2.70 GHz ST turbo). In 1.7.8.3, the APU at the slowest speed I tested (fixed 3.90 GHz) was ahead in single-thread by 27.1%. In multi-thread, it was ahead by 153.2%. In comparison for 1.7.9.0, the APU is now ahead in single-thread by only 4.2%, and in multi-thread by 76.9%.

I also ran the benchmark with the APU underclocked to 2.50 GHz and 2.70 GHz to see the difference on a 1:1 basis.

Regardless, here are the shiny, new graphs for CPU-Z version 1.7.9.0 and above:

*CPU-Z v1.7.9.×* — Single-Thread
*CPU-Z v1.7.9.×* — Multi-Thread​Additionally, the older graphs have been updated to credit users directly from the graph, and will permanently live here:

*CPU-Z v1.7.8.×* — Single-Thread
*CPU-Z v1.7.8.×* — Multi-Thread​


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 27, 2017)

What the heck happened to cpuZ's bench scores ? They are like less than half of what they used to be if that

  It looks like I'll have to run my bench again and seems they change the scaling of the results

Pentium 3258 4.7Ghz  new CPU-z Ver. 1.79


----------



## dylricho (Apr 27, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> What the heck happened to cpuZ's bench scores ? They are like less than half of what they used to be if that
> 
> It looks like I'll have to run my bench again and seems they change the scaling of the results



Not even that. Going by the two stock Ryzen 7 1700X scores, single-thread dropped from 2,139 to 370. 

Incidentally, there's something that has just struck my mind. Check out the single-thread graph for v1.7.9.0. Look at the scores for the Core i7-6700K and Core i5-7600K. Both at 4.20 GHz, yet the 7600K is 7.2% faster, and with a lower base clock frequency at that. IPC-wise, Skylake and Kaby Lake are absolutely identical so that doesn't explain it either.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 27, 2017)

Yeah even my score went down from 2200 to 500 less than a quarter. As long as the scoring is for every processor My pentium should still be in third place for single thread performance


----------



## dylricho (Apr 27, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> Yeah even my score went down from 2200 to 500 less than a quarter. As long as the scoring is for every processor My pentium should still be in third place for single thread performance



It's at the top.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 27, 2017)

dylricho said:


> It's at the top.



For now

As a tip to anyone who might read this. Run the benchmark a minimum of 3 times for your best score. My first was 504, then 512, & finally 516 when i ran out of patience. I havent adjusted voltage yet, i should be able to reach 4.8 + ghz if i do


----------



## MrGenius (Apr 27, 2017)

I have one score I was interested in seeing lower than before. And I believe *I *win. 

Celeron Northwood-128 @ 2.0GHz


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 27, 2017)

MrGenius said:


> I have one score I was interested in seeing lower than before. And I believe *I *win.
> 
> Celeron Northwood-128 @ 2.0GHz
> View attachment 87068
> ...



 Did you hit the start button?


----------



## MrGenius (Apr 27, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> Did you hit the start button?


I assume you mean the "Bench CPU" button. Oh yes. The zeros for ST and MT and 0.57 for MT Ratio appeared shortly after which.

EDIT: AND I just beat your ST score by 1 point! 

i5-3570K @ 5.0GHz










MT Ratio looks like 3.97 or 3.98. Let's call it 3.975?

EDIT 2: One more. Because I can. 

E8600 @ 3.33GHz


----------



## dylricho (Apr 27, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> For now
> 
> As a tip to anyone who might read this. Run the benchmark a minimum of 3 times for your best score. My first was 504, then 512, & finally 516 when i ran out of patience. I havent adjusted voltage yet, i should be able to reach 4.8 + ghz if i do



You talked that one up.  Incidentally, I did forget to say that for all of my results, I did exactly what you stated.



MrGenius said:


> I have one score I was interested in seeing lower than before. And I believe *I *win.
> 
> Celeron Northwood-128 @ 2.0GHz



Oh man...  NetBurst at its finest.



MrGenius said:


> I assume you mean the "Bench CPU" button. Oh yes. The zeros for ST and MT and 0.57 for MT Ratio appeared shortly after which.
> 
> EDIT: AND I just beat your ST score by 1 point!
> 
> ...



Yikes. The Bridges were such good overclockers.


----------



## Komshija (Apr 27, 2017)

@MrGenius :




That voltage!  What were the temps after CPU-Z bench?


----------



## FC Copenhagen (Apr 27, 2017)




----------



## Kliim (Apr 27, 2017)

@FckMoaners try version 1.79.0


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 27, 2017)

MrGenius said:


> AND I just beat your ST score by 1 point!








_*Sorry bud....   i was being "modest" . got 12 more points by chance? *_


----------



## FC Copenhagen (Apr 27, 2017)

@Kliim I see your point. Big decrease in scores. Benchmark has changed to something else?


----------



## dylricho (Apr 27, 2017)

FckMoaners said:


> @Kliim I see your point. Big decrease in scores. Benchmark has changed to something else?



I think it's either SSE3 or SSE4 (was previously SSE2). One method to find out would be if anyone has a Merom/Conroe Core2 Duo (E4000/E6000/T5000/T7000), to run the benchmark and compare with the Penryn chips we have in the graphs. If Penryn has a noticeable improvement, we can safely assume SSE4.

On another note, your 6700K is now at the top. It's safe to say that Ryzen won't be getting up there, unless there are some LN2 overclockers here who happen to own Ryzen...


----------



## Deleted member 163934 (Apr 27, 2017)

Athlon II X4 640



Pentium G3260


 

single core Athlon x4 / singler core Pentium = ~0.4 same ratio as in the old test 

Doubt I will be able to get the scores for my other 3 cpu: Sempron 145, AMD Athlon 64 x2 4000+ and AMD Athlon X2 5400B. The Sempron 145 is used in the pc that is basicaly a TV in my father's room (TV broke and I found a solution without costs  ), the AMD Athlon X2 5400B has Win 7 x86 and I think I need x64 for the test and the AMD Athlon 64 x2 4000+ is in the pc that will become a router as soon as I get a decent psu for it (no hdd... I understand it will consume more than a router but well...).


----------



## MrGenius (Apr 27, 2017)

Komshija said:


> @MrGenius :
> View attachment 87090
> 
> That voltage!  What were the temps after CPU-Z bench?


I don't know for sure on that one. I didn't check. But I just ran it again to get an idea. Max of 74°C ain't too bad.




Some benchmarks require even more voltage than that @ 5.0GHz too. Namely Valley and Superposition. The highest I run it is 1.680V @ 5.0GHz. That either gets the job done or I quit trying.




Them volts are pretty scary though. I only run them that high for occasional benches. And I lower them below 1.52V @ 4.8GHz, or less, immediately afterwards. So far no issues.



jboydgolfer said:


> _*Sorry bud....   i was being "modest" . got 12 more points by chance? *_


Damn! You win then. I've run it a bunch of times now and that's my highest ST score. And 5.1GHz is a no go. So it's looking like I'm all tapped out for ST.  

I did manage to up my MT score by 6 points though.

i5-3570K @ 5.0GHz


----------



## dylricho (Apr 27, 2017)

thedukesd1 said:


> Athlon II X4 640
> Pentium G3260
> 
> Doubt I will be able to get the scores for my other 3 cpu: Sempron 145, AMD Athlon 64 x2 4000+ and AMD Athlon X2 5400B. The Sempron 145 is used in the pc that is basicaly a TV in my father's room (TV broke and I found a solution without costs  ), the AMD Athlon X2 5400B has Win 7 x86 and I think I need x64 for the test and the AMD Athlon 64 x2 4000+ is in the pc that will become a router as soon as I get a decent psu for it (no hdd... I understand it will consume more than a router but well...).



Thank you for the Athlon and Pentium. They have been added to the graphs. You can run the 32-bit version of the program, though I'm not sure what kind of impact that will have on the scores. I've just run both versions. You will definitely want to run the 64-bit version with a 64-bit-capable processor. My scores for 32-bit were less than half what they were for 64-bit (237/576 vs. 85/249).

Does anyone have a Core2 Duo E6300, E6400, E6600 or E6700 that they could test?


----------



## TheRagnarok (Apr 28, 2017)

My current Xeon setup.
Was able to boot it at 5Ghz, but not stable.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 28, 2017)

Xeon 1231 V3 a suprisingly capable CPU.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Apr 28, 2017)

8 years old Xeon W 3520

Base clock 2.67ghz overclocked to 4.2ghz which is about 60 per cent or something.






@basco


----------



## dylricho (Apr 28, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> 8 years old Xeon W 3520
> 
> Base clock 2.67ghz overclocked to 4.2ghz which is about 60 per cent or something.



Approximately, what voltage did you achieve that at? (I am assuming the 0.944 V reading is too low).


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 28, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> 8 years old Xeon W 3520
> 
> Base clock 2.67ghz overclocked to 4.2ghz which is about 60 per cent or something.
> 
> ...




 I wish I could overclock my Xeon


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Apr 28, 2017)

dylricho said:


> Approximately, what voltage did you achieve that at? (I am assuming the 0.944 V reading is too low).




1.26 v


----------



## dylricho (Apr 28, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> 1.26 v



Awesome, thanks. All up-to-date.


----------



## birdie (Apr 29, 2017)

Ryzen what? 





That's a six years old CPU without OC.


----------



## wally_1973 (Apr 29, 2017)

The 17.01.64 CPUID bench shows very different score.


----------



## Tomgang (Apr 30, 2017)

It looks like CPU-z has updated and change that benchmark. So new results incoming.

I7 980X is what tested.
Stock




4.25 GHz




4.7 ghz


----------



## fusseli (Apr 30, 2017)

Very tempted to go 7700k


----------



## wally_1973 (Apr 30, 2017)

fusseli said:


> Very tempted to go 7700k


OR you could go for the Ryzen 5 1600.. also very good. But overclocking.. not yet.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 30, 2017)

birdie said:


> Ryzen what?
> 
> View attachment 87226
> 
> That's a six years old CPU without OC.



No way that is a legit stock 2500 result  cant be, right?


----------



## purecain (Apr 30, 2017)

haswell 4770k @ 4.5


----------



## wally_1973 (May 1, 2017)

For now I'll stick with the FX8320 and FX8350 and I'll wait a little longer. Maybe I'll buy an Intel maybe AMD.. duno yet. Prices of the intel's bound to drop so..


----------



## TheHunter (May 1, 2017)

@
https://valid.x86.fr/2lzkan


----------



## dylricho (May 1, 2017)

fusseli said:


> Very tempted to go 7700k



I am a little skeptical of your result. Looks like it's throttling due to temperatures (I see the 23 multiplier, and assume 4.60 GHz). I was getting that with my APU beyond 4.80 GHz. Therefore, I'm not too sure how to interpret this for the graph.


----------



## birdie (May 1, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> No way that is a legit stock 2500 result  cant be, right?



It's my own PC and the verification data is at the window title bar. I know it's difficult to reconcile with reality but it is what it is.


----------



## Kliim (May 2, 2017)

Software overclocking FTW 
If I try overclocking the bclk in the bios over 150, the PC won't start, no matter what I do (several seems to have this prob with these mobo in combination with westmere). So I try overclocking with easytune 6 in windows and I get 178Mhz bclk or 4.272Ghz core speed. 
(Srybadengl.)


----------



## jboydgolfer (May 2, 2017)

birdie said:


> I know it's difficult to reconcile with reality but it is what it is



no difficulty, i owned that CPU (the K version) , but based off the perf of Much newer higher clocked CPU's, i was surprised to see a 2011 or 2012,  2500 @ stock do 400+ , thats all.

for example a 4770k doing about 80 points better with a extra Ghz of frequency. just _seems_ off is all. its not that i cant belive the chip CAN do it, it just that i had trouble seeing it happen @ stock aka. A max of 3.7 Ghz.& i noticed you didnt run the front screen of cpuz showing actual clocks, so i thought it might be a mistake since cpuz always shows stock clocks on the bench screen


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (May 2, 2017)

Kliim said:


> Software overclocking FTW
> If I try overclocking the bclk in the bios over 150, the PC won't start, no matter what I do (several seems to have this prob with these mobo in combination with westmere). So I try overclocking with easytune 6 in windows and I get 178Mhz bclk or 4.272Ghz core speed.
> (Srybadengl.)
> 
> View attachment 87386




try dropping the multi to X 22


----------



## Kliim (May 2, 2017)

@CAPSLOCKSTUCK tried it, at 179 Mhz bluescreen without any load @1.344V. Which further voltages you have (QPI,PLL...)? 
But it seems that 178 is the highest I can squeeze out of these board.


----------



## Xuper (May 2, 2017)

my PC : CPU-z 

ST Score : 135
MT Score : 535

Win7 64bit / Cpu-z 64 bit

when I click "submit and compare", CPU-Z's Web page does not show me score, any idea? bench Just gives me only link with no score.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (May 2, 2017)

Kliim said:


> @CAPSLOCKSTUCK tried it, at 179 Mhz bluescreen without any load @1.344V. Which further voltages you have (QPI,PLL...)?
> But it seems that 178 is the highest I can squeeze out of these board.




what CPU cooler do you have.?

All my volts are on auto.


----------



## droopyRO (May 2, 2017)

I really want to upgrade to a Ryzen 1600.


----------



## Kliim (May 2, 2017)

Tower cooler with 120mm fan.
Ok, mine too so far, so they seem not the problem. Maybe I'll try it one time without smt.


----------



## dylricho (May 3, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> no difficulty, i owned that CPU (the K version) , but based off the perf of Much newer higher clocked CPU's, i was surprised to see a 2011 or 2012,  2500 @ stock do 400+ , thats all.
> 
> for example a 4770k doing about 80 points better with a extra Ghz of frequency. just _seems_ off is all. its not that i cant belive the chip CAN do it, it just that i had trouble seeing it happen @ stock aka. A max of 3.7 Ghz.& i noticed you didnt run the front screen of cpuz showing actual clocks, so i thought it might be a mistake since cpuz always shows stock clocks on the bench screen



Well, the software itself comes with two baselines that don't make sense. The 6700K and 7600K both have the same ST turbo, and yet the i5 is faster in single-thread by 7%.


----------



## FilipM (May 4, 2017)

As @CAPSLOCKSTUCK (or was it someone else?) would say, long live X58 






PS. In Single Thread I beat a Ryzen...at least according to CPUZ's database...wow


----------



## purecain (May 4, 2017)

hopefully have realworld ryzen 1800x results tomorrow.
ps.just spotted the run on the last page. those results are crazy.. cant wait...


----------



## fusseli (May 5, 2017)

fusseli said:


> Very tempted to go 7700k



Aaaaand here we go 









vs. old FX-8350 @ 4.4 GHz


----------



## dylricho (May 6, 2017)

I forgot to tell you guys. Last week, I got in contact with the developers and they told me that version 17 of the benchmark still utilizes scalar SSE2 instructions at most. No SSE3, SSE4 or AVX.

(I also contacted to notify them of the "i7-7600K" typo.)




purecain said:


> hopefully have realworld ryzen 1800x results tomorrow.
> ps.just spotted the run on the last page. those results are crazy.. cant wait...



Awesome. It'll be interesting to have an 1800X result with SMT enabled.


----------



## phanbuey (May 6, 2017)

meh... with 2 games running in the background


----------



## purecain (May 6, 2017)

nice, I'm having to wait a couple more days as I didn't like the replacement back plate for the temporary water cooling. so bought an am4 bracket. just waiting on delivery now...


----------



## Enterprise24 (May 7, 2017)




----------



## Compgeke (May 10, 2017)

Here's something a little different: Xeon E5-1650. Basically an i7 3930K with ECC support.

It actually holds up really well for its age. Modern CPUs are a bit faster single core but multi core it seems to hold up fine with mid range chips.


----------



## Losi (May 14, 2017)

ist ganz schön okay, für ein Bench.


----------



## jboydgolfer (May 14, 2017)

Losi said:


> für ein Bench.



use newest version.

http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html


----------



## Zyll Goliat (May 14, 2017)

My FX 8300 OC at 4.125 at minimum V




I am really interesting in X1366 Xeon Hexa-core build as they still look really good after all this years but it is pain in the arse to find good/working mobo cheaply....


----------



## jboydgolfer (May 14, 2017)

Nice


----------



## Compgeke (May 14, 2017)

Zyll Goliath said:


> My FX 8300 OC at 4.125 at minimum V
> View attachment 87952
> 
> I am really interesting in X1366 Xeon Hexa-core build as they still look really good after all this years but it is pain in the arse to find good/working mobo cheaply....



I'd honestly look towards a 2011 system. Something like http://www.ebay.com/itm/Xeon-E5-1650-CPU-EVGA-X79-SLI-Motherboard-/132189512619 would be a good start. E5-1650's a 3.2 GHz hex with an unlocked multiplier, essentially the same chip as a 3930K with ECC support. Motherboard side of things you get PCIe 3, it'll be UEFI so NVMe support should be addable if it's not already, quad channel ram, etc. Separate board/CPU would be something like http://www.ebay.com/itm/222509557232 + http://www.ebay.com/itm/272667929840 .

There's also the fact that for this benchmark alone, an overlocked X5670 @ 4.2 GHz isn't a whole lot faster than an E5-1650 at base clock


----------



## Zyll Goliat (May 14, 2017)

Compgeke said:


> I'd honestly look towards a 2011 system. Something like http://www.ebay.com/itm/Xeon-E5-1650-CPU-EVGA-X79-SLI-Motherboard-/132189512619 would be a good start. E5-1650's a 3.2 GHz hex with an unlocked multiplier, essentially the same chip as a 3930K with ECC support. Motherboard side of things you get PCIe 3, it'll be UEFI so NVMe support should be addable if it's not already, quad channel ram, etc. Separate board/CPU would be something like http://www.ebay.com/itm/222509557232 + http://www.ebay.com/itm/272667929840 .
> 
> There's also the fact that for this benchmark alone, an overlocked X5670 @ 4.2 GHz isn't a whole lot faster than an E5-1650 at base clock


Ohh sure that´s better choice but it´s far beyond of my budget limit


----------



## fusseli (May 21, 2017)

First attempt at 5ghz on the 7700k


----------



## er557 (May 21, 2017)

OK, bow down to the king everyone  ;-)
hacked xeon e5 2686 v3 , turbo bins hacked, not overclocked- all stock.  18cores/36threads   2.9ghz--3.5ghz







(don't compare to old versions of cpu-z)


----------



## Verbatim (May 29, 2017)

Can anybody help i need Ryzen 5 1500X latest CPU-Z screenshot "print screen". OS Windows 10... Thanks!


----------



## jboydgolfer (May 29, 2017)

Verbatim said:


> Can anybody help i need Ryzen 5 1500X latest CPU-Z screenshot "print screen". Thanks!








Dunno if this has what u need? from google images.


----------



## Verbatim (May 29, 2017)

Sorry i need clean print screen from desktop this is CPU-Z VALIDATOR where text shape is completely different from original.

For example... It should look like this.


----------



## jboydgolfer (May 29, 2017)

Verbatim said:


> Sorry i need clean print screen from desktop this is CPU-Z VALIDATOR where text shape is completely different from original.
> 
> For example... It should look like this.








Here.? I know what your saying, like using the windows snipping tool (i disnt know it changes text otherwise) anyway, ive found several on google...


----------



## Arctucas (May 29, 2017)




----------



## jboydgolfer (May 29, 2017)

Arctucas said:


> 579



thats one of the Few CPU's that actually beat my Pentium @4.8Ghz. that CPU of your's is a beast! that has to be one of the better 90% of its kind.


----------



## mcraygsx (May 30, 2017)

My Core 2 Xtreme X6800 @ stock






Do I get the Award for oldest CPU? I still have P2 with 440BX sitting around but I don't wanna setup Operating System and drivers.


----------



## FilipM (Jun 1, 2017)

New version of CPU-Z, bench has been updated again, numbers differ slightly. Now I beat the 1800X as well...by 1 point


----------



## Admin89 (Jun 2, 2017)

AMD FX-9590 5GHz killer : Mobile CPU i7 4700MQ @ 3.6GHz (OC with Intel XTU)







Beat Skylake i7 6770HQ (stock) too




https://valid.x86.fr/sbcmpe


----------



## Enterprise24 (Jun 2, 2017)




----------



## itlvk (Jun 2, 2017)




----------



## Admin89 (Jun 2, 2017)

@itlvk CPU-Z has changed the system score , your result is outdated . Please update CPU-Z (Latest Version is 1.79 atm)


----------



## FilipM (Jun 2, 2017)

1.79.1 is latest version. Please re-bench using that.


----------



## cdawall (Jun 2, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> 8 years old Xeon W 3520
> 
> Base clock 2.67ghz overclocked to 4.2ghz which is about 60 per cent or something.
> 
> ...









Competitive with my macbook lol


----------



## DR4G00N (Jun 2, 2017)

My FX-8300 @ 4.6GHz

I hate this thing, it runs hot and chugs power for such terrible performance. I have a Xeon X5650, X5670 & X5687 just sitting around because I have no good boards that work with them.


----------



## er557 (Jun 3, 2017)

@itlvk:   nice,   regards from the little brother, e5 v3


----------



## itlvk (Jun 3, 2017)

@er557
Great combo !


----------



## Rickkins (Jun 6, 2017)

Here's mine...


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 6, 2017)

We seriously are all running different versions.  1.79+ gives completely different scores people, please try to use that.

My Ryzen 7 1800X:


----------



## Rickkins (Jun 6, 2017)

Ok wtf...??/
There's a huge difference between the two. What does that mean...??


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jun 6, 2017)

Rickkins said:


> Ok wtf...??/
> There's a huge difference between the two. What does that mean...??



 The first results were from an older version of CPUZ the second results were from the new version ,they changed the scoring system ,it's all relative to what version you use.  Your performance is no different unless you increased the frequency it's just the numbers in the score that changed


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 6, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> The first results were from an older version of CPUZ the second results were from the new version ,they changed the scoring system ,it's all relative to what version you use.  Your performance is no different unless you increased the frequency it's just the numbers in the score that changed



Yep, they just score things different 1.79+


----------



## Rickkins (Jun 6, 2017)

Ok, I see, thanks.


----------



## Rickkins (Jun 6, 2017)

Well, how come the "reference" cpu seems to score better with the "new" version...??

Seems pretty suspect to me...


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jun 6, 2017)

Rickkins said:


> Seems pretty suspect to me.




 I'm certain that it's not some kind of conspiracy ,it's best that you try not to compare versions because they change wildly ...why I don't know but they do. if their getting the Results that are used for reference from other users, maybe the CPU your testing against did better this run? i cant say for sure. but i wouldnt put Too much stock in it.

use this as reference ....4790 @ bone stock


----------



## Rickkins (Jun 6, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> I'm certain that it's not some kind of conspiracy ,it's best that you try not to compare versions because they change wildly ...why I don't know but they do. if their getting the Results that are used for reference from other users, maybe the CPU your testing against did better this run? i cant say for sure. but i wouldnt put Too much stock in it.
> 
> use this as reference ....4790 @ bone stock




I'm sure you're right.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 6, 2017)

The actual official reason is the old test was slightly Ryzen biased, and they patched that.  Read into that what you will.


----------



## The Data Master (Jun 6, 2017)

Ryzen coming soon. Haswell i3 for now..


----------



## purecain (Jun 6, 2017)

basically cpuz said that amd's chip was optimised to run the code it was using. more so than intels. in their opinion that's not fair so they found a test where ryzen was less optimised. like I stated before. I don't agree with it.
so if ryzen gets some microcode which benefits it in this test are they going to change the test again.
to clarify they are simulating the workload you would expect running a game. well we know that unless that code has been specifically designed to use ryzen it will not run correctly thus giving the impression of less performance.
according to this bench my old 4770k at 4.45 beats my new 16thread 1800x.

ive used both and this is a big improvement. each core equals a haswell core and there are twice as many on ryzen. so no the scores are complete bullshit.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 6, 2017)

purecain said:


> so if ryzen gets some microcode which benefits it in this test are they going to change the test again.



How?  They just added more ISA testing in the test.  They can't magically pull others out of thin air.  AMD is good at SSE2 and general x86, Intel is good at more modern functions like AVX/FMA3.  Games use SSE2/x86 more, so I can see how you could call it "biased" from that angle, but not everyone plays games so personally I feel it was biased before.


----------



## fusseli (Jun 6, 2017)

Scales for my meager 10% OC... I need better cooling


----------



## wally_1973 (Jun 9, 2017)

Again a new version. Here the V17.01.64 scores of my small form factor.


----------



## wally_1973 (Jun 9, 2017)

Here the V17.01.64 scores of my ATX ASUS M5A97 EVO R2


----------



## Deathmourne (Jun 11, 2017)

Here is mine, took a lot of effort to get 5ghz on a 8320 haha, runninng a m5a97 evo r2 aswell.


----------



## Thunder162 (Jun 11, 2017)

Hi guys , its my first post in this awesome forum and site  
Btw , i want show the difference between 1.78+ and 1.79+ versions using same processor.
This is my bench of my secondary laptop for daily use.
Sorry for my english but im italian guy !


----------



## Norton (Jun 11, 2017)

*Ryzen 1600X*


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 11, 2017)

DR4G00N said:


> My FX-8300 @ 4.6GHz
> 
> I hate this thing, it runs hot and chugs power for such terrible performance.



No wonder , that's a lot of voltage for just 4.6 Ghz , you lost the silicon lottery by a lot.


----------



## wally_1973 (Jun 12, 2017)

Deathmourne said:


> Here is mine, took a lot of effort to get 5ghz on a 8320 haha, runninng a m5a97 evo r2 aswell.View attachment 88961


did not think that was possible with the M5A97 EVO R2 board. I would think you would fry your power regulators.


----------



## TommyT (Jun 12, 2017)




----------



## wally_1973 (Jun 13, 2017)

Norton said:


> *Ryzen 1600X*


Finally some Ryzen 5 1600 types show up in the mix. Probably the processor I am going to purchase.


----------



## Aenra (Jun 13, 2017)

http://valid.x86.fr/1pv2cp

(am not good at this paint-imgur business, lol)


----------



## fusseli (Jun 13, 2017)

@Aenra that's the old version, 1.79.1 is current


----------



## Aenra (Jun 13, 2017)

fusseli said:


> @Aenra that's the old version, 1.79.1 is current



If it ain't broke..


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jun 13, 2017)

interesting how Ryzen 1600 scores the same as my 7 year old Xeon


----------



## Nuckles56 (Jun 13, 2017)

An i5 6500 with 2133MHz RAM, not terribly exciting really.


----------



## TommyT (Jun 13, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> interesting how Ryzen 1600 scores the same as my 7 year old Xeon
> 
> 
> View attachment 89006



well basic ryzen 3.2ghz 219$ vs old much more expensive xeon and under oc...

so i guess its kinda nice score


----------



## Hardi (Jun 13, 2017)




----------



## Komshija (Jun 15, 2017)

Most recent benchmark. My i7 6700K scores very good against the i7 7700K.


----------



## fusseli (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## fusseli (Jun 17, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> interesting how Ryzen 1600 scores the same as my 7 year old Xeon
> 
> 
> View attachment 89006



I like how OC 7700k whips OC ryzen 1600 in IPC (gaming) and is comparable multithreaded... with 2/3 the cores.  A hundred bucks extra well spent, IMO.


----------



## Komshija (Jun 17, 2017)

fusseli said:


> I like how OC 7700k whips OC ryzen 1600 in IPC (gaming) and is comparable multithreaded... with 2/3 the cores.  A *hundred bucks extra well spent*, IMO.


 I doubt that. I would much rather pick Ryzen 7 1700 for the same price, since this CPU destroys i7 7700K, plus it has much better value and is much more future-proof. For gaming, Ryzen 5 1600 or 1600X would be a better solution than Ryzen 7, Intel i5 and especially expensive 4C/8T i7.


----------



## fusseli (Jun 18, 2017)

I don't agree with that one bit.  I don't run WinZip for fun, I play games.  The multicore performance you are referring to doesn't actually do anything


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 18, 2017)

fusseli said:


> The multicore performance you are referring to doesn't actually do anything



Games are going increasingly multicore.  

This isn't the place for this debate, regardless.


----------



## FR@NK (Jun 18, 2017)

Mainly setup for lightly threaded work loads(gaming and normal PC usage). Hyperthreading is disabled so the multithread score is abit weak. Single thread score is pretty good and this is at 4.5GHz. 








fusseli said:


> I don't run WinZip for fun



Have you played blender or cinebench?


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 18, 2017)

@ 4 GHz


----------



## purecain (Jun 18, 2017)

@4.015


----------



## uuuaaaaaa (Jun 18, 2017)

mcraygsx said:


> My Core 2 Xtreme X6800 @ stock
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Fire up that P2 then, I have my P4 3.4EE GHz Gallatin core benched at the start of this thread


----------



## Losi (Jun 18, 2017)

My Dual Xeon Workstation


----------



## Komshija (Jun 19, 2017)

fusseli said:


> I don't agree with that one bit.  I don't run WinZip for fun, I play games.  The multicore performance you are referring to doesn't actually do anything


 There are people who can actually do something with their PC and even make money with it besides just gaming.  Even though, as R-T-B already said, new games will be able to utilize more cores and don't forget that for gaming much more important factor will be GPU.


----------



## Hugis (Jun 19, 2017)




----------



## jboydgolfer (Jun 19, 2017)

Aenra said:


> If it ain't broke..



No it isnt broken, but when posting scores for comparison, it doesnt  work, since the scoring is wildly different on current versions, its like comparing apples to dwarf stars. Unless your intent is to just post older results...admittedly it isnt very conducive to this thread based score posting though, as people cant be expected to constantly be updating their scores...atleast it isnt in my opinion. i dont know why they keep changing it, but im guessing they do have a reason. i suppose it isnt all that serious though.


----------



## Verbatim (Jul 1, 2017)

Maybe someone has a Ryzen 5 1500X?


----------



## Laki89 (Jul 1, 2017)

My Crunch lady Xena:
everything running on stock speeds, nothing overclocked:


----------



## Tomgang (Jul 1, 2017)

I7 980X @ 4.3 GHz


----------



## FR@NK (Jul 1, 2017)

10 year old laptop


----------



## Razor12911 (Jul 14, 2017)

QX9650 @3.8GHz


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 20, 2017)

Celeronadingdong


----------



## fusseli (Aug 8, 2017)

kabylake 7700k @ 5ghz


----------



## Thimblewad (Aug 8, 2017)

Devilish CPU, must say.


----------



## Jhelms (Aug 8, 2017)

My 1700 with a slight OC, just shy of 3.8


----------



## WhiteNoise (Aug 9, 2017)

My 7800X


----------



## phanbuey (Aug 9, 2017)

WhiteNoise said:


> My 7800X
> View attachment 90884


so tempted to get one of these... but the Kaffee Lakes are releasing in 1-2 months.


----------



## Jhelms (Aug 9, 2017)

Wanted to play and do one more entry. Not bad for a $269 processor (what I paid with heatsink). Had to push it a little hard for this speed but nothing crazy - 1.35V. however monitoring software was showing a tad less than 1.39. Not a great OC mobo.... No LLC and only a 3+3 phase. But hey - ran it all night over 4ghz without an issue. Software, games, prime 95... all was stable. But 25mhz further and she could not handle it without a lot more voltage. Went back to my daily 3.8 however which hardly requires any voltage increase. In short - this system does it no problem. I just have no need to push it in any way for daily use. For $269 this little 1700 is a multi threaded beast


----------



## WhiteNoise (Aug 9, 2017)

phanbuey said:


> so tempted to get one of these... but the Kaffee Lakes are releasing in 1-2 months.



Yeah with the new chips coming it is worth the wait I'm sure.


----------



## phanbuey (Aug 9, 2017)

Jhelms said:


> Wanted to play and do one more entry. Not bad for a $269 processor (what I paid with heatsink). Had to push it a little hard for this speed but nothing crazy - 1.35V. however monitoring software was showing a tad less than 1.39. Not a great OC mobo.... No LLC and only a 3+3 phase. But hey - ran it all night over 4ghz without an issue. Software, games, prime 95... all was stable. But 25mhz further and she could not handle it without a lot more voltage. Went back to my daily 3.8 however which hardly requires any voltage increase. In short - this system does it no problem. I just have no need to push it in any way for daily use. For $269 this little 1700 is a multi threaded beast



that is a great overclock for a ryzen... you sure that is stable? damn nice ram & scores too.


----------



## johnspack (Aug 9, 2017)

My poor old cpu...  will have to do a run at 5ghz soon I guess...  here's grandpa:  oops,  it's at 4.7..


----------



## phanbuey (Aug 9, 2017)

WhiteNoise said:


> Yeah with the new chips coming it is worth the wait I'm sure.


Some rumors are saying 4+2 kaby lake, and cannonlake as true 6 core... who knows might not be a worthwhile wait.


----------



## johnspack (Aug 9, 2017)

Just so you know the score above wasn't cheating,  my load info:


----------



## Jhelms (Aug 9, 2017)

phanbuey said:


> that is a great overclock for a ryzen... you sure that is stable? damn nice ram & scores too.


Yep - all was rock solid but it was on the wire for the voltage. Any more than that and it got super power hungry. As I mentioned, 25mhz more and things would fall apart in prime or memtest. As it was - ran excellent  However 3.8 seems to be the real sweetspot for my 1700. Barely have to touch voltage and I have run it for periods on stock voltage @ 3.8 - no issues. I only bumped it when I was having ram stability issues at 3330ish and the above timings. Once I dropped back to 3200, all was rock stable and I simply never lowered the cpu voltage back to stock. Will drop it back down tonight and see how it goes.

Ram has been great and very fast. Does everything numbers wise it says it will. RGB on the ram does not work with a crap though. Gskill & Asus are still figuring it all out. So I am stuck with rainbows and unicorn farts for a color theme.


----------



## xkm1948 (Aug 9, 2017)

6950X @ 4.2GHz with 3.5GHz Cache


----------



## dylricho (Aug 12, 2017)

@xkm1948 — May I ask what voltage you are using to achieve 4.20 GHz on that 6950X?   ← no longer required; I got it from your system specs. 

Hello guys. I am back after a brief hiatus. Looks like CPU-Z got another update which has improved the balancing between Zen and Skylake, so let's start the 1.8.0.x graphs! 

*CPU-Z v1.8.0.x* — Single-Thread | Multi-Thread


----------



## Norton (Aug 12, 2017)

*1700X *running on an *Asrock X370 Taichi*






Trident Z ram is running happily at 2933 after the latest BIOS update


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 12, 2017)




----------



## FR@NK (Aug 12, 2017)

dylricho said:


> Looks like CPU-Z got another update which has improved the balancing between Zen and Skylake, so let's start the 1.8.0.x graphs!



There is no difference with the new update as it uses the same benchmark version.


----------



## dylricho (Aug 12, 2017)

FR@NK said:


> There is no difference with the new update as it uses the same benchmark version.



Well, the benchmark figures used for the baselines have all increased slightly.


----------



## er557 (Aug 12, 2017)

@dylricho :   can you add me to the MT graph


----------



## FR@NK (Aug 12, 2017)

dylricho said:


> Well, the benchmark figures used for the baselines have all increased slightly.



I believe you are confused. The new 1.8.0 update doesn't effect any of the benchmarking compared to the 1.79.X version. See http://www.cpuid.com/news.html for more information.


----------



## xkm1948 (Aug 13, 2017)

The Wife's oooold laptop. 8yrs still going strong. Pretty good for a HP


----------



## dylricho (Aug 13, 2017)

er557 said:


> @dylricho :   can you add me to the MT graph



Added, thank you! 




FR@NK said:


> I believe you are confused. The new 1.8.0 update doesn't effect any of the benchmarking compared to the 1.79.X version. See http://www.cpuid.com/news.html for more information.



Thank you for the link. I am genuinely intrigued because both the i5-7600K and i7-6700K have the same 4.20 GHz turbo frequency on a single core, and yet the i5 (still incorrectly stated as an i7 in 1.8.0, I see) has a better score in the baseline (508 vs. 474). And 7% is a bit much for a margin of error. You can also see other baselines adjusted below.


----------



## Readlight (Aug 13, 2017)




----------



## Readlight (Aug 13, 2017)




----------



## Readlight (Aug 13, 2017)




----------



## dylricho (Aug 13, 2017)

Hey @Readlight! Are all of those results at stock?


----------



## Readlight (Aug 13, 2017)

dylricho said:


> Hey @Readlight! Are all of those results at stock?


Only athlon is oc to 3,11Ghz


----------



## dylricho (Aug 13, 2017)

Readlight said:


> Only athlon is oc to 3,11Ghz



Could you capture the CPU information tab please?


----------



## Readlight (Aug 13, 2017)

dylricho said:


> Could you capture the CPU information tab please?




 View attachment 91065 View attachment 91065


----------



## dylricho (Aug 13, 2017)

Awesome, thank you!


----------



## fusseli (Aug 14, 2017)

skylake i3-6100 @ stock w/ ddr4-2133 cpu-z benchmark


----------



## DR4G00N (Sep 4, 2017)

New lowest score.


----------



## Peter Lindgren (Sep 4, 2017)

Xeon 2680v2 @3.5Ghz


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 13, 2017)

DR4G00N said:


> New lowest score.
> 
> 
> View attachment 91744



WHY U NO ACTIVATE WINDOWS?

Just messin' man... 

My new Ryzen RMA:



 

 



She's fiesty.  Going nearly clock for clock with Kaby Lake in ST...


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 13, 2017)

DR4G00N said:


> New lowest score.
> 
> 
> View attachment 91744


For you maybe. But there's no lower score than mine. Well...points wise anyway. I'll be impressed if someone can manage to get 0 ST and 0 MT with a lower MTR than 0.57. Then I'll admit defeat.


----------



## fusseli (Sep 13, 2017)

@R-T-B but can it do 5Gs? +10% ST.  HAH!!!


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 13, 2017)

fusseli said:


> @R-T-B but can it do 5Gs? +10% ST.  HAH!!!
> 
> View attachment 92004 View attachment 92005



That's fair if you acknowledge that I'll multithread the wazoo out of you. 

I'm really just happy to touch Intel stock.  There's no denying Intel is king of singlethread.


----------



## dylricho (Sep 13, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> My new Ryzen RMA:
> 
> She's fiesty.  Going nearly clock for clock with Kaby Lake in ST...



Great numbers. Added your result to the graphs.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 13, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> That's fair if you acknowledge that I'll multithread the wazoo out of you.
> I'm really just happy to touch Intel stock.  There's no denying Intel is king of singlethread.


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 13, 2017)

teh skylake x





The 1700 workstation while crunching a query


----------



## dylricho (Sep 13, 2017)

@phanbuey - Do you have a voltage figure for your i7, and is your Ryzen overclocked? 

@Knoxx29 - Added your Xeon to the graphs!


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 13, 2017)

dylricho said:


> @phanbuey - Do you have a voltage figure for your i7, and is your Ryzen overclocked?



yes (it's on the home rig though - it is 4.64Ghz @ 1.16v for 7820x - the r7 1700 is very lightly OC'd at 3.7 1.23v -- it's a 24/7 machine and it was crunching at the time, so i dont know if you really want to use that score... just wanted to throw it up in the thread since I am on it at the moment.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 13, 2017)

dylricho said:


> @Knoxx29 - Added your Xeon to the graphs!


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Sep 13, 2017)

Single-Thread Graph / Multi-Thread Graph


----------



## dylricho (Sep 13, 2017)

phanbuey said:


> yes (it's on the home rig though - it is 4.64Ghz @ 1.16v for 7820x - the r7 1700 is very lightly OC'd at 3.7 1.23v -- it's a 24/7 machine and it was crunching at the time, so i dont know if you really want to use that score... just wanted to throw it up in the thread since I am on it at the moment.



Thank you.  Also, your 1700 figures appear to be up there with stock 1700X and 1800X chips, so performance doesn't appear to be hampered much, if at all.


----------



## Filip Georgievski (Sep 13, 2017)

Maybe my little old I5 can get into the graphs?
It is a little rusty but at 3.8GHZ, it gets pretty close in single thread to most newer CPUs.

I took the Ryzen 7 1700 as a reference for this bench.


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 13, 2017)

Couldn't capture the image quick enough to get the full 4.0GHz. Speed in the pic.
But here is my 6700K's score.


----------



## dylricho (Sep 14, 2017)

Filip Georgievski said:


> View attachment 92034
> 
> Maybe my little old I5 can get into the graphs?
> It is a little rusty but at 3.8GHZ, it gets pretty close in single thread to most newer CPUs.
> ...



Could you also capture the CPU tab?


----------



## Filip Georgievski (Sep 14, 2017)

Here is the full sheet for my CPU, including RAM and Bench again.


----------



## fusseli (Sep 15, 2017)

kaby lake 7700k 5.2ghz 1.4v, 280mm AIO, ddr4-3000 cl15

Not sure this is 24/7 stable, but here's a wider gap for ST   https://valid.x86.fr/75zzbd

This is 5.2; 5.3 will bsod at 1.4v and I care not to go higher


----------



## HeliosDoubleSix (Sep 15, 2017)

Threadripper 1950X 3.9ghz 1.275v - RAM 2933mhz - Liqtech 360 AIO - Stable 24/7 with 3D rendering

( cpu-z shows wrong clock speed )

Cinebench of 3336 multi core, 158 single core


----------



## purecain (Sep 15, 2017)

my system atm... btw I managed to get all 32gb to 3266mhz... using proc odt... just a heads up.


----------



## itlvk (Sep 20, 2017)




----------



## dylricho (Sep 23, 2017)

@Filip Georgievski 
@fusseli 
@HeliosDoubleSix 
@purecain 
@itlvk 

Added all of your results to the graphs. Amazing Threadripper results, by the way!


----------



## drade (Sep 23, 2017)

My laptop for graduate school. Brand is ASUS.


----------



## Norton (Sep 24, 2017)

My new main rig
*Ryzen 1700X* (CPU at stock clocks, ram at 3200)







My old main rig
*FX-8350* (CPU at stock clocks, ram at 1600)


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 24, 2017)

Tweaking the OC


----------



## dj-electric (Sep 25, 2017)

Stock currently:














Next week, whatever's this guy's^ background image named-after CPU


----------



## purecain (Sep 26, 2017)

same just tweaking my timings... took the ram down to 15 15 15 35 54 and all benchmarks are passing. I'm going to run steep in a second and then i'll clock it to 4050 up from 3995 -4022mhz and see what kind of performance that brings or if its even possible with my silicon.





everything is running well atm aswell..


----------



## DR4G00N (Sep 28, 2017)

New Ryzen 1700, it tops out at about 3.9GHz 1.35V stable. 4GHz doesn't play well with it. Haven't touched mems yet.


----------



## TheHunter (Sep 28, 2017)

Single threaded pwning 


 
https://valid.x86.fr/pu4h9q


----------



## er557 (Sep 30, 2017)

a bit of topic, can anyone with threadripper or i9 run linx 0.7.1 mkl update, and post your tested Gflops performance? This is a xeon 18c I boosted towards 3.5ghz all cores, tdp limit hacked, water cooled


----------



## fusseli (Sep 30, 2017)

TheHunter said:


> Single threaded pwning
> View attachment 92550
> https://valid.x86.fr/pu4h9q



Nice.  There's really no reason to upgrade from a Haswell!  My clock at 5.2 is 10% higher and score is also only about +10%.


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 30, 2017)

TheHunter said:


> Single threaded pwning



I had a 4770K that ran faster than my 4790K does. It was golden, and a lot of fun to play around with.

6700K


----------



## er557 (Sep 30, 2017)

Dude, what's with win 7? don't you want dx12?


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 30, 2017)

Half are on Win-7, half on Win-10


----------



## er557 (Sep 30, 2017)

Nice,  I keep a second pc under the desk for older games or games that cant run on 18 cores, with a 780 ti sli and also windows 10. BTW, you know you can use same keyboard and mouse and same monitor for both, there's an app called sharemouse...


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 30, 2017)

That sharing thing gets a little dicey with 6 PCs. LOL!


----------



## er557 (Sep 30, 2017)

True, but on two pc's it provides a seemless experience, like you work on one machine. although recommend to use eset smart security, as other av/firewall cause this network sharing kvm to lag.


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 30, 2017)

I'll have to try it out one of these days.
I have three PCs to build over the next week or so, as a result I'm busier than a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs!


----------



## er557 (Sep 30, 2017)

Ahh sure..  I just built my own dual xeon rig with double water rads, gonna hack it to unlock turbos, waiting for second xeon from fleabay... I cant have 1950x and 7980xe outperform me on youtube, among other things...


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 30, 2017)

Single thread performance FTW


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 30, 2017)

I suppose I'll rerun all my CPUs with 1.80.x so I can get on the results lists.

i5-3570K @ 5.0GHz (I get higher *ST* scores with 1.80.*0*)









i5-3570K @ 5.0GHz (I get higher *MT* scores with 1.80.*1*)









Celeron Northwood-128 @ 2.0GHz










Spoiler: Lower MT Ratio


----------



## er557 (Sep 30, 2017)

Why would you care so much about single thread FTW? it is not dos games you know...


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 30, 2017)

Single thread performance x thread count = Multi thread performance. That's why. And it's why your 36 thread Xeon will relatively suck for games that don't use more than 4 threads. Which is most games at the moment.

E8600 @ 3.33GHz


----------



## er557 (Sep 30, 2017)

You're funny...  you mean games that are cpu bound @1080p at medium settings?  I game @4k only with vsync on at extreme settings with gpu stress mostly, dual 1080 gtx sc acx,  where my cpu easily maxes them out, any modern game. my cores are boosted to 3.5ghz 8~10 at a time due to a hack, and believe me that is enough to say the least.

er557 out

edit: have you seen my synthetic results in specs?


----------



## TheHunter (Oct 1, 2017)

ST is also per core performance and this still matters the most, newer games usually stop by 8 threads, use to be 4 not so long ago. Those that scale more are already so fast with 8 threads, that those extra don't matter or its per core performance is slower and eliminates extra cores efficiency, ProjectCars2 is kind of like that.


----------



## er557 (Oct 1, 2017)

I don't know about per core performance, mine is about a 5960x wise, all I know is every game runs smooth as butter @4k vsync @ultra, @60fps or of course could do more. sli is really mature imho.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Oct 1, 2017)

5.3 Kaby   





Was trying to pull 5.4 but the motherboard was saying "CPU Overvoltage" and wouldn't boot to windows. 

Ill have to look into the motherboard options for some sort of override.


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 1, 2017)

Look for a jumper on the board that sais something with OV. once jumped, it should allow higher voltages


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 5, 2017)

Stock 8400 with 2133 memory:


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 5, 2017)

I just did an i7-7700K swap from an i7-6600K, but I'm having problems running the 7700K chip on Win-7. Unsupported hardware issues.
This is how they plan to force us into Win-10, isn't it?


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 6, 2017)

Decided to re-run this bench again since CPU-Z has changed. Not pushing to 5GHz, it's almost bedtime for me


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 7, 2017)

8700K @ 4.8


----------



## FYFI13 (Oct 8, 2017)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> 8700K @ 4.8



What RAM you're using? Single thread performance is a bit disappointing.


----------



## droopyRO (Oct 8, 2017)

3770k @4.3 DDR3 2133


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 8, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> What RAM you're using? Single thread performance is a bit disappointing.



G.Skill's 2666Mhz C15 4X4GB. An old kit i got with my X99 kit back in Dec 2015. I am looking at an upgrade soon.
My system is full of horrible bloat though, witch effects the score. I was able to get 4.9Ghz stable at the same voltage. Single core was 575.

RealNeil's score seems somewhat IPC similar, so i see no oddities here.


----------



## fusseli (Oct 8, 2017)

kaby lake at 5.2ghz

ST - 592   .....%50 higher than a stock Ryzen 1800X  and it doesn't look like the 8700k is going to be any faster than this 7700k
MT - 3130

https://valid.x86.fr/ie5kxd


----------



## BMfan80 (Oct 8, 2017)

RealNeil said:


> I just did an i7-7700K swap from an i7-6600K, but I'm having problems running the 7700K chip on Win-7. Unsupported hardware issues.
> This is how they plan to force us into Win-10, isn't it?
> 
> View attachment 92716




This will help with updates.
https://github.com/zeffy/wufuc/releases

You will still get messages but it's just a message.
My 7700k and Z270 are on Win 8.1


----------



## Hnykill22 (Oct 8, 2017)




----------



## Outback Bronze (Oct 8, 2017)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> Look for a jumper on the board that sais something with OV. once jumped, it should allow higher voltages



Yep found it 

But guess what. It didn't do shit.

1) Moved jumper to Over Volt.

2) Updated to latest bios

3) Selected CPU Over Volt setting in bios.

4) Select +500 on the CPU voltage offset. Roughly sets 1.565v.

5) Wont get past the boot screen because it says "CPU OVER VOLT" 

6) WTF?

7) CPU Over Volt jumper???... Yeah pigs arse.

8) Asus, if I want to kill my CPU please let me do it FFS!


----------



## fusseli (Oct 9, 2017)




----------



## Tomgang (Oct 9, 2017)

Old junk is old, but not obsolete 

I7 980X @ 4.75 GHz


----------



## droopyRO (Oct 9, 2017)

1.52V is that for 24/7 or bench only ?


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 9, 2017)

droopyRO said:


> 1.52V is that for 24/7 or bench only ?



Bench only. 24/7 use is 1.35 volts at 4.25 Ghz and if needed more power 4.55 GHz at 1.45 volts. Above that is benchmark only. Need better cooling for higher voltage/clocks over longer time like custom water loop.


----------



## DR4G00N (Oct 9, 2017)

Thought I posted this already, but I guess not.

Pretty stable @ 4.9 but will do 5-5.1GHz at this voltage if the temps are kept low (sub 40c on load).


----------



## fusseli (Oct 10, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> Old junk is old, but not obsolete
> 
> I7 980X @ 4.75 GHz



Not in the slightest!  Is that 24/7 stable?


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 11, 2017)

fusseli said:


> Not in the slightest!  Is that 24/7 stable?



It is 24/7 stable aswell as benchmark stable. But i do not run these clocks for every day use. Cooling is not suficient for this clock. Im on air cooling. Custom water cooling needed.


----------



## Deleted member 163934 (Oct 11, 2017)

Intel G3260 (microcode rev 22 loaded in windows, mainboard comes with rev 19):




 



Amd Athlon II x4 640:



 



Only have Windows x86 (not x64) on my other 3 PCs and I think the scores between cpu-z x86 and x64 are not the same so I won't be able to provide results for the Sempron 145, Athlon x2 4000+ and Athlon x2 5400B.


----------



## Morgoth (Oct 12, 2017)

Intel Xeon W5580 3.20ghz 4 cores 8 threads ( 8 cores 16 threads)


----------



## Morgoth (Oct 12, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> Old junk is old, but not obsolete
> 
> I7 980X @ 4.75 GHz


how com my W5580 xeon beated the 980x ??

looks like my old xeons even beaten some i9 and i7 and a ryzen by an inch..


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 12, 2017)

Morgoth said:


> how com my W5580 xeon beated the 980x ??
> 
> looks like my old xeons even beaten some i9 and i7 and a ryzen by an inch..



Probably because your CPU-Z is outdated.  They changed the benchmark scoring recently.


----------



## Morgoth (Oct 12, 2017)

updated cpu -z


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 12, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> It is 24/7 stable aswell as benchmark stable. But i do not run these clocks for every day use. Cooling is not suficient for this clock. Im on air cooling. Custom water cooling needed.



That chip is still impressively fast... that's awesome.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 13, 2017)

Morgoth said:


> updated cpu -z



Still a pretty potent chip for the money you can get them for, don't let the new score get you down.  It's just a number. 

It's amazing how well Nehalem has aged.


----------



## fusseli (Oct 13, 2017)

thedukesd1 said:


> Intel G3260 (microcode rev 22 loaded in windows, mainboard comes with rev
> 
> Amd Athlon II
> 
> Only have Windows x86 (not x64) on my other 3 PCs and I think the scores between cpu-z x86 and x64 are not the same so I won't be able to provide results for the Sempron 145, Athlon x2 4000+ and Athlon x2 5400B.



I cannot believe the core 2 duo T8300 mobile chip at 2.4ghz in my laptop compared to the x4 640 ... wth?  Those old AMDs are slow.  I had a phenom x4 965 and liked it, since it beat the q6600, but it too got whooped by the early i5 and i7


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 13, 2017)

phanbuey said:


> That chip is still impressively fast... that's awesome.



I have no complains so far


----------



## Deleted member 163934 (Oct 13, 2017)

fusseli said:


> I cannot believe the core 2 duo T8300 mobile chip at 2.4ghz in my laptop compared to the x4 640 ... wth?  Those old AMDs are slow.  I had a phenom x4 965 and liked it, since it beat the q6600, but it too got whooped by the early i5 and i7



No matter what version I used the single core x640 / g3260 ratio has always been ~0.4, I also did 2 bench in each case with +/- 1 variations so I think the results are right.

The core 2 duo series single core performance was nice at that time. The single core performance difference between K8 and K10 is not that big.

You will laugh but I can't even play Heroes of the Storm on the Athlon II x4 x640, in teamfights I see some 20 fps (even saw some 18 fps), and that's with all on low/off...


----------



## fusseli (Oct 14, 2017)

Yeah, it's kind of amazing how fast ryzen and >=haswell actually are... yet we complain about marginal year over year gains 

Time to game, and smile!


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 14, 2017)

Multiple i7 CPUs and one Ryzen 1700X too.

I'm not complaining one bit. 
It's good to be a gamer these days.


----------



## wally_1973 (Oct 15, 2017)

Finished building / tuning my value for money Gaming rig. Prime 95 stable of course. Fairly cheap setup with the R5 1600X @ 4Ghz, mem @ 2933Mhz. Got it stable @ 4090 but got a lot more hot. so took it down a notch for dayly use. Cooling it with an Arctic freezer 33. Cheap cooler but good.


----------



## wally_1973 (Oct 15, 2017)

Maxxed out and HOT. Not for dayly use ) I do not know if these temps are with the 20C offset or minus the 20C offset. With the 4115mhz OC it was Prime 95 stable but temps got to a worrysome 80C. With higher vcore I could run at 4.2Ghz but this crashed after 5 minutes of stressing. Do not want to go higher on Vcore so I leave it at this. 4Ghz is a great OC for a budget mATX B350 board. But just to show what the performance would be on liquid cooling with a better board. I saved on the CPU/MB/MEM and put it in the Graphics.


----------



## shork (Oct 15, 2017)

my second pc





https://valid.x86.fr/6fyu16


----------



## er557 (Oct 16, 2017)

dual xeon haswell-ep =36 cores, 72 threads @3.5ghz

stock speeds bclk and 2133mhz octal channel ddr4

@dylricho : I see your graph hasn't been updated with threadripper?

edit: apparently cpuz benchmark does not scale very well, does it;  should be a much better score there, in cpuz v1.77 I get 41000 pts multi, which still does not represent other apps results.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 16, 2017)

Whoah!


----------



## Andy Acord (Oct 18, 2017)

My pc is old!


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 18, 2017)

Andy Acord said:


> My pc is old!


I have one of those CPUs sitting on the shelf! Talk about a room heater,....


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Oct 18, 2017)

Here's my new E5-2696V3. It seems to be stable at 3.35GHz across all cores and 3.85GHz when fewer cores are loaded. Oh and it runs at low temperatures, too!


----------



## er557 (Oct 18, 2017)

cheers, I see you installed the turbo hack, must be with a result like that...

Now that I enabled C6 in bios, things look better a bit





Did I see a corpse of a threadripper somewhere lying around? ah no, it was 7980xe...

edit: it's nice to know we can run our procs @ less that 1.00 vcore and still rock @55c, while i7 is struggling @5ghz @1.4 vcore or whatever


----------



## natr0n (Oct 18, 2017)

Best I can do with a stock dell.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Oct 18, 2017)

My Every day use RiG.....@E5645 at 3986Ghz -24Gb DDR3


----------



## kniaugaudiskis (Oct 19, 2017)

er557 said:


> cheers, I see you installed the turbo hack, must be with a result like that...



You're right, I've got the turbo hack with -60mv on vcore and -50mv on cache along with all power saving features enabled.


----------



## exodusprime1337 (Oct 22, 2017)

I7-770K @ 5.1Ghz Ram at 3600


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 22, 2017)

Good score!


----------



## exodusprime1337 (Oct 23, 2017)

RealNeil said:


> Good score!



Thank's.  I feel like it could be improved, but it's brand new to me. Just built like 2 weeks ago.


----------



## Hugis (Oct 23, 2017)

rocking a low voltage OC (4770k is still a great cpu even now!)
v happy


----------



## Final_Fighter (Oct 23, 2017)

here they are.




i have to use .200mv offset to make this chip do 4.9ghz but its been doing it for a while with temps no higher than 78c on the hottest core.  no whea errors or any other in the event long and passes memtest.


----------



## FR@NK (Oct 29, 2017)

Passed the 600 mark for single thread! 






Still need to do some tweaking to get the multicore score higher.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 29, 2017)

I need to get off of my ass and build my 7900X.


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 29, 2017)

RealNeil said:


> I need to get off of my ass and build my 7900X.



You bought a 7900X? Nice!


----------



## wally_1973 (Oct 29, 2017)

FR@NK said:


> Passed the 600 mark for single thread!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Should show higher multithreads scores right? But u will fix that


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 29, 2017)

FR@NK said:


> Passed the 600 mark for single thread!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Looks like your Hyper Threading was disabled. 10 Core 10 Threads only!


----------



## FR@NK (Oct 29, 2017)

wally_1973 said:


> Should show higher multithreads scores right? But u will fix that



Still tweaking as on this board you can set each core with its own voltage and max turbo ratio. I'm hoping to get 4 cores running at 5GHz and the rest to max out at 4 to 4.5 depending on thermals. The score above was with two cores at 5GHz and the rest at 4GHz.



xkm1948 said:


> Looks like your Hyper Threading was disabled. 10 Core 10 Threads only!



Yeah I dont really need hyperthreading; 10 cores is more then enough for gaming.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 29, 2017)

xkm1948 said:


> You bought a 7900X? Nice!



Traded four RX GPUs for the CPU MoBo and 64GB RAM (2-480s and 2-580s)


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 29, 2017)

If all you do is gaming then sure 10 threads should be good. I would use the turbo boost max software to figure out the best single core first and focusing on overclocking that single core to the max.

Can you do per core vid adjustments on X299? That would be neat!


Also Neil, what mobo have you got for the 7900x? Are you gonna delid?


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 30, 2017)

xkm1948 said:


> Neil, what mobo have you got for the 7900x? Are you gonna delid?



The Mainboard is an MSI X299 Gaming M7 ACK. When I traded my GPUs for all this stuff, that was the only choice. 
I usually like ASUS or Gigabyte boards.
The RAM is 64GB of HyperX Fury and I know that's good stuff as I have used it before.

Delid? no way. I have a custom 360mm AlphaCool loop for it. There won't be any temp issues.


----------



## purecain (Oct 30, 2017)

er557 said:


> dual xeon haswell-ep =36 cores, 72 threads @3.5ghz
> 
> stock speeds bclk and 2133mhz octal channel ddr4
> 
> ...


whats going on with the scores, this would of been my choice over the amd rig. I was intersted to see how it scored in this bench.
those scores should be much higher. thanks for posting anyway, great build!

just looking at the scores on this page... we build some exotic pc's atm. I don't think we've ever had cpu choice like this before, its crazy. there's about 3 different configurations id like to build for myself.


----------



## Andy Acord (Nov 5, 2017)

RealNeil said:


> I have one of those CPUs sitting on the shelf! Talk about a room heater,....


I have a 6950 that pulling 32 amps?? with it and occasionally it will peg my 625 watt power supply


----------



## TheHunter (Nov 5, 2017)

Sunday OC madness 

 idk how stable it really is, I always returned back to 4.7GHz. Although I didnt use such settings yet
Vccsa 0.120mv offset
svid 1.85v
cpuv 1.32v adaptive
cache 0.040 offset and 1.12v adaptive
digi+
llc7
cpu power phase extreme, power current 130%


https://valid.x86.fr/93qj57


----------



## xkm1948 (Nov 5, 2017)

TheHunter said:


> Sunday OC madness
> 
> idk how stable it really is, I always returned back to 4.7GHz. Although I didnt use such settings yet
> Vccsa 0.120mv offset
> ...



That is one golden 4770K. If only used for gaming looks like you dont have to upgrade for a long time


----------



## TheHunter (Nov 5, 2017)

xkm1948 said:


> That is one golden 4770K. If only used for gaming looks like you dont have to upgrade for a long time


Yes got lucky , usually I run it at 4.7GHz with adaptive 1.284v


----------



## BurntJoint (Nov 5, 2017)

First time overclocking. I was told 4.5Ghz was a good place to start on air, do these results look normal?

I only changed the clock ratio and left the power on auto, any tips on how i should go forward?

https://valid.x86.fr/cxegq8


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 5, 2017)

Stop using auto. The goal is lowest voltage possible for a given clock. Need further help, start your own thread and we will come.


----------



## BurntJoint (Nov 5, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> Stop using auto. The goal iz lowest voltage possible for a given clock. Need further help, start yoyr own thread and we will come.



As you can see on the SS the voltage peaked at 1.280v so what is a good place to start?


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 5, 2017)

Lower than that. Every cpu is different. You need to find out what it would be for yours... or set that voltage manually at 1.28 and push the multiplier higher.  Keep temps at 90c or less stress testing.

Again, create your own thread for help. This is for cpuz test scores, not overclocking assistance.


----------



## xkm1948 (Nov 6, 2017)

Just discovered something. For BWE processors, at least for a 6800K I am testing, disable Intel Turbo Max 3.0 in Windows will actually boost your CPU-Z benchmarks. Huh, never thought of that.


----------



## BurntJoint (Nov 6, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> Lower than that. Every cpu is different. You need to find out what it would be for yours... or set that voltage manually at 1.28 and push the multiplier higher.  Keep temps at 90c or less stress testing.
> 
> Again, create your own thread for help. This is for cpuz test scores, not overclocking assistance.




Ok sorry, still new to this. In any case i took your earlier advice and im done with this for a while now so i dont think it deserves a thread on its own.

I set it to manual and got it down to 1.220V @4.5Ghz at 75-80 degrees C on air using prime95 to test. I might look at increasing it further when i get the time. Thanks for the help.

My single thread score went up, but my multicore score went down.
https://i.imgur.com/ablqSli.png


----------



## er557 (Nov 7, 2017)

@xkm1948 : how did you disable turbo max 3? removed the app? I found that you might need to fiddle with windows power management setting profile and enable c-states c6 and c3 for max boost results. cpu z is not the most scalable measurement by far, try to compare with other software, like cinebench r15, hwbot x265 v2.0, wprime.


----------



## FR@NK (Nov 7, 2017)

xkm1948 said:


> Just discovered something. For BWE processors, at least for a 6800K I am testing, disable Intel Turbo Max 3.0 in Windows will actually boost your CPU-Z benchmarks. Huh, never thought of that.



If you have your chip overclocked with all the cores running at the same speed, then yeah the Turbo driver wont be helping you at all.


----------



## er557 (Nov 7, 2017)

but isn't turbo max 3.0 about boosting one or two cores even further when possible for single threaded loads? and yes, cpuz will ignore that


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 8, 2017)




----------



## DR4G00N (Nov 9, 2017)

Yet another new system for the bench.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 22, 2017)




----------



## FR@NK (Nov 22, 2017)

Knoxx29 said:


> 8700k



You need to push your ram. It should be able to run at T1.


----------



## wally_1973 (Nov 23, 2017)

Knoxx29 said:


> View attachment 94184


Impressive.. That it should do for that price.


----------



## natr0n (Nov 23, 2017)




----------



## FireFox (Nov 24, 2017)

FR@NK said:


> You need to push your ram. It should be able to run at T1.



What do you suggest?


----------



## FireFox (Nov 26, 2017)

Better?


----------



## er557 (Nov 27, 2017)

he meant the command rate could be ran at 1T, though I don't see any big gains from this


----------



## DR4G00N (Dec 1, 2017)

Testing my new mobo, the Z170M OCF. The old gigabyte z270 did okay but it couldn't oc the memory very well.


----------



## jaggerwild (Dec 1, 2017)

You can get higher memory over clocks with lower CPU, I thought? also the least amount of memory, to decrease stress on the CPU.
 so if your stressing the CPU and the controller is on Die, the memory will suffer.

 Update disregard, just realized its CPU-Z benchmark


----------



## er557 (Dec 13, 2017)

recent run on latest windows update build, dual xeon e5-2686 v3, result in the realm of 56core/112 thread systems, due to turbo hack boost


----------



## jaggerwild (Dec 22, 2017)

My new lap top I got for twenty bucks, the fan was off in the bios.


----------



## er557 (Dec 22, 2017)

nice deal there!


----------



## jaggerwild (Dec 22, 2017)

er557 said:


> nice deal there!



Oh you have a rack board, how many core's? And can I get just one? You game with it? Are they locked?


----------



## er557 (Dec 22, 2017)

Yeah that's 36 cores, 72 threads, locked but unleashed with a turbo boost exploit, simulating performance of 56 cores. Gaming exclusively @4k with vsync on ultra, butter smooth


----------



## Bazim (Dec 23, 2017)

Hello guys, is this fine?


----------



## Good Guru (Dec 23, 2017)

This is 4.4ghz - with two cores at 4.6. On an i5 4670k.


----------



## jaggerwild (Dec 23, 2017)

er557 said:


> Yeah that's 36 cores, 72 threads, locked but unleashed with a turbo boost exploit, simulating performance of 56 cores. Gaming exclusively @4k with vsync on ultra, butter smooth



 NICE!
 What games you playing, can you post a screenie so I can droll(with some FPS stuff)? You live near Micro center or you got it through work? Just curios as you don't see many of those boards.


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 23, 2017)




----------



## er557 (Dec 23, 2017)

jaggerwild said:


> NICE!
> What games you playing, can you post a screenie so I can droll(with some FPS stuff)? You live near Micro center or you got it through work? Just curios as you don't see many of those boards.



LOL I dont like to brag so people drool over my fps... actually I already take the performance for granted as long as the pc does what I need it to do, efficiently, and I dont mind capping the fps as long as it's smooth @ ultra. That board is easy enough to attain @ amazon, though I got it via a pc dealer by wholesale, didnt want it to ship from afar.


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 25, 2017)

6700k @ 3.8GHz atm.. (keeping the temps below 60 and still good enough for gaming..)


----------



## natr0n (Dec 27, 2017)




----------



## Kissamies (Dec 28, 2017)

i5-7600K @ 5GHz


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 28, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> i5-7600K @ 5GHz



Ok, water cooled. At what core temps does it run?


----------



## Kissamies (Dec 28, 2017)

P4-630 said:


> Ok, water cooled. At what core temps does it run?


Had to drop it to 4.7GHz since it just isn't stable. About 60C when playing games. 

Delidded of course almost instantly when I got this (well, 5 days..)


----------



## FireFox (Dec 28, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> i5-7600K @ 5GHz



Is it worth it the voltage applied just for the sake of achieving 5.0GHz?


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 28, 2017)

Knoxx29 said:


> Is it worth it the voltage applied just for the sake of achieving 5.0GHz?



I fed a 7700k that for a good year to get to 5.1 and had no issues, but YMMV as always.  I tend to go through chips fast so didn't care.


----------



## er557 (Dec 28, 2017)

Yeah, that's the difference between degradation-prone i7-i5 @1.4~1.5v, not chips for too many years, and between xeon cpu- I have them cruising @55c   @0.67v, probably for the next 20 years, with stellar performance and no overclocking worries. Even used, they are exceptional value, far better binned chips, and of course the soldered TIM, no need to dellid. At the price of one i7 5930k, I got six times the performance of such.


----------



## Kissamies (Dec 28, 2017)

Knoxx29 said:


> Is it worth it the voltage applied just for the sake of achieving 5.0GHz?


Nah it isn't. Going to grab an used delidded & binned 7700K at February... Guaranteed 5GHz etc.


----------



## wally_1973 (Dec 30, 2017)

Going to test a Huanan X79 V2.49 with a Xeon E5-2680v2. Will be showing the results here.


----------



## natr0n (Jan 5, 2018)




----------



## Morgoth (Jan 9, 2018)




----------



## wzrd (Jan 12, 2018)

Xeon X3440, ASUS P7P55D, 4 x 2Gb Samsung DDR3-1333


----------



## wally_1973 (Jan 15, 2018)

Huanan E5 X79 V2.49 with the used Xeon E5-2680v1. Cheap Ali Express upgrade to replace other old FX-8350 system. Still waiting for the E5-2680v2 to arrive. No BCLK overclocking on this board / cpu combo. But performs good with good efficiency.


----------



## wzrd (Jan 16, 2018)

Main PC:
i7-6800K@4.2GHz \ ASUS Strix X99 \ 2x 16Gb DDR4 Samsung DDR4-2133


----------



## fusseli (Jan 20, 2018)

overclocked 7700k cpu-z benchmarks:

4.9, 24/7 stable


5.2, not 24/7 stable


----------



## wally_1973 (Jan 20, 2018)

Huanan E5 X79 V2.49 with the used Xeon E5-2680v2. Wow paid just over € 400 for the board, CPU, MEM and cooler, a bargain to my opinion.










New version but same bench.. but higher score!? do not know why. No overclock, that is not possible with this board. But scores like the R7 1700 for less then half the price. Gunning in Battlefield 1, ultra on 1080p this beast is at aprox 50% load   with the R9-290 overclocked. Seems to be a walk in the park for this cpu. Max temp 44 degrees celcius with the CM Hyper 612v2 cooler.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jan 25, 2018)




----------



## wally_1973 (Jan 27, 2018)

a little BIOS tweaking delivers constant results.. Thanks Aliexpress


----------



## Kissamies (Jan 27, 2018)

Sorry for not cropping


----------



## Enterprise24 (Jan 27, 2018)

Need to turn off HT for 5.4Ghz.


----------



## Admin89 (Jan 29, 2018)

Laptop Overclocking : Core i7 4700MQ @ 3.6GHz (Maximum Turbo Boost is 3.4GHz)
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-4700MQ-Notebook-Processor.92959.0.html

Software : Intel XTU









Score :


----------



## navair2 (Feb 5, 2018)

For those who wish to laugh, or better yet, those who are still soldiering on with old(er) hardware...


----------



## tugrul_SIMD (Feb 5, 2018)

Fx8150 at 3.7 GHz and dual 1600MHz ddr3.

Now I'm sure this is 8 cores since 4 cores can't scale with 6.5x speedup multiplier. I sold my HD7870 a while ago but it was tens of times faster than this CPU.

For those who are under depression.


----------



## Locksmith (Feb 8, 2018)




----------



## trickson (Feb 12, 2018)

Here is a good laugh! OMG what a PATHETIC POS! This has GOT to be the WORST SO CALLED UPGRADE I EVER DONE! Never BUY AMD! WHAT A SORRY POS PLATFORM! 
Utterly Sorry and Pathetic! Total waste of time and money!


----------



## ArbitraryAffection (Feb 12, 2018)

1800X @ 4.1 GHz w/ 3200 MHz CL 14 RAM 

punching above its weight


----------



## dylricho (Feb 12, 2018)

er557 said:


> @dylricho : I see your graph hasn't been updated with threadripper?



Yeah, sorry about that. I've been in and out of hospital three times since my last post (due to Marfan's syndrome/pneumothorax).

The 1.81 graphs have been updated. I've also made graphs for 1.82 and 1.83. 

*CPU-Z v1.7.8.x* = Single | Multi
*CPU-Z v1.7.9.x* = Single | Multi
*CPU-Z v1.8.0.x* = Single | Multi
*CPU-Z v1.8.1.x* = Single | Multi
*CPU-Z v1.8.2.x* = Single | Multi
*CPU-Z v1.8.3.x* = Single | Multi




wzrd said:


> Xeon X3440, ASUS P7P55D, 4 x 2Gb Samsung DDR3-1333
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nehalem is reliant on instruction throughput; Piledriver is reliant on frequency.




tugrul_SIMD said:


> https://snag.gy/hgCUNb.jpg
> Fx8150 at 3.7 GHz and dual 1600MHz ddr3.
> 
> Now I'm sure this is 8 cores since 4 cores can't scale with 6.5x speedup multiplier. I sold my HD7870 a while ago but it was tens of times faster than this CPU.
> ...



Yup, it has eight integer units. That's what AMD classifies as cores, which isn't inaccurate since FPUs were not always on-chip.




trickson said:


> Here is a good laugh! OMG what a PATHETIC POS! This has GOT to be the WORST SO CALLED UPGRADE I EVER DONE! Never BUY AMD! WHAT A SORRY POS PLATFORM!
> Utterly Sorry and Pathetic! Total waste of time and money!



The result looks fine to me. What's wrong with it?


----------



## trickson (Feb 12, 2018)

you name it. poor weak not good. 
look fine? a 6 year old i5 i7 and i3 smoke mine so yeah this CPU sucks!


----------



## dylricho (Feb 12, 2018)

trickson said:


> you name it. poor weak not good.
> look fine? a 6 year old i5 i7 and i3 smoke mine so yeah this CPU sucks!



It's a quad-core, quad-thread processor that competes with the Core i3 segment. What were you expecting?


----------



## trickson (Feb 12, 2018)

dylricho said:


> It's a quad-core, quad-thread processor that competes with the Core i3 segment. What were you expecting?


Not much from AMD to be sure. The only way this CPU could get any faster is if it dies and comes back as a slug!


----------



## dylricho (Feb 12, 2018)

trickson said:


> Not much from AMD to be sure. The only way this CPU could get any faster is if it dies and comes back as a slug!



I think the problem here lies less with AMD, but with yourself for not choosing the correct processor for your needs. Please don't be spreading propaganda due to your own negligence.




trickson said:


> a 6 year old i5 i7 and i3 smoke mine so yeah this CPU sucks!



In much the same way that Core2 Quads were faster than the first Core i3s on the market. Performance doesn't always improve. It merely shifts down the stack. Years ago, Core i9 performance was restricted to Xeons. Now that the stack has shifted, it has reached consumers.


----------



## trickson (Feb 12, 2018)

dylricho said:


> I think the problem here lies less with AMD, but with yourself for not choosing the correct processor for your needs. Please don't be spreading propaganda due to your own negligence.



First off the hype and all the "good" stuff said about the AMD Ryzen ON TPU and other sites is the reason I went with the system! Do not precieve to think I went into this ignorant at all! I was told and by all the scores I seen that this CPU was better than a core i7 this thig can't even begin to compete with ANY Intel's Quad cores! I use Quad cores ONLY for Gaming. It is pointless to use anything with more cores.
I am in NO way seeing any of the speeds that I was told I would see! It is just not there! I have run the tests I have OC this to the MAX! The ONLY thing left is to max out the RAM modules with the MAX number and speed see if that will boost this CPU.


----------



## dylricho (Feb 12, 2018)

trickson said:


> First off the hype and all the "good" stuff said about the AMD Ryzen ON TPU and other sites is the reason I went with the system! Do not precieve to think I went into this ignorant at all!



The only things that let Ryzen down, are the frequency wall, and the insane amount of voltage required to reach that wall. Both of these flaws are the result of the process used, and are therefore fixable.




trickson said:


> I was told and by all the scores I seen that this CPU was better than a core i7 this thig can't even begin to compete with ANY Intel's Quad cores! I use Quad cores ONLY for Gaming. It is pointless to use anything with more cores.
> I am in NO way seeing any of the speeds that I was told I would see! It is just not there! I have run the tests I have OC this to the MAX! The ONLY thing left is to max out the RAM modules with the MAX number and speed see if that will boost this CPU.



Comparable to an i7? What? What would make you think that the lowest tier option from AMD would equate to the highest tier option by Intel? That should have been an alarm bell right there.

Ryzen 3 == Core i3-6000 pricing; Core i5-6000 performance
Ryzen 5 == Core i5-6000 pricing; Core i7-6000 performance
Ryzen 7 == Core i7-6000 pricing; Core i7-6000 XE performance

That's how AMD stacked it from the beginning.

Also, don't rely on CPU-Z to depict accurate performance for any processor. It's more a novelty than anything.


----------



## trickson (Feb 12, 2018)

dylricho said:


> The only things that let Ryzen down, are the frequency wall, and the insane amount of voltage required to reach that wall. Both of these flaws are the result of the process used, and are therefore fixable.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


NO but surely it would compete with a 6 year OLD LINE FOR SHITZ SAKE! And NO matter HOW you stack it the AMD LINE ALL of them so far are sub-par performance platforms. Far from the Intel offerings even there GPU line is a getto budget build! Never buying AMD again! I have proff and you can't see it? I have run the tests even in Cinabench My system gets walked on by a 6 year old LINE! WTF! 6 YEAR OLD CPU blows mine away? I am at a loose for emotion support I got kicked in the NUTS! And now my gut actually hurts! I can actually feel buyers remorse and I now feel the pain others have buying crap tech.


----------



## Enterprise24 (Feb 12, 2018)




----------



## trickson (Feb 12, 2018)

Enterprise24 said:


>


SWEET! BLOWS MY NEW Ryzen 3 1300x AWAY! Awesome!


----------



## dylricho (Feb 12, 2018)

trickson said:


> Far from the Intel offerings even there GPU line is a getto budget build!



Okay. Shitposting confirmed.  Again, don't blame the company when the information was out for a while before they were even released. You're just trying to find an excuse for your poor purchasing decision.


----------



## diatribe (Feb 12, 2018)

I think trickson hasn't taken the new scoring into consideration.  His Ryzen scores very well.  It will *blow away *his old CPU, he just needs to run both on the same version of the benchmark to show it.

My *Intel i7-7700 (*work pc) @ stock ($310)
Single-Core: 477.5
Multi-Core: 2,404.6 - 8 Threads

His *AMD Ryzen 3 1300X* ($130) - *$180 less than the i7-7700*
Single-Core: 457 (-20.5 points) - Pretty close to a top-end i7
Multi-Core: 1,780 - 4 Threads

It's obviously not going to compete with an 8-threaded CPU in multi-core benchmarks, but single core is extremely close.

What exactly is your complaint?  If anything, I feel like you got a blazing fast single-threaded machine on the cheap.  If you wanted more threads then you should have purchased a Ryzen 5 or 7 CPU.


----------



## dylricho (Feb 12, 2018)

diatribe said:


> I think trickson hasn't taken the new scoring into consideration.  His Ryzen scores very well.  It will *blow away *his old CPU, he just needs to run both on the same version of the benchmark to show it.



Well, there have been many numbers posted since version 1.79 was released. All up to now use the same version of the benchmark, which by the way is only representative of sequential superscalar SSE2 instructions. That's why it doesn't really carry much weight behind its figures.

But even so, Cinebench also shows similar results. The 1300X is 20% behind a 6600K, which wasn't its target from the beginning. But with that in mind, a 6600K/7600K currently sells for over twice the amount of the 1300X. Sure the clocks are nice, but a 100% price increase for 20% performance improvement wouldn't sit well with most people. As for its primary competition, such as the i3-6320 and i3-7350K, it's 30% and 21% faster, respectively. Again, both are more expensive.

I don't know, it just feels like whenever it's an AMD processor, people don't really take into consideration the true competition to the chip. It's the FX-8350 situation all over again, albeit the results are actually closer now than they have ever been since 2011.

Your results were added, by the way.


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 12, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Well, there have been many numbers posted since version 1.79 was released. All up to now use the same version of the benchmark, which by the way is only representative of sequential superscalar SSE2 instructions. That's why it doesn't really carry much weight behind its figures.
> 
> But even so, Cinebench also shows similar results. The 1300X is 20% behind a 6600K, which wasn't its target from the beginning. But with that in mind, a 6600K/7600K currently sells for over twice the amount of the 1300X. Sure the clocks are nice, but a 100% price increase for 20% performance improvement wouldn't sit well with most people. As for its primary competition, such as the i3-6320 and i3-7350K, it's 30% and 21% faster, respectively. Again, both are more expensive.
> 
> ...



yeah but the 8100 is the real competition, and that is sitting at $120... it's not going to kill it in cinebench, but with one stick of ram and a 1050ti, it will spank the r3 systems in real world.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1499-intel-core-i3-8100-i3-8350K/page4.html


----------



## wally_1973 (Feb 13, 2018)

New and easy bios on asrock ab350m pro, an improvement. Cool & quiet enabled.


----------



## purecain (Feb 13, 2018)

new score... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




look at the state of that picture... Microsoft need to leave the picture settings alone... dear me...


----------



## dylricho (Feb 13, 2018)

phanbuey said:


> yeah but the 8100 is the real competition, and that is sitting at $120... it's not going to kill it in cinebench, but with one stick of ram and a 1050ti, it will spank the r3 systems in real world.



i3-8100 == Ryzen 3 1200
i3-8300 == Ryzen 3 1300X

Although they were released after Ryzen. And Cinebench is more real-world than CPU-Z.

Also, enjoy getting a 1050 Ti with current pricing. They're $100+ more expensive than they should be. So you'd be stuck on Intel graphics for a while. Ew.

*Edit:*
@wally_1973 @purecain; both of your results have been added. 

They are some sweet overclocks guys. I was seriously contemplating a 1600X build, but with the way GPU pricing is right now, I think I might settle for a 2400G. That thing is a beast.


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 13, 2018)

dylricho said:


> i3-8100 == Ryzen 3 1200
> i3-8300 == Ryzen 3 1300X
> 
> Although they were released after Ryzen. And Cinebench is more real-world than CPU-Z.
> ...



I was talking about trickson specifically, who has one stick of ram and a 1050ti on his ryzen 3 1300x...


----------



## dylricho (Feb 13, 2018)

phanbuey said:


> I was talking about trickson specifically, who has one stick of ram and a 1050ti on his ryzen 3 1300x...



My bad. I didn't pay attention to his configuration since I was primarily responding to his remarks on the 1300X.


----------



## Dia01 (Feb 13, 2018)

Ouch, something wrong here WTF?


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 14, 2018)

@Dia01 looks like you might have a turbo-boost/bios glitch... (this is going to sound stupid) but open like 3 chrome browsers to TPU and run it again....  Do something in chrome while its running.


----------



## Dia01 (Feb 14, 2018)

phanbuey said:


> @Dia01 looks like you might have a turbo-boost/bios glitch... (this is going to sound stupid) but open like 3 chrome browsers to TPU and run it again....



I am on a modded BIOS provided by MSI so anything is possible.  I'll give it another go when I get home.  All cores are boosting to 4.5 though which I have preset in the BIOS?


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 14, 2018)

Dia01 said:


> I am on a modded BIOS provided by MSI so anything is possible.  I'll give it another go when I get home.  All cores are boosting to 4.5 though which I have preset in the BIOS?



My initial MSI bios the CPU-Z benchmark didn't pass the "Run this at full tilt" threshold, so you will see your score go up as you open more background apps.

Don't know if its the bios or just windows being its usual flaky self, but it went away after the latest BIOS update... my scores used to be SUPER low (around 4400ish at 4.6), until i opened like 3-4 apps in the background then it would spike up into the 5K's.... It still randomly happens from time to time.

I really think it's the bios but that's pretty much pure speculation.


----------



## Dia01 (Feb 14, 2018)

Re-run again, used new version 1.82 and the older version 1.73 as per OP.  Why the difference?


----------



## dylricho (Feb 14, 2018)

Dia01 said:


> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/dia01-cpuz-1-jpg.97181/
> Re-run again, used new version 1.82 and the older version 1.73 as per OP.  Why the difference?



The benchmark was altered starting from version 1.80 to standardize the numbers as they were getting a little too much. They also fixed the Ryzen performance as the older benchmark was small enough to fit entirely into the L2 cache, which resulted in higher performance for Ryzen, than expected. The benchmark itself still consists of sequential superscalar SSE2 instructions.

Your results look fine to me.


----------



## Dia01 (Feb 14, 2018)

Fiddled with some of the BIOS settings, you were spot on phanbuey thanks


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 14, 2018)

Dia01 said:


> View attachment 97220
> 
> Fiddled with some of the BIOS settings, you were spot on phanbuey thanks



additional things I have learned (you may already know these) but:

To get some impressive performance gain, see if you can drop your dimms' TRFC to around 300... lowers the overall latency of the system.  Also mesh OC to 3-3.1 (you probably know this.)

run aida ram & latency before and after, and you will see what I mean.  Big improvement in games & smoothness.


----------



## Dia01 (Feb 14, 2018)

phanbuey said:


> additional things I have learned (you may already know these) but:
> 
> To get some impressive performance gain, see if you can drop your dimms' TRFC to around 300... lowers the overall latency of the system.  Also mesh OC to 3-3.1 (you probably know this.)
> 
> run aida ram & latency before and after, and you will see what I mean.  Big improvement in games & smoothness.








Played with the Mesh Ratio, set it at 2800.  3000 was unstable, 3200 impossible atm without fiddling more with voltages.


----------



## dylricho (Feb 16, 2018)

@Dia01 - added both of your results to the graphs.

I finally got mine after a long-awaited system restart. I don't really want to go any further on air, just for a number (it's not used overclocked).

Added the CPU-Z baselines in a dark slate color so as to make our own stand out better. After finally going through the baselines, I noticed that there was another typo. This time, apparently a so-called "i7-7900X" exists. 

Also decided to benchmark my uncle's laptop. Sadly, I can't benchmark mine currently because my uncle is using it with Ubuntu on it, but it's a T9300; should be twice the performance of the Athlon there (CPU-Z numbers, of course). I'll stick my HDD back in it at some point and grab some numbers.


----------



## wally_1973 (Feb 17, 2018)

trickson said:


> First off the hype and all the "good" stuff said about the AMD Ryzen ON TPU and other sites is the reason I went with the system! Do not precieve to think I went into this ignorant at all! I was told and by all the scores I seen that this CPU was better than a core i7 this thig can't even begin to compete with ANY Intel's Quad cores! I use Quad cores ONLY for Gaming. It is pointless to use anything with more cores.
> I am in NO way seeing any of the speeds that I was told I would see! It is just not there! I have run the tests I have OC this to the MAX! The ONLY thing left is to max out the RAM modules with the MAX number and speed see if that will boost this CPU.


More and more games getting optimized to use more cores. That's why I thought the used old Xeon's would be a good purchase and I was right. The Xeon E5-2680v1 performs extremely well with newer games that utilize all cores. Because of it's large L3 cache and relatively high frequency (3,2 on all cores) this CPU runs Battlefield 1 like a champ, even with the old R9-290. When combined with the GTX 1080 it outperforms the Ryzen 5 1600x by a fraction although it has a way lower ST en slightly lower MT score. Your quadcore should do great on most ( older) games, but for the newest games it will not be sufficient to run them on high settings. Also a GTX 1050 is a bare minimum for gaming. It is the videocard that runs your games and your CPU is the platform it runs on. If you buy a GTX 1070 you will need a CPU that does not bottleneck your GPU, like a I5 or i7 or R5 or R7.
I have not seen any benchmarks / reviews that claim the R3 1300x is a CPU to run GTA V or BF1 or Witcher 3. All reviews I have seen tell us these CPU's are good for low end gaming. They will bottleneck a GTX 1070 in several games. They perform as priced. AMD has made 6-8 core CPU's a lot cheaper in 2017 / 2018. If you wanna buy a CPU for gaming the I5-8400 is the CPU for budget gaming. Last year that was a 4 core 8 thread CPU like the I7-7700 and that will still be a great CPU for gaming. Thanx to DX12 the owners of FX cores can still game and wait for a Ryzen 2 or the new Intel's. Double your RAM and uitilize the dual channel speed up. Today 16GB is the way to go for gaming, BF1 already uses more than 10GB of system RAM in some maps. I do not know what games you are playing but my Ryzen 5 performs very well and since the last BIOS update the system performs even better. BF 1 runs smooth as can be on both my systems so go for 6 cores and 16GB. Unfortunatly RAM is very expensive right now, but it has been before and will return back to normal. Summertime vacation time is the best time to buy PC stuff. So wait till summer and buy an updated Ryzen with 6 or more cores or buy a second hand one (many will dump their first gen Ryzen to buy the new ones, I probably will).


----------



## dylricho (Feb 17, 2018)

wally_1973 said:


> Your quadcore should do great on most ( older) games, but for the newest games it will not be sufficient to run them on high settings.



It'll handle most games as well as an i5-6600, or i5-7500, at stock. Unlike these chips, it can be overclocked. All of them can push 60 frames/sec on high for most games. There are games that are poorly optimized that fall exception to this, of course, but you're still pretty good with an i5 in 2018.


----------



## xkm1948 (Feb 17, 2018)




----------



## dylricho (Feb 18, 2018)

@xkm1948 - added your results.


----------



## ArbitraryAffection (Feb 18, 2018)

Ryzen 5 2400G @ 3.9 GHz with 2866 MHz Ram


----------



## er557 (Feb 18, 2018)

standard run un-optimized, NOT after fresh boot, still pretty good


----------



## grunt_408 (Feb 18, 2018)




----------



## mouacyk (Feb 18, 2018)

https://valid.x86.fr/b364l8


----------



## dylricho (Feb 19, 2018)

@ArbitraryAffection @er557 @grunt_408 @mouacyk - results added. 

I now have the T9300 result. And for the sake of completeness, I decided to rerun my uncle's laptop and my own desktop overclock, complete with screenshots.














Also, the benchmark really loves Penryn. I achieved a greater than perfect multi-core scaling result. K8 and K10 really suck for superscalar sequential SSE2.


----------



## grunt_408 (Feb 19, 2018)

Thanking you


----------



## Komshija (Feb 22, 2018)

Newest bench, max "safe" OC for my i7 6700K.


----------



## dylricho (Feb 27, 2018)

Your results have been added to the 1.82 graphs.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 27, 2018)

Where are results being added?


----------



## dylricho (Feb 27, 2018)

EarthDog said:


> Where are results being added?



The link in my signature; https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/page-46#post-3797711


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 27, 2018)

Ok.. I will get a full run up here soon, but here is a 7960X without HT enabled (16c/16t) @ 4.5 GHz...


----------



## dylricho (Feb 27, 2018)

Your results have been added.


----------



## natr0n (Feb 28, 2018)




----------



## radrok (Mar 3, 2018)

Hey guys just built a new system, this should be in line for a 5,1GHz 8700K, right?


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 4, 2018)

Old HP compaq DC7900. Nice build quality. I am wondering if I can get a quadcore running on it. Ordered a cheap Intel Xeon X5472. These chineze claim it should run on al Socket 775, we will see. This is nice to compare.


----------



## Admin89 (Mar 4, 2018)

My 2010 "gaming laptop" , now it's only good for android game 



Got this for my mom , for only $100 and add a cheap SSD , gotta love Used PC Market when everything is so expensive these days .


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 4, 2018)

radrok said:


> Hey guys just built a new system, this should be in line for a 5,1GHz 8700K, right?


That looks very healthy. But probably some know some extra tweaks.


----------



## Tomgang (Mar 4, 2018)

Yeah there is not much to say here other than this is properly one of slowest cpu's out there of the more resent gen cpu . Even an old core 2 qaud cpu would spank this one.


----------



## er557 (Mar 5, 2018)

@dylricho : for reference, a new score in windows redstone 4 with several bcd options tweaked, also ultimate performance in power options is enabled.


----------



## wally_1973 (Mar 11, 2018)

oh btw tried the Xeon in the HP DC7900SFF, that didn't work.. the sff version no supporto quadcore. : (


----------



## Kliim (Mar 12, 2018)

Before



and after the bios update (07. Mar 2018) against spectre and meltdown



Noticed a drop of my single thread performance. Round about 20%


----------



## Recon-UK (Mar 12, 2018)




----------



## agent_x007 (Mar 17, 2018)

Pretty good for LGA775 




Valid : https://valid.x86.fr/e6dxcb
7600k boosts to 4GHz on all cores (if Turbo is enabled).


----------



## HarvesterOfSorrow (Mar 23, 2018)

I'm sad because my CPU won't go higher


----------



## mcraygsx (Mar 23, 2018)

7600K running 5.0Ghz.


----------



## Toothless (Mar 28, 2018)

Do I win?





EDIT: We need a worst and best categories type thing going.


----------



## chuckbam (Mar 29, 2018)

4930K










*
Almost stock speed. Small bus speed increase .. only*


----------



## HammerON (Mar 29, 2018)




----------



## wally_1973 (Apr 1, 2018)

HammerON said:


>


DisQualified.. to much cores )


----------



## dylricho (Apr 3, 2018)

Tomgang said:


> Yeah there is not much to say here other than this is properly one of slowest cpu's out there of the more resent gen cpu . Even an old core 2 qaud cpu would spank this one.
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/8wZA9sK



A Core2 Quad would still be more than capable in 2018.



Kliim said:


> Before
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/before-png.98248/
> and after the bios update (07. Mar 2018) against spectre and meltdown
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/after-bios-update-png.98249/
> Noticed a drop of my single thread performance. Round about 20%



That's a rather good metric to have actually. Does anyone else have similar comparisons?



agent_x007 said:


> Pretty good for LGA775
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/wBfp4yC
> ...



Nice to see some Penryn goodness. 



Toothless said:


> Do I win?
> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/300523281449222145/428337889668235286/benchie_-_turion.PNG
> 
> EDIT: We need a worst and best categories type thing going.



Nope; but that perfect multi-thread scaling is interesting. Unless 1.84 changed the benchmark (no apparent visual indication), that isn't what I get with my uncle's Athlon II machine.

Also, that very much is a thing. We have graphs. 



HammerON said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/180329/capture005.jpg



EPYC! 

----------------

All up to date on the graphs. I will be shifting to a web-based format very soon. Image versions will still be offered, but of the new format. And all existing graphs will be converted over.

It should be more pleasurable to view. Mobile devices will be supported, however very small viewports will have the CPU model data truncated. The image version might be better for those users.


----------



## Tomgang (Apr 3, 2018)

dylricho said:


> A Core2 Quad would still be more than capable in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah old cpu's are not so bad. That i7 980x i have can run far cry 5 maxed out at 1600P.


----------



## er557 (Apr 3, 2018)

@EPYC,  7980xe , 1950x : That's right! and stay down!!




No need to fry the voltage regulator, no need for fancy cooling or overclocking, just enjoy a quiet system...


----------



## basco (Apr 4, 2018)

i am really surprised about the good bench performance of the 4770k.


----------



## anselmo (Apr 4, 2018)

The graphics card in this old Acer or the screen is almost dead, but its Pentium II is still going strong. 15 Multi-Thread score means that it is the fastest processor around. Where's my prize? Ah, and with Windows 98 (Microsoft's Latest OS) it runs smoother than fresh tarmac.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 4, 2018)

@anselmo; which version of CPU-Z is that?


----------



## anselmo (Apr 4, 2018)

The Windows 98 version. I don't recall the exact number...


dylricho said:


> @anselmo; which version of CPU-Z is that?


----------



## dylricho (Apr 4, 2018)

anselmo said:


> The Windows 98 version. I don't recall the exact number...



It appears to be 1.78. Okay.

@er557; are your Xeons still running at 3.50 GHz on all cores?

----------------

*Old laptop:*





*Uncle's laptop:*


----------



## anselmo (Apr 4, 2018)

My daily driver, an old Toshiba A300, sporting an Intel Core 2 Duo P8600. Slower than your T9300, but it only has a 25W TDP. Yes, I do have the Whistler Beta wallpaper.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 4, 2018)

anselmo said:


> My daily driver, an old Toshiba A300, sporting an Intel Core 2 Duo P8600. Slower than your T9300, but it only has a 25W TDP. Yes, I do have the Whistler Beta wallpaper.



Would you believe my laptop started its life with a Celeron M 575? 

Ahh... The good old days, when laptops were highly upgradable.


----------



## anselmo (Apr 4, 2018)

I do believe. I had a Lenovo T430 (traded it for a disappointing Sony Vaio) before this Toshiba, and that was the last truly upgradable series of Thinkpads and I loved it to bits, even planned on putting an i7 instead of the i5. Old laptops and their upgradeability were also easier to mantain. If the graphics car died (on some, just like the Toshiba A300 series) it could be swapped for another or even upgraded. Or bring some new life by swapping the CPU from an old, tired Celeron that was good for office tasks 10 years ago for a Core 2 Duo that can even support VM's (the P8600 is a great example, I use it to virtualize anything, from XP to Server 2016 or from Ubuntu 10.04 to the Budgie betas, even though, sometimes it could have a bit more horsepower).


----------



## biffzinker (Apr 4, 2018)

Final overclock for this Ryzen 3 1200








This surprised me:


----------



## anselmo (Apr 4, 2018)

That AIDA 64 is surprising indeed. Can it be due to the core count?


----------



## biffzinker (Apr 4, 2018)

I think it might have something to do with the FPU Julia bench it depends on for the frames encoded with the VP8 codec.

Also the instruction set extensions are having and effect.

FPU VP8 Benchmark
The content of the frames are generated by the FPU Julia fractal module.
The code behind this benchmark method utilizes the appropriate MMX, SSE2, SSSE3 or SSE4.1 instruction set extension.

FPU Julia Benchmark
The code behind this benchmark method is written in Assembly, and it is extremely optimized for every popular AMD, Intel and VIA processor core variants by utilizing the appropriate x87, 3DNow!, 3DNow!+, SSE, AVX, AVX2, FMA, and FMA4 instruction set extension.

Edit: Ryzen has a more capable FPU perhaps compared to the previous Bulldozer?


----------



## anselmo (Apr 4, 2018)

Mostly, FPU benchmarks optimized for AMD chips is what gives it such an impressive score? Can the FPU performance in AM4 chips be better than Intel? I know that AM4 was a breath of fresh, needed air for AMD and that it gave Intel a hard time, but both brands were pretty much side by side on their offerings.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 4, 2018)

anselmo said:


> That AIDA 64 is surprising indeed. Can it be due to the core count?



the tests arent comparable between differing Versions of Aida (like the CPU-Z bench tests, which on one ver can be a 2000, then if you update to the following Ver, that same CPU scores a 200, due to restructuring of the scoring system, not the same as Aida i think, but just asa demonstration of how they arent comparable)....i ran it myself, and my 8600k, @ stock beats out the 8700k  seems lacking a structured logging of results, atleast structured in the sense where they are categorized by Ver, Frequency, etc. i also ran it again 30 seconds later, and scored lower, then higher again, all within around 100 points, but there seems to be a variance in the scoring that makes it more of a test or basic idea of perf, and not a reliable bench....or atleast thats how i interpreted it. i could very well be wrong


----------



## anselmo (Apr 4, 2018)

It is that "as is" thing. It works, but most of its default benchmarks are outdated.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 4, 2018)

anselmo said:


> It is that "as is" thing. It works, but most of its default benchmarks are outdated.



agreed, they are , but certainly a great tool nonetheless, with a TON of functions.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 4, 2018)

anselmo said:


> I do believe. I had a Lenovo T430 (traded it for a disappointing Sony Vaio) before this Toshiba, and that was the last truly upgradable series of Thinkpads and I loved it to bits, even planned on putting an i7 instead of the i5. Old laptops and their upgradeability were also easier to mantain. If the graphics car died (on some, just like the Toshiba A300 series) it could be swapped for another or even upgraded. Or bring some new life by swapping the CPU from an old, tired Celeron that was good for office tasks 10 years ago for a Core 2 Duo that can even support VM's (the P8600 is a great example, I use it to virtualize anything, from XP to Server 2016 or from Ubuntu 10.04 to the Budgie betas, even though, sometimes it could have a bit more horsepower).



I was using my laptop from 2009 when I bought it, until summer of 2016 when a friend offered me the system I currently have at a super cheap price (he had switched to Mac at the time and had no use for it, although he has since gotten rid of his Mac).

My laptop went through four CPU upgrades (Celeron 575 --> Core2 T5900 --> Celeron 925 --> Core2 T9300), although the 925 was purely to test for Penryn microcode support since I had no way of checking the BIOS back then. That's been with me through the entirety of high school and further education, and still in perfect working order. I love that machine; props to ASUS on that one. Who would have thought that a £220 machine (bought second-hand via eBay) could be upgraded with a $530 (2008 RRP) CPU? Memory is also maxed out and there's a WD Black in there. I spent £35 on the T9300 in 2013, by the way.

The only way I could perhaps make it last longer, is to get an SSD (SATA-II speeds, though...), or to buy some very specific memory to get 4+ GiB bootable.




jboydgolfer said:


> [...] seems lacking a structured logging of results, atleast structured in the sense where they are categorized by Ver, Frequency, etc.



I think it suffers from the same problem as Geekbench, PassMark and UserBenchMark in that results are highly skewed rather than setting actual baselines independently like CPU-Z appears to have.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 4, 2018)

dylricho said:


> I think it suffers from the same problem as Geekbench, PassMark and UserBenchMark in that results are highly skewed rather than setting actual baselines independently like CPU-Z appears to have.



 I agree, just like with any benching result, it has to all be done in a controlled "like" environment ,otherwise what's the point ?  I don't know for certain, but it seems like many of the programs you mentioned don't categorize or at least don't log their results in a discerning ,or accurate manner.  So you end up with an apples versus oranges situation, or rather a green apples versus red apples situation.  I think it's good for a loose or basic idea of performance, and it's also a good way to stress certain aspects of a persons processor but other than that I don't put very much stock in it


----------



## anselmo (Apr 4, 2018)

dylricho said:


> I was using my laptop from 2009 when I bought it, until summer of 2016 when a friend offered me the system I currently have at a super cheap price (he had switched to Mac at the time and had no use for it, although he has since gotten rid of his Mac).
> 
> My laptop went through four CPU upgrades (Celeron 575 --> Core2 T5900 --> Celeron 925 --> Core2 T9300), although the 925 was purely to test for Penryn microcode support since I had no way of checking the BIOS back then. That's been with me through the entirety of high school and further education, and still in perfect working order. I love that machine; props to ASUS on that one. Who would have thought that a £220 machine (bought second-hand via eBay) could be upgraded with a $530 (2008 RRP) CPU? Memory is also maxed out and there's a WD Black in there. I spent £35 on the T9300 in 2013, by the way.
> 
> The only way I could perhaps make it last longer, is to get an SSD (SATA-II speeds, though...), or to buy some very specific memory to get 4+ GiB bootable.


That's the beauty of it, older machines were slightly better. Speed and energy efficience, no, but upgradeability and (arguably) portability in some cases. I dearly miss those old laptops that had those weird screens that folded into horizontal, vertical, whatever positions.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 5, 2018)

anselmo said:


> That's the beauty of it, older machines were slightly better. Speed and energy efficience, no, but upgradeability and (arguably) portability in some cases. I dearly miss those old laptops that had those weird screens that folded into horizontal, vertical, whatever positions.



Considering its age, it's more than capable for every day tasks. Office tasks would be fine. What really lets those platforms down, is the low memory capacity limit. And honestly, that's my only complaint about my laptop. The Core2 itself is very snappy. Needless to say, I noticed the jump from 3 GiB to 16 GiB.


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 5, 2018)

Last time with 7600K, I hope that I'll get 7700K today. Not mine, just a typical 7600K stock result as a reference.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 5, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> Last time with 7600K, I hope that I'll get 7700K today. Not mine, just a typical 7600K stock result as a reference.



Am I the only one who can't read the results in the pictures in this post? They're so tiny....maybe its a mobile issue. Ill try DT


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 5, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Am I the only one who can't read the results in the pictures in this post? They're so tiny


Double click when fullscreen


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 5, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> Double click when fullscreen



I tried that, it just makes it double blurry. I'll have to try on my desktop. It must be the aspect ratio ,because other images posted in this thread I can see fine on my iPhone ,it's just that one's a wider format i think.

yeah, i was right. it is the combination of my iphone, and the format....see it on DT, its just smaller is all.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 5, 2018)

@anselmo; out of curiosity, do you still have access to that Pentium II machine?

@Chloe Price; are you wanting me to add that result?


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 5, 2018)

dylricho said:


> @Chloe Price; are you wanting me to add that result?


If I can have two results, with a 7600K and with a 7700K, then add! If not, then wait for a day or two that I get my sweet 7700K


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 5, 2018)

@ stock frequency.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 5, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> If I can have two results, with a 7600K and with a 7700K, then add! If not, then wait for a day or two that I get my sweet 7700K



You can have as many as you like!


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 5, 2018)

dylricho said:


> You can have as many as you like!


Then feel free to add.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 6, 2018)

Okay guys; here are the new graphs. Still finalizing a few things before the webpage version is done.

*CPU-Z 1.8.4.x* — Single | Multi


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 6, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Okay guys; here are the new graphs. Still finalizing a few things before the webpage version is done.
> 
> *CPU-Z 1.8.4.x* — Single | Multi


You are getting new shit when I get my 7700K today and I OC it 

One dude from my streams promised to borrow a delid tool, great. 

HOLD ON A FUCKING MINUTE?!*

I'm on first on single threaded? DAMN! 

*Reference from 8 Mile.. 

... just wait that I get that 7700K!


----------



## anselmo (Apr 6, 2018)

dylricho said:


> @anselmo; out of curiosity, do you still have access to that Pentium II machine?


I do, why? It is mine, after all.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 6, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> You are getting new shit when I get my 7700K today and I OC it
> 
> One dude from my streams promised to borrow a delid tool, great.
> 
> ...



You are indeed on top.

In before an 8700K owner walks in and steals that spot. 




anselmo said:


> I do, why? It is mine, after all.



Would you be able to open CPU-Z and screenshot the entire window? The version number is in the bottom-left. I ask because it has come to my attention that Windows 98 versions exist for all of the latest versions as well. Upon initial inspection of the site, it appeared to me that Windows 98 stopped being supported with version 1.7.8, but I was wrong. I would like to add you to the correct graph.


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 6, 2018)

Won't post yet, now I have 7700K kickin', but since I didn't have any thermal paste, this shit throttles. 

Roommate's brother will probably bring some.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 6, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> Won't post yet, now I have 7700K kickin', but since I didn't have any thermal paste, this shit throttles.



Ah yes... The dreaded Intel-branded toothpaste.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 6, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Okay guys; here are the new graphs.



im curious if the scoring of this newer CPUZ is comparable to the older Ver from when i had 1st place in CPUz ST bench?? My 2c/2t G3258 scored 516, and beat out 3960 extreme , but i know some times the CPUz results arent comparable_ *edit* i ran 1.79 VS 1.84 and they are using the same scoring system_ 

*just in case.  G3258 @ 4.7Ghz. *(wish i had the results from my 4.9Ghz run, but i never Screen capped it apparently* ) *
i no longer have the chip, so if it isnt valid for submission, its all good, another member own's it now


----------



## anselmo (Apr 6, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Would you be able to open CPU-Z and screenshot the entire window? The version number is in the bottom-left. I ask because it has come to my attention that Windows 98 versions exist for all of the latest versions as well. Upon initial inspection of the site, it appeared to me that Windows 98 stopped being supported with version 1.7.8, but I was wrong. I would like to add you to the correct graph.


I can, but Windows 98 SE, supports the latest version? I will post it later.


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 6, 2018)

Now with 7700K @ 5GHz


----------



## dylricho (Apr 6, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> im curious if the scoring of this newer CPUZ is comparable to the older Ver from when i had 1st place in CPUz ST bench?? My 2c/2t G3258 scored 516, and beat out 3960 extreme , but i know some times the CPUz results arent comparable_ *edit* i ran 1.79 VS 1.84 and they are using the same scoring system_
> 
> *just in case.  G3258 @ 4.7Ghz. *(wish i had the results from my 4.9Ghz run, but i never Screen capped it apparently* ) *
> i no longer have the chip, so if it isnt valid for submission, its all good, another member own's it now
> ...



Yep, versions 1.7.9, 1.8.0, 1.8.1, 1.8.2, 1.8.3 and 1.8.4 all use the same benchmark. Version 1.7.8 was small enough to fit inside Ryzen's L2 cache, and so produced some higher than expected numbers. The benchmark itself is pure scalar SSE2 for all versions.

Your Pentium result is currently added to the older 1.7.9 graphs as I'm trying to separate them by version number in an effort to keep them somewhat moderately sized. Is that voltage correct?  I'll get to the older graphs soon. 




anselmo said:


> I can, but Windows 98 SE, supports the latest version? I will post it later.



Apparently, I was correct the first time. The site is misleading because it lists a Windows 98 download under 1.8.4, but it's actually linking to 1.7.8. I don't like that.

My bad, though.




Chloe Price said:


> Now with 7700K @ 5GHz
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/JKB2VxU



Added.  Only 510? That must be throttling like crazy.


----------



## anselmo (Apr 6, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Apparently, I was correct the first time. The site is misleading because it lists a Windows 98 download under 1.8.4, but it's actually linking to 1.7.8. I don't like that.
> 
> My bad, though.


That is weird. I did not notice that. The Win 98 version appears as a separate download. If it links to 1.8.4, it is misleading and wrong, of course. Thank you for the info. By the way, I am thinking of buying a Gameboy Advance. I want to see what people think of it and their experiences with one. I only had a Color back in the day. So sad. So, if I want to create a thread for it, where do I put it on this forum. I know that the forum is mostly directed towards computers and their components (software and hardware).


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 7, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Added.  Only 510? That must be throttling like crazy.


Mmh, not delidded yet.. 

One dude from last night's stream promised to loan a delid-tool for me.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 7, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> Mmh, not delidded yet..
> 
> One dude from last night's stream promised to loan a delid-tool for me.



I plan on delidding my 8600k tomorrow if i can. I did my 4790 earlier today & dropped almost 30c


----------



## biffzinker (Apr 7, 2018)

Don't have to delid since AMD soldered it for me. /s


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 7, 2018)

that is nice..i miss soldered intel chips (2500k), i guess i dont HAVE to, but since intel cpu's OC above 4100Mhz , we need to keep temps in check


----------



## biffzinker (Apr 7, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> we need to keep temps in check


Highest I've observed with the stock cooler has been 72C at 3.8 GHz with a suppose to be 1.4v but this board droops the voltage bad underload even with LLC.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 7, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> Highest I've observed with the stock cooler has been 72C at 3.8 GHz with a suppose to be 1.4v but this board droops the voltage bad underload even with LLC.



@ 5Ghz i can keep Sub 70c, but im not on a stock cooler, i have a H110iGTX. But the chip is stock, still havent delidded *yet* . i will break higher into the 70's, if i run for periods greater than 20 minutes, whic his how im justifying the Delidding


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 7, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> I plan on delidding my 8600k tomorrow if i can. I did my 4790 earlier today & dropped almost 30c


Crap that I don't know where is my CL Pro.. Going to put just general paste after delidding. Damn!


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 7, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> Crap that I don't know where is my CL Pro.. Going to put just general paste after delidding. Damn!


Y not order some LM?  The paste intel uses isn't really that bad at all ,it's just the application could be better.   the way I see it ,if I am going to delid the CPU, I'm definitely going to go for 100% , although a good TIM applied well, will likely give better temps, LM will likely give better,  conductonaut sells for $15 on newegg, its pretty cheap, plus the syringe will last a ling time


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 7, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Y not order some LM?  The paste intel uses isn't really that bad at all ,it's just the application could be better.   the way I see it ,if I am going to delid the CPU, I'm definitely going to go for 100% , although a good TIM applied well, will likely give better temps, LM will likely give better,  conductonaut sells for $15 on newegg, its pretty cheap, plus the syringe will last a ling time


I'll delid this and put just some general paste first.

This gets hotter than my crush chick 

After a reboot, can u @dylricho update my score? 

Over that old crappy score.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 7, 2018)

Wow, you beat my old pentium score, not bad. I wish i still had that chip, 5ghz wouldve gotten me almost to 600ST . It was a beast , especially considering it costs around $90


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 7, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Wow, you beat my old pentium score, not bad. I wish i still had that chip, 5ghz wouldve gotten me almost to 600ST . It was a beast , especially considering it costs around $90


No delidded even yet. One dude promised to loan me a delid tool. 

The only condition was "well, if I can get it back", heh, he will.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 7, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> No delidded even yet. One dude promised to loan me a delid tool.
> 
> The only condition was "well, if I can get it back", heh, he will.



You should Try out some more  benchmarks. Give cinebench a try if tou havent, even the newer Final Fantasy benchmark is pretty cpu intensive.


----------



## Kissamies (Apr 7, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> You should Try out some more  benchmarks. Give cinebench a try if tou havent, even the newer Final Fantasy benchmark is pretty cpu intensive.


Hm. Let's fire up Fire Strike as I'll go to smoke a cigarette. 

I'll edit this post with the results.


----------



## fullinfusion (Apr 7, 2018)

here's mine, A mild OC 








Chloe Price said:


> No delidded even yet. One dude promised to loan me a delid tool.
> 
> The only condition was "well, if I can get it back", heh, he will.


De-lid tools are over rated... 

Just do it proper and no need for such a tool..


----------



## biffzinker (Apr 7, 2018)

I'm on to you @fullinfusion.





Running two different versions side by side.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 7, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> I'll delid this and put just some general paste first.
> 
> This gets hotter than my crush chick
> 
> ...



You can keep both scores, or I can overwrite with your new one. What would you like? 

Also, in other news, I appear to have suddenly developed high fever from out of nowhere. Bedridden with an immense headache, high temperature, dizziness, loss of appetite and lethargy. I will be taking a short period of leave from the Internet while I [hopefully] recover.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 7, 2018)

fullinfusion said:


>



ive seen guys post their "REALLY high scores , using ancient CPUZ Versions, thinking they smashed everyone elses scores, and genuinely not realizing they were scored on a different scale



Chloe Price said:


> I'll edit this post with the results.


you use invisible text??


----------



## er557 (Apr 7, 2018)

@dylricho : all the best and good health


----------



## dylricho (Apr 7, 2018)

er557 said:


> @dylricho : all the best and good health



Thank you buddy.


----------



## fullinfusion (Apr 7, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> I'm on to you @fullinfusion.
> 
> View attachment 99424
> 
> Running two different versions side by side.


Oh forgive me for downloading the version on the first page the op had linked to ... And what's your point? Would you like me to run the test again just for you?

Go to the op link... To be honest that's what I did to follow rules but if some want to piss on me for installing the stand alone then enjoy. Also I didn't have both running . I clicked on the rog one after to show the clocks.  The other was running of another drive and don't bother opening it back up when I had a perfect version just sitting there... Seriously, and some wonder why I don't frequent this site anymore...


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 7, 2018)

fullinfusion said:


> And what's your point? Would you like me to run the test again just for you?



i thought you were joking, im guessing the other person did too, apparently we were wrong. the older Ver uses a different scoring system, it seemed like you were purposely running it, and making a joke


----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 7, 2018)

Are my scores normal for a delidded 5ghz 8600k?







and for snuggles, here is my 1080 ti stable at 2075 core   don't be mad at me mods, I want to share my golden chip


----------



## dylricho (Apr 7, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> Are my scores normal for a delidded 5ghz 8600k?



Those scores are in line with what I expect from a 5.00 GHz overclock, without Intel toothpaste.


----------



## biffzinker (Apr 8, 2018)

You're taking it way to seriously @fullinfusion. There wasn't any harmful intent toward you or your post. I didn't even know you only did it to stay in compliance with the old version scores.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 8, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> You're taking it way to seriously



yup, i was a bit surprised at that response .


anyway, in regards to the thread topic, i am waiting for the RTV to cure on my 8600k, it had great temps before, but i figured what the hell. 

got the IHS back on after letting the RTV sit for about 2 hours, and here is the first CPUz test since  delidding. For me, it didnt make a big difference , it only dropped about 12c'ish, but its all good.
Notice my Max temps while running 5Ghz though...51Celcius is the highest that chip got after CPUz and cinebench

*5Ghz 8600k - 600.5 points* 
@dylricho


----------



## wally_1973 (Apr 8, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> Are my scores normal for a delidded 5ghz 8600k?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That looks awesome, good gaming rig.


----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 8, 2018)

wally_1973 said:


> That looks awesome, good gaming rig.



how come jboy has 50 more points then me in single core even though we are same speed?  is that something I need to worry about?

edit: nm i just OC'd to 5.1 and now surpass him by 10 points, so i guess everything is fine.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 8, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> how come jboy has 50 more points then me in single core even though we are same speed? is that something I need to worry about?



silicon lottery. just becasue a CPU is the same frequency, or model, doesnt mean they perform the same. I wouldnt worry too much about it though, its just a CPUz bench test, i dont put too much stock in them. I'd put more faith in a cinebench result, the CPUz tool (as i understnd it) ismore of a utility, than a benchmark. unless im mistaken.


----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 8, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> silicon lottery. just becasue a CPU is the same frequency, or model, doesnt mean they perform the same. I wouldnt worry too much about it though, its just a CPUz bench test, i dont put too much stock in them. I'd put more faith in a cinebench result, the CPUz tool (as i understnd it) ismore of a utility, than a benchmark. unless im mistaken.



cheers. my single score in cinebench is 220 at 5.1 seems about right so im happy.  can you tell me why my voltages in the above post screenshot are 1.2 even though in BIOS it shows it at 1.36? i mean its fine, everything is stable and not crashing, but even when i reboot it shows 1.36v in bios so just confused why HWINFO is reading it wrong


----------



## dylricho (Apr 9, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> how come jboy has 50 more points then me in single core even though we are same speed?  is that something I need to worry about?
> 
> edit: nm i just OC'd to 5.1 and now surpass him by 10 points, so i guess everything is fine.



There are a few factors at play;

1) First of all, the most obvious as @jboydgolfer has already said; no two processors are identical, even with identical specifications. Impurities in silicon will result in varying levels of voltage, current, capacitance and resistance. Overclocking does rely on what is known as the 'silicon lottery' whereby a better 'draw' will yield better overclocking results. This somewhat ties into a technique known as binning, which is essentially how all the different models are made. For example, if one chip can achieve 4.00 GHz, but the other can only achieve 3.80 GHz, they will likely be turned into two different models. (Look back to Haswell, and see just how many Pentium, Core i3 and Core i5 models there were.) Binning also takes into consideration cache, memory controller, integrated graphics and hardware-level features such as simultaneous multi-threading (Intel markets this as Hyper-Threading). However, where the 'silicon lottery' differs from binning is that the 'silicon lottery' applies to multiple chips of the exact same model.

2) While unknown and probably not the case since he didn't showcase it, it may be possible that @jboydgolfer altered settings beyond the processor frequency, which would aid with better performance.

3) The benchmark itself, I have noticed from my own testing, will give you completely different numbers over a number of runs. With modern, quad-core processors, the multi-threaded score can easily jump by 50-100 points because it's only a small percentage of the overall score. You're best to run it several times in succession and to draw an average, if you really care about it. And I think it might be worth mentioning that successive runs may yield higher scores for desktop processors, and lower scores for mobile processors.

4) Is Windows doing anything in the background?

5) And finally, margin of error. 10% is agreeably too high for a margin of error in this case, but I wouldn't worry about, say, 3-5%.




jboydgolfer said:


> [...] I wouldnt worry too much about it though, its just a CPUz bench test, i dont put too much stock in them. I'd put more faith in a cinebench result, the CPUz tool (as i understnd it) ismore of a utility, than a benchmark. unless im mistaken.



Pretty much. As with all benchmarks, the result only really means anything if you will be doing the exact same workload as the benchmark uses. For CPU-Z, that's essentially scalar SSE2, and nothing more. So unless you plan on using software that only uses SSE2 instructions, I wouldn't put much thought into the numbers it spits out at all.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 12, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> nm i just OC'd to 5.1 and now surpass him by 10 points, so i guess everything is fine.



615.6 @5.1Ghz






lynx29 said:


> can you tell me why my voltages in the above post screenshot are 1.2 even though in BIOS it shows it at 1.36?



 If you're using cpuZ its not known for its accuracy.  Always rely on what you enter in the bios ,and not what some program tells you, my guess would be an inaccurate reading on the part of the program


----------



## Maxima (Apr 12, 2018)

View attachment 99696


----------



## fullinfusion (Apr 16, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> You're taking it way to seriously @fullinfusion. There wasn't any harmful intent toward you or your post. I didn't even know you only did it to stay in compliance with the old version scores.


Sorry to you and @jboydgolfer.. things been hectic just before my.post.to you all.. I'm down in Australia ATM and had a bunch of loose ends to tie up and I know that's no excuse but no sleep makes me not think straight :/

But thanks for understanding it means alot


----------



## Deleted member 178464 (Apr 17, 2018)

i7 7700k @ 4.99GHz


----------



## Maxima (Apr 17, 2018)




----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 18, 2018)

@dylricho

*624.8 *@ 5200Mhz.





trying to figure out the OC settings on this board, next step is beat the 1st place 8600k in the Cinebench scoreboard


----------



## Mobile (Apr 19, 2018)

Just you know I have no interest in social as for me is wot.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 19, 2018)

Mobile said:


> Just you know I have no interest in social as for me is wot.
> 
> View attachment 99959



not too far off the 1800x results stored in CPUz 400ST, 4500MT .You should hit the bench button


----------



## dylricho (Apr 24, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Okay guys; here are the new graphs. Still finalizing a few things before the webpage version is done.
> 
> *CPU-Z 1.84.x* — Single | Multi



So, over the past three weeks, I've gone through all 51 pages and added most of the results to the new graphs (this is why I've been quiet lately). I've added everyone who has displayed the processor model, bus/interconnect frequency and multiplier, although there are quite a lot of posts with broken images (red crosses).

The web version is now ready and it will also act as a result hub for all versions spanning 1.73.x to current, with access to image versions of the graphs directly as well. (Those with slower network connections will be better served by the web version.)

*CPU-Z 1.73.x *— Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.74.x *— Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.75.x *— Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.76.x *— Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.77.x *— Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.78.x *— Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.79.x *— Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.80.x *— Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.81.x* — Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.82.x* — Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.83.x* — Single (Image) | Multi (Image)
*CPU-Z 1.84.x* — Single (Image) | Multi (Image)

And now begins the very long list of credits and thank-yous: 


Spoiler: Credits and Thank-Yous



@18kaninchen
@50eurouser
@Aenra
@Admin89
@agent00skid
@AhokZYashA
@ahujet
@ajb101
@AlwaysHope
@Andy Acord
@anselmo
@AntDeek
@Aquinus
@ArbitraryAffection
@Arctucas
@argon
@Ascaris
@ASOT
@AsRock
@Azot2033
@avenger001
@babbage78
@backwoods
@Bansaku
@BarbaricSoul
@basco
@Bazim
@beholder88
@behrouz
@biffzinker
@BiggieShady
@birdie
@blysk
@bobalazs
@broken pixel
@budozero
@buildzoid
@BurntJoint
@c2DDragon
@cadaveca
@cant_be_farkt
@Capitan Harlock
@CAPSLOCKSTUCK
@CaptainVeyron
@Cartel
@cdawall
@Chloe Price
@chuck216
@chuckbam
@CiprianRO
@cleggy999
@CK011885
@Compgeke
@councilior
@Countryside
@CrackerJack
@CS85
@dayathor
@Dbiggs9
@Deathmourne
@Derek12
@Devon68
@DeXa
@Dia01
@diatribe
@dieselcat18
@dj-electric
@Doothe
@DR4G00N
@Dragos
@droopyRO
@dylricho
@dustinclark07
@EarthDog
@Ebo
@edgarss
@eidairaman1
@EmbeddedGenius
@Enterprise24
@er557
@erixx
@EvOlViOlEnCe
@exodusprime1337
@F-Zero
@F0restgump123
@FC Copenhagen
@Ferrum Master
@Filip Georgievski
@FilipM
@Final_Fighter
@Flybyderp
@fmasins
@Fouquin
@FR@NK
@FR9
@freakshow
@Frick
@fullinfusion
@fusionblu
@fusseli
@FYFI13
@gazzyk1ns
@gdallsk
@GenieGOR
@gint87
@GoldenX
@Grings
@grunt_408
@HammerON
@Hardi
@Hargon
@HarvesterOfSorrow
@HeliosDoubleSix
@hilpi
@Hnykill22
@hrp32
@hrsh91
@Hugis
@HummelMD
@huntedjohan
@Imsochobo
@ikeke
@infrared
@Ithanul
@itlvk
@ivanbass1
@Jadawin
@jaggerwild
@janaxhd
@Jborg
@jboydgolfer
@Jetster
@Jhelms
@johnspack
@jorj02
@JrockTech
@KainXS
@Kakdave
@Kanan
@khemist
@Kliim
@kniaugaudiskis
@Knoxx29
@kNOZEl
@Komshija
@Kyuuba
@Laki89
@LAN_deRf_HA
@levima43
@LightningJR
@Liviu Cojocaru
@Locksmith
@Losi
@LowlightHighsight
@lynx29
@Makaveli
@manhattan222
@Maxima
@MCanalog
@mcraygsx
@Melvis
@Mercennarius
@Mobile
@MoltoMiller
@moomeacow
@Morgoth
@mouacyk
@mr jocs
@MrGenius
@mrthanhnguyen
@N1GHTRA1N
@Narajujo
@Narval
@natr0n
@navair2
@NELT
@nickthaskater
@night.fox
@Norton
@Nuckles56
@oldtech5670
@Olma
@Outback Bronze
@P4-630
@panther030
@patriotaki
@PCGamerDR
@peche
@Pegadroid
@Peteln007
@Peter Lindgren
@petra
@phanbuey
@PHaS3
@Pierluigi
@Platon
@Poepzak130
@POLJDA
@Psychoholic
@PSychoTron
@puma99dk|
@purecain
@pyon
@Qstik
@qynqy
@R-T-B
@radrok
@RandomAxe
@RandomSadness
@Rasp
@Razor12911
@Readlight
@RealNeil
@Recon-UK
@redmaster
@RejZoR
@Robert Dunlop
@Ruyki
@sasamkd
@scevism
@Schmuckley
@Scirron
@Sempron Guy
@sensation45
@Shao
@Shengli
@Shikatok
@shork
@silentbogo
@silkstone
@sn2x
@Soijai
@SonicBlaster
@SpiteofCerberus
@Stalker563
@stealth83
@Steevo
@tabascosauz
@TeddyPawsWolf
@The Data Master
@The Pack
@ThE_MaD_ShOt
@thedukesd1
@TheHunter
@TheRagnarok
@TheUnbrained
@Thimblewad
@Thunder162
@tigger
@Tomgang
@tomkaten
@TommyT
@Toothless
@trickson
@TRWOV
@tttony
@tugrul_SIMD
@Underdog
@Univocal
@UnRPhOeNiX
@uuuaaaaaa
@vabeachboy0
@valyamd
@Viking73
@Vlada011
@vnl7
@Vya Domus
@wally_1973
@watageek
@WhiteNoise
@wildone
@wolfaust
@wtfskilz
@wzrd
@xkm1948
@XSI
@xvi
@YautjaLord
@yesyesloud
@yotano211
@ZenZimZaliben
@zsolt_93
@zwer54
@Zyll Goliath


----------



## Norton (Apr 24, 2018)

*1700X @3.7Ghz (memory @2933Mhz)*

*



*


----------



## INT-ELboy (Apr 27, 2018)

hello people,that's my baby.......


----------



## er557 (Apr 27, 2018)

1.4v..... you're pushing it


----------



## phanbuey (Apr 27, 2018)

INT-ELboy said:


> hello people,that's my baby.......
> 
> View attachment 100292View attachment 100293


That's nice!


----------



## dylricho (Apr 28, 2018)

All up to date.


----------



## INT-ELboy (Apr 28, 2018)

er557 said:


> 1.4v..... you're pushing it


i know, my baby always under pressure ....................maybe 1.6 year............but what to do i like performance............


----------



## er557 (Apr 28, 2018)

if that dual core is a baby, mine 36 core is already retired...


----------



## jboydgolfer (Apr 28, 2018)

INT-ELboy said:


> hello people,that's my baby.......
> 
> View attachment 100292View attachment 100293



 I no longer have the CPU ,but I got my G3258 up to the 5GHz ... easily the best core performance to price value ever.  If I clocked in high enough, I was actually able to run Grandtheft auto five without stuttering & terrible frames


----------



## Arctucas (Apr 29, 2018)

My lowly 6700K


----------



## dylricho (Apr 29, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> I no longer have the CPU ,but I got my G3258 up to the 5GHz ... easily the best core performance to price value ever.  If I clocked in high enough, I was actually able to run Grandtheft auto five without stuttering & terrible frames



Even so, I still wouldn't _want_ to do it. That's a lot of work for two cores.

@Arctucas; added.


----------



## er557 (Apr 29, 2018)

slight improvement with windows rs4 17134.5,  should I downgrade to Pentium G single core?


----------



## phanbuey (May 5, 2018)




----------



## nomdeplume (May 9, 2018)

Size discrepancy; Short lived experiment with W10 (CPU screenshot) and return to W7 (Bench screenshot) rendered different sized output with snipping tool in respective OS.  Obviously CPU output is identical but if the rules are very strict I will reinstall CPU-Z and take another screenshot using W7.  

Bench and overall performance were better in W7 with this machine.


----------



## jboydgolfer (May 9, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Even so, I still wouldn't _want_ to do it. That's a lot of work for two cores.
> 
> @Arctucas; added.



Whats a lot of work? Overclocking? No more work than any other cpu, & it was the cpu i had @ the time, so it wasnt like i had a choice, it was OC or no game.  I have a few kids of my own ,and I also take care of my brothers boys full-time, so my CPU hobby takes a backseat to things that they need, and at that time I didn't have the money to spend on anything more than that Pentium  was the best i could with what i had. thats the whole point of this....to get more out of what you have


----------



## wally_1973 (May 11, 2018)

ASUS X202E Laptop


----------



## biffzinker (May 19, 2018)

https://valid.x86.fr/xev3g4


----------



## wally_1973 (May 20, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> https://valid.x86.fr/xev3g4
> 
> View attachment 101228 View attachment 101229 View attachment 101230


That CPU should do better than that.


----------



## biffzinker (May 20, 2018)

wally_1973 said:


> That CPU should do better than that.
> View attachment 101376


I've checked up on it but the culprit is XFR2. It's eager to push a lightly threaded core load say 2/3 cores to 4,248 MHz but as the threads increase it starts dropping down to 4,175-4,150 MHz.

My 2600X seems to be trying to maintain 4.0 GHz clockspeed with a 12 thread load with occasion dip to 3.9 GHz on a core but then it shoves back to 4.0 GHz. Interesting to watch how fast and dynamic the clockspeed adjusts. 

I re-did the CPU-Z bench again to check and it starts out way high above 3700.0 but then quickly drops as XFR2 scales the multiplier back.




Also compared the Cinebench score I posted in the other thread to the score from W1zzard's review of the 2600X.
   VS  
Post #579
TPU Ryzen R5 2600X Review (Page 9)


----------



## xkm1948 (May 21, 2018)

Still cannot break 10,000. Damn it!


----------



## Norton (May 21, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Still cannot break 10,000. Damn it!


Need EPYC for that 
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/post-3820916


----------



## xkm1948 (May 21, 2018)

Norton said:


> Need EPYC for that
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/post-3820916



Nah with an Enermax TR AIO 360mm cooler I should be able to OC 1950X to 4.15GHz. That outta do it.


----------



## wally_1973 (May 22, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> I've checked up on it but the culprit is XFR2. It's eager to push a lightly threaded core load say 2/3 cores to 4,248 MHz but as the threads increase it starts dropping down to 4,175-4,150 MHz.
> 
> My 2600X seems to be trying to maintain 4.0 GHz clockspeed with a 12 thread load with occasion dip to 3.9 GHz on a core but then it shoves back to 4.0 GHz. Interesting to watch how fast and dynamic the clockspeed adjusts.
> 
> ...


Are you running stock cooler, they are OK but my Arctic freezer probably pushes it a bit further. @ 4Ghz on all cores this thing stays very cool.


----------



## dylricho (May 25, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Whats a lot of work? Overclocking? No more work than any other cpu, & it was the cpu i had @ the time, so it wasnt like i had a choice, it was OC or no game.



No, a game such as GTA V and all its AI. That's what I meant.



jboydgolfer said:


> I have a few kids of my own ,and I also take care of my brothers boys full-time, so my CPU hobby takes a backseat to things that they need, and at that time I didn't have the money to spend on anything more than that Pentium  was the best i could with what i had.



Did you really think I was putting you down for this? Hell naw. What I was saying was purely towards the processor and the game. Perhaps you've forgotten, but I am the guy that went eight years with a Core2 T9300-powered laptop, 3 GiB RAM and awful Intel GMA X3100 graphics because I couldn't afford anything better, meanwhile everyone around me had moved well onto Intel's Core i5/i7 families. 

Now I'm using a hand-me-down (from a friend) A8-6600K APU build with 16 GiB RAM and the integrated HD 8570D graphics; I paid just £65 for it, including a 1080p monitor TV. Like your Pentium machine, this is also used to play GTA V.

Trust me, I know all about making the most of what you have, and I absolutely commend you for it.

-----

*CPU-Z 1.85.x* — Single-Threaded Results (Image) | Multi-Threaded Results (Image)


----------



## biffzinker (May 25, 2018)

Overclocked to the 4.2 GHz boost over all cores, and also two separate runs.
https://valid.x86.fr/h3xra5


----------



## dylricho (May 25, 2018)

Added.


----------



## T3500 (May 25, 2018)

This was at 4.27 GHz (x32 multi) on my W3680. Pushed any further it would BSOD


----------



## DR4G00N (May 25, 2018)

Dual quad power!


----------



## Morgoth (May 25, 2018)

not that bad for a 100 usd used cpu


----------



## Caring1 (May 26, 2018)

Morgoth said:


> not that bad for a 100 usd used cpu


I hate you


----------



## dylricho (May 26, 2018)

@T3500; @DR4G00N; @Morgoth 

Added.


----------



## nomdeplume (May 30, 2018)

No regrets moving up from i5-2400.  Other than waiting until DDR4 prices peaked.


----------



## biffzinker (May 30, 2018)

Any luck forcing all cores to 4.0 GHz @nomdeplume? In W1zzard's i5-8400 review it didn't work as expected.

From the review: 





> The second option is to adjust the CPU boost settings, making it so that the highest boost state is enabled not just for single-threaded workloads, but all - no matter the core count.
> 
> When we tested the latter, we noticed that no matter what we did, the maximum frequency the CPU would run at was 3800 MHz, not 4000 MHz as you would expect by going with the maximum-rated boost frequency.
> 
> Whether this is a bug or a feature is unknown at this time.


https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/17.html

Multi Core Enhancement would be the setting to look for.


----------



## nomdeplume (May 30, 2018)

Hardly done anything but drivers and updating BIOS so far.  Will try it in the next day or two.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 1, 2018)

An effort was made.  No options as described existed so I did my best with what was available to expected results.  Basically I chose Performance mode and maxed out anything I was allowed to that looked relevant.

Note I updated the BIOS two versions newer than it shipped with before this came up.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jun 1, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Did you really think I was putting you down for this?



No i didnt get that impression , i was just explaining my reason for pushing the chip to run gta5, i did think you might have meant OC'ing the pentium was a pita, but wasnt sure. GTA5 was the one game i was playing at the time, and the pentium was my cpu at the time


----------



## Tomgang (Jun 1, 2018)

It has been some time since i last post some results. So here are some from the latest cpu-z version (V1.85.0). So here are the old I7 980X.

stock cpu. Well its 7 years now since this cpu came out, so its not on the top of the food chain any more when it comes to performance.






At 4.37 GHz i run it at for every day use, it begins to look decent i think.






The cpu can do more, but voltage is getting high here. Thats the problem with old CPU´s, to get them up to clocks modern Intels cpu can run at pretty easy needs a high voltage on these old chips.


----------



## BraveSoul (Jun 1, 2018)

using i7-2600K as reference because current setup is an upgrade from|i5-2500K@4.5ghz 16gbDDR3| that was choking to death in video editing


----------



## dylricho (Jun 2, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> No i didnt get that impression , i was just explaining my reason for pushing the chip to run gta5, i did think you might have meant OC'ing the pentium was a pita, but wasnt sure. GTA5 was the one game i was playing at the time, and the pentium was my cpu at the time



No, overclocking that is just like any other unlocked chip. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, to be honest.

-----

@nomdeplume; @Tomgang; @BraveSoul

Added.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jun 2, 2018)

dylricho said:


> I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, to be honest.



I didnt come to a conclusion, i just thought you might be referring to the subject i was speaking about, because you wrote in response to me speaking about overclocking my Pentium, naturally, it would be reasonable for me to think you would be speaking about me overclocking my pentium, or atleast wouldnt be out of line for me to see it as possibility

Text communication isnt like spoken language, it is left for the reader to interpret the meaning often ,( like when you thought i was under the impression you were putting me down for running my 3258 in GTA5) which could lead me to wonder how you came to that conclusion, but i didnt , im aware of the open interpretation nature of text communication.

Either way, its not worth anymore time. Just a misunderstanding


----------



## MrGenius (Jun 2, 2018)

3770K is still a single thread *BEAST!!! *

1.84 (Beat a 7700K @ 5GHz in ST!)




1.85 best ST score.



1.85 best MT score.


----------



## MrGenius (Jun 15, 2018)

Got 'er done @ *5.1*!!! 

3770K @ 5.1GHz

1.84




1.85


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jun 15, 2018)

Is there any difference between 1.84 and 1.85 in regards to bench results? The only reason I ask is im curious if my score in 1.84 will still be the same in 1.85


Edit
 NeveRemind ,I can see from the results above that the difference is negligible


----------



## MrGenius (Jun 15, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Is there any difference between 1.84 and 1.85 in regards to bench results? The only reason I ask is im curious if my score in 1.84 will still be the same in 1.85


1.85 consistently scores slightly lower than 1.84 for me. Not much lower. But not nothing either.

I'm just trying to get my name on both lists.


----------



## droopyRO (Jun 16, 2018)

i7 930 with Rampage II Extreme and 2x4GB DDR3
.


----------



## dylricho (Jun 16, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Is there any difference between 1.84 and 1.85 in regards to bench results? The only reason I ask is im curious if my score in 1.84 will still be the same in 1.85
> 
> Edit
> NeveRemind ,I can see from the results above that the difference is negligible



Nope, the benchmark remains identical from version 1.79 through 1.85. Any fluctuation you're seeing is just down to natural variation.



MrGenius said:


> 1.85 consistently scores slightly lower than 1.84 for me. Not much lower. But not nothing either.
> 
> I'm just trying to get my name on both lists.



And now you're on them.  Ivy Bridge is still a great chip.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jun 16, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Nope



 That's what I thought, 600+ ST ftw


----------



## Komshija (Jun 17, 2018)

Old but gold T9900 from my laptop. CPU-Z versions 1.85 and 1.84 had problems recognizing and benchmarking this CPU. Version 1.82 and older CPU-Z versions have no such problems.

Intel Core 2 Duo T9900 @ 3,196 GHz.


----------



## dylricho (Jun 18, 2018)

Komshija said:


> Old but gold T9900 from my laptop. CPU-Z versions 1.85 and 1.84 had problems recognizing and benchmarking this CPU. Version 1.82 and older CPU-Z versions have no such problems.
> 
> Intel Core 2 Duo T9900 @ 3,196 GHz.
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/t9900-bench-jpg.102551/



Interesting. I'll get my T9300 laptop out and see if I have the same issue. 1.84 did work for me though.

I've added your result to the 1.82 graphs.


----------



## er557 (Jun 26, 2018)

meltdown/spectre mitigations enabled, memory integrity enabled in device protection







and then a clean account without memory integrity


----------



## dylricho (Jun 28, 2018)

Komshija said:


> Old but gold T9900 from my laptop. CPU-Z versions 1.85 and 1.84 had problems recognizing and benchmarking this CPU. Version 1.82 and older CPU-Z versions have no such problems.
> 
> Intel Core 2 Duo T9900 @ 3,196 GHz.
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/t9900-bench-jpg.102551/





dylricho said:


> Interesting. I'll get my T9300 laptop out and see if I have the same issue. 1.84 did work for me though.



Tried it, and noticed nothing problematic, so it must be your system.








er557 said:


> meltdown/spectre mitigations enabled, memory integrity enabled in device protection
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/06262018-195944-jpg.103142/
> 
> ...



Added.


----------



## Komshija (Jun 28, 2018)

dylricho said:


> Tried it, and noticed nothing problematic, so it must be your system.



Unlikely. Both 1.84 and 1.85 displayed some error immediately after loading. They loaded, but few things like multiplier, bus speed, clock were not displayed... Maybe these new versions cannot recognize my unicorn 3,2 GHz T9900. 

Anyways, both 1.84 and 1.85 displayed significantly lower scores for my two PC's than 1.81 and 1.82.  As a matter of fact, even the 1.82 repediately displayed some 20-30 points less in multi-core and some 2 points less in single-core than 1.81 considering stock i7 6700K. I tried the same tests with third PC (parents', i5 3470) and it was exactly the same percentage drop.

For instance, my i7 6700K (stock) in CPU-Z 1.81.1 scored average 501-503 for SC and 2535-2560 for MC; in 1.82.2 it was around 497-501 SC and 2510-2525 MC; in 1.85 around 490-495 SC and 2450-2470 MC. Interesting thing is that reference values for all CPU's remained the same, while benchmark for the actual CPU was downgraded from CPU-Z 1.81 to 1.85.
On the other hand, T9900 scored 268-274 SC and 531-538 MC in CPU-Z 1.82.1, while in CPU-Z 1.85 it scored around 264-269 SC and 470-480 MC, which is ridiculous.
I used exactly the same conditions for all tests in three different PC's.


----------



## dylricho (Jun 29, 2018)

Komshija said:


> Unlikely. Both 1.84 and 1.85 displayed some error immediately after loading. They loaded, but few things like multiplier, bus speed, clock were not displayed... Maybe these new versions cannot recognize my unicorn 3,2 GHz T9900.
> 
> Anyways, both 1.84 and 1.85 displayed significantly lower scores for my two PC's than 1.81 and 1.82.  As a matter of fact, even the 1.82 repediately displayed some 20-30 points less in multi-core and some 2 points less in single-core than 1.81 considering stock i7 6700K. I tried the same tests with third PC (parents', i5 3470) and it was exactly the same percentage drop.
> 
> ...



Your T9900 should be 23% faster than my T9300 in multi-thread, and 24% faster in single-thread.

With a 3.20 GHz overclock, it should be 28% faster.
If your T9900 has been set to run at its IDA frequency constantly, it should be 33% faster.

I didn't run *1.82 (17.01.64)*.
*In 1.83 (17.01.64):* 218/434.
*In 1.84 (17.01.64):* 221/440.
*In 1.85 (17.01.64):* 201/387.

*264 / 201* = +31.343%
*269 / 201* = +33.831%

*470 / 387* = +21.447%
*480 / 387* = +24.031%

Incidentally when I ran it yesterday, I did think the results were a little low. Now that I've compared them, they are genuinely lower (~9.5% drop), but the benchmark version has not changed. Also, I haven't had any errors with any of them. Everything displays normally for my machine.


----------



## Face2Face (Jun 29, 2018)

Lenovo T470s  - Core i5 7300U - Seems really low.


----------



## droopyRO (Jun 29, 2018)

Not mine, but i got to play a bit with a i7-4790.


----------



## natr0n (Jul 27, 2018)




----------



## dylricho (Jul 29, 2018)

Sorry guys. All up to date now.


----------



## MrGenius (Jul 31, 2018)

3770K @ *5.4GHz* bitches!!! 

1.84




1.85


----------



## droopyRO (Jul 31, 2018)

1.7V ? didn't knew the BIOS got that high  What is the max.  you used it at for 24/7 ?


----------



## 27MaD (Jul 31, 2018)

night.fox said:


>


Name: Intel Core I5
Specification : Intel Core I7 6700HQ 2.6 GHz 
WTF!!


----------



## MrGenius (Jul 31, 2018)

droopyRO said:


> 1.7V ? didn't knew the BIOS got that high  What is the max.  you used it at for 24/7 ?


For 24/7 I like to stay at/below 1.52V with Ivy Bridge. For benching...I've ran my 3570Ks with up to 1.9V without killing any(I've had 3 in total, still have 1). I did kill one 3570K with overvoltage...but that was an accidental ~2.2V slip up. I thought I could get away with pushing near 1.9V with my first 3770K for some benches(the one from my previous post with 5.1GHz scores). Found out the hard way that's a no-go. Popped that one with ~1.86V running Geekbench 3. This one I've got now is going to stay well below 1.8V. I really like it. And don't intend on pushing it too hard. Does 5.0GHz fully stable w/ 1.456V. That's a keeper in my book. 

BTW...all on AIO/water.


----------



## dylricho (Jul 31, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> 3770K @ *5.4GHz* bitches!!!



Added. 




27MaD said:


> Name: Intel Core I5
> Specification : Intel Core I7 6700HQ 2.6 GHz
> WTF!!



That's CPU-Z being not completely reliable, but the correct identification is the Core i7 section. It will also mistake the desktop Ryzen APUs as the mobile version.


----------



## XTR³M³ (Aug 2, 2018)

ZEN pooowaaaa:


----------



## dylricho (Aug 7, 2018)

Added. Glad to see more Ryzen results.


----------



## TheGhastModding (Aug 8, 2018)

This really old laptop a friend gave me probably gives the lowest benchmark results I have ever seen


----------



## MrGenius (Aug 8, 2018)

TheGhastModding said:


> ...the lowest benchmark results I have ever seen


See here.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 9, 2018)

New case, noticed much better thermals with the new found airflow. Finally got stable at these clocks.





Finally hit 500 on single thread, which has been my goal for a long while. Hitting about 72c too.


----------



## argon (Aug 10, 2018)

argon said:


> hello!
> 
> my new not so much tuned 6800k
> 
> ...


Has been like 2 years and still rocking this dude, need to change thermal paste

not sure if I would upgrade to 6950x, meh I dont think there game that use all those core, so my next investment would be a 240hz monitor or new gpu


----------



## Dinnercore (Aug 10, 2018)

Just a tiny bit ahead of zen+ in multi-thread. That´s all I want for now.


----------



## MrGenius (Aug 12, 2018)

Time for 1.86.

3770K @ 5.4GHz.




I'm #1!!!


----------



## AlejoZ (Aug 12, 2018)

i7 8700k


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 13, 2018)

New bios, new windows, new CPUZ new blabla.
Not much has changed, slightly lower Multicore performance but not much.


----------



## Dinnercore (Aug 13, 2018)

Ok my OCD told me I can not stay below the magic 5k mark:






Next target: 500 single thread. Not very high hopes on that one tho.


----------



## argon (Aug 13, 2018)

hello everyone what about cl12 ram I think no one have that low latency


----------



## Dinnercore (Aug 14, 2018)

argon said:


> hello everyone what about cl12 ram I think no one have that low latency



*cough* *cough* Check your frequency before talking about latency. My ddr2 at 800 CL4 should have exactly the same latency. Maybe your were just joking tho, im bad at catching that sry


----------



## argon (Aug 14, 2018)

no I was serious, Just saw everyone here with cl16-18 and was thinking I was better. But Yea 2400mhz vs 3000mhz thats different, not sure if I'd get new ram in future...


----------



## MrGenius (Aug 15, 2018)

argon said:


> Just saw everyone here with cl16-18...


Everyone?




I guess if that doesn't include me...or CL10...or DDR3.


----------



## dylricho (Aug 15, 2018)

argon said:


> [...] Just saw everyone here with cl16-18 and was thinking I was better.



With higher frequencies, also come higher latencies. Paying extra for better timings out of the box is something you can do, and is the typical choice of those in scenarios such as owning Ryzen, an APU of any kind, and/or using their machine primarily for memory bandwidth-limited workloads. For everyone else, providing it runs, who cares, right?

You're going to find that most people participating in this thread fit into the former description because more often than not, the people these kinds of forums attract are those who know their way around a transistor or two, and therefore tend to have better systems (i.e. faster memory).


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 15, 2018)

A hit by the new microcode update? (spectre / meltdown patch)
It's scoring lower then before.


----------



## Caring1 (Aug 16, 2018)

Without any Micro code updates, and nothing else running, with BOINC in the background it dropped to half the score.
CPU shown at idle, underload it is showing 3.1GHz


----------



## CS85 (Aug 16, 2018)

2700X at 4.3GHz


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 16, 2018)

CS85 said:


> View attachment 1054112700X at 4.3GHz


Really curious about the 7nm processors AMD is going to bring next year. Will probably update to a 12 core or something.


----------



## CS85 (Aug 16, 2018)

wally_1973 said:


> Really curious about the 7nm processors AMD is going to bring next year. Will probably update to a 12 core or something.


Me too. Not sure I'll be able to justify upgrading though.

2700X 4.35 GHz. Tried 4.4 but would hard lock as soon as load was put on CPU.


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 18, 2018)

CS85 said:


> Me too. Not sure I'll be able to justify upgrading though.
> 
> 2700X 4.35 GHz. Tried 4.4 but would hard lock as soon as load was put on CPU. View attachment 105455


Rumor is; the next ryzen gen might have more then 8 cores, might achive higher clocks... defenitely upgrading from a 6 core then.


----------



## MrGenius (Aug 18, 2018)

Pentium 4 HT 3.06GHz @ stock


----------



## Dinnercore (Aug 19, 2018)

Ok so 4.1GHz is the all core OC wall for my 1800x. Not even straight 1.5V got me above that and I don´t plan to degrade my chip just yet, it has some more GPU benchmarks to run. 
Oh and now on Version 1.86 too. 







However, 4.1GHz is by far not the end on this one, I ran some single core loads with partly deactivated CCX on 4274 MHz:




And had it on 4.324 on that voltage for a short moment, but it was not stable enough for capture.png to create the screenshot


----------



## argon (Aug 25, 2018)

overclocked my ram and got some serious performance Upgrade for basically free and no temp increase!
Already got 2 hours of F@H and some game on Rainbow and its def stable at all! (cant boot with 3400mhz :/ )


----------



## dylricho (Aug 27, 2018)

All up to date, guys.

Had some server trouble. Should be fixed now.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Aug 27, 2018)

wally_1973 said:


> Rumor is; the next ryzen gen might have more then 8 cores, might achive higher clocks... defenitely upgrading from a 6 core then.



Interesting you say that because this B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC board I got has 2 x CPU power connectors - 1 x 4pin + 1 x 8 pin, do MSI know something we don't about future Ryzen cpus?|


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 27, 2018)

AlwaysHope said:


> Interesting you say that because this B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC board I got has 2 x CPU power connectors - 1 x 4pin + 1 x 8 pin, do MSI know something we don't about future Ryzen cpus?|


Zen 2 probably will have 8 cores per CCX (now 4) and maybe 2CCX's on one chip for the AM4 socket.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-zen-two-design-supports-sixteen-cpu-cores/
https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-zen-2-rumors-point-to-16-core-ryzen-3rd-generation-processors
https://www.forbes.com/sites/antony...-2019-does-intel-have-an-answer/#1a774a6443a5


----------



## droopyRO (Aug 30, 2018)

A6 3420M


----------



## valyamd (Aug 30, 2018)

FX 6300 at 4300mhz


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 31, 2018)

CS85 said:


> Me too. Not sure I'll be able to justify upgrading though.
> 
> 2700X 4.35 GHz. Tried 4.4 but would hard lock as soon as load was put on CPU. View attachment 105455


What mainboard? would be nice if this is possible on a B350 chipset.


----------



## Dinnercore (Aug 31, 2018)

I haven´t posted my current work build before:





Not really an OC but I wanted it at a permanent and controlled frequency that reaches a known max. temp under constant load. Maybe I will push it to the limit some day.


----------



## CS85 (Aug 31, 2018)

wally_1973 said:


> What mainboard? would be nice if this is possible on a B350 chipset.


It's an MSI X470 Gaming Plus, not a bad board for the money. Not sure about other chipsets, this has been my first AMD build.


----------



## DR4G00N (Aug 31, 2018)

Dual X5460 upgrade for the D5400XS. At 3.85GHz they are a nice boost over the dual E5420's @ 3GHz.
Next up on the list is to get more ram.


----------



## dylricho (Sep 7, 2018)




----------



## neatfeatguy (Sep 7, 2018)

Been playing with my 4670k. Things appear stable at 4.6 on 1.21V. So I thought I'd share my aging Haswell's CPUZ bench.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Sep 8, 2018)

CPUZ score on my current platform: i7 7700k@4.8 24GB DDR4 3200Mhz


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 10, 2018)

System in my signature.... Steamroller power!


----------



## cdawall (Sep 10, 2018)




----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 10, 2018)

Best shot with 2400 MHz kit of Kingston Hyper X & 1.10 bios, better ram coming later this week... another shot in progress. 







cdawall said:


>



Got ya with single core.... come on, OC that baby!


----------



## cdawall (Sep 10, 2018)

AlwaysHope said:


> Got ya with single core.... come on, OC that baby!



I don't know how happy this thing will be with the voltage it will take for 4.4/4.5 stable lol


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 10, 2018)

cdawall said:


> I don't know how happy this thing will be with the voltage it will take for 4.4/4.5 stable lol



Have to be philosophical about it, either will or it won't. 
Only 1 way to find out! 
Go on, be brave.


----------



## Caring1 (Sep 10, 2018)

To quote a famous philosopher "Do, or do not, there is no try"


----------



## wally_1973 (Sep 10, 2018)

Woooooooohah, me loves rumours for once 
Source: https://nl.hardware.info/nieuws/amp...00x-liggen-als-reactie-op-intel-core-i9-9900k


----------



## XTR³M³ (Sep 11, 2018)

wally_1973 said:


> Woooooooohah, me loves rumours for once
> Source: https://nl.hardware.info/nieuws/amp...00x-liggen-als-reactie-op-intel-core-i9-9900k
> View attachment 106515




its a fake, the 2800X would have 12 cores... biggest ryzen = same core count like the smallest threadripper...


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 11, 2018)

XTR³M³ said:


> its a fake, the 2800X would have 12 cores... biggest ryzen = same core count like the smallest threadripper...


Most likely, Cinebench scores are easy to fake too.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 12, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Most likely, Cinebench scores are easy to fake too.



Quite possible, it can't even recognize win10, yet OCers love comparing performance with it.


----------



## mcraygsx (Sep 13, 2018)

7700K @ 5.1Ghz. It can prob be pushed little further but temps are holding it back. I am not into delidding at all.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 13, 2018)

mcraygsx said:


> 7700K @ 5.1Ghz. It can prob be pushed little further but temps are holding it back. I am not into delidding at all.


Why not delid? I delidded my 7740x with no fancy tools - those "cap openers" on eBay are dirt cheap and are perfectly safe when done correctly, it's an easy 20~ c drop.


----------



## dj-electric (Sep 13, 2018)

Can't wait to upload a 600+ single core, 6K+ multicore score. What a multi-purpose behemoth awaits behind the corner... Just a little bit longer now...


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 13, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Can't wait to upload a 600+ single core, 6K+ multicore score. What a multi-purpose behemoth awaits behind the corner... Just a little bit longer now...


Let's see it then
I can't wait too lol



dj-electric said:


> Can't wait to upload a 600+ single core, 6K+ multicore score. What a multi-purpose behemoth awaits behind the corner... Just a little bit longer now...


7820x?


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 17, 2018)

4.45GHz...


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 19, 2018)

4.5GHz
This is as far as it goes without 4.55GHz causing lockups atm. More research needed... that or waiting for bios maturity...lol... 

Single core better than Au$2750 cpu.... take that INTEL!


----------



## phill (Sep 19, 2018)

cdawall said:


>



There's always one gotta show off  
Love it


----------



## cdawall (Sep 19, 2018)

phill said:


> There's always one gotta show off
> Love it



It does 23K, but isn't quite stable there. I need a better VRM section to pull that off.


----------



## phill (Sep 19, 2018)

You had me at 22k!!


----------



## sirk69 (Sep 30, 2018)

Edit(Forgot to write what it is): Overclocked i5 8600k to 5.1GHZ @ 1.365v max stress test temp 72C - Corsair CPU water block.  - Not sure how good this is, just started overclocking.


----------



## dylricho (Sep 30, 2018)

AlwaysHope said:


> System in my signature.... Steamroller power!
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/cpuz-bench_4-5-jpg.106507/



That's about what I would expect without a crappy case and useless power supply. If only I could replace those parts. 

@cdawall; you completely destroyed @er557's dual Xeon setup in both single-thread and multi-thread.


----------



## cdawall (Sep 30, 2018)

dylricho said:


> That's about what I would expect without a crappy case and useless power supply. If only I could replace those parts.
> 
> @cdawall; you completely destroyed @er557's dual Xeon setup in both single-thread and multi-thread.



These new chips are monsters when the work well lol


----------



## tstr7119 (Oct 8, 2018)

slighly low score for a 5,5 GHZ on all cores 8086k?


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 8, 2018)

tstr7119 said:


> View attachment 108281
> View attachment 108280
> slighly low score for a 5,5 GHZ on all cores 8086k?




You have hyper threading dissable. Only 6 cores and 6 threads. It shut have 12 threads. Take a look in bios and see if hyper threading is set to dissable and if it is enable it.


----------



## tstr7119 (Oct 8, 2018)

yeah, cannot get the processor to run 5,5Ghz with hyperthreading. shouldnt affect single thread scroe though?


----------



## phill (Oct 8, 2018)

Nope just the multicore score


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 8, 2018)

tstr7119 said:


> yeah, cannot get the processor to run 5,5Ghz with hyperthreading. shouldnt affect single thread scroe though?



Nope ht does not impact on single core score, only multi score. But if you lower core clock it will impact single core score.


----------



## Vlada011 (Oct 8, 2018)

Intel i7-5820K 4.5GHz




This still not worth upgrade compare to 1151 socket.


----------



## dylricho (Oct 8, 2018)

tstr7119 said:


> yeah, cannot get the processor to run 5,5Ghz with hyperthreading. shouldnt affect single thread scroe though?



It won't decrease your ST score if you disable it. In fact, it should be slightly higher with it off.

Graphs updated.


----------



## agent_x007 (Oct 8, 2018)

1MHz = 1MT Point
Seems reasonable


----------



## Vlada011 (Oct 9, 2018)

That Xeon from X79 is still in game with his 8 cores + HT.
I hate because Intel remove HT from some high class processors now.
That will revenge to them very soon, not even 6 months after launch date.

E5 1680 V2 is definitely investment for longer period, good because could be OC.
Most important is his single threaded applications who is still competitive with X99 platform.
On 4400MHz have similar single threaded score as i7-5820K on default/turbo frequency.


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 11, 2018)

So a new version of CPU-z means a new run. I7 980X @ 4.43 GHz 24/7 clock and at 4.77 GHz. As a new thing, this time the runs is made by oc on multiplier, the older runs is BLCK oc. Yeah wanted to try out some thing new.


----------



## Vlada011 (Oct 11, 2018)

I get nothing if I switch to i7-5960X in single thread.
After OC his single threaded performance would jump on mine value and multithreaded would be far above me.





Actually what I get with OC, much bigger single threaded performance and same speed as I7-5960X default.
Not bad, 400$ vs 1000$. Multithread should go up, but I more worry to performance of my new platform in same time single thread jump on somewhere 650-660.
Before that no reason for upgrade. 600-650 single and 5000-5500 multi. That's improvement.


----------



## Ibotibo01 (Oct 11, 2018)




----------



## Gassay (Oct 11, 2018)

Я побеждаю.

А так?

А так?


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 11, 2018)

clevo x7200 laptop


----------



## phill (Oct 11, 2018)

Vlada011 said:


> I get nothing if I switch to i7-5960X in single thread.
> After OC his single threaded performance would jump on mine value and multithreaded would be far above me.
> 
> View attachment 108435
> ...



I'm glad for mine 5960X, it's a good clocker and works really well..  Found after tweaking ram performance in some software it's been like a massive jump in clock speed   I'll see if I can post some screen shots up tonight   Only have it running at 4.2Ghz as I use it for the WCG..  No point it running at 4.6Ghz or 4.8Ghz for that


----------



## agent_x007 (Oct 11, 2018)

phill said:


> I'm glad for mine 5960X, it's a good clocker and works really well..  Found after tweaking ram performance in some software it's been like a massive jump in clock speed   I'll see if I can post some screen shots up tonight   Only have it running at 4.2Ghz as I use it for the WCG..  No point it running at 4.6Ghz or 4.8Ghz for that


I wish for a comparison between our Octa Core CPUs, and that new 8 core models that are coming (1680 v2 vs. 5960X vs. 6900k vs. 9800X vs. 9900k)
On both one frequency (for example 4,2GHz for all with no turbo beyond that) and max OC possible on sample used.


----------



## phill (Oct 12, 2018)

I could try and do something like that if you'd like 


















There's a few results, but slightly older CPU-Z..  Here's some results when I was testing ram speeds   I think my MSI board might be holding it back a little...  Plus well, Windows 10....











Ram timings and cache speed seems to have very little effect on the CPU scores.. Yet testing in Geekbench and such, there's a bit of difference there..  Strange really I guess...
If I try it back in Windows 7 as well, I'm sure the vcore will be lower for the CPU speeds I'm running at the moment...  If needs be I can retest if there's enough want


----------



## Salty_sandwich (Oct 12, 2018)

Beast ...





 I bet ya cant match it!


----------



## TheUnbrained (Oct 14, 2018)

My Sandy-Bridge EP build...
Actually a backstep from my 3770... but more options to upgrade (well E5-1650v2 incomming)


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 14, 2018)

7740x @ 5ghz delidded 1.3v in bios


----------



## Deleted member 163934 (Oct 17, 2018)

Many things changed recently in my life and well as result I no longer have the Pentium G3260, Athlon II x4 640 and Sempron 145. For the time being I no longer have access to the Athlon x2 5400B and Athlon 64 X2 4000+ .
This laptop is kinda the only thing I will use for a while now...


----------



## SIGSEGV (Oct 18, 2018)

Ryzen 2700x at stock


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Oct 18, 2018)

Uh, looking at everyone else's score, did I just destroy this thread with a 3930k OC'ed to only 4.1Ghz?






How did I outscore newer 6c/12t and 8C/16T CPUs that are OC'ed higher than my 3930k? What am I missing here?

edit: I see scores are affected by what version CPUZ you have installed. Tried version 1.86, and my multi-thread score was cut down to the 3k range.


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 19, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Can't wait to upload a 600+ single core, 6K+ multicore score. What a multi-purpose behemoth awaits behind the corner... Just a little bit longer now...





Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Let's see it then
> I can't wait too lol
> 
> 
> 7820x?



No, I meant this:


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 19, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> No, I meant this:


Awesome there are 5.1 ish 7820x's out there for example: (I missed the 6k multi - guess it couldn't have been a 7820x anyways that 9900k looks awesome.


----------



## DR4G00N (Oct 19, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> No, I meant this:


Ooh, speedy. Can't wait to stick one of these in my Z170M OCF. 
Have to get rid of the 8700K first though.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 19, 2018)

DR4G00N said:


> Can't wait to stick one of these in my Z170M OCF.


But will it work? And I've been wondering is that 8700k 100% usable in that z170 board without problems? That's crazy if it is.



DR4G00N said:


> Can't wait to stick one of these in my Z170M OCF.


Please let me know the result of it - I'm curious is the 8700k only working on the z170m ocf with the mod? Or can I use a 8700k with the mod on my z270x gaming 7 for example? I've got a z270x gaming 7 with a puny 6600k and I could do with a 8700k


----------



## jboydgolfer (Oct 19, 2018)

dj-electric said:


>



not my highest, but whatever . 5.2Ghz is as far as i have pushed these 6Cores, 5.0Ghz for the test below


----------



## DR4G00N (Oct 19, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> But will it work? And I've been wondering is that 8700k 100% usable in that z170 board without problems? That's crazy if it is.


Yeah, the 8700K works 100% in this board on ambient & LN2. The 9900K looks to work fine as well from what I hear. https://community.hwbot.org/topic/175489-asrock-z170-mocf-lives-on-coffee-lake-mods/?page=10

It's technically possible to run the 8700K on other z170/270 boards but I'm not sure how to go about doing that as it's not my area of expertise.


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 19, 2018)

My 9900K chip's ASIC is of a very, very low quality unfortunately.
Selected ones are important because otherwise OC is pretty much out of the window.

Getting a 9900K stable on all core 5Ghz requires immense cooling.

I am using a Maximus XI Extreme, so technically not much higher to go in terms of board.
Gonna play with a 9700K soon and see maybe its a little better


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 19, 2018)

DR4G00N said:


> It's technically possible to run the 8700K on other z170/270 boards but I'm not sure how to go about doing that as it's not my area of expertise.


Damn it - that's a shame... Do you know anyone who would help me do it? I'm curious since I don't want to buy a whole new motherboard to run a cpu.


----------



## Mr. Extreme 60 (Oct 23, 2018)

My Lenovo Z510 Benchmark 



 . 

 .


----------



## fusseli (Nov 13, 2018)

Can't seem to hit 600 sc, got 575 or so at 5.1-5.2 but it's not 24/7 stable there


----------



## Mussels (Nov 13, 2018)

stock result with 2700x and DDR4 3200


----------



## dj-electric (Nov 13, 2018)

Currently experimenting with the fresh 9980XE. 
For use reasons i'm trying to find a nice and versatile balance between gaming and working.
Having so many cores is kind of a playground for ideas.

Currently a 10C\10T config seems very capable. I reached some sort of a buffed up Skylake config at 5Ghz. STIM and die size allows proper cooling using an X62.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Nov 13, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Currently experimenting with the fresh 9980XE.


Wish I had one lol, that looks interesting, Near 600 single thread is crazy. Looks like I'm saving for one in this case, how's the STIM working?


----------



## dj-electric (Nov 13, 2018)

Don't... buy that CPU. You had enough expensive fun with your LGA2066 suited quad-core. A fresh take on this socket for upgrades will be upgraded 8-core part, i7 9800X.

STIM working much better than expected on my chip, as i'm able to fully squeeze a 10C\10T 5Ghz  operation under 75c.
1.30v Vcore.


----------



## er557 (Nov 13, 2018)

As cpuz 1.87 is out, let's rejuvenate this thread with the new avx2 benchmark results, should be interesting


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Nov 15, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Don't... buy that CPU. You had enough expensive fun with your LGA2066 suited quad-core.


Not expensive at all : ) - I was waiting for the skylake-x refresh though I'm tempted by the 7900x / 7980xe and I'm holding out to see overclocking results vs first gen. I couldn't care less about STIM or no STIM I've got my delid stuff still anyways.


----------



## nomdeplume (Nov 16, 2018)

New best scores on everything but mt ratio.  Fairly sure if I tried a little harder I could get mt score at least a little closer to the nearly 20 point single thread jump I saw.









Previous best score in 1.85.0.  Followed by an update now that I noticed there is an AVX bench.


----------



## rodrigox (Dec 4, 2018)

i5 8600k @ 5Ghz


----------



## rodrigox (Dec 6, 2018)

Lost 2 or 3 points on the single bench moving from 1803 to 1809 win 10. Anybody else?


----------



## wzrd (Dec 7, 2018)

i5-6400@4.6GHz + DDR3-2266 Samsung + Windows 7 SP1 + updates


----------



## dylricho (Dec 16, 2018)

rodrigox said:


> Lost 2 or 3 points on the single bench moving from 1803 to 1809 win 10. Anybody else?



Well within the margin of error. The benchmark is identical between versions 1.79 and 1.87.

---------

Soo ... I've been away, focusing on my degree for the past couple of months. I see there's a new version of CPU-Z, and a new benchmark accompanying it.

I've updated the graphs so that everyone who posted since my last visit has now been added. New separate graphs also exist for both CPU-Z 1.87 benchmarks. All graphs are available from the links within my signature.

In the meantime, I feel like I obtained a completely new system, even though I simply replaced a few parts. A new case, new power supply and a graphics card. The only thing left to get is an SSD. The old power supply was absolute garbage and I couldn't have gotten rid of it sooner. Suddenly, overclocks on this system aren't complete ass, although from what I've seen, the Richland APU overclocked better. It seems like 4.60 GHz is all I can get out of this, and there isn't much headroom with the BCLK now that I'm using a graphics card. The Richland APU played well with a 113 MHz BCLK, and a > 4,800 MHz core clock.

Here are my results for versions 1.86, 1.87 SSE2 and 1.87 AVX2.

*CPU-Z 1.86 @ stock*


*CPU-Z 1.86 @ 4.50 GHz*


*CPU-Z 1.86 @ 4.60 GHz*


*CPU-Z 1.87 SSE2 @ stock*


*CPU-Z 1.87 SSE2 @ 4.50 GHz*


*CPU-Z 1.87 SSE2 @ 4.60 GHz*


*CPU-Z 1.87 AVX2 @ stock*


*CPU-Z 1.87 AVX2 @ 4.50 GHz*


*CPU-Z 1.87 AVX2 @ 4.60 GHz*


----------



## jaggerwild (Dec 16, 2018)

5930@4428
CPU-Z 1.81




4428 on 1.87


----------



## dylricho (Dec 16, 2018)

Added. 

I'm going to play around with some older versions, just to see how Godavari compares to Richland, given they are almost identical frequency-wise. Usually Richland comes out on top though, for some reason.


----------



## Tomgang (Dec 16, 2018)

Got my hands in new Asus laptop with a i5-8250U cpu in it.


----------



## dylricho (Dec 16, 2018)

Added.


----------



## dylricho (Dec 18, 2018)

Wellp... I tried older versions of CPU-Z to compare against the other results.

No matter how hard I try, I can't get past 4.60 GHz with a much better power supply. The "trash" power supply handled the A8-6600K at 4.80 GHz, and even briefly at 5.00 GHz under light usage. I guess Kaveri/Godavari just doesn't overclock as well, which is a shame.

Granted, the results show that Steamroller doesn't need those clocks to perform better, but when clocked identically, it's actually quite hard for Steamroller to give better results than Piledriver in this specific SSE2 test. Interesting.

5,235 pts is the highest I can achieve*** without tinkering with the BCLK, which puts the A10-7890K roughly 8% behind a Core i5-2500K at stock.





***
CPU-Z 1.78
CPU @ 4.60 GHz (+ 0.048 V offset; can use stock voltage for 4.50 GHz)
NB @ 2,000 MHz (+ 0.024 V offset; can use stock voltage for 1,900 MHz)
My RAM is not overclockable (Kingston ValueRAM), hence the move to an RX 460.


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 18, 2018)




----------



## Gorstak (Dec 23, 2018)

perhaps bottlenecker is right at saying RAM bottlenecks cpus?


----------



## dylricho (Dec 25, 2018)

Gorstak said:


> perhaps bottlenecker is right at saying RAM bottlenecks cpus?



The gains will drop off after 8 GiB of RAM.

It's just because 4 GiB is basically pushing it with 64-bit Windows and an integrated GPU.

---

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to you all.


----------



## MartinClay (Dec 26, 2018)

Here is my bench , what you think?


----------



## mikalo (Dec 27, 2018)




----------



## tylee96 (Dec 29, 2018)




----------



## Devil1950 (Dec 29, 2018)

And me


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jan 1, 2019)

5.3Ghz 9700K


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 1, 2019)

Outback Bronze said:


> 5.3Ghz 9700K
> 
> View attachment 113821



gotta update ur specs... also what size rad are you using?:


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jan 1, 2019)

phanbuey said:


> gotta update ur specs... also what size rad are you using?:



This is just a bench rig. No need to update specs atm.

280mm with 2x140mm fans pushing through rad. Ambient was 24°C


----------



## nomdeplume (Jan 10, 2019)

Previous post in here with CPUZ 1.87 produced a single core number within easy tolerance of what I'm still seeing.  

Multicore... 91 points better.

Which is to say I figured out how to maximize this bench score on my PC and could probably get that up to a round 100 with repeated attempts.


----------



## tstr7119 (Jan 22, 2019)

Core i9 9900k @ 5,7 GHz 8C/8T , also runs stable @ 5,4GHz 8C/16T. Was hoping to breach 700 points single thread, but coulnd get her to run stable at 5,8Ghz


----------



## tstr7119 (Jan 28, 2019)

Just FYI the same CPU at 5,4GHz with 8C/16T


----------



## ArbitraryAffection (Jan 28, 2019)

tstr7119 said:


> View attachment 115249Just FYI the same CPU at 5,4GHz with 8C/16T


That is absolutely mental. 5.7 Ghz. with just 8 threads you are matching my 2700X at stock with 16 threads.  Madness.

I ran all three benches of the new CPUz version on my 2700X completely stock on B450 motherboard with 3000 MHz C16 ram.





Meow.


----------



## tstr7119 (Jan 28, 2019)

ArbitraryAffection said:


> That is absolutely mental. 5.7 Ghz. with just 8 threads you are matching my 2700X at stock with 16 threads.  Madness.
> 
> I ran all three benches of the new CPUz version on my 2700X completely stock on B450 motherboard with 3000 MHz C16 ram.
> View attachment 115253
> ...



Its hardly fair to compare though, i9 9900k is twice the price and running at 158% of stock using a phase change cooler @-40 degrees celsius


----------



## ArbitraryAffection (Jan 28, 2019)

tstr7119 said:


> Its hardly fair to compare though, i9 9900k is twice the price and running at 158% of stock using a phase change cooler @-40 degrees celsius


True but it's still pretty awesome from a nerdy point of view.


----------



## Deleted member 185658 (Feb 21, 2019)

Anyone know why the CPUZ validator results are so off? The 4770k scores less than a pentium 4 and my locked 4770 scores 200 points higher than a locked 4770 and beats the 6700 in single threaded?


----------



## dorsetknob (Feb 21, 2019)

Probably because of under the hood tuning has altered the benchmark
test again with older version  or test with a P4 for comparison


----------



## mapnam charun (Mar 7, 2019)

xeon e3-1230 v2 stock


----------



## overvolted (Mar 7, 2019)

Not sure what it proves, but here's what I have...I'll probably get 10 years out of this processor. Just like my old i7-920 I've had since its release. LOL


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Mar 17, 2019)

6600k delidded @ 4.8ghz 1.36v


----------



## cucaracha777 (Mar 18, 2019)

Just installed 9700k! Awesome.


----------



## Darmok N Jalad (Mar 20, 2019)

Brace yourselves for J4105:


----------



## micropage7 (Mar 20, 2019)




----------



## Ibotibo01 (Mar 20, 2019)




----------



## Deleted member 163934 (Mar 27, 2019)

Intel Pentium G3260:




Intel i5 3320M:




AMD Athlon II x4 640:




AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+:





Later I will see if I can get the results for AMD Athlon x2 5400B (for 17.01.64 results should be something like single thread 102, multi thread 209, if i remember right it kinda scaled linear). I no longer have access to AMD Sempron 145...


----------



## Chomiq (Mar 27, 2019)

*plays sad trombone in the background*


----------



## wally_1973 (Apr 20, 2019)

Ah new versions benches .. Bought this CPU on Ali a year ago, for really cheap. It is stock btw, won't overclock a darn thang.


----------



## EvOlViOlEnCe (Apr 24, 2019)




----------



## wally_1973 (Apr 27, 2019)




----------



## TheUnbrained (Jul 11, 2019)

After switching Mainboards - From Sapphire Pure Black X79N to an Asus Rampage 4 IV Extreme.
I need to apologize to my CPU cause it is much more capable than i thought ... xD


----------



## azngreentea01 (Jul 12, 2019)

My new Cpu R9 3900x


----------



## Vlada011 (Jul 12, 2019)

AMD R9-3900 is better CPU then Intel 9900K. Who say opposite is abnormal person.
Advantage of i9-9900K need only to people who buy i3 for surfing on internet and playing Java games.
If I need to gave up for 3000 points in multi threaded applications because 500 points in single threaded applications then I don't need such platform at all and I should buy i3 processors and not Z390 chipset.
With this kind of power higher resolution mean less difference in fps between Intel and AMD.
If some new game show up and use 6-8 CPU Cores and you play on 4K there is a chance to AMD give you higher fps.
But in games 2012-2015 on 1080p Intel is little faster.


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 12, 2019)

Vlada011 said:


> If I need to gave up for 3000 points in multi threaded applications because 500 points in single threaded applications then I don't need such platform at all and I should buy i3 processors and not Z390 chipset.


No.


Vlada011 said:


> If some new game show up and use 6-8 CPU Cores and you play on 4K there is a chance to AMD give you higher fps.


No again.

9900K has 8c/16t and faster clocks so it will not be faster at 4K. How would it 'slow down' when its faster at a more CPU bound res? The difference between the CPUs shrinks, yes, but suddenly the intel doesn't become slower. 

Now, maybe if the game uses MORE than 8c/16t would the AMD perform better, but so long as games are using less than 16t, which 99% do and will for the next few years, AMD is still a few percent behind.

Man... you are all over AMD's tip....between the ESL and knowledge gap...........


----------



## trog100 (Jul 12, 2019)

cores are a bit like memory.. buying more than you need or use is a waste of money.. 

16 gigs of memory is plenty enough for gaming pretty much like 6 cores is plenty enough for gaming.. 

trog


----------



## azngreentea01 (Jul 12, 2019)

trog100 said:


> cores are a bit like memory.. buying more than you need or use is a waste of money..
> 
> 16 gigs of memory is plenty enough for gaming pretty much like 6 cores is plenty enough for gaming..
> 
> trog



Nah man, 16 Gb is the past, Now you got to do 32GB. LOL  JK


----------



## Vlada011 (Jul 12, 2019)

It's not true, difference between AMD and Intel is very small 2-3% in games.
Special because Intel platform suffer from Spectre and Meltdown and lost significant speed because of that. 
Only chance for Intel is to beat AMD 12 cores with their 10 core CPU because extremely high boost.
But they need miracle to change that. That's 5.2-5.3GHz speed for all cores. 
Off course Intel platform need and PCI-E 4.0 because OS last several years depend of PCI-E Interface not SATA III any more.


----------



## mouacyk (Jul 12, 2019)

need. PCI-e 4.0. 

go read the TPU review (hint conclusion)

NVMe at least provided a decent uplift in random IOPS over Sata3.


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 13, 2019)

I am going for the R7-3700X for my Asrock AB350M Pro4, 2 more cores and a little more speed per core is a nice  affordable upgrade.  I also  expect  a little bump on  my memory speed for  it's  spec't at 3000mhz but running at 2666 (4 cheap G-Skill aegis 8Gb 3000mhz dimms).


----------



## MrGRiMv25 (Jul 13, 2019)

Here's my old Xeon at 3.8Ghz, not too shabby...


----------



## trog100 (Jul 13, 2019)

9900k at 4.8..   core voltage 1.200..






trog


----------



## freeagent (Jul 13, 2019)

My crusty 3770K


----------



## Filip Georgievski (Jul 17, 2019)

My X3460 overclocked to 3.8Ghz


----------



## jesdals (Jul 20, 2019)

My 3800x scores


----------



## TWK_OCZ (Jul 20, 2019)

*Core i5 8600k @ 5.26 GHz*


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 23, 2019)

jesdals said:


> My 3800x scores
> View attachment 127282View attachment 127283View attachment 127284View attachment 127285


Is this an overclock or is this a stock boost moment?


----------



## jesdals (Jul 23, 2019)

wally_1973 said:


> Is this an overclock or is this a stock boost moment?


Using PBO but no overclock



Did a new - PC just turn on - cooling is king on these cpus


----------



## biffzinker (Jul 23, 2019)

Got say there is a definitely a noticeable uptick in responsiveness in Windows, and Firefox over the 2600X.


----------



## Wavetrex (Jul 24, 2019)

jesdals said:


> Using PBO but no overclock
> View attachment 127576
> Did a new - PC just turn on - cooling is king on these cpus


What sorcery is this ?
I'm barely getting 520 (and that is absolute max) with very fast DDR3600-CL16 memory on 3700X with PBO+AutoOC +200 on a 3700X, and up to ~5550 or so on multi.

Hmm, let me guess
Room AC set to 17 degrees and max fan speed ?


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 25, 2019)

Wavetrex said:


> What sorcery is this ?
> I'm barely getting 520 (and that is absolute max) with very fast DDR3600-CL16 memory on 3700X with PBO+AutoOC +200 on a 3700X, and up to ~5550 or so on multi.
> 
> Hmm, let me guess
> Room AC set to 17 degrees and max fan speed ?


Maybe older AGESA version? There are updates in microcode that influence boost behavior. It is also very depending on motherboard, cooling etc.  X570 is scoring 2-4% better on average.


----------



## BATOFF3 (Jul 25, 2019)




----------



## Deleted member 171912 (Jul 25, 2019)




----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 26, 2019)

First run with the new Ryzen. Voltages on stock are very high I think. 1.5V seems very high.. but it's got an 14nm IO chip, so I dont know what to think of it. Memory works as spec. Not the latest AGESA.


----------



## Athlonite (Jul 26, 2019)

wally_1973 said:


> First run with the new Ryzen. Voltages on stock are very high I think. *1.5V seems very high*.. but it's got an 14nm IO chip, so I dont know what to think of it. Memory works as spec. Not the latest AGESA.



That's because it is high it's a 65W CPU you shouldn't be needing more than 1.35V at stock Boost speeds at the Volts you're running you'll probably kill the VRM on your B350 before you kill the CPU

Did Asrock go backwards with the AGESA version as BIOS version 5.50 says AGESA 1.0.0.6 but with 5.90 it's 1.0.0.1


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 26, 2019)

Found the boost button..


----------



## biffzinker (Jul 26, 2019)

Athlonite said:


> AGESA 1.0.0.6 but with 5.90 it's 1.0.0.1


The AGESA v1.0.0.1 microcode is only for Matisse. Pinnacle Ridge has it's own separate AGESA microcode 1.0.0.6. That's why MSI had difficulty with the 16 MB ROM chip.


----------



## Metroid (Jul 26, 2019)

The best I could do without exceeding the 1.44v danger limit. Stock cooler.

More here : https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/ryzen-3600.257635/

Also if you have a msi am4 motherboard + ryzen 3xxx and plan on overclocking then you must set "AMD Overclocking", that will not let voltage to go up and down, voltage will be fixed while is in load.

Validation: 
	

	







						AMD Ryzen 5 @ 4348.99 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[e95z9s] Validated Dump by Metroid (2019-07-24 23:30:52) - MB: MSI B450 GAMING PLUS (MS-7B86) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## spectatorx (Jul 26, 2019)

Default settings, pbo enabled, bios 3.30 on x470 taichi ultimate and ram 3200MHz cl16:


----------



## jesdals (Jul 28, 2019)

Did some more testing today




My PBO was genorus today




Did one after, but forgot to save the result - did get 5735 in multi thread - but looking forward to better memory


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 28, 2019)

Metroid said:


> The best I could do without exceeding the 1.44v danger limit. Stock cooler.
> 
> More here : https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/ryzen-3600.257635/
> 
> ...


On my board the first voltage setting you'll see is a dummy it seems, no mather what I change voltages stay the same, unless I set a manual voltage and clockspeed but then no auto down- volting / clocking ( cool and quiet ).
The 3600 is the go to CPU for budget gamers I guess. Cheapest per core, best value for mony for gaming. In multithread it's faster then my Xeon e5-2680v2. Massive performance for that price. Only because upgrading from a 6 to a 6core did not feel right I took the 8 core. For gaming it is overkill.


----------



## Metroid (Jul 28, 2019)

wally_1973 said:


> On my board the first voltage setting you'll see is a dummy it seems, no mather what I change voltages stay the same, unless I set a manual voltage and clockspeed but then no auto down- volting / clocking ( cool and quiet ).
> The 3600 is the go to CPU for budget gamers I guess. Cheapest per core, best value for mony for gaming. In multithread it's faster then my Xeon e5-2680v2. Massive performance for that price. Only because upgrading from a 6 to a 6core did not feel right I took the 8 core. For gaming it is overkill.



2 things I set in the motherboard bios other than the voltages, msi b450 gaming plus, "cool and quiet" and "amd overclocking", these 2 things give me constant voltage while is in load, while in idle state, voltage will fluctuate from 1.30v to 1.53v.


----------



## DoLLo73 (Jul 29, 2019)

My old rusty 5820K@4.5Ghz with HT disable.





My not so old 2600X@4350MHz with SMT disable.


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 29, 2019)

I like the power saving mode with autovolting enabled. When in power saving mode, same as many others cpu's downclock and downvolt, it drops to 0.9V 33W 2200mhz. The CPU fan is not running, so it is very silent. But still plenty powerfull.


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 30, 2019)

Metroid said:


> 2 things I set in the motherboard bios other than the voltages, msi b450 gaming plus, "cool and quiet" and "amd overclocking", these 2 things give me constant voltage while is in load, while in idle state, voltage will fluctuate from 1.30v to 1.53v.


I want to keep the auto volting/clocking enabled, I always overclock like this since the Core and Athlon CPU's. I get the 525 / 5300 bench scores with all the auto power saving enabled and only (XFR  / PBO enabled end the max power limits filled in. For cooling still the Arctic Freezer 33 (superb cooler) also in auto rpm mode. I think the BIOS needs to mature, still. Because it's mostly on very high clocks and voltages in balanced mode. Even though it is power efficient like this, it can be way better.


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 31, 2019)

Something already changed in the background it seems, in balanced mode Cool & Quiet now works as I emagine it should.


----------



## jesdals (Aug 1, 2019)

With new bios an fixed setting at 4500MHz + PBO











Well my settings seems stable, so I did it again - gave it a notch up



Not much but at 4525MHz all cores it did give a small jump


----------



## Enterprise24 (Aug 4, 2019)

delidded 9900K @ 5.3 + normal custom loop. Room temp 28C. Nothing sub-zero.
Score is a bit weak since I mix several memory.
2x Hynix A-die (dual ranks) + 1x Hynix C-die (single rank) + 1x Micron E-die (single rank).
Will try to tweak further.


----------



## Apocalypsee (Aug 4, 2019)

My A10-9600p


----------



## jesdals (Aug 4, 2019)

My new Corsair 3600MHz kit  CMK16GX4M2B3600C18 gave some extra points



Managed to make the settings more thigt on memory


----------



## Arctucas (Aug 4, 2019)




----------



## jaggerwild (Aug 4, 2019)

Ibotibo01 said:


> View attachment 119168View attachment 119170View attachment 119169View attachment 119171View attachment 119172


LOLZ@1.760 vcore


----------



## nico_80) (Aug 4, 2019)

Here's mine.


----------



## jesdals (Aug 9, 2019)

Did some testing af 4550MHz and new improved score


----------



## TommyT (Aug 11, 2019)




----------



## PooPipeBoy (Aug 16, 2019)

Haswell still hanging in there with single-core performance. Running a one-click automatic overclock at 4.2GHz.


----------



## sam_86314 (Aug 16, 2019)

My main PC with PBO off and -0.1v Vcore offset. Seems to aim for 4.1-4.15GHz on all cores.






My laptop.


----------



## johnny-r (Aug 16, 2019)

cheers ! 

;~)


----------



## biffzinker (Aug 16, 2019)




----------



## mx62 (Aug 16, 2019)

my old timer...


----------



## Dinnercore (Aug 16, 2019)

mx62 said:


> my old timer...



Oldtimer? I´ll show you an oldtimer, my lovely E8500:





That is Wolfdale pushed to the edge on 'ambient' cooling (Mo-Ra3 in front of an open window, ~ 10°C water).


----------



## mx62 (Aug 16, 2019)

Dinnercore said:


> Oldtimer? I´ll show you an oldtimer, my lovely E8500:
> 
> View attachment 129374
> 
> That is Wolfdale pushed to the edge on 'ambient' cooling (Mo-Ra3 in front of an open window, ~ 10°C water).


yeah thats old 
2008 cpu running 5Ghz 24/7?
way to go intel


----------



## 1986nath (Aug 16, 2019)




----------



## Dinnercore (Aug 16, 2019)

mx62 said:


> yeah thats old
> 2008 cpu running 5Ghz 24/7?
> way to go intel



No these are not 24/7 settings, it would not survive that with ambient temps. I stick with 1.5V max on these for 24/7, but I don´t run them that much any more. Just for a few benches and on my retro games machine.


----------



## PooPipeBoy (Aug 17, 2019)

Dinnercore said:


> Oldtimer? I´ll show you an oldtimer, my lovely E8500:
> 
> That is Wolfdale pushed to the edge on 'ambient' cooling (Mo-Ra3 in front of an open window, ~ 10°C water).



The Core 2 Duos were great overclockers, but 5.0GHz on water is just nuts.
I have an E8400 in storage that I got for $8 and it did 4.2GHz stable on a cheapie tower cooler, it was a nice chip but I ditched it for a Xeon E5450.



Spoiler: E8400 at 4.2GHz on air


----------



## johnny-r (Aug 17, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> View attachment 129371


wow, we are so close !


----------



## Voltaj .45 ACP (Aug 17, 2019)




----------



## bissag (Aug 17, 2019)

everything @ default pbo level 3


----------



## Enterprise24 (Aug 17, 2019)

Dinnercore said:


> Oldtimer? I´ll show you an oldtimer, my lovely E8500:
> 
> View attachment 129374
> 
> That is Wolfdale pushed to the edge on 'ambient' cooling (Mo-Ra3 in front of an open window, ~ 10°C water).



Very impressive especially that singlethread performance.


----------



## Dinnercore (Aug 17, 2019)

Enterprise24 said:


> Very impressive especially that singlethread performance.



Yeah I was surprised that it scaled so well, at that speed it is close to current gen stuff at stock speed.

I ran CPUZ on my current build too:






Maybe I should start pushing it just a bit more


----------



## freeagent (Aug 17, 2019)

Vcore is getting up there, next stop is a bit over 1.5v


----------



## mx62 (Aug 17, 2019)

freeagent said:


> Vcore is getting up there, next stop is a bit over 1.5v
> 
> View attachment 129452


1.4v plus on that cpu will cause severe degradation, please remember


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 17, 2019)

With new BIOS, PBO and XMP enabled. First boot succesfull.
Performance: OK. Time to game!


----------



## freeagent (Aug 17, 2019)

mx62 said:


> 1.4v plus on that cpu will cause severe degradation, please remember



Indeed, its just for a few minutes, trying to keep up with them AMD boys   

Not working too well!


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Aug 29, 2019)

4.7ghz, HT off, 1.21v in BIOS. No delid, silent loop 280mm.


----------



## NoJuan999 (Sep 14, 2019)

Optimized Default Setttings in BIOS except for DOCP (XMP) Profile applied to RAM.


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 14, 2019)

NoJuan999 said:


> Optimized Default Setttings in BIOS except for DOCP (XMP) Profile applied to RAM.
> Snip


Look out, I might catch up to you.


----------



## Voltaj .45 ACP (Sep 14, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> Look out, I might catch up to you.
> View attachment 131870


what is your mobo?i remember 525 single on asus prime pro x470 with 3700x but now its 510 on asus rog strix-e x570.i couldn't understand why?it's agesa 1.0.0.2 bios on x470.now it's way more new bios but useless.


----------



## Athlonite (Sep 15, 2019)

Voltaj .45 ACP said:


> what is your mobo?i remember 525 single on asus prime pro x470 with 3700x but now its 510 on asus rog strix-e x570.i couldn't understand why?it's agesa 1.0.0.2 bios on x470.now it's way more new bios but useless.


Version 12012019/09/1214.72 MBytes
ROG STRIX X570-E GAMING BIOS 1201
Update AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA to improve system performance

seems it has an updated BIOS which is AGESA 1003abba now


----------



## Voltaj .45 ACP (Sep 15, 2019)

Athlonite said:


> Version 12012019/09/1214.72 MBytes
> ROG STRIX X570-E GAMING BIOS 1201
> Update AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA to improve system performance
> 
> seems it has an updated BIOS which is AGESA 1003abba now


no way we're using same board with same bios.new improvements will come.this board does not get 509 points.


----------



## Athlonite (Sep 15, 2019)

Voltaj .45 ACP said:


> no way we're using same board with same bios.new improvements will come.this board does not get 509 points.



yeah it might be helpful to all of us if you actually fill your system specs in your profile so we know which hardware you are running 

and if you are using the asus prime x470 pro your mobo also has an updated bios giving you the 1.0.0.3ABBA Agesa


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 15, 2019)

Recently updated to 0702 on my X299 Omega and tuned RAM to 2666 @ 1.33v, got a seriously nice boost! : )


----------



## jesdals (Sep 16, 2019)

Did som pretesting before upgrading bios from F5I to latest F7a












cant get memory stable past 3666mhz so Infinity maxed out at 1833Mhz

Did a second run




First run with F7a bios


----------



## Voltaj .45 ACP (Sep 16, 2019)

Athlonite said:


> yeah it might be helpful to all of us if you actually fill your system specs in your profile so we know which hardware you are running
> 
> and if you are using the asus prime x470 pro your mobo also has an updated bios giving you the 1.0.0.3ABBA Agesa


hey are you spying on me? yes i have asus prime pro x470 on second system but there is ABB bios just installed and i couln't saw new one.in first system x570 strix-e and installed ABBA it's good.what's system specs?we're using signature on donanimhaber but i don't think no one cares my specs here.NVM found it.


----------



## NoJuan999 (Sep 16, 2019)

@ Voltaj .45 ACP
I Love the system name you chose: "Revenge of the Strix" !!!


----------



## sam_86314 (Sep 17, 2019)

Did some experimentation on my old PC. I set it to OC to 4.3GHz under a single core load, 4.2GHz under two cores, 4.1GHz under three, and 4.0GHz under an all-core load.






Wondering if I'll finally be able to get past 4.3GHz on one core using this method.


----------



## Tralalak (Sep 17, 2019)

*VIA QuadCore C4650 2.0GHz





*


----------



## Voltaj .45 ACP (Sep 17, 2019)

NoJuan999 said:


> @ Voltaj .45 ACP
> I Love the system name you chose: "Revenge of the Strix" !!!


Pink Ryzen: a cine20 in the dark. i'm movie maniac but esp. pick star wars.thank you.


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 17, 2019)

Voltaj .45 ACP said:


> Pink Ryzen: a cine20 in the dark. i'm movie maniac but esp. pick star wars.thank you.



I miss peter sellers movies...  going to have to watch revenge of the pink ryzen for a nostalgia itch now.


----------



## wally_1973 (Sep 22, 2019)

Waiting for the 1.0.0.3ABBA Agesa for my ASrock AB350 M Pro4, still having bootcrashes in Win and max boost at 4320mhz.


----------



## Enterprise24 (Sep 24, 2019)




----------



## wally_1973 (Sep 29, 2019)

Little manual OC 44x 1.375v consuming 120w.
No cool & quiet unfortunetly.


----------



## Voltaj .45 ACP (Sep 29, 2019)

my 4.4 ghz


----------



## Dinnercore (Oct 6, 2019)

Been pushing my 2500k a bit and settled on this for daily use as a secondary system: 








						Intel Core i5 2500K @ 4900.61 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[cegsbd] Validated Dump by Osmium-OC (2019-10-06 17:51:51) - MB: Gigabyte Z77X-UP7 - RAM: 8192 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				








I wonder how much further I can go before I cause serious degradation. Gonna have some fun gaming on this old platform and then push it either into thermal limit or voltage death, whichever comes first  (current temp @ 1.4V ~52°C under constant full load)


----------



## Dinnercore (Oct 10, 2019)

Sorry for double posting, but I already have an updated score:







I couldn´t bring myself to torture it further. Load temps around 67°C @ 1.6V. I already did not like to run 1.6V on my C2Ds with ambient water, and this 32nm chip is probably not enjoying anything past 1.6V on ambient temps either. As much as I would have liked to see some higher numbers, this is as far as my sample will go.

538 Single Thread, not too bad for Sandy Bridge. Now im back down on 4850 / 1.38V.









						Intel Core i5 2500K @ 5300.66 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[9iltcr] Validated Dump by Osmium-OC (2019-10-10 03:19:24) - MB: Gigabyte Z77X-UP7 - RAM: 8192 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## phill (Oct 10, 2019)

That is a seriously lovely CPU!!    Great work @Dinnercore !!


----------



## Gavrilla (Oct 11, 2019)

9700K test on IX Extreme  with B8 Microcode


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 11, 2019)

that score is actually insane.


----------



## biffzinker (Oct 11, 2019)

phanbuey said:


> that score is actually insane.


Impressive for no SMT.


----------



## Dinnercore (Nov 2, 2019)

Those first gen Threadripper CPUs are a bit more capable then I thought. I was thinking at ~1.35V I can´t expect any more than 4GHz (the first gen ryzen frequency-wall).





Seems like I was wrong, only the RAM is holding me back a bit. I´m done with stability testing for today, 4.1GHz on 1.35V (1.36V during load with LLC) is stable. And I still have the early reviews stuck in my head, where reviewers struggled to achieve 4GHz all core stable due to high temps, setting voltages to 1.40 up to 1.45...
Sometimes a little less goes a long way. 

Only my temp sensors seem to bug out, either that or Afterburner has problems. 




It´s the same on my Vega with the memory temp:



Slightly above the melting point of Iron and a little bit below the melting point of Titanium. I knew the HBM could get hot, but that is impressive.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Nov 2, 2019)

Gavrilla said:


> 9700K test on IX Extreme with B8 Microcode


What clock speed is that / voltage?


----------



## phanbuey (Nov 2, 2019)

pretty sure it's fake unless he's running ~6.3-6.5Ghz


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Nov 2, 2019)

phanbuey said:


> pretty sure it's fake unless he's running ~6.3-6.5Ghz


Doubt it's fake, it'll have to be at 5.5-5.8 for that level of single thread.


----------



## Voltaj .45 ACP (Nov 3, 2019)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Doubt it's fake, it'll have to be at 5.5-5.8 for that level of single thread.


at first message?oh c'mon..


----------



## TxGrin (Nov 3, 2019)

i9-9900KS and 5.3Ghz at stock voltage









						Intel Core i9 @ 5302.86 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[cs4dc6] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-SLI (2019-11-03 15:48:39) - MB: Gigabyte Z390 AORUS MASTER-CF - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Nov 3, 2019)

TxGrin said:


> i9-9900KS and 5.3Ghz at stock voltage
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nice validation there!! How does it do with the Cpu-Z benchmark??


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Nov 3, 2019)

Voltaj .45 ACP said:


> at first message?oh c'mon..


That score is unbelievable - for all you know it could be under a chiller, jealousy is no reason to doubt. But it could be "fake" too but it doesn't mean it's not possible.


----------



## TxGrin (Nov 3, 2019)

ShrimpBrime said:


> Nice validation there!! How does it do with the Cpu-Z benchmark??



The benchmark is here









						CPU-Z Benchmark for Intel Core i9-9900KS (1T) - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

Best CPU performance - 64-bit - December 2022




					valid.x86.fr
				






TxGrin said:


> The benchmark is here
> 
> 
> 
> ...


picture is when i was testing stress test at 5.2Ghz, 5.3 was stable but i haven't tried to up the core voltage to try higher

I just use a

*Hydro Series™ H115i RGB PLATINUM 280mm Liquid CPU Cooler*


----------



## E-curbi (Nov 3, 2019)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> That score is unbelievable - for all you know it could be under a chiller, jealousy is no reason to doubt. But it could be "fake" too but it doesn't mean it's not possible.



That's a very BIG Single Thread score for a 9700K. *I got 635 CPUZ single-thread at 5.4Ghz 6c12t. Believe that's fairly standard for 5.4Ghz.*

But 756? 

Doesn't make sense really because HWiNFO64 ALWAYS RECORDS your highest single core or multi core setting in bios as CPU Turbo, *and his is reading 4900Mhz,* which obviously would not give you 756. lol

I could run the CPUZ ST bench at 5.5 and 5.6, but I doubt it would reach 756. 

....Don't look at my multicore, I'm all set up for ST work, so my MT is shameful. 





CPU-Z single thread bench seems to increase by 20 unit points for every 100Mhz at least for Coffee Lake and Coffee Lake-R.

So:
5.0Ghz will score 556
5.1Ghz will score 576
5.2Ghz will score 596
5.3Ghz will score 616
5.4Ghz will score 636
5.5Ghz will score 656
5.6Ghz will score 676 (my screenshot below)

The Chiller Zone:
5.7Ghz will score 696
5.8Ghz will score 716
5.9Ghz will score 736
6.0Ghz will score 756

Conclusion: That 756 score of the 9700K CPU above is most likely running at 6.0Ghz with a chiller.  Do I win a prize? 

Here’s my CPU-Z single thread bench score at 5.6Ghz - 676.8. That's fast like Speedy Gonzales.


----------



## Voltaj .45 ACP (Nov 4, 2019)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> That score is unbelievable - for all you know it could be under a chiller, jealousy is no reason to doubt. But it could be "fake" too but it doesn't mean it's not possible.


so fifty fifty then?not worth to talk.i could be alien it's 50/50.don't turn this to schrödinger's cat i'm terrible at quantum physics.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Nov 4, 2019)

E-curbi said:


> That's a very BIG Single Thread score for a 9700K. *I got 635 CPUZ single-thread at 5.4Ghz 6c12t. Believe that's fairly standard for 5.4Ghz.*
> 
> But 756?
> 
> ...


This reminds me, this little 7640X thread was an interesting read:








						Mini Extreme Benching i5-7640X @ 5.9Ghz+ with Phase Change
					

สวัสดีครับ วันนี้กระผมนาย Audigy มีผลการทดสอบแบบ Mini Extreme Benchmark ด้วย CPU Intel Core i5-7640X 4C/4T [Kabylake-X 14nm.] Socket LGA-2066 ที่ระบายความร้อนด้วยด้วย Single Stage Phase Change จากท…




					www.clockemup.com


----------



## phill (Nov 4, 2019)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> This reminds me, this little 7640X thread was an interesting read:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I remember a little about the phase units, had a little devil one for a while but never really got into using it so much..  Last time I played with one was with my cherry picked 4770k.... Been a while now


----------



## Hnykill22 (Nov 4, 2019)




----------



## E-curbi (Nov 4, 2019)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> This reminds me, this little 7640X thread was an interesting read:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Fairly certain all (or most) higher binned 8700K/8086K processors and 9700K/9900K(S) processors can hit 6.0Ghz with a chiller. This (screenshot below) an engineering friend of mine when he first received his 8086K. He had a chiller set up with extended tubing so the unit and all that lovely chiller noise was (2) rooms away - with a buffer area to dissipate the noise from his computer room/home office.

He said he loved the extended frame rates that 6.0Ghz offered when gaming. lolol 

I've never used any cooling method other than Noctua ambient air, but our 8086Ks both came from the same binning sample from SL.com binned at 5.3Ghz. So I guess mine could also reach those higher chiller clock speeds.

I just won't push the 8086K that far while I'm still relying on it as my primary part to complete work. NON-replaceable at this point in time - well kinda.* 9900K(S) won't do 5.4 or 5.5 or 5.6 on air.*

Stinks sometimes having so many restrictions on high performance parts because I'm using them in a home office scenario, but it is what it is.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 4, 2019)

E-curbi said:


> Fairly certain all (or most) higher binned 8700K/8086K processors and 9700K/9900K(S) processors can hit 6.0Ghz with a chiller.


Jesus, this shit again? 

How many times /day will I look at my avatar and laugh?


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Nov 14, 2019)

E-curbi said:


> Fairly certain all (or most) higher binned 8700K/8086K processors and 9700K/9900K(S) processors can hit 6.0Ghz with a chiller. This (screenshot below) an engineering friend of mine when he first received his 8086K. He had a chiller set up with extended tubing so the unit and all that lovely chiller noise was (2) rooms away - with a buffer area to dissipate the noise from his computer room/home office.
> 
> He said he loved the extended frame rates that 6.0Ghz offered when gaming. lolol
> 
> ...



Using a single stage maybe 6ghz but not likely chilled liquid. Im breaking 5.5ghz chilled, 5.2ghz at best ambient liquid.


----------



## E-curbi (Nov 14, 2019)

ShrimpBrime said:


> Using a single stage maybe 6ghz but not likely chilled liquid. Im breaking 5.5ghz chilled, 5.2ghz at best ambient liquid.



An engineering friend of mine sent this screenshot below to me saying his 8086K was running 6.0Ghz 6c6t using a chiller and a Maximus XI Apex board.

I have no reason not to believe him.

I do know his 8086K was also binned at 5.3Ghz and delidded - a golden CPU.

Can run mine on air at 5.5 6cores 12threads and 5.6 6cores 6threads (disabling hyperthreading) for completing benchmarks. As a daily completing work, I keep it at 5.4Ghz 6c12t ddr4 at 4400Mhz 16-16-16-34, the memory overclock and 10microsecond low latency Optane drive more than make up for the 5.5 to 5.4 100Mhz loss in CPU clock speed.

I don't own a chiller.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Nov 14, 2019)

Why is 5.3ghz a golden cpu. Almost all the 8000 series chips do this frequency.
My 8700k is running 5.2ghz vcore on auto.

So. What is water delta and load temps on 5.6ghz not chilled?


----------



## E-curbi (Nov 14, 2019)

ShrimpBrime said:


> Why is 5.3ghz a golden cpu. Almost all the 8000 series chips do this frequency.
> My 8700k is running 5.2ghz vcore on auto.
> 
> So. What is water delta and load temps on 5.6ghz not chilled?



5.3Ghz was the highest clock speed to pass the siliconlottery.com battery of stability tests, so that's how he sold them. Der8auer and 8-Pack also offered binned/tested 8086Ks tested at 5.2, yet not 5.3.

Yes, I realize a 5.3Ghz tested CPU will run at a higher frequency.

8700Ks at 5.3 top 4%, 8086K at 5.3 top 15%. I believe everyone uses the term golden CPU or cherry-picked CPU.


----------



## Crowley (Nov 14, 2019)

I am not doing anything crazy with OC. Just have Enchanced Core turned on for 4.7GHZ on all cores


----------



## E-curbi (Nov 14, 2019)

Crowley said:


> I am not doing anything crazy with OC. Just have Enchanced Core turned on for 4.7GHZ on all cores
> 
> 
> View attachment 136467View attachment 136468




Try going manual and a simple 5.0Ghz all core OC for your 8700K. You might like it. 

Then try a simple 5.1Ghz ... and so on, and 5.2Ghz and so forth.

*Copy and Paste and Print this page if you want, and Happy Overclocking!!! *

This is Der8auer's 8700K overclocking step by step. He wrote it for ROG boards but can be easily adapted to other motherboards.


These settings are for the Asus bios. Der8auer does not say this but you can tell by his default settings he FIRST set bios to "Load Optimized Defaults" and applied/saved out and then rebooted back into bios.

1-Ai Overclock Tuner to XMP, then select NO to all core enhancement in the Notice window. Apply by saving out of bios and reboot back into bios and make sure your memory is running at your individual memory's XMP settings, in Asus bios that information is located at the right side information bar

2-Asus Multicore Enhancement to Disable

3-AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset to 3

4-CPU Core Ratio to Sync All Cores and 1-Core Ratio Limit Multiplier to 50 (for the first 5.0GHz overclock attempt). Scroll down and all 6 Cores Ratio Limit will change to 50

5-CPU SVID Support to Disable

6-Drop into External Digi+ Power Control (opens a new window) Set CPU Load-line Calibration to Der8auer says 5 or 6, I used 5. (5 seemed like a more conservative number than 6 LOL)

7-ESC out of Ext Digi+ Pwr Cntl back to the Extreme Tweaker window, select Internal Digi+ Power Control this time (opens a new window) and set Long Duration Power Limit to 55555 (4095) and Short Duration Power Limit to 55555 (4095)

8-ESC out of Int Digi+ Pwr Cntl back into the Extreme Tweaker window and set CPU Core/Cache Current Limit Max. to 55555 (255.50)

9-Min CPU Cache Ratio to 42 and Max CPU Cache Ratio to 42

10-BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage set to Disable

11-CPU Core/Cache Voltage to Manual, and for CPU Core Voltage Overide type in the value 1.350volts for your 8700K/8086K that should be good for the first 5.0Ghz overclocking run.

12-Go into Asus Overclocking Profile and save your settings in Profile 1 (if you wish). Then APPLY all these settings SAVE OUT of bios and boot into Windows

Der8auer is using Cinebench and CPUID and Core Temp to set up his stability testing screen, so I did exactly the same thing. 

Those (3) apps/programs are FREE to download.


----------



## Crowley (Nov 14, 2019)

E-curbi said:


> Try going manual and a simple 5.0Ghz all core OC for your 8700K. You might like it.
> 
> Then try a simple 5.1Ghz ... and so on, and 5.2Ghz and so forth.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the info. I will give it a try and see what I stable speeds I can achieve



E-curbi said:


> Try going manual and a simple 5.0Ghz all core OC for your 8700K. You might like it.
> 
> Then try a simple 5.1Ghz ... and so on, and 5.2Ghz and so forth.
> 
> ...



So I have now OC'd to 5.0Ghz on all cores. Results are a little bit better. About 250 higher on multi and 35 higher on single. Letting it stay at 5.0 for now to make sure it is stable

5.0 GHz








4.7GHz


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Nov 14, 2019)

So a quick question concerning binning if you dont mind..

Exactly what cooling is used for binning and would binning on that particular cooling be useful for other types of cooling?


----------



## E-curbi (Nov 14, 2019)

ShrimpBrime said:


> So a quick question concerning binning if you dont mind..
> 
> Exactly what cooling is used for binning and would binning on that particular cooling be useful for other types of cooling?



As far as I know, binning is usually standardized, where every component within the test bed is fixed, and the only variable is the CPU being tested or binned.

I don't know what Der8auer and 8-Pack use for cooling, but I know SiliconLottery.com uses 240mm CLC AIO coolers I believe by Corsair and Maximus Hero boards by Asus as the standard test bed.

The testing is more of a comparison vs an absolute, the binning is a service *just like say Gskill bins ddr4 Samsung B-die memory chips* and sells the higher performing chips as a set of modules (a kit) at a higher price.

The 3groups that I know of that bin CPUs do the same. 

Der8auer - CaseKing.de Germany

8-Pack - United Kingdom

Siliconlottery - Texas USA


@Crowley  Nice 5.0Ghz OC, great work! 

Does your rig FEEL any zippier? More responsive at 5.0 all core vs 4.7?


----------



## Crowley (Nov 14, 2019)

E-curbi said:


> @Crowley  Nice 5.0Ghz OC, great work!
> 
> Does your rig FEEL any zippier? More responsive at 5.0 all core vs 4.7?



Hard to say at this point. But I am so far stable and might go up a little and see how far I can go


----------



## E-curbi (Nov 15, 2019)

Crowley said:


> Hard to say at this point. But I am so far stable and might go up a little and see how far I can go



Good Luck bro. 

And enjoy yourself. 

...I see my work is done here.


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Nov 15, 2019)




----------



## wally_1973 (Dec 1, 2019)




----------



## Karzar (Feb 3, 2020)




----------



## Toothless (Feb 3, 2020)




----------



## Makaveli (Feb 3, 2020)




----------



## argon (Feb 4, 2020)

Toothless said:


>




you was able to lock all core on 3.3 or 3.6 ?

I was looking at those cheap xeon version of 6950x


----------



## Toothless (Feb 4, 2020)

argon said:


> you was able to lock all core on 3.3 or 3.6 ?
> 
> I was looking at those cheap xeon version of 6950x


They're all 3.1 as per spec. My board doesn't allow for pushing them further. They're also Ivy Bridge which isn't the worst, just the clocks are hurting me a bit.


----------



## Ricktheslickster (Feb 4, 2020)

My highest Bus Speed achieved              






Highest Frequency (Core Speed) Archived




Highest single thread score 






Highest Multi-Thread Score  Not being able to enjoy Hyperthreading is killing me on the Multi-Thread Score.                     







My Motherboard:





Video Card:






I need to have double ranked DIMMs per channel to get a better score, but as you can see I was able to provide tighter timing specs than what the XMP profile provides.





And my NB Frequency is looking pretty good .





My position compared to other 6 core 6 thread CPU's. I'm holding 4th place. Not bad for a non-K. I smoked those other two non(K) 86 and 8500's


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Feb 4, 2020)

Toothless said:


> They're all 3.1 as per spec. My board doesn't allow for pushing them further. They're also Ivy Bridge which isn't the worst, just the clocks are hurting me a bit.


Tho' you have 2x2680V2 in that board even so still great single score result,I did OC my 2650V2 via BCLK so it works always all cores on 3,4Ghz and boosting turbo on 3,842Ghz on my X79 Sabertooth mobo.....


----------



## Hugis (Feb 4, 2020)

Got my timings down quite a bit and the H55 is doing a nice job on cooling, also quite a bit lower vcore now  


Still life in the old dog yet !


----------



## phill (Feb 4, 2020)

Hugis said:


> Got my timings down quite a bit and the H55 is doing a nice job on cooling, also quite a bit lower vcore now
> 
> 
> Still life in the old dog yet !
> ...


That vcore is damn impressive!!  I've never seen it so low!!   0.056v!!     I'd say that Core Temp is probably reading it a little closer to the truth


----------



## Hugis (Feb 4, 2020)

phill said:


> That vcore is damn impressive!!  I've never seen it so low!!   0.056v!!     I'd say that Core Temp is probably reading it a little closer to the truth


lol it is  it was running  just over 2v before


----------



## phill (Feb 4, 2020)

Hugis said:


> lol it is  it was running  just over 2v before
> 
> View attachment 143997


Wow 2v is rather hard core    Glad it's all settled down now


----------



## Hugis (Feb 4, 2020)

phill said:


> Wow 2v is rather hard core    Glad it's all settled down now


DERP i meant 1.2V volts yep 2v is rather high,lol


----------



## phill (Feb 4, 2020)

Hugis said:


> DERP i meant 1.2V volts yep 2v is rather high,lol


It'll definitely be getting enough juice!!


----------



## Toothless (Feb 4, 2020)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Tho' you have 2x2680V2 in that board even so still great single score result,I did OC my 2650V2 via BCLK so it works always all cores on 3,4Ghz and boosting turbo on 3,842Ghz on my X79 Sabertooth mobo.....
> 
> View attachment 143985View attachment 143996


I've been wanting to go with the 2687w v2 for a long while just to somewhat hit around 3.6 all core but I don't think the cost is worth the swap out. It's still 40 threads of goodness and never gets hot so I think I did good.


----------



## nico_80) (Feb 7, 2020)

Here's everything on my rig!  



Why the laugh maybe because of smudge background hehe.


----------



## Kissamies (Feb 7, 2020)

Having all the basic crap in background, probably could get more.


----------



## nico_80) (Feb 10, 2020)

Did it again a retest fined tuned settings!


----------



## purecain (Feb 12, 2020)

Here's my 3900x going strong... this is just 24/7 with several windows open idle etc...


----------



## Rgt0007 (Feb 22, 2020)

just stock settings


----------



## TWK_OCZ (Feb 23, 2020)

*Core i5 8600k @ 5.26 GHz*


----------



## agent_x007 (Feb 23, 2020)

I think I broke it...



800MHz RDRAM 
Valid : https://valid.x86.fr/1h71ai


----------



## Rock72 (Feb 23, 2020)

Asrock Tachi X570 48gig of G.Skill 3600@3733@1.4v'


----------



## Hardi (Feb 24, 2020)

3900X PPT/EDC 90W/90A , single thread got a small boost, multicore was a little over 8400 before, so not much of a loss. 
load temp went down ~10C


----------



## Lindatje (Feb 29, 2020)




----------



## rrrrex (Mar 19, 2020)

First pic - run from WinPE
Second pic - run from Win10
What's wrong with single thread test? Also results vary with Win10, from 360 to 420.


----------



## wildone (Mar 20, 2020)

PCGamerDR said:


> 1.45v for that chip/speed seems rather high, have you tried lowering volt a bit?


 
yeah,thats something with the turbo core and extreme oc vcore settings in the bios on gigabyte boards,

P.S. sorry about 4-5 year delay on my response .


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 21, 2020)

Stock xeon non overclockable chip (times two)... but at least it turbos to 3.5GHz... I've always wanted a  CPUz screenshot like this


----------



## freeagent (Mar 22, 2020)




----------



## TWK_OCZ (Apr 19, 2020)

*Core i5 8600k @ 5.26 GHz*


----------



## rodrigox (Apr 28, 2020)

Gavrilla said:


> 9700K test on IX Extreme  with B8 Microcode



wtf? 756 single score? what clock? U wouild need like 6.3ghz to have that score

*Core i5 8600k @ 5.1 Ghz*


----------



## Ed_1 (Apr 29, 2020)

Not sure if this effects all CPU's but on my 3570k I ran the new 1,92 version and scored 472, 1872, which seemed low.
I ran older 1.90 and get 486, 1912. That pretty big change.


----------



## Fizban (Apr 29, 2020)

Here's 5 runs on 1.92:

Run 1: 456.9 3382.3
Run 2: 457.8 3373.1
Run 3: 459.8 3370.7
Run 4: 458.3 3361.7
Run 5: 458.5 3353.9
average: 458.26 3368.14

The consistent drop per run for me on multi-threaded score makes me fairly sure it's a heat related degradation.

Trying 5 runs on 1.90 now:

Run 1: 449 3340.7
Run 2: 462 3375.5
Run 3: 461.7 3369.5
Run 4: 461.3 3369.1
Run 5: 464.5 3369.1
Average: 459.7 3364.78

I'm not convinced there's much difference between versions. Just minor variation between runs.

Your runs varied by 14 single-core, 40 multi-core, mine varied by 15 single-core, 42 multi-core.


----------



## Ed_1 (Apr 29, 2020)

Fizban said:


> Here's 5 runs on 1.92:
> 
> Run 1: 456.9 3382.3
> Run 2: 457.8 3373.1
> ...


I ran it 3 more times, rebooting each time so same fresh start, I get the same avg results, always better with 1.90 than 1.92.
I run clocks at 4700mhz and I would get about the same results if I ran 1.90 at somewhere around 4500-4600mhz (closer to 4600).

PS: my temps are low, like 60-65c.


----------



## Fizban (Apr 30, 2020)

60-65 C doesn't actually strike me as particularly low for a benchmark that short, or one lacking a GPU-taxing component.

My CPU idles around 58 C, it reached 79 C during the benchmark. Still pretty cool for a laptop CPU. It's a i7-9750H that I was testing it on, so during really intensive benchmarks it's common for me to see temps that reach around 95 C.


----------



## Tomgang (Apr 30, 2020)

It´s been a while since i last posted, as i whas planning to upgrade to at Ryzen 9 3950X setup. But thanks to Covid-19 and lock down i lost my job and by that my income. I had to put it on hold sadly. But luckely X58 is still going strong and works flawless even throw i have given my old I7 980X i good beating over the last 3 years i have had it. result are done with my every day settings. Seems like it pretty much match a stock AMD Ryzen 5 1600 that is a 3 year old CPU vs. my 10 year old CPU al throw overclock.


----------



## Ed_1 (Apr 30, 2020)

Fizban said:


> 60-65 C doesn't actually strike me as particularly low for a benchmark that short, or one lacking a GPU-taxing component.
> 
> My CPU idles around 58 C, it reached 79 C during the benchmark. Still pretty cool for a laptop CPU. It's a i7-9750H that I was testing it on, so during really intensive benchmarks it's common for me to see temps that reach around 95 C.


That wasn't pertaining to CPU-Z only, as that BM is short I get like 60c, prime95 I get like 68-70 after mins of running. Either way, it's moot as I have never seen any throttling conditions with my chip, though I have not gone above 80c ever, AFAIK I would need to hit over 100c.
I will just use 1.90 so my old tests are still valid when I update to new CPU I just use the latest as it won't matter.


----------



## Arctucas (Apr 30, 2020)




----------



## Samiam66 (May 17, 2020)




----------



## freeagent (May 17, 2020)

Here one of the old girl.




Vcore is a little high, that's normally what I use to run 4500mhz, but its what I needed to pass linpack xtreme.


----------



## Dinnercore (May 24, 2020)




----------



## fusseli (Jun 1, 2020)

Stock out of the box running XMP no other changes


----------



## Dirtdog (Jun 1, 2020)




----------



## fusseli (Jun 2, 2020)

i7-10700K overclock to 5.1 on all cores -- No changes besides changing multipliers and setting XMP.









						Intel Core i7 10700K @ 5100 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[kvll3e] Validated Dump by fusseli (2020-06-02 04:23:04) - MB: Gigabyte Z490 AORUS ULTRA - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				








One more with 1-core turbo at 5.3 and 7 through 8-cores turbo at 5.1

CPU-Z doesn't seem to see the fastest core... or it's not working, not sure which...









						Intel Core i7 10700K @ 5100 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[kvll3e] Validated Dump by fusseli (2020-06-02 04:23:04) - MB: Gigabyte Z490 AORUS ULTRA - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## tabascosauz (Jun 2, 2020)

@fusseli AFAIK CPU-Z doesn't use anything other than Core 0 for the ST test. It kinda sucks because Windows is smart enough to know which are the best cores on both AMD and Intel, but CPU-Z can't make use of it if it's not Core 0.

Maybe 2004 will change that, I dunno.


----------



## Dinnercore (Jun 2, 2020)

@fusseli These new chips clock insanely well. If your aio holds up you might be able the get 5.3GHz all-core. 

I just saw Luumi got 5.5GHz on a 10900k with ambient watercooling.


----------



## Dirtdog (Jun 2, 2020)

My low power HP laptop... interestingly the RAM runs at 2400MHz although Intel seems to say that 2133 is the max for this CPU type.  It came with a single stick of 2666 which ran at 2400 CL17, which I replaced with 2x4GB HyperX 2400 CL14.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jun 2, 2020)

All is good so far , yet when I increased the multiplier by .25x vid needed a 50mv bumb up


----------



## Fizban (Jun 5, 2020)

This has served me well, but I just ordered its replacement, curious to see how well the new one will perform.





Its replacement is a i7-10875H,I'm expecting it to score around 525 single-core and around 4350 multi-core, or on par with a Ryzen 1800X in all-core performance, and about on par with a i7-6950X in single-core.


----------



## Dinnercore (Jun 27, 2020)




----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 27, 2020)

Dinnercore said:


> View attachment 160453


LIquid nitrogen or what?


----------



## Dinnercore (Jun 27, 2020)

Zyll Goliath said:


> LIquid nitrogen or what?


This was on dry ice


----------



## Fizban (Jul 4, 2020)

Laptop CPU, not that far off 9900KF performance.

So much for my 4350 all-core score expectations referenced above. Nah, we're in the 5k+ club now.

Just barely beat that dry-iced Core 2 Duo in single-core performance.


----------



## Pugheaven (Jul 13, 2020)




----------



## xman2007 (Jul 13, 2020)

Dinnercore said:


> View attachment 160453


How in God's name have you managed such a single core score that beats a lot of modern day processors with a 12 year old CPU? that in itself is a feat or perhaps more of an indication that since it's inception the "Core" series of processors even over 12 years haven't really improved a great deal when it comes to actual IPC though there has been quite a lot of frequency bumps which have made up the performance increase with minor tweaks and improved process nodes making up for the rest. As now most modern Core I CPU's are well within the 5Ghz region you would have thought that even a 12 year old E8600 at 5.7Ghz, which is considered extreme for that class of CPU, would be decimated by a 2020 Core I CPU at about 4Ghz which wouldn't seem to be the case... boggling!


----------



## Pugheaven (Jul 13, 2020)

Yeah it's because Intel has spent the last 8 years just throwing mhz at their chips and not increasing IPC like AMD, hence why they're in the trouble they are. I bet if everyone did a CPUZ benchmark all of us at 4GHZ exactly, and then showed our single cores... we'd find that AMD is on top... and the latest and greats I9 9 series and 10 series aren't barely any better than the i5's/i7's variations mhz for mhz (taking out featuresets like avx2 etc, i.e. keeping a level playing field)... there certainly won't be much in it! 

So just incase anyone fancies doing that, I've just declocked mine to 4ghz as close as I can get... and here is my single core on CPUZ, lets see what other more modern cpu's can do at the same mhz?


----------



## xman2007 (Jul 13, 2020)

Pugheaven said:


> Yeah it's because Intel has spent the last 8 years just throwing mhz at their chips and not increasing IPC like AMD, hence why they're in the trouble they are. I bet if everyone did a CPUZ benchmark all of us at 4GHZ exactly, and then showed our single cores... we'd find that AMD is on top... and the latest and greats I9 9 series and 10 series aren't barely any better than the i7's mhz for mhz... there certainly won't be much in it! So just incase anyone fancies doing that, I've just declocked mine to 4ghz as close as I can get... and here is my single core on CPUZ, lets see what other more modern cpu's can do at the same mhz?
> 
> View attachment 162165 View attachment 162166


Ryzen 1600af @4ghz


----------



## Pugheaven (Jul 13, 2020)

*CPU_Z SCORES @ 4Ghz*
Ryzen 1600AF:  Single Core = 461.8, 
E5 Xeon 1860V2: Single Core = 411.8,


----------



## xman2007 (Jul 13, 2020)

Pugheaven said:


> *CPU_Z SCORES @ 4Ghz*
> Ryzen 1600AF:  Single Core = 461.8, Multi Thread = 3734.5
> E5 Xeon 1860V2: Single Core = 411.8, Multi Thread = 4062.1


Multi is kinda useless in this respect as you have an 8c/16t CPU compared to my 6c/12t though I can beat/match your 4.7Ghz ST score with a 4.2Ghz overclock on my 1600af:


----------



## RealNeil (Jul 14, 2020)

i9-9900K Box


----------



## harm9963 (Jul 14, 2020)

Can push much harder,  i prefer quiet and cool


----------



## heinztvoert (Jul 14, 2020)




----------



## biffzinker (Jul 14, 2020)

heinztvoert said:


> View attachment 162178View attachment 162179


I would of expected the 3800X to beat the i7-10700. Maybe not in gaming benchmarks.


----------



## Dinnercore (Jul 14, 2020)

xman2007 said:


> How in God's name have you managed such a single core score that beats a lot of modern day processors with a 12 year old CPU? that in itself is a feat or perhaps more of an indication that since it's inception the "Core" series of processors even over 12 years haven't really improved a great deal when it comes to actual IPC though there has been quite a lot of frequency bumps which have made up the performance increase with minor tweaks and improved process nodes making up for the rest. As now most modern Core I CPU's are well within the 5Ghz region you would have thought that even a 12 year old E8600 at 5.7Ghz, which is considered extreme for that class of CPU, would be decimated by a 2020 Core I CPU at about 4Ghz which wouldn't seem to be the case... boggling!


I had similar thoughts about the Core 2 Duos that I bench. The IPC did not increase all that much in the past decade. You also have to consider that this CPU is running on a 12 year old platform, still with memory controller outside of the CPU. And very small cache sizes. 
Now CPU-Z bench is probably ideal for these old CPUs as it does not put much load if any at all on the memory bus. So these limitations will show a lot more when you try to use a Core 2 Duo today in typical applications. 

I think most performance gains in the past years came just from higher clocks, larger cache and much faster memory bus due to IMCs. Pure IPC gains play a very small role in all that. 

If you want to compare a 5GHz Core 2 Duo vs. modern CPUs: https://valid.x86.fr/r7wdt1 
This one was on ambient water, so no extreme measures and still on a borderline 24/7 safe voltage.


----------



## Bones (Jul 14, 2020)

Just messing around this morning with the daily machine.
Nothing special.


----------



## ThrashZone (Jul 14, 2020)

Pugheaven said:


> Yeah it's because Intel has spent the last 8 years just throwing mhz at their chips and not increasing IPC like AMD, hence why they're in the trouble they are. I bet if everyone did a CPUZ benchmark all of us at 4GHZ exactly, and then showed our single cores... we'd find that AMD is on top... and the latest and greats I9 9 series and 10 series aren't barely any better than the i5's/i7's variations mhz for mhz (taking out featuresets like avx2 etc, i.e. keeping a level playing field)... there certainly won't be much in it!
> 
> So just incase anyone fancies doing that, I've just declocked mine to 4ghz as close as I can get... and here is my single core on CPUZ, lets see what other more modern cpu's can do at the same mhz?
> 
> View attachment 162165 View attachment 162166


Hi,
4.0 is a little too low here's a everyday web clock 4.2





4.8


----------



## heinztvoert (Jul 14, 2020)

biffzinker said:


> I would of expected the 3800X to beat the i7-10700. Maybe not in gaming benchmarks.



Unless I have some set up wrong on the BIOS. I ran the test a few times, it does go higher but eventually settles around this point.


----------



## uco73 (Jul 23, 2020)




----------



## JoeD (Jul 23, 2020)

*3600Mhz CL14 Test*


----------



## biffzinker (Jul 25, 2020)




----------



## Dirtdog (Aug 3, 2020)




----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Aug 24, 2020)




----------



## dylricho (Aug 25, 2020)

I have finally upgraded.


----------



## dylricho (Aug 27, 2020)

I refuse to push it any further than this (@ 1.375 V). I still have memory to play around with.






Here is my current overclock that I am very happy with (@ 1.28125 V). I use this 24/7, but frankly the 3600 is already overkill for what I do, so I have all power saving options enabled. Consistent 70–90 fps in Grand Theft Auto V/Online with an overclocked (and not flashed) RX 460 at 1080p high–very high (from a variable 40–60 fps with my previous CPU) is nothing to sneeze at. Now it's the GPU holding my CPU back! 






It will also do 4,200 MHz at stock voltage (1.1 V), and 4,425 MHz at 1.3 V. The newer silicon is definitely better.

Here is what I upgraded from (the CPU could do 4,600 MHz, but the board was trash for that). Next, I'm looking into possible GPU upgrades during the Black Friday sales.


----------



## xtreemchaos (Aug 27, 2020)

7700k watercooled.


----------



## Fizban (Aug 27, 2020)

Closest competitor in multi-thread is 2700X, can't compete in multi-thread, but comes damn close to a 9900KF in single-thread performance at least.


----------



## dylricho (Aug 27, 2020)

I forgot to mention that my results are from a crappy Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO, with an ambient room temperature of 25°C.

The CPU doesn't pass the mid 70s at full load, and only pulls around 80 watts at 4.40 GHz while gaming.


----------



## sam_86314 (Aug 30, 2020)

Found a netbook at a yard sale today. Crammed Windows 10 onto it somehow, ran the benchmark, and I was impressed...






...impressed that it managed to perform worse than my Celeron M based system.


----------



## biffzinker (Aug 30, 2020)

sam_86314 said:


> Found a netbook at a yard sale today. Crammed Windows 10 onto it somehow, ran the benchmark, and I was impressed...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


At least Hyper Threading worked. Used to have that Atom chip in a beta chromebook the CR-48.


----------



## jlewis02 (Aug 30, 2020)

Best I can do till the temps get better outside.


----------



## kiriakost (Aug 30, 2020)

My CPU has it age,  but thanks to the bench I did manage to verify the perfect performance of my air cooling under artificial stress.
No one of my software serving productivity this can cause such stress at my CPU, neither the games.


----------



## xac81 (Aug 30, 2020)

Сheap and powerful


----------



## Fizban (Sep 2, 2020)

sam_86314 said:


> Found a netbook at a yard sale today. Crammed Windows 10 onto it somehow, ran the benchmark, and I was impressed...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So...my laptop is roughly.....93 times faster than those netbooks? Or do scores not scale linearly?


----------



## jorj02 (Sep 14, 2020)

9900ks 5.2 ht off


----------



## vabeachboy0 (Oct 13, 2020)




----------



## plat (Nov 3, 2020)

Here's mine.  I referenced it to a 10th generation 8 core cpu and it's pretty close.  That's good.


Spoiler











Spoiler


----------



## rethcirE (Nov 3, 2020)

A locked/undervolted 8750H and some reasonably overclocked DDR4. (Default: 2666 20-19-19-43 2T @ 1.2v running 3000 16-18-18-34 1T @ 1.35v). The CPU-Z Bench drew only 50W from the CPU which is a bit lighter than some other benchmarks.


----------



## Cetinakpan (Nov 10, 2020)




----------



## Athlonite (Nov 10, 2020)

stock with everything on auto


----------



## PooPipeBoy (Nov 10, 2020)

Currently running the 5600X with XMP, Precision Boost enabled, 1800MHz FCLK and fans on 100%. No other changes. Performance is awesome and it's a big upgrade from my Core i5 4670K.


----------



## seth1911 (Nov 10, 2020)

My I5 4590S with 2,2GHz Limit via BIOS


----------



## lazord00d (Nov 16, 2020)




----------



## steevebacon (Nov 16, 2020)




----------



## seth1911 (Nov 16, 2020)

dylricho said:


>


 

4,3 GHz and the same score in multi like my i5 Haswell @ 2,2 GHz


----------



## droopyRO (Nov 17, 2020)

Ryzen 5600X, PBO on and memory OC to 3600 CL16.


----------



## biniteck (Nov 23, 2020)

Hello everybody! I decided to overclock my old computer and ran into the following problem: read cache L2 and Read cache L3 constantly differ several times! for example now L2 cache read = 315GB / s, immediately in the next test- 140GB / s. Read cache L3 140Gb / s, in the next test 45000Mb / s. and so constantly! does this indicate a problem? thanks


----------



## jesdals (Nov 28, 2020)

Testing my 5950x - stuck at 1900MHz Infinity settings


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Nov 28, 2020)

"Old"X79 12c/24t Xeon 2697 V2 (OC)3,45Ghz/All *Cores/---Turbo up to 4,03Ghz


----------



## wally_1973 (Nov 30, 2020)

Anyone else notice a little performance bump since the last windows update? My 2667v2 would put 380 and 3580 before.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 30, 2020)

wally_1973 said:


> Anyone else notice a little performance bump since the last windows update? My 2667v2 would put 380 and 3580 before.
> View attachment 177564


Nope. If anything it perfomance went down. Likely something was running or ran during the testing. The difference is merely a couple %...almost margin of error.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Nov 30, 2020)

wally_1973 said:


> Anyone else notice a little performance bump since the last windows update? My 2667v2 would put 380 and 3580 before.
> View attachment 177564


Hey we are close in single score score so I am a bit curious what is the speed your 2667V2 is working?
P.S.CPU Z is very sensitive so if you try benchmarking as soon as your system is up you will probably get a bit better result then if when you try it after a while when you already open some programs


----------



## jesdals (Nov 30, 2020)

Last test before changeing cooler from Noctua D15-SE to Arctic Liquid Cooler II 360 (if it will fit my Fractal Meshify C)


----------



## arabus (Nov 30, 2020)




----------



## Samiam66 (Dec 1, 2020)




----------



## Athlonite (Dec 1, 2020)

Samiam66 said:


> View attachment 177690



You should be able to lower that voltage considerably from 1.425 to 1.250 and get 4325MHz if you've got a good CPU see below


----------



## Samiam66 (Dec 2, 2020)

nothing is overclocked  and it has hit 4400
so whats the process to lower voltage?


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 2, 2020)

@ *Samiam66 use CTR to run the tests and it'll give you the max allcore and lowest stable Voltage to get there with *


----------



## wally_1973 (Dec 3, 2020)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Hey we are close in single score score so I am a bit curious what is the speed your 2667V2 is working?
> P.S.CPU Z is very sensitive so if you try benchmarking as soon as your system is up you will probably get a bit better result then if when you try it after a while when you already open some programs


know all that, its stock. 3,6 all core 4ghz singlecore.
my Ryzen 7 is the same, also had the update, this 2667v2 scores a hundred more.








						CPU-Z Benchmark for Intel Xeon E5-2667 v2 (16T) - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

Best CPU performance - 64-bit - December 2022




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## jesdals (Dec 3, 2020)

Lost some multi core gain


----------



## natr0n (Dec 9, 2020)




----------



## Athlonite (Dec 9, 2020)

@natr0n that single thread is great that's better than I get by 30 points but that multi thread seems a bit whack 383.69 points per thread I would have expected better with an all core of 4.54GHz


----------



## wally_1973 (Dec 9, 2020)

jesdals said:


> View attachment 178054
> Lost some multi core gain


Maybe you need a remount, did you take the plastic of?


----------



## ThrashZone (Dec 14, 2020)

Hi,
My little beast lol


----------



## Toretobcn (Dec 16, 2020)

cpuz
					

Image cpuz hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				




here my 10900k! I can still adjust it a little more, for now it is at 53xall cores with avx0 and 4 cores with soft load if it does not heat up to 54x4.

Remaining:
53x10
54x4

I'm waiting to make a profile of 55x2 54x4 and 53x10 and see what result I get! those photos that I put is to 53xall cores


----------



## Countryside (Dec 16, 2020)

My ryzen


----------



## Toretobcn (Dec 16, 2020)

Update!! 10900k!!



Spoiler: Screenshots












						201216175721
					

Image 201216175721 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						201216175729
					

Image 201216175729 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						201216175741
					

Image 201216175741 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						201216175750
					

Image 201216175750 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						201216175806
					

Image 201216175806 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Captura
					

Image Captura hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Captura2
					

Image Captura2 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Captura3
					

Image Captura3 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Sin-t-tulo
					

Image Sin-t-tulo hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Sin-t-tulo2
					

Image Sin-t-tulo2 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Sin-t-tulo3
					

Image Sin-t-tulo3 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Sin-t-tulo4
					

Image Sin-t-tulo4 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Sin-t-tulo5
					

Image Sin-t-tulo5 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Sin-t-tulo6
					

Image Sin-t-tulo6 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Sin-t-tulo7
					

Image Sin-t-tulo7 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co
				











						Sin-t-tulo7
					

Image Sin-t-tulo7 hosted in ImgBB




					ibb.co


----------



## Defragler (Dec 17, 2020)

My fastest run for single core speeds.

Single Thread: *568*
Multi Thread:  *8637*









						AMD Ryzen 9 3900X @ 4224.02 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[kaefbn] Validated Dump by Anonymous (2020-12-16 23:27:59) - MB: Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 17, 2020)

Defragler said:


> My fastest run for single core speeds.
> 
> Single Thread: *568*
> Multi Thread:  *8637*
> ...



Are you running your ram at 3800MHz


----------



## Defragler (Dec 18, 2020)

Athlonite said:


> Are you running your ram at 3800MHz


Yes


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 18, 2020)

Defragler said:


> Yes



Yup missed the bit that said 3800MHz and just saw the bit that XMP 3600MHz my bad


----------



## Defragler (Dec 18, 2020)

Athlonite said:


> Yup missed the bit that said 3800MHz and just saw the bit that XMP 3600MHz my bad


My goal is to reach 570 on single core, I think then I will move towards the 5000 series.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Dec 18, 2020)

stock setting, no OC.


----------



## Countryside (Dec 18, 2020)

My 6600k


----------



## maksover (Dec 19, 2020)

ryzen 7 pro 3700@4.5Ghz 1.31v


----------



## Det0x (Dec 19, 2020)

Screenshot of my cpuz scores together with my cinebench runs:
5950x maxtuned with curve optimize, custom watercooling.

Version 17.01.64:

Single thread: 713.9 points
Multithread: 13950 points

Version 19.01.64 AVX2:

Single thread: 844 points
Multithread: 15843 points


----------



## Toretobcn (Dec 20, 2020)

Det0x said:


> Screenshot of my cpuz scores together with my cinebench runs:
> 5950x maxtuned with curve optimize, custom watercooling.
> 
> Version 17.01.64:
> ...


 nice points in single!! the best ipc in the moment!!


----------



## wally_1973 (Dec 20, 2020)

Det0x said:


> Screenshot of my cpuz scores together with my cinebench runs:
> 5950x maxtuned with curve optimize, custom watercooling.
> 
> Version 17.01.64:
> ...


Was looking forward for this one. Holy cowpie!
Feels like yesterday I bought me R7 3700, now looks, old.


----------



## Defragler (Dec 21, 2020)

Upgraded my bios and fiddled a bit more with the pbo
Seems to be the highest AMD 3000 series single core score on air ever reported here? If not feel free to correct me.

Cpu-Z Single core: *570.3*
Cpu-Z Multi core:  *8680.2*

CPU                     *Ryzen 9 3900x* - pbo
RAM*                    F4-3600C14Q-32GTZNB* (4x8gb)
Mobo                  *X570 TUF Gaming-Plus*
Cooler                 *Scythe Mugen 5 + 2x Noctua NF-F12 industrialPPC-3000 PWM*
PSU                     *Corsair HX850*









						AMD Ryzen 9 3900X @ 4224.02 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[qqb63f] Validated Dump by Anonymous (2020-12-21 19:46:55) - MB: Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 23, 2020)

Gave 10600K to daughter (high clocks=high IPC in Minecraft), got myself Ryzen 2700. Using@3.9. Nice progress, AMD, almost getting 10700 multi-core score, just laughing about 3700X... not to mention 3000&5000 Ryzens have memory write speed 2x slower than reading... Love Pinnacle Ridge Zen+ cpus, they were AWESOME! Yea, some RAM troubles occur, using Corsair 3200.16 kit @3000.16, but don't care, it's not a server, it's just gaming and surfing PC


----------



## Defragler (Dec 23, 2020)

AleXXX666 said:


> not to mention 3000&5000 Ryzens have memory write speed 2x slower than reading.



Would you like to elaborate?


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 23, 2020)

Defragler said:


> Would you like to elaborate?


Sorry, don’t understand, what do you mean?


----------



## Defragler (Dec 23, 2020)

AleXXX666 said:


> Sorry, don’t understand, what do you mean?


elaborate = explain/tell in a neat way

I am confused about the 2x slowdown of write speeds, would love to read about it.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Dec 23, 2020)

16B/cycle is only applicable to SKUs below the 3900X/5900X, so anything that's a 3900X/5900X or above has the full write speeds, anything below it is gimped.


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 23, 2020)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> 16B/cycle is only applicable to SKUs below the 3900X/5900X, so anything that's a 3900X/5900X or above has the full write speeds, anything below it is gimped.


Yeah, i know this. Wouldn’t care about Ryzen 5, but for Ryzen 7 price this is kindda unacceptable imo.


----------



## Defragler (Dec 23, 2020)

*Xx Tek Tip xX
AleXXX666*

Thank you, learned something here  .


----------



## Block10 (Dec 23, 2020)

Cpu-Z Single core: *574.8*
Cpu-Z Multi core: *7208.2*

CPU *Intel Core I9 10850K* - Stock
RAM* Corsair Vengence Pro RGB 3200 Mhz CL14* (2x8gb)
Mobo *Asus Z490-E Gaming*
Cooler *Corsair H100i XT Pro - LL120 Fan PWM*
PSU *Evga Supernova G3 750W Gold*


----------



## Toretobcn (Dec 23, 2020)

Block10 said:


> Cpu-Z Single core: *574.8*
> Cpu-Z Multi core: *7208.2*
> 
> CPU *Intel Core I9 10850K* - Stock
> ...



tighten more! that surely you can get more performance! look at my 10900k! for a few pages back.


----------



## Block10 (Dec 23, 2020)

Toretobcn said:


> tighten more! that surely you can get more performance! look at my 10900k! for a few pages back.



It generates a lot of heat, when I change the cooling system, then yes, I squeeze it until the last drop of OC. thanks


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 23, 2020)

Toretobcn said:


> tighten more! that surely you can get more performance! look at my 10900k! for a few pages back.



What's your cooling tho - 10900K at 1.4v + and 5.3-5.4 ghz is nuts.


----------



## Toretobcn (Dec 23, 2020)

Yes it is! 53 all cores to avx0 and 54 to 4 cores!
My cooling is a magnitude block with 2 xspc 360mm radiators with push and pull of noctua nf-f12 fans on one side and the other with nf-s12 flow and then another small 120mm radiator
total 360 + 360 + 120 all in one H500 master cooler.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 23, 2020)

Toretobcn said:


> Yes it is! 53 all cores to avx0 and 54 to 4 cores!
> My cooling is a magnitude block with 2 xspc 360mm radiators with push and pull of noctua nf-f12 fans on one side and the other with nf-s12 flow and then another small 120mm radiator
> total 360 + 360 + 120 all in one H500 master cooler.



Yah exactly - for us to hit those numbers we would have to throw our computers in a icy lake.


----------



## Toretobcn (Dec 23, 2020)

Not that much! at least 5.2 sure you can do!


----------



## Annihilation (Dec 24, 2020)

5.0Ghz all cores


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 24, 2020)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> My little beast lol
> 
> View attachment 179539


Back times, i’ve had laptop with 1core celly 540, then upgraded it to pentium t3200, and then to c2d t8100 which slapped those-time new core i3 mobiles 



seth1911 said:


> 4,3 GHz and the same score in multi like my i5 Haswell @ 2,2 GHz


Yeah old amd apus were surprisingly good in mc but they sucked in sc so windows use was pain in a$$ lol



uco73 said:


> View attachment 163130


Niice



Dirtdog said:


> View attachment 157482


Just one question.. HOW?!



Ed_1 said:


> Not sure if this effects all CPU's but on my 3570k I ran the new 1,92 version and scored 472, 1872, which seemed low.
> I ran older 1.90 and get 486, 1912. That pretty big change.


Yes, they scale.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 24, 2020)

Toretobcn said:


> Not that much! at least 5.2 sure you can do!







Alriiiight, you've inspired me... 5.3 4 core @1.35v, with 5.0 all core 1.29v  -- testing stability and adaptive settings now 

edit -

5.3 6 core - 5.2 8core 5.0 all core:


----------



## QuietBob (Dec 25, 2020)

OK, so you've seen the fastest from AMD. How about the slowest?


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 25, 2020)

QuietBob said:


> OK, so you've seen the fastest from AMD. How about the slowest?
> 
> View attachment 180936



That was my first gaming PC proc! 

This overclocked on bus in an e-machines... and a pencil modded Radeon 9500 was my half life 2 rig  .  Only took like 43ish seconds to do 1m superpi


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 25, 2020)

phanbuey said:


> That was my first gaming PC proc!
> 
> This overclocked on bus in an e-machines... and a pencil modded Radeon 9500 was my half life 2 rig  .  Only took like 43ish seconds to do 1m superpi


Maybe if i’m not mistaken this was system i’ve found layed around forgotten on abandoned warehouse and replaced my ooold pentium 4 with RDRAM lmfao
So it could have been “first hardware total upgrade” done 4 free lol


----------



## StaticVapour (Dec 25, 2020)

Basic as it gets


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 25, 2020)

StaticVapour said:


> View attachment 180958View attachment 180959
> Basic as it gets


Nice typewriter, interesting to compare this to my typo with G6400 lol


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 29, 2020)

StaticVapour said:


> View attachment 180958View attachment 180959
> Basic as it gets


G6400 here, let's start the battle


----------



## StaticVapour (Dec 29, 2020)

AleXXX666 said:


> G6400 here, let's start the battle



Fair enough. Didn't bother finding the best voltage, just slapped +0.200V on it, it had some instability at 1.4V already, around 4.1Ghz last time I tested so I went over it





I did not run for long at that voltage, so no worries


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 29, 2020)

StaticVapour said:


> Fair enough. Didn't bother finding the best voltage, just slapped +0.200V on it, it had some instability at 1.4V already, around 4.1Ghz last time I tested so I went over it
> View attachment 181484View attachment 181485
> I did not run for long at that voltage, so no worries


Cool, i also noticed some 1.3+ volts for Athlon, lol


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 31, 2020)

Dual Socket Workstation from a bygone era.


----------



## Toretobcn (Dec 31, 2020)

StaticVapour said:


> Fair enough. Didn't bother finding the best voltage, just slapped +0.200V on it, it had some instability at 1.4V already, around 4.1Ghz last time I tested so I went over it
> View attachment 181484View attachment 181485
> I did not run for long at that voltage, so no worries





phanbuey said:


> View attachment 180888
> 
> Alriiiight, you've inspired me... 5.3 4 core @1.35v, with 5.0 all core 1.29v  -- testing stability and adaptive settings now
> 
> ...




good! so better! at least I stretch as much as I can! It seems that we have a good stick with the 11th and it does not look like we can approach its ipc or as a joke! axis

nor at 5.4ghz it seems that we will match that ipc!


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 31, 2020)

@Xx Tek Tip xX 




Why are you laughing at this? Apparently, you are the only one. Nobody else but you find this funny, I'm just curious as to why.


----------



## AleXXX666 (Dec 31, 2020)

storm-chaser said:


> @Xx Tek Tip xX
> View attachment 181731
> 
> Why are you laughing at this? Apparently, you are the only one. Nobody else but you find this funny, I'm just curious as to why.


He just knows his cpu can’t beat it in multi-core any chance...


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 31, 2020)

AleXXX666 said:


> He just knows his cpu can’t beat it in multi-core any chance...


That's got to be it! We've got him sweating bullets


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Dec 31, 2020)

AleXXX666 said:


> He just knows his cpu can’t beat it in multi-core any chance...





storm-chaser said:


> That's got to be it! We've got him sweating bullets


Keep dreaming and check my CPU-Z valids ; )

But cool, you go daily your puny xeons in 2020 and I'll enjoy much faster things ; )


----------



## the54thvoid (Dec 31, 2020)

This thread is for posting CPU-Z benchmarks. If people want to contribute, please do so. However, snarky comments and aggravating actions (be they emoji's, responses, or otherwise) will swiftly accumulate points. Benchmark threads are not pissing contests, nor are they meant to put others down.

*This is the only warning I'll give before handing out reply-bans and points*. If people cannot contribute in a meaningful manner, or if you feel this thread is not your cup of tea, don't post at all.


----------



## CeasingEnd (Jan 1, 2021)

here's mine....I see some nice CPU and RAM OC's so I figured i'd post mine.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 1, 2021)

still rocking my 8600k. it runs all games & apps so well, i havent seen a need to upgrade for my purposes, despite 6 cores being a small number these days


----------



## StaticVapour (Jan 1, 2021)

jboydgolfer said:


> still rocking my 8600k. it runs all games & apps so well, i havent seen a need to upgrade for my purposes, despite 6 cores being a small number these days


As long as it does it's job well, it's retirement day is far far away


----------



## Arctucas (Jan 1, 2021)

CeasingEnd said:


> here's mine....I see some nice CPU and RAM OC's so I figured i'd post mine.



Really good scores, beats my 9900K at same frequencies (CPU & RAM) running 8 threads.

https://valid.x86.fr/c15205


W10 offline install, HT off:









						Intel Core i9 9900K @ 5000 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[hxfrxb] Validated Dump by  (2021-01-01 19:05:22) - MB: EVGA Corp. Z390 DARK - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## AleXXX666 (Jan 1, 2021)

Arctucas said:


> Really good scores, beats my 9900K at same frequencies (CPU & RAM) running 8 threads.
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/c15205
> 
> ...


9900k needs veery good AIO to not to throttle lol
It’s just fx9590 reborn by tdp


----------



## CeasingEnd (Jan 1, 2021)

Arctucas said:


> Really good scores, beats my 9900K at same frequencies (CPU & RAM) running 8 threads.
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/c15205
> 
> ...


Wow that is impressive...I appreciate the response my friend. happy newyears to you....Looking at upgrading to x299 and a i9 9900x from a buddy. So I am looking forward to spending another 2 weeks tweaking until I can reach a max OC...idk why but I love doing this lol.



AleXXX666 said:


> 9900k needs veery good AIO to not to throttle lol
> It’s just fx9590 reborn by tdp


I mean its a lot more than just that lol. Those fx series were some insanely hot chips that ate up some insane amounts of wattage for very mediocre performance....The 9th and 10th gen intels are far superior than most Ryzen chips in single and threaded instances and while new ryzen puts a hurtin on 9th and 10th gen intel those fx chips couldnt compete.....BUT I will be honest I never got to experience the 9590 I did have the 8350 8370 and 9370 and even after some intense overclocking they couldnt even get close to what my i7 pre OC. I was one of those that felt extremely let down by AMD during the FX days.....Thats what pushed me back to intel....and now that they got their SH** together I am extremely interested in the new gen ryzen 9 5950x with a 3080ti 3090 or even just possibly if I am lucky enough the 6900xt. All in all no disrespect intended by my comment my friend...I really do enjoy this type of discourse...so happy I joined this forum.


----------



## Toretobcn (Jan 1, 2021)

Attentive guys there are first infos of the 11900k! and he comes warm going over 700 points in monocore


----------



## Arctucas (Jan 1, 2021)

AleXXX666 said:


> 9900k needs veery good AIO to not to throttle lol
> It’s just fx9590 reborn by tdp



I am a long way from thermal throttling, as evidenced by this run with all 16 threads:


----------



## storm-chaser (Jan 2, 2021)

jboydgolfer said:


> still rocking my 8600k. it runs all games & apps so well, i havent seen a need to upgrade for my purposes, despite 6 cores being a small number these days


The "multicore madness" craze that is so prevalent in our community is just that. So while some people scream bloody murder if you are still running or buying a six core chip in 2020, all the claims are baseless and it's all pretty much BS and misinformation. 6 cores will be totally fine for the foreseeable future. A slightly overclocked 9600KF, for example, will run on par with a 9900K in nearly every single game on the market, even today, for example. Mostly just an aggressive and subversive marketing campaign executed through an army of online "marketers" posing as gaming enthusiasts and overclocking hobbyists who are secretly pushing the will and agenda of multi billion dollar corporations that don't have your best interests at heart. 

Like Justice Peter Mahon so eloquently said in reference to Air New Zealand after their careful and calculated conspiracy was exposed following the Mount Erebus disaster: 

*"an orchestrated litany of lies"*


----------



## Defragler (Jan 2, 2021)

570 single
8724 multi









						AMD Ryzen 9 3900X @ 4274 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[zpjy38] Validated Dump by Anonymous (2021-01-02 16:39:53) - MB: Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				



3900X PBO
Higher multi score than before


----------



## biffzinker (Jan 2, 2021)

Single-Thread 521
Multi-Thread (16T) 5842









						AMD Ryzen 7 3800X @ 4274 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[5we90t] Validated Dump by DESKTOP (2021-01-02 21:17:17) - MB: MSI B450 TOMAHAWK (MS-7C02) - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Toothless (Jan 2, 2021)

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X @ 4600.57 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[sn77v0] Validated Dump by VOLT (2021-01-02 21:53:13) - MB: ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				




Still don't know what to do to get it stable at these clocks. Maybe more SoC?

Bonus pic


----------



## heky (Jan 2, 2021)

Defragler said:


> 570 single
> 8724 multi
> 
> 
> ...


Nice score man! Care to share the settings for it? Tnx


----------



## Deleted member 202104 (Jan 3, 2021)

** Edit **

*RAM didn't make the difference.  Essentially the same results with 3733 C19*










**
I bought some faster RAM and was able to break 600 ST 

10850k at stock, PL1 removed. 4400 CL19


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 3, 2021)

weekendgeek said:


> I bought some faster RAM and was able to break 600 ST
> 
> 10850k at stock, PL1 removed. 4400 CL19
> 
> ...


Wish that was the case with with my AMD platform 5800X , from 3200 to 3866 , adds zero difference, on Aida64 yes Hugh difference , good for you on that Intel system .


----------



## freeagent (Jan 3, 2021)

Just letting her stretch her legs a bit..


----------



## nuggdoctor (Jan 3, 2021)

Delidded I7 8700k 5.1ghz oc @ 1.365 volts. not bad for a 3 year old rig


----------



## biffzinker (Jan 3, 2021)

nuggdoctor said:


> Delidded I7 8700k 5.1ghz oc @ 1.365 volts. not bad for a 3 year old rig


How much does your scores improve with the security mitigations in Windows disabled?


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 3, 2021)

360 AIO / Conductonaut liquid metal , helps a lot .


----------



## nuggdoctor (Jan 3, 2021)

biffzinker said:


> How much does your scores improve with the security mitigations in Windows disabled?


I dont have windows security turned off if thats what youre wondering.



harm9963 said:


> 360 AIO / Conductonaut liquid metal , helps a lot .


I can help you with you 1080 ti oc to better your firestrike score. you should be crushing my score. but because my ti is faster i beat you with an 8700k and those afterburner numbers are at idle 



harm9963 said:


> 360 AIO / Conductonaut liquid metal , helps a lot .


are you running a hybrid version ti or a custom water loop? or are you running it on air? if youre on water, just copy my afterburner numbers. mine is a evga ftw3 hybrid edition 1080 ti. so if your running the same liquid cooling or a similar aio or a custom loop my afterburner settings should at least get you close to maxed out


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 3, 2021)

nuggdoctor said:


> I dont have windows security turned off if thats what youre wondering.
> 
> 
> I can help you with you 1080 ti oc to better your firestrike score. you should be crushing my score. but because my ti is faster i beat you with an 8700k and those afterburner numbers are at idle


My 1080Ti  not a great OC , 3080rtx are imposable to get, 3090 was available at $1689 ,but a  3080RTX and 5900X are a better deal, running out of time on my 5800X ,have till 15th , other wise  the 5800X stays, in that case will wait for the 3080Ti .


----------



## biffzinker (Jan 3, 2021)

nuggdoctor said:


> I dont have windows security turned off if thats what youre wondering.


I was referring to Spectre, Meltdown etc.


----------



## nuggdoctor (Jan 3, 2021)

im waiting on the 4080 ti. specs have already leaked and its a complete monster



biffzinker said:


> I was referring to Spectre, Meltdown etc.


I just windows 10, and i have msi afterburner for my gpu oc, and do all my cpu oc in bios, i also run cpuz, gpuz, and 3d mark software for testing my oc's. and have corsair icue on for my cpu cooler and to control all my rgb



harm9963 said:


> My 1080Ti  not a great OC , 3080rtx are imposable to get, 3090 was available at $1689 ,but a  3080RTX and 5900X are a better deal, running out of time on my 5800X ,have till 15th , other wise  the 5800X stays, in that case will wait for the 3080Ti .


ild love a 5800x but im holding out for the 5950x. Thats the first cpu ive considered from amd since they ran over my balls with Bulldozer.

for a few bucks you can snag an nzxt bracket and for around 100$ more you can get an 120mm aio and have the same cooling on your ti as i do. if i wouldnt have killed my founders edition ti by doing the power mod and misplacing a stupid thermal pad i was planning to do the conversion.





on my founders edition i think i was pushing only 175 on memory oc and i think 30 on the core was all before it would start to throttle.


----------



## Defragler (Jan 3, 2021)

heky said:


> Nice score man! Care to share the settings for it? Tnx


I can pm you for sure!


heky said:


> Nice score man! Care to share the settings for it? Tnx



This is sort of what you want to be aiming for ( just a couple of cpu-z benchmarks and some generic usage over 20 minutes of time)
Air cooled so indeed your water set can do better!

Anyways thanks for giving a look into a msi bios.


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 3, 2021)

nuggdoctor said:


> Delidded I7 8700k 5.1ghz oc @ 1.365 volts. not bad for a 3 year old rig


That's an amazing rig -- I ran that exact same setup for 2.5 years and sold it off to a friend -- still insanely fast.


----------



## Hankieroseman (Jan 5, 2021)

ASUS TUF There's one score at the bottom with the ASUS TUF 1650 Gaming card before I got the 3090. 5699 don't look too bad.

3DMark Extreme


----------



## oobymach (Jan 6, 2021)

My 3600x in all its glory, so jealous of the 5k series cpu's.


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 6, 2021)

Made a switch , now 5950X !


----------



## jesdals (Jan 6, 2021)

New bios (F31 for the Aorus Master X570) gave some multicore performance back



Will try to optimize with the curve settings under PBO


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 6, 2021)

Hankieroseman said:


> ASUS TUF There's one score at the bottom with the ASUS TUF 1650 Gaming card before I got the 3090. 5699 don't look too bad.
> 
> 3DMark Extreme


Awesome card -  Just had a friend build with one... super quiet and compact.  ASUS cards are on point this gen.


----------



## Toretobcn (Jan 6, 2021)

jesdals said:


> La nueva BIOS (F31 para el Aorus Master X570) devolvió algo de rendimiento multinúcleo
> View attachment 182658
> Intentará optimizar con la configuración de la curva en PBO


I caught you! : D


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jan 6, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> Dual Socket Workstation from a bygone era.
> 
> View attachment 181720


Nice...here is my Xeon 2697 V2 result(single-socket)
3,45GhzAll Cores/4,03GhzTurbo


----------



## Hankieroseman (Jan 6, 2021)

jesdals said:


> New bios (F31 for the Aorus Master X570) gave some multicore performance back
> View attachment 182658
> Will try to optimize with the curve settings under PBO


Been looking at 5950 but it's like the 3090. Unavailable except miner/scalpers.


----------



## storm-chaser (Jan 6, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Nice...here is my Xeon 2697 V2 result(single-socket)
> 3,45GhzAll Cores/4,03GhzTurbo



Looking good! Always happy to see another 2600 series xeon member around here.

Speaking of non overclocked 2697 v2 processors, there is something to note. And while the 2697 v2 is theoretically Intel's highest ranked and the flagship processor for the 2600 series line, for heavy work loads or sustained all core turbo stuff, the 2696 v2 is the better option, believe it or not. Why? They both have a single core turbo of 3.5GHz, but for all core turbo the 2696 v2 has 100Mhz over the 2697 (3.1 v 3.0)... thus, if you have a lot of stuff going on that really loads up the cores, the 2696 v2 is the way to go, in my opinion. And despite having a higher all core turbo than the 2697, it actually has a lower TDP (120w vs 130w)

But of course, this doesn't apply to your overclocked Xeon. That would definitely take down a 2696 v2 

Edit: Intel's OEM processors (which the 2696 v2 is) in the 2600 series are definitely more desirable than their retail counterparts. This is a good example, as well as the 2673 v2, at 110w matching the 2667 v2 which has a staggering 130w TDP. Also performs on par with the 2687w, same boost clocks and everything, but much lower TDP.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jan 6, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> Looking good! Always happy to see another 2600 series xeon member around here.
> 
> Speaking of non overclocked 2697 v2 processors, there is something to note. And while the 2697 v2 is theoretically Intel's highest ranked and the flagship processor for the 2600 series line, for heavy work loads or sustained all core turbo stuff, the 2696 v2 is the better option, believe it or not. Why? They both have a single core turbo of 3.5GHz, but for all core turbo the 2696 v2 has 100Mhz over the 2697 (3.1 v 3.0)... thus, if you have a lot of stuff going on that really loads up the cores, the 2696 v2 is the way to go, in my opinion. And despite having a higher all core turbo than the 2697, it actually has a lower TDP (120w vs 130w)
> 
> ...


Hmm....I didn't know that 2696 V2(stocked)have all cores on 3,1Ghz that's good to know anyway 2697 V2 is have higher turbo speeds on few cores(2-4) and I guess that's the reason why it was more expensive.... I have this interesting chart for 2600 Xeons to share:




(Note only 2696 V2 is missing)......
Well I really love this Xeon 2697 V2 it's my current daily driver and this sample is definitely a keeper what can I said 3,45Ghz on12c/24t is still great for everything(gaming Included) and the best thing it's cool&quiet I am using simple air cooling and some "old"Lian LI case.....
P.S.If you are interested I tested this 2697 V2(OC) and 2650 V2(OC) so you can read more about it in HERE


----------



## storm-chaser (Jan 6, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Hmm....I didn't know that 2696 V2(stocked)have all cores on 3,1Ghz that's good to know anyway 2697 V2 is have higher turbo speeds on few cores(2-4) and I guess that's the reason why it was more expensive.... I have this interesting chart for 2600 Xeons to share:
> 
> (Note only 2696 V2 is missing)......
> Well I really love this Xeon 2697 V2 it's my current daily driver and this sample is definitely a keeper what can I said 3,45Ghz on12c/24t is still great for everything(gaming Included) and the best thing it's cool&quiet I am using simple air cooling and some "old"Lian LI case.....
> P.S.If you are interested I tested this 2697 V2(OC) and 2650 V2(OC) so you can read more about it in HERE


The turbo core clock speeds are identical between the two processors including cores 2-4 as well, with the only difference being the 100Mhz higher all core turbo. Great writeup there, looks like you do good work.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jan 6, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> The turbo core clock speeds are identical between the two processors including cores 2-4 as well, with the only difference being the 100Mhz higher all core turbo. Great writeup there, looks like you do good work.


I just look around for 2696 V2 on Ebay and seems like some of them working on 2,5-3,3Ghz and some on 2,5-3,5Ghz also on some max TDP stands 115W on others 120W this is possibly difference between OEM or ES and regular version but it's a bit confusing.....
Apparently looks like that only OEM version have 120W TDP and works on 2,5-3,5Ghz


----------



## JCL (Jan 7, 2021)




----------



## harm9963 (Jan 7, 2021)

Toretobcn said:


> I caught you! : D


Nice


----------



## jesdals (Jan 8, 2021)

Using curve optimizer all core negative 10 gave som single thread performance (4800~4975MHz during test) but less multi. Did try negative 30 but that did not boot properly


----------



## jesdals (Jan 9, 2021)

Did some testing lowering my TDC/EDC limits to 135 (se prior settings below)and Scalar to 2x




That gave a much better result in both multi and single core


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 9, 2021)

New BIOS 5821 BETA ,Asus Prime Pro.


----------



## Defragler (Jan 9, 2021)

JCL said:


> View attachment 182810


Very nice! I am glad running 570 single on air, 576 is like another step beyond that.

It would be really amazing if you validate those runs!


----------



## jesdals (Jan 10, 2021)

So close to that 700 single core score


----------



## JCL (Jan 11, 2021)




----------



## biffzinker (Jan 11, 2021)

How about a run @Knoxx29?


----------



## FireFox (Jan 11, 2021)

biffzinker said:


> How about a run @Knoxx29?


As soon i figure out what is wrong with my GPU


----------



## biffzinker (Jan 11, 2021)

How about this old post of a dual socket board with two quad cores @Knoxx29? 








						Share your CPUZ Benchmarks!
					

on which windows version are ya? best is fill out your systems specs and open a new thread with your problems because we are derailing the thread




					www.techpowerup.com


----------



## jesdals (Jan 11, 2021)

Did some more Curve/PBO optimization along with Juan and the good guys here https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/amd-curve-optimizer-any-guides-experience.275640/



That 700 mark feels so close


----------



## Toretobcn (Jan 11, 2021)

there you have my last update!

10900k at 54x4 + 53x10 all cores AVX0.

With profile 1 + Boost therefore resulting final if it is cold: 55x4 + 54x10 all cores AVX0!

I am testing it and for now I have been with it for a few days and it seems stable adaptive voltage at 1.399v

Ram 4100Cl 17/18/18/38


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 12, 2021)

Final  , good balance , st and mt , happy !


----------



## jesdals (Jan 14, 2021)

Cold weather in Denmark below 0c gave better result


----------



## jesdals (Jan 16, 2021)

doing some more cold weather testing




Best single core result



Best multi core result



Did the test in a cold room and lost the internet connection because my router got to cold so the last could not get validatet


----------



## Toretobcn (Jan 16, 2021)

Under normal conditions do I understand that 5950x over 690? hahaha or these data with what weather are we talking at 0 degrees?


----------



## JCL (Jan 18, 2021)

3900x* 600* single thread.


----------



## jesdals (Jan 18, 2021)

Toretobcn said:


> Under normal conditions do I understand that 5950x over 690? hahaha or these data with what weather are we talking at 0 degrees?


Clear frost and about -7c outside - equipped with winter clothing inside and gloves the temp got down almost under 5c - PC standing in the window opening. CPU temps went as low as 19c - bot still high bost temps


----------



## QuietBob (Jan 18, 2021)

Finally got around to tweaking my Ryzen build. All core 4.5 GHz @ 1.275v,  staying at roughly 70 C on air at full load. I'm a happy camper


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 18, 2021)

Toretobcn said:


> Under normal conditions do I understand that 5950x over 690? hahaha or these data with what weather are we talking at 0 degrees?


Room temp 75F  ,AIO X360 , liquid metal .








						AMD Ryzen 9 5950X @ 4598.93 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[8ne4fy] Validated Dump by reset (2021-01-16 16:45:31) - MB: Asus PRIME X470-PRO - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 18, 2021)

harm9963 said:


> Room temp 75F  ,AIO X360 , liquid metal .
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's nuts.


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 18, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> That's nuts.


Water loop next  !


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 19, 2021)

harm9963 said:


> Water loop next  !



Pretty sure that 360 AIO will beat a 360 open loop with a gpu in pretty soundly.  Esp with that push into restrictive grate combination that's going on in that youtube.


----------



## harm9963 (Jan 19, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> Pretty sure that 360 AIO will beat a 360 open loop with a gpu in pretty soundly.  Esp with that push into restrictive grate combination that's going on in that youtube.





phanbuey said:


> Pretty sure that 360 AIO will beat a 360 open loop with a gpu in pretty soundly.  Esp with that push into restrictive grate combination that's going on in that youtube.


https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-coolstream-ce-420-triple  FTW !


----------



## Toretobcn (Jan 19, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> That's nuts.


crazy that, of a lot or a few points?

I'm not fluent in Ryzen but I understand that this score is "normal"? Or is it well above the average of other AMD 5950x?


----------



## shadow3401 (Jan 21, 2021)




----------



## Det0x (Jan 23, 2021)

AMD Ryzen 9 5950X @ 4798.88 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[dl125q] Validated Dump by ERLEND (2021-01-23 01:00:38) - MB: Asus ROG CROSSHAIR VIII HERO (WI-FI) - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				




Single-Thread 725
Multi-Thread (32T) 14147

Screenshot in the cinebench r23 thread, but can post here also if needed.


----------



## Felix123BU (Jan 25, 2021)

5800X with some light PBO

Single -695.1
Multi - 6968.5









PBO actually is useful this gen


----------



## Kissamies (Jan 25, 2021)

AMD Ryzen 5 3600 @ 4403.7 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[iy3clt] Validated Dump by Maenad (2021-01-25 19:56:44) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Felix123BU (Jan 26, 2021)

Broke 700 in single, the 5800X reminds me of my late 4790K


----------



## Toretobcn (Jan 26, 2021)

Felix123BU said:


> Broke 700 in single, the 5800X reminds me of my late 4790K
> 
> View attachment 185650


I imagine that was in an ideal condition right?? Everything clean, fresh And top priority


----------



## Felix123BU (Jan 26, 2021)

Toretobcn said:


> I imagine that was in an ideal condition right?? Everything clean, fresh And top priority


Ideal as in PBO + 200, negative manual curve, normal windows, closed all non essential apps, boost to 5.05 Ghz single, 4.775 multi, 280mm AIO, 25 celsius ish room temp (so on the warm side), so not super ideal, but normal-ideal. Have not fiddled with priority setting, normal, might be that Real Time might get a few extra points, but was not going for absolute max but something I could use all day long, even though I wont use this as a daily setup


----------



## kapone32 (Jan 26, 2021)

I don't want to paste the entire HTML or text file but I got 651.2 for single core and 4943.7 for multi on my 5600x and 461.4 single and 7238.5 Multi core for my 2920X.


----------



## Toretobcn (Jan 26, 2021)

kapone32 said:


> No quiero pegar todo el archivo HTML o de texto, pero obtuve 651.2 para un solo núcleo y 4943.7 para varios en mi 5600x y 461.4 solo y 7238.5 para varios núcleos para mi 2920X.


I didn't understand what you mean hahaha


----------



## bobbybluz (Jan 29, 2021)

Here's two oldies I just ran across. Check out the temps & voltages along with the clock speeds.

Intel Core i7 4790K @ 4968.98 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)






						CPU-Z Validator 3.1
					

CPU-Z Validation Checker (by canardpc.com)



					valid.canardpc.com


----------



## Felix123BU (Feb 3, 2021)

bobbybluz said:


> Here's two oldies I just ran across. Check out the temps & voltages along with the clock speeds.
> 
> Intel Core i7 4790K @ 4968.98 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)
> 
> ...


hot damn, 5Ghz on that chip, I just gave my 4790K away this week to a friend in need, but could only go 4.6 allcore on a decent voltage, and it was delidded


----------



## mortenserv (Feb 22, 2021)

Hey there,

I need a bit of advice. I have this 3+ year old build that have been running like this since the beginning and is stable:

- i7-8700K running 5.3GHz @ 1.400V. No AVX and delidded so under stress test temps max out at 72C-ish.
- Asus Z390-F mobo (originally a Z370-E)
- NZXT Kraken Z63 AIO cooler
- 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3333MHz
- AORUS GTX 1080Ti Xtreme Edition

Obviously I was lucky with my 8700K as it OC's very good. Now I'm considering going for a Rocket Lake 11900K upgrade. I mainly play one game called iRacing which is a weird creature in terms of performance. It really just craves single thread performance hence my upgrade thoughts. But....even though no reliable benchmarks have been released I'm just not sure if it makes sense. From what I have heard the 11900K should be able to hit 700 in CPUZ. Looks like the AMD X5XXX's can hit the same area. I had never benched my CPU but to my surprise it hits 634 points. Naturally it's getting obliviated in multi thread, but I really don't care about multi thread.

- So is there something wrong with my numbers making my 634 score not valid? With the IPC gains made over the years it just seems odd my ol' 8700K still rocks so good.
- Is there another benchmark which is better for gaming?
- Will a never CPU give me other gains for gaming a benchmark doens't take into account? Apart from PCIE 4.0 with better possible M.2 speeds.


----------



## QuietBob (Feb 22, 2021)

mortenserv said:


> Now I'm considering going for a Rocket Lake 11900K upgrade. I mainly play one game called iRacing which is a weird creature in terms of performance. It really just craves single thread performance



If those leaked benchmarks are anything to go by, you'd be looking at 14% ST boost in SSE2:







iRacing is currently recommending an octa core CPU with 32 GB RAM for playing in high detail. You may see better minimum frame rates and less frame time variation with two extra cores.
You can test your current CPU and GPU usage by setting CPUMeter=1 in your app.ini file and pressing "F" in-game. That should tell you whether your current setup is CPU-bound: enabling meter box

And welcome to TPU forums!


----------



## mortenserv (Feb 23, 2021)

QuietBob said:


> If those leaked benchmarks are anything to go by, you'd be looking at 14% ST boost in SSE2:
> 
> View attachment 189554View attachment 189555
> 
> ...


Thx Bob 

It just seems so crazy that more than 3 years later Intel can only offer a 14% improvement. Where did Moore's Law go? I know my 8700K OC's well, but still  Of course this is only single thread.

I have the CPUMeter enabled. Playing on a 5120 x 1440 monitor with a little above medium settings my CPU and GPU seems almost on par - maybe with the GPU a tad more stressed. I'm looking for a 3080 (like the rest of the world...) but my "fear" is that once I get it, my 8700K will be the bottleneck. That's why I began to look into Rocket Lake. I guess I will have to wait for official benchmarks, but for a 14% increase it just seems like too much money to spend and then I might as well have to wait and see what Alder Lake can do...even though I don't have that high expectations for the first generation.


----------



## Toretobcn (Feb 23, 2021)

that 11900k throws me a lot I hate that it has so much in single core! I'm at 640 scores with the 10900k .... 712scores is going to be a big difference in games.

I was stung ... I managed to put 1 core of the 10900k to 5.6! and even so...


----------



## mortenserv (Feb 23, 2021)

Toretobcn said:


> that 11900k throws me a lot I hate that it has so much in single core! I'm at 640 scores with the 10900k .... 712scores is going to be a big difference in games.
> 
> I was stung ... I managed to put 1 core of the 10900k to 5.6! and even so...
> 
> View attachment 189696


So a 10-15% gain in CPUZ will be more than 10-15% worth for gaming?


----------



## Toretobcn (Feb 24, 2021)

I have no idea, but it is clear that it is innalcalzble for a 10900k in monocore!

I do not know how much difference there will be but it is clear that it will be better playing almost certainly ..

how much? no idea also the 11900k say that it gives those values without doing oc, bone stock, so I imagine that there will still be more gap!





10900k oc!


----------



## storm-chaser (Feb 25, 2021)

Dell Workstation (dual CPU)







My other Z820 is geared more towards single core performance, hence I went with the ultra rare 2673 v2 chip, with turbo up to 4.0GHz. Keep in mind this is a dual processor rig.


----------



## AZUTAROU (Feb 25, 2021)

I would like to thank Amzon.com and AMD.

It's just $ 240 to sell this amazing CPU ^^


----------



## Felix123BU (Feb 25, 2021)

Felix123BU said:


> hot damn, 5Ghz on that chip, I just gave my 4790K away this week to a friend in need, but could only go 4.6 allcore on a decent voltage, and it was delidded


same, could not go past 4.6 on my late 4790k back in the day whit out insane voltages, and it was also delidded and with liquid metal on a strong AIO, temps where not the problem, voltages where


----------



## storm-chaser (Feb 26, 2021)

I managed to coax a bit more out of my HP z820 workstation...


----------



## Makaveli (Feb 27, 2021)




----------



## storm-chaser (Feb 27, 2021)

Slight improvement in bandwidth after bumping up the RAM from 4166 to 4400MHz, going to see if I can run this frequency on CL18...
What about z390 BLCK overclocking? So far it seems stable at 200 Mhz, a 100% overclock. Does it make any difference at all seeing how it's uncoupled from the PCIe bus and other integral systems? Maybe just a coincidence, but right off the bat I hit 4400MHz on the RAM, I was not able to do that with 100MHz BLCK....





Edit: Have not found the upper limit of this ram yet:


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Feb 27, 2021)

Funny how you bombard my posts. Cute scores by the way, you're yet to even get close to my z390 rig.
Mine by the way, it's been months since you've tried to beat it so have a smaller reminder:


----------



## storm-chaser (Feb 27, 2021)

_L_ said:


> View attachment 190247
> Funny how you bombard my posts. Cute scores by the way, you're yet to even get close to my z390 rig


Im not in competition with you in any regard, not sure why you are bench racing here. I'm just having fun.

Are you familiar with overclocking 9th gen intel chips? Perhaps you can shed some light on front side bus overclocking for me.

Very happy to get 4533 on the RAM... I think that's where I'll settle up @ CL18

EDIT: Moving to cache overclocking now as the memory appears to be stable.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Feb 27, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> Im not in competition with you in any regard, not sure why you are bench racing here. I'm just having fun.
> 
> Are you familiar with overclocking 9th gen intel chips? Perhaps you can shed some light on front side bus overclocking for me.
> 
> ...


Push uncore, 4.4 is pretty low and I'd recommend running around 4.8-5 or so depending on the CPU bin, as for your prior statement you asked for advice to only bombard my DM, constantly spam me with reactions for months on end so it's only fair I return the favour, move on and stop bombarding my posts it's childish quite frankly. As for BCLK I would advise against that if you are running NVME SSDs as it can cause damage to them and potentially break them, SATAs should be fine though - also, I would advise moving tRFC down to the 320-360 mark.


----------



## storm-chaser (Feb 27, 2021)

_L_ said:


> Push uncore, 4.4 is pretty low and I'd recommend running around 4.8-5 or so depending on the CPU bin, as for your prior statement you asked for advice to only bombard my DM, constantly spam me with reactions for months on end so it's only fair I return the favour, move on and stop bombarding my posts it's childish quite frankly. As for BCLK I would advise against that if you are running NVME SSDs as it can cause damage to them and potentially break them, SATAs should be fine though - also, I would advise moving tRFC down to the 320-360 mark.


I could say the same about you, but really, If you have any issues please PM me and I'd be happy to discuss in a respectful conversation. We don't need the whole world to know about our minor disagreements and I'd prefer to keep this thread clean from strife if at all possible.

As for the memory tips, I will try them and report back. Is the PCIe bus not uncoupled from the FSB? Thought I read that somewhere where this issue with the NVMe drives only effects some Ryzen chips?

EDIT: Sorry the last few posts should be in the AIDA64 benchmark thread, I will post there going forward so as not to clutter this thread up with unrelated chatter.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Feb 27, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> Is the PCIe bus not uncoupled from the FSB?


Some boards have a separate BCLK generator for the CPU+RAM (2 BLCK generators) so it isolates it from PCIe and similar. And the NVME drive issue is universal to any platform, if you push the BCLK on NVME drives it will eventually kill them at a fast rate.


----------



## Vendor (Feb 28, 2021)




----------



## Toothless (Feb 28, 2021)

Dual x5570.






Dual 2680v2.







Dual x5680.


----------



## storm-chaser (Feb 28, 2021)

Toothless said:


> Dual x5570.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


For reference here is my dual processor dell workstation (x2 Xeon X5650)









Running a higher bus speed yielded a slight improvement in single core and a slight dip in MT.





And this is the validation:


----------



## mortenserv (Mar 1, 2021)

Well it's at the end of its lifespan so thought I could just as well up the OC on my 8700K to 5.4 MHz (AVX0) @ 1.420V. Hyperthreading disabled on purpose.


----------



## Yukikaze (Mar 1, 2021)

15W Kaby Lake vs 25W Tiger Lake (Lenovo x390 vs Lenovo Thinkbook Yoga 14s):


----------



## Ferrum Master (Mar 1, 2021)

Yukikaze said:


> 15W Kaby Lake vs 25W Tiger Lake (Lenovo x390 vs Lenovo Thinkbook Yoga 14s):



If you divide the score to get performance per one watt... they are same...


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 2, 2021)

Working on stability now but I can get it to boot into windows at the very least... It's right near the limit of my custom loop which consists of two radiators: One 120 mm and one 360 mm... Question, how big of an impact does flow have? In other words, should I be running the pump at full throttle or back off a little bit? It's a freezemod pump with PWM control. BTW this is my highest OC, ever. !!!





EDIT: Looks like 5.602GHz is the upper limit for this chip.


----------



## ezmafl (Mar 12, 2021)

10700-K, playing around with single core turbo overclocks -- 53, 53, 52, 52, 52, 52, 51, 50, 1.295v fixed, 47x Ring, LLC High on a Gigabyte Z490 Vision D.   The 53x bump helped push the single core score to 629.

Running a few hours of P95 26.6 blended, forcing an hour or two on 112/112, running Forza Horizon 4 for a couple hours and trying 30 mins of R20 or R23 in loops don't cause any blue screen or WHEA errors.  Not true 24-hour test by any stretch, but these little short runs initially look good. 

R20 single core gets 542.

I tried 55, 55, 54, 54, 53, 53, 52, 50 at 1.35v fixed, LLC High, AVX 0.  It blue-screened at 1.31v, so I bumped it to 1.35v.  Haven't tried any stability tests whatsoever, but it got through CPU-Z.

Windows didn't like 57, 57, 56, 56, 1.35v.   I wonder why...

It's probably better overall if I went to all core 51x.   Settling at the moment with 53x4, 52x2, 51x1, 50x1 and testing stability at 1.295v.


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 12, 2021)

ezmafl said:


> 10700-K, playing around with single core turbo overclocks -- 53, 53, 52, 52, 52, 52, 51, 50, 1.295v fixed, 47x Ring, LLC High on a Gigabyte Z490 Vision D.   The 53x bump helped push the single core score to 629.
> 
> Running a few hours of P95 26.6 blended, forcing an hour or two on 112/112, running Forza Horizon 4 for a couple hours and trying 30 mins of R20 or R23 in loops don't cause any blue screen or WHEA errors.  Not true 24-hour test by any stretch, but these little short runs initially look good.
> 
> ...


I've been doing the same as of late. Turbo core is really fun to play around with.

Something very similar with my 9600KF: x53 x53 x53 x52 x51 x50
Here is my bench with these settings:





So I take it there are zero gains in IPC between 9th and 10th gen Intel CPUs? We are both within the margin of error, and at the same clock speed getting identical results.

Have you tried leaving the vcore settings on auto? As is the case with my MSI board, when you do that, it automatically goes into adaptive mode, indicating the board will seek out and deliver optimum voltage based on load / heat etc. This works really well for my 9600KF vs a vcore set to override mode, because the voltage will dip at idle but the clocks still remain really high, so it seems ideal for modifying turbo config.


----------



## ezmafl (Mar 12, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> I've been doing the same as of late. Turbo core is really fun to play around with.
> 
> Something very similar with my 9600KF: x53 x53 x53 x52 x51 x50
> Here is my bench with these settings:
> ...



Ha, too funny regarding the similarities.  Good idea about trying adaptive; however, it'll be a few days before I have the extra time to tinker with this again.  Was trying to have some computer fun after the kids went to bed.  I want to try all-core 51x soon, as it's been a while, also want to look at finding a way to actually test the single core overclocks.  Just because it's booting and "working," I'm concerned it may not be stable.  Someone recommended that the new OCCT 8.0 can individually test.  I also want to see if I force certain programs (handbrake) to not use certain cores, and will that then cause the processor to run said program at 51, 52 or 53 all cores?  

However, I think Cinebench R20's single core test is utilizing the turbo speed -- at 5.2 or 5.3.  Trying to get a baseline for other CPUs, online shows 539 is also what an i9-10900K stock runs, since that can turbo to 5.3.  Fun stuff.


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 12, 2021)

ezmafl said:


> Ha, too funny regarding the similarities.  Good idea about trying adaptive; however, it'll be a few days before I have the extra time to tinker with this again.  Was trying to have some computer fun after the kids went to bed.  I want to try all-core 51x soon, as it's been a while, also want to look at finding a way to actually test the single core overclocks.  Just because it's booting and "working," I'm concerned it may not be stable.  Someone recommended that the new OCCT 8.0 can individually test.  I also want to see if I force certain programs (handbrake) to not use certain cores, and will that then cause the processor to run said program at 51, 52 or 53 all cores?
> 
> However, I think Cinebench R20's single core test is utilizing the turbo speed -- at 5.2 or 5.3.  Trying to get a baseline for other CPUs, online shows 539 is also what an i9-10900K stock runs, since that can turbo to 5.3.  Fun stuff.


You could also disable 4 cores and set the two remaining active cores @ 5.3 or 5.4. Sometimes, you can get away with this despite the fact the same system may crash if you have an all core 5.4GHz OC.



ezmafl said:


> I tried 55, 55, 54, 54, 53, 53, 52, 50 at 1.35v fixed, LLC High, AVX 0. It blue-screened at 1.31v, so I bumped it to 1.35v. Haven't tried any stability tests whatsoever, but it got through CPU-Z.



Another thing. If you are running close to your thermal margins with your turbos set this high, you can drop LLC down to the lowest level possible and re-run some torture tests to find the optimal setting. Slowly raise your LLC until stability is reach.

This was the case with my 9600KF because I had LLC set on max, which was pumping over 1.430 volts into the CPU under load, greatly reducing the performance of my custom loop and adding huge amounts of heat, which narrowed the margins even further.

So I methodically went through each LLC option until I came across the one that could pass torture tests and maintain stability. This means instead of 1.430 vcore it turned out to be more like 1.373 volts, enough to keep the OC stable.


storm-chaser said:


> You could also disable 4 cores and set the two remaining active cores @ 5.3 or 5.4. Sometimes, you can get away with this despite the fact the same system may crash if you have an all core 5.4GHz OC.


Wow. I am super impressed with the adaptive vcore on this motherboard. and After fixing LLC temps are substantially lower. matter of fact out of curiosity I have all my fans set at 800 rpm, the pump at 2000 rpm and each radiator fan the same, 800rpm. This is essentially an idle setting for this rig. Hard to believe but with the AIDA64 stress test, temps peak at about 163*F... totally rock solid! and that's at 5.0GHz all core turbo speed! That's right, these fans DONT ramp at all. Damn I'm beginning to like LGA 1151 more and more.


----------



## mclaren85 (Mar 12, 2021)

I know the core voltages are way too high but that's how AMD works. Settings are all default


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 13, 2021)

ezmafl said:


> Ha, too funny regarding the similarities.  Good idea about trying adaptive; however, it'll be a few days before I have the extra time to tinker with this again.  Was trying to have some computer fun after the kids went to bed.  I want to try all-core 51x soon, as it's been a while, also want to look at finding a way to actually test the single core overclocks.  Just because it's booting and "working," I'm concerned it may not be stable.  Someone recommended that the new OCCT 8.0 can individually test.  I also want to see if I force certain programs (handbrake) to not use certain cores, and will that then cause the processor to run said program at 51, 52 or 53 all cores?
> 
> However, I think Cinebench R20's single core test is utilizing the turbo speed -- at 5.2 or 5.3.  Trying to get a baseline for other CPUs, online shows 539 is also what an i9-10900K stock runs, since that can turbo to 5.3.  Fun stuff.


I just tried an experimental setting with 53x 53x 53x 53x 51x 50x set for turbo boost.

This substantially improved my single core result as you can see below. Prior to this I had only three cores running at 53x, like the screenshot above....


----------



## freeagent (Mar 13, 2021)

Nothing too crazy..


----------



## mclaren85 (Mar 13, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> I just tried an experimental setting with 53x 53x 53x 53x 51x 50x set for turbo boost.
> 
> This substantially improved my single core result as you can see below. Prior to this I had only three cores running at 53x, like the screenshot above....
> 
> View attachment 192202


How could Intel manage to get so low cpu core voltage? Damn Intel is way better! My voltage hungry 3900x takes up to 1,45V. !


----------



## freeagent (Mar 13, 2021)

mclaren85 said:


> How could Intel manage to get so low cpu core voltage? Damn Intel is way better! My voltage hungry 3900x takes up to 1,45V. !


He is probably up there too..


----------



## mclaren85 (Mar 13, 2021)

freeagent said:


> He is probably up there too..


Have you undervolted your 5600x?


----------



## freeagent (Mar 13, 2021)

mclaren85 said:


> Have you undervolted your 5600x?


Nope no need to.. pour quoi?

(How come?)


----------



## Panchovix (Mar 13, 2021)

This was at -20 CO on all cores, and wish ASUS updated my BIOS lol, the offset I set is +200Mhz (for 5.05Ghz), but it's bugged and it goes only to 199Mhz, so the offsets goes down by 25Mhz (to +175 Mhz)


----------



## Block10 (Mar 13, 2021)




----------



## R00kie (Mar 13, 2021)




----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 13, 2021)

gdallsk said:


> View attachment 192251


What was your clock speed for this run?


----------



## R00kie (Mar 13, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> What was your clock speed for this run?


4650MHz


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 13, 2021)

mclaren85 said:


> How could Intel manage to get so low cpu core voltage? Damn Intel is way better! My voltage hungry 3900x takes up to 1,45V. !


Under load it goes to 1.383 v



storm-chaser said:


> What was your clock speed for this run?


So a 9th gen Coffee lake scores 630 at approximately 5.2GHz.

That means pound for pound these AMD chips have more horsepower than intel. At least in the mainstream market.


----------



## R00kie (Mar 14, 2021)

freeagent said:


> Nope no need to.. pour quoi?
> 
> (How come?)


Lower temperatures, higher and more constant boost


----------



## ksva (Mar 14, 2021)

Intel Core i7 5960X @ 4898.86 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[880wyw] Validated Dump by CRIMINALCLK (2020-12-31 19:22:39) - MB: Asus X99-DELUXE - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				






She's 7 years old (2014) but works just fine :]


----------



## freeagent (Mar 14, 2021)

gdallsk said:


> Lower temperatures, higher and more constant boost


It’s something I can look into for sure


----------



## phanbuey (Mar 14, 2021)

reject 10900k


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 14, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> View attachment 192332
> 
> reject 10900k


Any chip that goes 5.1GHz is no reject in my book! lol


----------



## Panchovix (Mar 15, 2021)

Managed to improve my scores a little, just PBO, sad I can't still surpass 7K in multicore :c


----------



## Toretobcn (Mar 18, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> View attachment 192332
> 
> rechazar 10900k


*I don't see it that way !! the 10900k is still something better!*


----------



## ezmafl (Mar 19, 2021)

Toretobcn said:


> *I don't see it that way !! the 10900k is still something better!*
> 
> View attachment 192999


For the sake of asking, what are you overclocked to -- single cores vs. all-core?


----------



## Toretobcn (Mar 19, 2021)

ezmafl said:


> For the sake of asking, what are you overclocked to -- single cores vs. all-core?


without problems, there are my captures in another post.

It is in all cores 53 Avx0

then core x core:

54x4
53x10

And later applied a + to boost thermal, so if it is cold 55x4 and 54x10.

I'm telling you from memory but I'm almost sure that's the way it is I'm at work now


----------



## Phabets70 (Mar 21, 2021)

Here are the results of my fresh Amd Ryzen 9 5950X build.

I have done no tweaking. PBO is set to auto.


----------



## Toretobcn (Mar 21, 2021)

Phabets70 said:


> Here are the results of my fresh Amd Ryzen 9 5950X build.
> 
> I have done no tweaking. PBO is set to auto.


incredible score! I hope you enjoy it!

I have several friends with the 5950x and they are having a lot of blue screen and weird stuff!


----------



## Phabets70 (Mar 22, 2021)

Toretobcn said:


> incredible score! I hope you enjoy it!
> 
> I have several friends with the 5950x and they are having a lot of blue screen and weird stuff!


Thanks for your reaction.

I am really enjoying it... CPU is mostly bored with the workload I am using it for. 

Thank god no blue screens or other strange things happening. Just updated BIOS of mainboard, enabled PBO and set to automatic and enabled 'XMP'.


----------



## ezmafl (Mar 23, 2021)

Phabets70 said:


> Here are the results of my fresh Amd Ryzen 9 5950X build.
> 
> I have done no tweaking. PBO is set to auto.


That's amazing... 11k+ on multi... close to 2x the multi-core score of my i7-10700K.


----------



## Karvan (Mar 24, 2021)

Here is my 8600K score.
St: 638
Mt: 3659

Still some headroom left, 5.4ghz should be doable.

How much would this chip bennefit from watercooling? Yet im still using A mugen 5 pcgh, but like to hit ~5.8


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 29, 2021)

Karvan said:


> Here is my 8600K score.
> St: 638
> Mt: 3659
> 
> ...


You could probably bench 5.5 with the right water cooling setup and a good all copper water block.



Phabets70 said:


> Here are the results of my fresh Amd Ryzen 9 5950X build.
> 
> I have done no tweaking. PBO is set to auto.


Damn. That is a powerhouse.


----------



## TxGrin (Mar 29, 2021)




----------



## Final_Fighter (Mar 30, 2021)




----------



## CS85 (Mar 31, 2021)

My new CPU


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 31, 2021)

CS85 said:


> My new CPU
> 
> View attachment 194775


so there is a slight improvement in IPC between my 9th gen i5 9600KF and your 11th gen i5 11500K... or so it would appear.

I will run my CPU at the same 4900MHz and see what I get. IIRC it's around 600 at that clock speed...


----------



## CS85 (Mar 31, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> so there is a slight improvement in IPC between my 9th gen i5 9600KF and your 11th gen i5 11500K... or so it would appear.
> 
> I will run my CPU at the same 4900MHz and see what I get. IIRC it's around 600 at that clock speed...


Sounds good, yeah I heard it was up to 19% increase in IPC compared to last gen. 5GHz, not sure how stable it is though.


----------



## storm-chaser (Mar 31, 2021)

CS85 said:


> Sounds good, yeah I heard it was up to 19% increase in IPC compared to last gen. 5GHz, not sure how stable it is though.View attachment 194777


Please let us know how far you can push it. Very curious about this CPU because it may very well be my next upgrade. Sucks I have to update the mainboard as well, but oh well. What kind of cooling and water block do you have on it?


----------



## CS85 (Mar 31, 2021)

storm-chaser said:


> Please let us know how far you can push it. Very curious about this CPU because it may very well be my next upgrade. Sucks I have to update the mainboard as well, but oh well. What kind of cooling and water block do you have on it?


So far seems like a solid CPU. No water cooling, I have a Noctua NH-D15 on it, temps are good, power consumption is quite high but nothing too bad. Will see if I can hit 5.1 at reasonable voltage and let you know. EDIT: seems like 5.1 is a no-go. Could do 5 with 1.36v but 5.1 will lock up at 1.4v. Not sure what the max safe vcore for Rocket Lake is.


----------



## mclaren85 (Mar 31, 2021)

Phabets70 said:


> Here are the results of my fresh Amd Ryzen 9 5950X build.
> 
> I have done no tweaking. PBO is set to auto.


How could that monster run with a so low voltage? Have you offset?


----------



## Phabets70 (Apr 2, 2021)

mclaren85 said:


> How could that monster run with a so low voltage? Have you offset?


No offset, all is on default except PBO which is set to Auto (technically an OC). I didn't even realize the low voltage. Now that I kept an eye on it I see it bumping to 1.2V when the CPU boosts to 5Ghz.


----------



## Final_Fighter (Apr 2, 2021)

this is after setting settings 88 for PPT, 60 for TDC, and 90 for EDC. also going +200mhz. dont have curve optimizer in this bios and the latest causes the board not to boot so i have to run with it. stays under 1.4v when boosting and under 80c.


----------



## RealKGB (Apr 2, 2021)

Nothing interesting on CPU tab for now (planning to OC tomorrow) but here's my Memory tab:



Spent 5 hours tuning this.
I've got a 2x8GB kit of Samsung B-Die at 3200 MT/s C14-14-14-31, and a Vengenance LPX kit at 3200 MT/s C16-18-18-36.
LPX has Nanya Tech RAM chips.

It passed half an hour of 1usmus' DRAM ClockTuner for Ryzen MEMbench memtest, and I'm planning to run memtest86 overnight to catch any errors.


----------



## storm-chaser (Apr 5, 2021)

So this is after some fine tuning with turbo core overclocking (dynamic).
I have voltage set to auto and using multipliers:
x53
x53
x53
x52
x51
x50

These are the cpu z results with this configuration:


----------



## jesdals (Apr 15, 2021)

Been playing around with memory timings and ended up here at normal room temps (21c)


----------



## ezmafl (Apr 22, 2021)

Differences between an i7-11700K and my former i7-10700K:

I'm having BIOS issues with my Gigabyte Z490 board and currently waiting to try out a revision when available.  However, I managed to get CPU-Z up and running with a few different combinations.  While I don't have screen captures to represent all of the below, I saved most "validation submissions."

As expected, not much of a multicore difference between my i7-10700K at 5.0ghz and 5.1ghz compared to a stock i7-11700K.

Per CPU-Z, the i7-10700K stock scores were around ~560/~5600.

*i7-10700K - 5.3 on 2 cores, 5.0 when running all cores (was my stable overclock):*
Single - 623
Multi - 6160
https://valid.x86.fr/a8fex6

*i7-10700K - 5.3 on 2 cores, 5.1 when running all cores (could never get stability without WHEA errors):*
Single - 623
Multi - 6260

*i7-11700K - 5.2 on 2 cores, 5.0 when running all cores:*
Single - 703
Multi - 6942
(attached picture)

*i7-11700K - 5.2 on 2 cores, 4.9 when running all cores:*
Single - 702
Multi - 6821
https://valid.x86.fr/lzta4l

*i7-11700K - 5.2 on 2 cores, 4.7 when running all cores:*
Single - 701
Multi - 6532
https://valid.x86.fr/tx96iq

*i7-11700K - Stock*
Single - 670
Multi - 6381
https://valid.x86.fr/k68ul8


----------



## ezmafl (May 5, 2021)

Ended up returning the i7-11700K; I believe the CPU was either faulty or there were BIOS compatibility issues with my Gigabyte Z490 board.  The RKL CPU would frequently (but briefly) read 0c on its thermal sensors, plus the fact I couldn't get a stable OC.  Anyway, I replaced it with an i9-10850K.   Other than adjusting voltage, I bumped the lower end turbo ratios from 48x to 49x (all core); leaving the max single ratio "stock" at 52x.   Will eventually try and see if I can get 50x all core when I have the time.


----------



## Toretobcn (May 5, 2021)

ezmafl said:


> Ended up returning the i7-11700K; I believe the CPU was either faulty or there were BIOS compatibility issues with my Gigabyte Z490 board.  The RKL CPU would frequently (but briefly) read 0c on its thermal sensors, plus the fact I couldn't get a stable OC.  Anyway, I replaced it with an i9-10850K.   Other than adjusting voltage, I bumped the lower end turbo ratios from 48x to 49x (all core); leaving the max single ratio "stock" at 52x.   Will eventually try and see if I can get 50x all core when I have the time.



what a mess you seemed happy with the scores ...


----------



## ezmafl (May 7, 2021)

^-- Yeah, was a mess.  I would have tried a different RKL chip if they had them in store, but couldn't be without a computer for a few days.  Happy with the i9-10850K; it put me back on track single thread wise compared to my i7-10700K.  Also ahead of the i7-11700K even OC'ed due to the additional cores.  It's a trade-off though.  

Slight tweak to my 52x set to 3 cores (versus 2) with 49x on the remaining cores.  The extra 52x helped boost the single thread from 601 to 621.   Seem to have good stability along with good temps.  I'm content with these settings (at least for a little while)!


----------



## QuietBob (May 29, 2021)

Ever wondered how fast the CPU inside your PS4 is? 





The console has two such modules. But even that is small comfort, seeing how everything is bottlenecked by the abysmal ST performance. And the Xbox One does no better at 1.75 GHz


----------



## freeagent (May 30, 2021)

My little 5600X @ +200 -30


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (May 30, 2021)

Pretty much what same ST score here giving CO a try with -15 did not yeld WHEA's in half a day  so I bumped it to -30 all-core with no errors in the two weeks since , well there were errors ironed out to dram timings and what not.


----------



## freeagent (Jun 3, 2021)




----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jun 11, 2021)

Show 'em boy'o ! Show them how it's done as the new  ones on their 7nm can't hold a candle to your 130nm displacement. A lower score is better in this case , right ? , No ? , Ok.


----------



## QuietBob (Jun 11, 2021)

dont whant to set it' said:


> A lower score is better in this case , right ?


Yep, it means your CPU has lower latency. Therefore it is faster 
Just look at my proud Sempron!


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jun 11, 2021)

@QuietBob  mine's overclocked and at it's max multi , don't know about yours as it's frequency seems low to the point of a decreased multiplier?(to lazy at the moment to Google the specs of a 2500+ 90nm Sempron).


----------



## Simkin (Jun 21, 2021)

Intel i7-5960X @ 4.6Ghz (32GB 3200Mhz CL14) *Multi: 5009, Single: 505*
AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G @ Stock (8 Core Zen 2 APU)  (16GB 3600Mhz CL16) *Multi: 5650, Single: 530*

So, seems like my Ryzen HTPC is faster than my Gamer/Workstation 

Cant wait for Alder Lake-S this fall.


----------



## GerKNG (Jun 21, 2021)

5800X @ 95W

(95/60/90), 1X Scalar, Curve Optimizer -15 all Core, +50Mhz offset.


----------



## GrevenX (Jun 22, 2021)

651 Single
5166 Multi









						AMD Ryzen 5 5600X @ 4773.89 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[07eey2] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-PHJTP6B (2021-06-21 13:14:22) - MB: Asus PRIME X570-PRO - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## birdie (Jun 25, 2021)

Stock Ryzen 7 5800X except for a 0.05V undervolt.


----------



## ezmafl (Jun 26, 2021)

At my in-law's, added some cheap SSDs and freshly installed Win10 on some older machines to revive them... so why not run CPU-Z?


AMD A6-5350M (2c/2t; 35w); HP ProBook 455G1 Laptop [8gb/RAM] - 189/326
AMD FX-4350 (4c/4t; 125w); Dell Desktop [8gb/RAM] - 247/831
Intel i5-2500 (4c/4t; 95w - non-"K"); Dell Inspiron 620 Desktop [6gb/RAM] - 351/1341


----------



## Othnark (Jul 14, 2021)

New CPU with a little PBO limit tuning and CO tuning on a Crosshair 7 Wifi. Don't see the point of Asus DCO, holds 4.83ghz all core and 51xx single core with just PBO already, and does so at lower than stock voltages...

BIOS 4301, all AGESA 1.2.0.x after 1.2.0.0 show performance regression









						AMD Ryzen 9 5950X @ 4723.9 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[amzz3m] Validated Dump by Anonymous (2021-06-27 10:04:07) - MB: Asus ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Girafa (Jul 24, 2021)




----------



## CS85 (Jul 26, 2021)

My new laptop.


----------



## xrobwx71 (Jul 26, 2021)




----------



## Tomgang (Jul 27, 2021)

My 5600X and 5950X.


----------



## 1986nath (Jul 27, 2021)

5800x pbo +200 offset


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 2, 2021)

Laptop with Ryzen 5 5500U. HP 15s-eq2518nd - 461V3EA. Standard settings out of the box.


----------



## Simkin (Aug 11, 2021)

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G @ Stock (8 Core Zen 3 APU)  (16GB 3600Mhz CL16) *Multi: 6359, Single: 626*


----------



## QuietBob (Aug 12, 2021)

The slowest 64-bit desktop CPU from Intel, released in 2004:





Only 28% behind the CPU powering your 8th Gen console


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 12, 2021)

QuietBob said:


> The slowest 64-bit desktop CPU from Intel, released in 2004:
> 
> View attachment 212321
> 
> Only 28% behind the CPU powering your 8th Gen console


You must be a very patient man


----------



## johnspack (Aug 12, 2021)

Ryzen 5900HX laptop:


----------



## ezmafl (Aug 14, 2021)

johnspack said:


> Ryzen 5900HX laptop



That's incredible.  Outperforms my i9-10850K on single thread with a mild OC (624) by a few points and similarly edges out my old i7-10700K at 5.2/5.3ghz with very similar single thread scores... all at 45w and 7nm.  It even outperforms the i7-10700K (among others) at stock on multi.  Nice chip!


----------



## rlifeh (Aug 17, 2021)

.
.
Ryzen 3100 - 4.0ghz 1.3V (lowest silicone quality )
with cheapest 2x16GB 3000mhz rams in the world  (cost me 102$)

you can see in photo i change timing from 19-19-19-43 to 16-17-17-36, and something from ~845 to ~520 :v


----------



## ezmafl (Aug 22, 2021)

Lenovo Ideapad 5 with i5-1035G1 and 16gb of ram.


----------



## ezmafl (Sep 1, 2021)

Lenovo Ideapad 3 with an i3-6100u, 12gb of ram -- 2.3ghz, 15w, 2c/4t


----------



## sam_86314 (Sep 1, 2021)

Main PC (5800X, 32GB DDR4-3600 C18)






I saw @speedy_sprocket try to start a new thread on this topic, and I think that's a good idea. This thread is very old and disorganized, and the old results are not comparable to the current ones.









						CPUz Multi-Core post your results here
					

Emphasis on multi-core here, and that will be how the leaderboard is arranged. Please post your submissions using this format. While it's okay to attach full screenshots instead, it does take an extra step to get to those results and thus is more inconvenient when compiling sub results,




					www.techpowerup.com
				




Shame it got locked, oh well.


----------



## AusWolf (Sep 5, 2021)

Bog standard Core i7-11700 with a bog standard kit of 2x16 GB Corsair 3200 MHz 16-20-20-38, dual rank.

I honestly don't know why it's fashionable to hate on 11th gen Intel. This CPU barely cost me £300 and it isn't considerably worse than a 5800X (which is also more expensive).


----------



## freeagent (Sep 5, 2021)

Just a mild tune, nothing crazy..





Runs a little cooler @ stock clocks


----------



## AusWolf (Sep 6, 2021)

AusWolf said:


> Bog standard Core i7-11700 with a bog standard kit of 2x16 GB Corsair 3200 MHz 16-20-20-38, dual rank.
> 
> I honestly don't know why it's fashionable to hate on 11th gen Intel. This CPU barely cost me £300 and it isn't considerably worse than a 5800X (which is also more expensive).
> 
> View attachment 215533


Got a new kit of 4x 8 GB Kinston Fury Beast 3200 MHz just for sentimental reasons - I've always been partial to Kinston RAM, and now they're back in the game with their own brand.

I didn't think the slightly tighter latencies of 16-18-18-36 would do anything compared to the Corsair's 16-20-20-38, but look at the single thread results! Or is it the fact that I reinstalled Windows?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Sep 6, 2021)

My every day driver and very "old" friend....X79/Xeon 2697 V2 12c/24t OC 3,45Ghz All Cores + Turbo boosting up to the 4,03Ghz


----------



## zrfnd (Sep 7, 2021)

I don't really know if the results are good or bad but here they are


----------



## zebra_hun (Sep 7, 2021)

Just a little overclocked Comet Lake 

Valid


----------



## Samiam66 (Sep 7, 2021)

Never been overclocked ..


----------



## Toothless (Sep 7, 2021)

Samiam66 said:


> Never been overclocked ..
> 
> 
> View attachment 215868


You're missing something there.


----------



## freeagent (Sep 7, 2021)

Samiam66 said:


> Never been overclocked ..


You say it like it’s a dirty thing


----------



## Samiam66 (Sep 7, 2021)

nothing like that ..everyone focus their attention on different aspects of thier
Setup ....


----------



## Toothless (Sep 7, 2021)

Samiam66 said:


> nothing like that ..everyone focus their attention on different aspects of thier
> Setup ....


You didn't post the benchmark. That's the point of the thread.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Sep 8, 2021)

AMD A6-3650 Liano 4c/4t OC 2,6Ghz Integrated GPU Radeon-6530D







Still using this little CPU/FM1 platform as a test bench for some linux distros or low level GPU's......Working Flawlessly


----------



## jayjr1105 (Sep 8, 2021)

Fuma 2 cooler, PBO+200MHz (95ppt-60tdc-110edc) -5 curve optimizer offset on all cores.


----------



## QuietBob (Sep 8, 2021)

Zyll Goliat said:


> AMD A6-3650 Liano 4c/4t OC 3,3Ghz Integrated GPU Radeon-6530D


Wow, that ST score is hard to believe! The same as the slowest 64-bit Celeron D, even after OCing


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Sep 8, 2021)

QuietBob said:


> Wow, that ST score is hard to believe! The same as the slowest 64-bit Celeron D, even after OCing


Aye...tho' I am 100% sure that this CPU could be "easily" OC up to the around 4Ghz and then it's totally different story ....
P.S. My bad Those Liano with GPU are tricky when it comes to the OC multiplier seems like it ain't working even if the Speed is showing higher in CPU-Z...seems like only way is base OC.....
This is actually real result when CPU is working on 3Ghz


----------



## Final_Fighter (Sep 8, 2021)

jayjr1105 said:


> Fuma 2 cooler, PBO+200MHz (95ppt-60tdc-110edc) -5 curve optimizer offset on all cores.
> View attachment 215982


looks like something is holding you back in your muti thread.

what are your temps?


----------



## jayjr1105 (Sep 8, 2021)

Final_Fighter said:


> looks like something is holding you back in your muti thread.
> 
> what are your temps?


Temps are very good overall.  I've been following guides/advice on tuning this chip more for single threaded performance like gaming vs productivity workloads (all core boost) since I don't do any productivity stuff whatsoever.


----------



## AusWolf (Sep 15, 2021)

Am I the boss now or what?


----------



## freeagent (Sep 15, 2021)

I thought she had a 705 in there, I thought wrong


----------



## jayjr1105 (Sep 16, 2021)

Anyone else have to reboot and then run CPU-z to get a good score?  Seems I can manually end task on all kinds of things so that RAM and CPU usage is at an absolute minimum and scores will stink... reboot and run CPUz benchmark and scores are way higher.  My recent bench


----------



## rlifeh (Sep 16, 2021)

jayjr1105 said:


> Anyone else have to reboot and then run CPU-z to get a good score?  Seems I can manually end task on all kinds of things so that RAM and CPU usage is at an absolute minimum and scores will stink... reboot and run CPUz benchmark and scores are way higher.  My recent bench
> View attachment 217145View attachment 217146


----------



## QuietBob (Sep 16, 2021)

AusWolf said:


> Am I the boss now or what?


Nope


----------



## zebra_hun (Sep 16, 2021)

QuietBob said:


> Nope


LoL


----------



## jayjr1105 (Sep 16, 2021)

rlifeh said:


>


What are you saying with this video?  I do use curve optimizer and PBO already.


----------



## AusWolf (Sep 16, 2021)

QuietBob said:


> Nope


Socket 754! Sweet memories!


----------



## QuietBob (Sep 17, 2021)

AusWolf said:


> Socket 754! Sweet memories!


Sure!
That CPU is literally the slowest 64-bit desktop processor made by AMD. Runs Win7 just fine - if you don't mind the occasional wait


----------



## AusWolf (Sep 17, 2021)

QuietBob said:


> Sure!
> That CPU is literally the slowest 64-bit desktop processor made by AMD. Runs Win7 just fine - if you don't mind the occasional wait


Nice! I was the coolest kid (only among the nerds) with my Athlon 64 3000+ back in high school. 

The one I posted the picture about is a quad-core Atom x5-Z8330 with a TDP of around 2 W inside a Compute Stick not much bigger than a USB flash drive, powered by a 3 W power brick with a micro USB plug, running Windows 10 32-bit - and not much else because of the 2 GB RAM.


----------



## RealKGB (Sep 17, 2021)

I thought had a CPU-Z screenshot of my Phenom II X4 955 at 4407 MHz (2 cores disabled), but I guess not.
Sad, I can't get it to do that anymore, though I might be dumb and forgot a setting I flipped before.
Why 2 cores disabled? It runs my personal Java Minecraft server, and there single-core performance is king. 1 core for OS and 1 core for Java - perfect! Worked well too until I broke something by accident and didn't have the time to fix it.
So I guess here's my Core 2 Quad Q9550S running at 2.66 GHz without thermal paste? IIRC it went to 800 MHz and then hit thermal shutdown in 10 seconds after starting Cinebench.


Spoiler








I fuggin hate Intel's stock coolers now, having handled one.
I never want to have to use one again.


----------



## Rehy (Sep 20, 2021)

Ryzen 9 5900x (stock) + AIO Be Quiet Silent loop 2 360mm, Asus Strix B450-e gaming wi-fi, 4x8Gb 3400mhz CL14


----------



## AusWolf (Sep 21, 2021)

Rehy said:


> Ryzen 9 5900x (stock) + AIO Be Quiet Silent loop 2 360mm, Asus Strix B450-e gaming wi-fi, 4x8Gb 3400mhz CL14
> 
> View attachment 217617


What are your thoughts on the Silent Loop 2? I'm thinking about buying the 280 mm version.


----------



## Rehy (Sep 22, 2021)

I was bit dissapointed on first, but havent realized that I had 30C indoor temperature. On stock AIO was much louder than my previous Noctua NH-D15s under load. When I set curve for fans in BIOS like 40% at 40C, 50% at 50C and 65% at 70C I was shocked how quiet this AIO can be and still be verry efficient. Now I have 38C iddle, 55-60C at gaming, and 65-68C at heavy workloads. I tried turn PBO2 on with curve optimizer -25 all cores, scallar auto, limits auto, +50mhz and my score is slightly higher and CPU even cooler :-D


----------



## AusWolf (Sep 22, 2021)

Rehy said:


> I was bit dissapointed on first, but havent realized that I had 30C indoor temperature. On stock AIO was much louder than my previous Noctua NH-D15s under load. When I set curve for fans in BIOS like 40% at 40C, 50% at 50C and 65% at 70C I was shocked how quiet this AIO can be and still be verry efficient. Now I have 38C iddle, 55-60C at gaming, and 65-68C at heavy workloads. I tried turn PBO2 on with curve optimizer -25 all cores, scallar auto, limits auto, +50mhz and my score is slightly higher and CPU even cooler :-D
> View attachment 217863


Based on that, I assume it's a good AIO.  In the UK, you rarely ever get 30 °C, so I guess I have nothing to worry about. Impressive results!


----------



## Athlonite (Sep 23, 2021)

Boom Bitches yeah I know I know but that's not a R7 5xxx series Ryzen and it's not likely to be either I'm not paying 200 bucks more for the same amount of cores/threads for a 5800X over the 3700X


----------



## JCL (Sep 28, 2021)

Multi and single scores.


----------



## DoH! (Sep 29, 2021)

1.97.0 x64


----------



## Athlonite (Sep 29, 2021)

Managed to eek out a few more points in the multi


----------



## Ware (Sep 29, 2021)

10850k air cooled


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 29, 2021)

Ware said:


> 10850k air cooled
> View attachment 218766



Air cooled?  what's the temperature there.


----------



## freeagent (Sep 29, 2021)




----------



## Final_Fighter (Sep 30, 2021)




----------



## JCL (Sep 30, 2021)

Single and multi combined.


----------



## JCL (Oct 1, 2021)

JCL said:


> Single and multi combined.


Increased scores slightly on each.


----------



## freeagent (Oct 1, 2021)

JCL said:


> Single and multi combined.


Oh I see.. it’s like that huh?

I will have to try again when I get out of bed 

Man that thing is a freak. I love it. Maybe I need more iod


----------



## JCL (Oct 1, 2021)

freeagent said:


> Oh I see.. it’s like that huh?
> 
> I will have to try again when I get out of bed
> 
> Man that thing is a freak. I love it. Maybe I need more iod


Oddly enough, I got those last night after I lowered the boost? from 200 to 150.


----------



## Ware (Oct 1, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> Air cooled?  what's the temperature there.


CPU-Z benchmark doesn't last long enough for much heat to build up so it only hits about 68 and reaches 5.4ghz
On a 10 minute cinebench run it gets up to 100 pretty fast and then throttles down to 4.9/5ghz, where it can hold and score over 16k.


----------



## AVATARAT (Oct 3, 2021)

Link



0


----------



## Franz (Oct 13, 2021)

My old war horsey in daily over


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 13, 2021)

Franz said:


> My old war horsey in daily over
> 
> View attachment 220680



Still pretty fast


----------



## USASXII (Oct 20, 2021)

Been using the 3930K for 9 years now. Im thinking of swapping it with a Xeon E5-1680v2

4711mhz


----------



## Franz (Oct 20, 2021)

USASXII said:


> Been using the 3930K for 9 years now. Im thinking of swapping it with a Xeon E5-1680v2
> 
> 4711mhz
> 
> View attachment 221551


air cooled?


----------



## USASXII (Oct 20, 2021)

Franz said:


> air cooled?


Corsair H110i


----------



## Asni (Oct 26, 2021)

They didn't add AVX2 support for Zen cpus yet (beta version has been released in oct '18) but they implement AMX instructions for Intel architectures yet to come.
Useless, biased, software.


----------



## mama (Oct 27, 2021)

Multi and single results.


----------



## Athlonite (Oct 27, 2021)

New CPU so New CPUz bench test results


----------



## zebra_hun (Nov 2, 2021)

zebra_hun said:


> Just a little overclocked Comet Lake
> 
> Valid
> 
> View attachment 215858


Tried 5500MHz all core


----------



## JCL (Nov 5, 2021)

The 5900x was doing some heavy lifting tonight.


----------



## freeagent (Nov 5, 2021)

JCL said:


> The 5900x was doing some heavy lifting tonight.


That is really nice! Good job man!


----------



## JCL (Nov 5, 2021)

freeagent said:


> That is really nice! Good job man!


Thank you.


----------



## Psychoholic (Nov 5, 2021)

12900K @ default with DDR4 3600Mhz









						Intel Core i9 12900K @ 4900 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[nx6qh1] Validated Dump by BEAST (2021-11-05 19:23:01) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## mama (Nov 6, 2021)

freeagent said:


> That is really nice! Good job man!


Very nice.  How much difference does the memory timings make?  I haven't looked at that yet.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Nov 11, 2021)

I did few runs just to be sure that result is 100% correct....






Nokia Booklet 3g from 2009 still crushing 
I been using this machine primary as old 8-bit machine like Atari ST/ZX Spectrum/Nintendo emulator but also it still works surprisingly good for web browsing.....


----------



## JCL (Nov 12, 2021)




----------



## The King (Nov 12, 2021)

With better RAM I think I can get it higher.








						AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4022.62 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[sxjb6v] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-CODFLON (2021-11-10 11:18:20) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Yttersta (Nov 12, 2021)

JCL said:


> View attachment 224891



That's mad results! Care to share your settings for a heads up? Maybe? 

Editing; Just to add the salt into the wound of my own here  I've spent about half an hour more and I cannot catch your single thread performance. I mean you have got a kit of RAM at least double the value of mine but I think your CPU is way off as well.

Well done!


----------



## JCL (Nov 12, 2021)

Thanks, and I am glad to share. One thing I can say for sure is my my PTE's I call them. Power 250, TDC 150 and EDC is 170. It seems if I go over 170 benches go down no matter the temps. Those don't change nor do my memory settings for now. At 2000 these work best. It took quite a while to get those, I kept wanting to run 2033. I don't think the memory has much to do though with cpu intensive benches. My CO's for curve opt. are from the Hydra program. I don't use it, but for finding the best (I think) offsets it is an invaluable tool. I attached what mine are, of course each cpu will be different. It provides a "fast" and "safe" list. The fast one will clock down in a relative short amount of time when benching. The safe one will sometimes leave some cpu on the table. So I made a "middle" list and that is the one I got good results esp. with cpuz single core. Also on my board scaler 6x sometimes works better than 10x. And 200 boost isn't always the best either I got 715 single core with 6x and 150 over. Last nights 716 and multi was with the fast and 200 over but I think 6x. I always try to write down what I'm doing but when I get started I get adhd I think. Cold is KING though. Anything to lower the temp is very helpful, no matter the temp range, 60 down to 50 or 30 to 20, lower is better. I can't be more specific, I wish I would have kept better notes, It would save me from doing what I've already done again.
CURVE OPTIMIZER values for BIOS
(If you do not plan to use HYDRA)
C01    SAFE CO: -30    30    FAST CO: -30
C02    SAFE CO: -20    23    FAST CO: -26
C03    SAFE CO: -17    20    FAST CO: -23
C04    SAFE CO: -28    29    FAST CO: -30
C05    SAFE CO: -30    30    FAST CO: -30
C06    SAFE CO: -18    23    FAST CO: -28
C07    SAFE CO: -30    30    FAST CO: -30
C08    SAFE CO: -22    26    FAST CO: -30
C09    SAFE CO: -26    28    FAST CO: -30
C10    SAFE CO: -26    28    FAST CO: -30
C11    SAFE CO: -13    17    FAST CO: -22
C12    SAFE CO: -30    30    FAST CO: -30
* formatting didn't come out so great on the chart. All of the middle values are neg and obviously they are the one in the middle column.


----------



## Hardi (Dec 6, 2021)




----------



## JCL (Dec 9, 2021)

717 single


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Dec 11, 2021)

12700k at 5.1 mem at 3800
https://valid.x86.fr/p9g3f5


----------



## Franz (Dec 12, 2021)

Tigger said:


> 12700k at 5.1 mem at 3800
> https://valid.x86.fr/p9g3f5
> View attachment 228539


Insane performance. And about temperatures?


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Dec 12, 2021)

Franz said:


> Insane performance. And about temperatures?



Custom loop so very acceptable. Says 87c on the cpu-z val page, but i had vcore set wrong lol so was at 1.4, will be less as it will only need 1.3x for that OC


----------



## Psychoholic (Dec 13, 2021)

Default Clocks on newest Asus Bios 0807.
Actually running a bit cooler on new bios for some reason (running same voltage)

I have been at 1.24v for a while (shortly after launch day) on air.. and the temps are great, I may see if i can go lower on the voltage if/when i get bored 










						Intel Core i9 12900K @ 4888.04 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[w4kux2] Validated Dump by BEAST (2021-12-13 02:04:36) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Dec 13, 2021)

My oc'd 12700k got a great single core score on CPU-z @5.1 832


----------



## Psychoholic (Dec 13, 2021)

Tigger said:


> My oc'd 12700k got a great single core score on CPU-z @5.1 832



Yup, good stuff, its flyin!


----------



## The King (Dec 14, 2021)

The King said:


> View attachment 224899
> With better RAM I think I can get it higher.
> 
> 
> ...


Got some new RAM Crucial Technology 8192 MB BL8G36C16U4W.M8FE1 X2

Managed to get a higher OC on my 1700X from 4025 up to 4050Mhz and 5051 on the MT score 








						AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4047.61 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[ybvuz0] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-CODFLON (2021-12-14 18:58:22) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## JCL (Dec 16, 2021)

720


----------



## INSTG8R (Dec 16, 2021)

I guess I just chuck a random go at it in the ring


----------



## Caring1 (Dec 16, 2021)

Tigger said:


> 12700k at 5.1 mem at 3800
> https://valid.x86.fr/p9g3f5
> View attachment 228539


So where's the single thread and multi thread benchmark?
I thought that was the purpose of this thread.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Dec 16, 2021)

Caring1 said:


> So where's the single thread and multi thread benchmark?
> I thought that was the purpose of this thread.



it's there 836/10178


----------



## The King (Dec 19, 2021)

Finally got my 4100ghz run with my 1700X on Air 











						AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4097.58 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[b78tju] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-CODFLON (2021-12-19 17:35:49) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				




Another run in Windows 11 (5150 MT)








						AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4085.72 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[mvvj3a] Validated Dump by Anonymous (2021-12-20 16:54:21) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## QuietBob (Dec 19, 2021)

The King said:


> Finally got my 4100ghz run with my 1700X on Air
> View attachment 229399
> 
> 
> ...



Wow - 472 ST is Zen2 territory, better than the R3 3100. Congrats!


----------



## E-Chassing-Flow (Dec 27, 2021)

Need Better Ram, or wait until Zen 3D LOL


----------



## TheUnbrained (Dec 31, 2021)

The pure power of an AMD Geode


----------



## QuietBob (Dec 31, 2021)

TheUnbrained said:


> The pure power of an AMD Geode
> View attachment 230779


This unit is barely faster in ST than their slowest 64-bit CPU despite having a faster clock and being 7 years younger


----------



## Girafa (Jan 7, 2022)




----------



## ricardomadela (Jan 12, 2022)

Dual Xeon E5-2697v3, 16g RAM 3200mhz


----------



## Deleted member 202104 (Jan 12, 2022)

12700k


----------



## ezmafl (Jan 14, 2022)

i9-12900K, 1.225v, LLC Level 4 (1.21v at load for CB, P95).
P-Cores:  2x53, 4x51, 8x50;  E-Cores: 40x (all core); Ring:  Auto
MSI Z690 Edge WiFi DDR4
32gb G. Skill Ripjaw (2x16gb), CL16 [at XMP only]


----------



## AVATARAT (Jan 14, 2022)

ezmafl said:


> i9-12900K, 1.225v, LLC Level 4 (1.21v at load for CB, P95).
> P-Cores:  2x53, 4x51, 8x50;  E-Cores: 40x (all core); Ring:  Auto


2+4+8 = 14P cores or I don't understand something?


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 14, 2022)




----------



## The King (Jan 14, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> View attachment 232340


You should upgrade CPU-Z to at least 1.98 or the latest 1.99.

CPU-Z 1.98


> Improved validation process for Alder Lake records.
> AMX instruction set support.
> AMD 4700S processor.


----------



## phanbuey (Jan 14, 2022)

The King said:


> You should upgrade CPU-Z to at least 1.98 or the latest 1.99.
> 
> CPU-Z 1.98



Oh nice -- thx for heads up.  It reads voltage correctly now.  Small bump in multi.


----------



## ezmafl (Jan 15, 2022)

AVATARAT said:


> 2+4+8 = 14P cores or I don't understand something?


P-Cores:  8 total..  2 running at 53x, 4 core load at 51x, all 8 cores used running at 50x. 

E-Core: All 8 at 40x.


----------



## ezmafl (Jan 16, 2022)

i9-12900K, all P-Cores at 51x, E-Cores at 40x.  1.218-1.22v load voltage.  1 hour of Cinebench R23 multiloop, Noctua NH-D15 Chroma air cooler.  No errors; still tinkering.

Slight improvement compared to my above post, but not much.  Broke 12,000 though.


----------



## fevgatos (Jan 16, 2022)

12900k on a u12a. 5.6 ghz on 3 cores. Could hit 5.7 but the voltage for stability is over 1.57


----------



## Det0x (Jan 20, 2022)

5950x


----------



## Motorcharge (Jan 20, 2022)




----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Jan 21, 2022)

Det0x said:


> 5950x
> View attachment 233291


5ghz all core?


----------



## Arctucas (Jan 22, 2022)




----------



## phanbuey (Jan 22, 2022)

Intel Core i5 12600K @ 5486.58 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[zt65rr] Validated Dump by ESPRESSOMACHINE (2022-01-22 03:25:20) - MB: MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4(MS-7D25) - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				




Cant quite break 900 yet.


----------



## glnn_23 (Jan 22, 2022)

12400F


----------



## fevgatos (Jan 22, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> View attachment 233483
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Υou need to be brave with the volts. I managed 5.7 / 927 score with 1.58 volt on ST workloads. Make sure to use low LLC though, im using LLC1


----------



## seth1911 (Jan 22, 2022)

Useless a A10 6800k is garbage in that, singlecore score is lower than a Core 2 Duo E8500


----------



## Nike_486DX (Jan 22, 2022)

Just some crappy s2066 cpu lol. Still the ipc improvement of the alder lake appears to be just about +45% (nowhere near 2x or 2.5x), so no need to change the socket just yet imo.



seth1911 said:


> Useless a A10 6800k is garbage in that, singlecore score is lower than a Core 2 Duo E8500


I think for some cpu's the results are way off. The E8600 is showing up as being almost identical to a i3 2100 in single core, how is this possible lol. Also really low results for FX (ofc fx is bad, but not _that _bad).


----------



## fevgatos (Jan 22, 2022)

Nike_486DX said:


> Just some crappy s2066 cpu lol. Still the ipc improvement of the alder lake appears to be just about +45% (nowhere near 2x or 2.5x), so no need to change the socket just yet imo.
> 
> 
> I think for some cpu's the results are way off. The E8600 is showing up as being almost identical to a i3 2100 in single core, how is this possible lol. Also really low results for FX (ofc fx is bad, but not _that _bad).


What? 50% of 500 is 250, +500 thats 750. Alderlake gets over 830+, im getting ~910. So where did you figure the 45%?


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jan 23, 2022)

Notice some AL have AVX512 disabled, what's the matter... scared?


----------



## Stormbringer (Jan 23, 2022)

Hi there.
I'm new here
CPU stock, without TURBO.


----------



## TheUnbrained (Jan 23, 2022)

well, i tortured my good old i7 2600k, i think thats pretty good score for a pretty old cpu (i know vcore is a "bit" high)


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jan 25, 2022)

AVX2 & 512 benchmark with i7-11700k all core/thread 5GHz OC. ring\LLC clock@42x


----------



## DoH! (Jan 28, 2022)

http://imgur.com/DrRtbZm


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Jan 28, 2022)




----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 3, 2022)

5700G bump...


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 3, 2022)

TheUnbrained said:


> well, i tortured my good old i7 2600k, i think thats pretty good score for a pretty old cpu (i know vcore is a "bit" high)
> View attachment 233621


What a legendary CPU.


----------



## harm9963 (Feb 4, 2022)

So far my best BIOS beta 4001  ,ASUS DARK HERO.


----------



## oobymach (Feb 19, 2022)

Messing with pbo, got a small bump over my manual 4.65ghz oc.


----------



## Shonk (Mar 17, 2022)

It seems they are downgrading Coffee Lake in benchmarks the latest being on 2.0.0.0
all taken at the same time

9900K 52,52,51,51,50,50,50,50
12900K 53,53,52,52,51,51,51,51

My 12900k is unaffected


----------



## johnspack (Mar 22, 2022)

This is my sad reality...  my x79 mobo bit the dust so now I have this to use:


----------



## ezmafl (Apr 9, 2022)

Can anyone with an i9-12900KS post stock vs. overclocked results?  I've seen the online reviews, but curious what folks are getting.


----------



## fevgatos (Apr 9, 2022)

ezmafl said:


> Can anyone with an i9-12900KS post stock vs. overclocked results?  I've seen the online reviews, but curious what folks are getting.


Check the previous page. I posted some numbers


----------



## oobymach (Apr 9, 2022)

With a bump in bus speed I hit these numbers, clocked up to 4875mhz on the high but with the high came a new low (2955mhz) that was introduced along with it (normal minimum is 3675mhz).


----------



## ttkciar (Apr 19, 2022)

Hello!  Does anyone know where I can find a list of the benchmarks CPU-Z uses and their descriptions?

I found this which describes one benchmark: https://www.cpuid.com/news/51-cpu-z-1-79-new-benchmark-new-scores.html

.. but cannot find a comprehensive listing. Possibly my search-fu just sucks.

I'm accustomed to looking at SPEC benchmark results and comparing its specific benchmark components most similar to my expected computational workload, and would like to do something similar for CPU-Z benchmarks.


----------



## Dia01 (Apr 19, 2022)

Best I can seem to get.

PBO Settings:
PPT    142W
TDC    95A
EDC    100A

Curve Optimizer Settings:
CCD 0 Top 4 Cores = -15
CCD 0 Next 4 Cores = -20    
CCD 1 Top 4 Cores = -15
CCD 1 Next 4 Cores = -20


----------



## The King (Apr 20, 2022)

ttkciar said:


> Hello!  Does anyone know where I can find a list of the benchmarks CPU-Z uses and their descriptions?
> 
> I found this which describes one benchmark: https://www.cpuid.com/news/51-cpu-z-1-79-new-benchmark-new-scores.html
> 
> ...











						CPU-Z Benchmark - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

Best CPU performance - 64-bit - January 2023




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## DooM3 (Apr 22, 2022)

xeon w3680 lga1366 2010








						Intel Xeon W3680 @ 4529.84 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[9fqjnw] Validated Dump by DOOMHOME (2020-10-26 00:04:58) - MB: Gigabyte EX58-UD3R - RAM: 12288 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				






ryzen 3600 AM4   2020 https://valid.x86.fr/j4yg63


----------



## QuietBob (Apr 22, 2022)

ttkciar said:


> Hello! Does anyone know where I can find a list of the benchmarks CPU-Z uses and their descriptions?
> 
> I found this which describes one benchmark: https://www.cpuid.com/news/51-cpu-z-1-79-new-benchmark-new-scores.html


To my knowledge, CPU-Z only tests FPU performance. According to the release notes for v1.79, the original benchmark (Version 17) utilizes up to SSE2 SIMD:

_"the x64 version uses scalar SSE/SSE2 instructions to achieve floating point operations, whereas the 32-bit version keeps using the legacy x87 instructions"_

CPU-Z v1.87 introduced a new benchmark (Version 19 beta) which utilizes up to AVX512 for the same purpose. Unfortunately, they didn't provide any release notes to go with it.


----------



## oobymach (Apr 24, 2022)

I pushed it as far as it could go, 4884mhz my new record, got a bsod shortly after test.


----------



## sam_86314 (May 8, 2022)

How fast is a $60 Aliexpress Windows 10 Tablet?






Not.


----------



## QuietBob (May 8, 2022)

Not one 5800X3D yet?


----------



## freeagent (May 15, 2022)

Saturday night wooo


----------



## glnn_23 (May 15, 2022)

Overclocking 12900K using Turbo Ratio and VF Points.  Custom water . Ambient.

Intel Core i9 12900K @ 5400 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)


----------



## sam_86314 (May 15, 2022)

Steam Deck!






Also my main PC.


----------



## The King (May 19, 2022)

Still learning how to OC this chip properly only did -25 all core in the BIOS.












						AMD Ryzen 5 5600X @ 4648.92 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[ud6hxg] Validated Dump by Anonymous (2022-05-19 18:56:36) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## dylricho (May 19, 2022)

Just put together an LGA775 system on Windows 10 21H2 and have 20 CPUs to choose from.

Here's a very fast 'Cedar Mill' Pentium 4 HT 631 scoring _amazingly_ well.

Validation link






And again, but this time with Hyper-Threading disabled:

Validation link


----------



## dylricho (May 20, 2022)

Here is the slowest Core-based processor I have for comparison -- a Celeron 450.

Interesting. Despite it scoring lower, I will say that the Pentium 4 with Hyper-Threading enabled feels more responsive.

Validation link






Also, I decided to run the 64-bit version of Cinebench R10 to see how they compare. Nearly 8 minutes for each CPU to complete the render. I didn't get a score for the Pentium 4 HT 631 without Hyper-Threading though, so it's 1C/2T vs. 1C/1T. The Pentium scored 2,080 and the Celeron scored 1,906.

I feel like it might be safe to assume the Pentium score without Hyper-Threading might be around half. NetBurst seems to _really_ gain from it.

--------

Overclocked to 3.00 GHz (+ 36%) using a 273 MHz front-side bus. More responsive now too.

Validation link

Also scoring 2,424 (+ 27%) in Cinebench R10 overclocked.


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

Intel Core2 Duo E8500 at stock. This particular sample runs extremely cool.

Validation link


----------



## phanbuey (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> Intel Core2 Duo E8500 at stock. This particular sample runs extremely cool.
> 
> Validation link
> 
> View attachment 248378


These are awesome.  I remember owning the e8400 from an sempron thinking it was insanely fast with an oc.  Amazing to see how one core today does the work of that entire chip.


----------



## Kissamies (May 22, 2022)

AMD 3600 @ PBO +200, I have background stuff running.


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> These are awesome.  I remember owning the e8400 from an sempron thinking it was insanely fast with an oc.  Amazing to see how one core today does the work of that entire chip.



I have a particular soft spot for the Core2 processors. I never owned an LGA775 system as I used my trusty Socket P laptop for nearly a decade. Loved the T9300. This era was Intel's peak, in my opinion. AMD wasn't too far behind with Phenom II, but the fact that you could go from a Pentium 4 up to a Core2 Quad in one socket...

Of course, you could argue that if the Pentium 4 didn't suck so much, that the improvement wouldn't be as noticeable, but still. 

Today, that kind of improvement seems trivial — Pentium → Core i9, or Athlon → Ryzen 9, for example.




Lenne said:


> AMD 3600 @ PBO +200, I have background stuff running.
> 
> View attachment 248383



That looks like a 2019 silicon sample. Nice result.


----------



## Kissamies (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> That looks like a 2019 silicon sample. Nice result.


Bought this in September 2020, can't remember the production date though..


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

Lenne said:


> Bought this in September 2020, can't remember the production date though..



If that's 2020+ silicon, you're potentially leaving a lot on the table.


----------



## Kissamies (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> If that's 2020+ silicon, you're potentially leaving a lot on the table.


It's stable at 4.4GHz, but how much voltage is safe for 24/7..?


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

Lenne said:


> It's stable at 4.4GHz, but how much voltage is safe for 24/7..?



You could run something like Cinebench to see what your stock all-core voltage is, and basically stick to that. I prefer to stick to this method for Ryzen. For mine, it was 1.3 V and it's stable at 4.40 GHz. I've been running it like this since I bought it in August 2020. No problems.

For brief periods, I had it reach 4.55 GHz using 1.45 V, but I absolutely didn't intend on keeping it there.

For Zen 2 and Zen 3, I wouldn't go beyond 1.35 V for a daily overclock.

--------

I couldn't resist. I overclocked the E8500. 

Two minutes in the BIOS, and it's up to a 1,600 MT/s FSB.

Validation link


----------



## Kissamies (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> You could run something like Cinebench to see what you're stock all-core voltage is, and basically stick to that. I prefer to stick to this method for Ryzen. For mine, it was 1.3 V and it's stable at 4.40 GHz. I've been running it like this since I bought it in August 2020. No problems.
> 
> For brief periods, I had it reach 4.55 GHz using 1.45 V, but I absolutely didn't intend on keeping it there.
> 
> For Zen 2 and Zen 3, I wouldn't go beyond 1.35 V for a daily overclock.


Hm, thanks for the tips, I'll try it later today.


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

Lenne said:


> Hm, thanks for the tips, I'll try it later today.



No probs!


----------



## Kissamies (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> No probs!


BTW I have an E8500 too, I'll test it too later with custom loop.


----------



## The King (May 22, 2022)

Updated to AGESA 1.2.0.6c seems it be faster than previous BIOS 1.2.0.3c. PBO +200Mhz


----------



## Kissamies (May 22, 2022)

Alright, I put 4.4GHz @ 1.334V


----------



## oobymach (May 22, 2022)

My laptop celeron.


----------



## budget_Optiplex (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> I have a particular soft spot for the Core2 processors. I never owned an LGA775 system as I used my trusty Socket P laptop for nearly a decade. Loved the T9300. This era was Intel's peak, in my opinion. AMD wasn't too far behind with Phenom II, but the fact that you could go from a Pentium 4 up to a Core2 Quad in one socket...
> 
> Of course, you could argue that if the Pentium 4 didn't suck so much, that the improvement wouldn't be as noticeable, but still.


I agree with your thoughts, love me some Core 2 as well. Only recently retired my LGA 771 to 775 Xeon E5450 system mostly because of being limited to 8GB of DDR2. Even at stock speeds I played a lot of modern games on it such as Metro Exodus, Wolfenstein New Colossus, Doom Eternal, Far Cry 5/New Dawn! My Dell Inspiron 1545 laptop still chugs along upgraded to a Core 2 P8700 I paid a whopping four dollars for.

Anyways here is a CPU-Z benchmark for my current daily driver which is still an ancient 2010 relic that I put together for less then one hundred dollars a few months ago, reusing most of the stuff from my Core 2 system. It holds it's own for being a Socket 1156 Lynnfield at stock speeds. Currently playing Far Cry 6 and having no real complaints even on my low end overclocked GTX 745 4GB *GDDR3.*Runs game at a smooth 30-35 FPS at 1360x768 with low/medium settings - good enough to have an enjoyable experience as I'm a low-end gamer and proud of it.


----------



## Fouquin (May 22, 2022)

Trying to get to 2.6GHz but it's not playing nice.


----------



## Pasi123 (May 22, 2022)

X5675 @ 4.5GHz





E5-2690 @ stock (3.3GHz all core turbo)





i7-3770 @ 4.22-4.43GHz


----------



## andy_3_913 (May 22, 2022)

Second attempt


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

Lenne said:


> Alright, I put 4.4GHz @ 1.334V
> 
> View attachment 248386



Here's mine:

Validation link


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (May 22, 2022)

12700K stock


----------



## QuietBob (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> Intel Core2 Duo E8500 at stock. This particular sample runs extremely cool.
> 
> Validation link
> 
> View attachment 248378


Good ST performance for a 14-year-old processor! This CPU could be used comfortably in a family PC even today. My FX 8300 gets the same ST score at 4.5 GHz.


----------



## Tomgang (May 22, 2022)

my 5950X but not at stock settings.


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

QuietBob said:


> Good ST performance for a 14-year-old processor! This CPU could be used comfortably in a family PC even today. My FX 8300 gets the same ST score at 4.5 GHz.



Especially since it really enjoys being overclocked. 3.80 GHz was barely scratching the surface from how it was performing. It felt super snappy at this frequency and browsing this forum to post results from it was easily acceptable.

Your FX might score similarly here, but if you had a game that used AVX, I would expect the Core2 to fall drastically behind. Or any program with an instruction that Penryn lacks.

_Or, you know, if you just played a game that used more than two cores, like Grand Theft Auto V. Out of curiosity, I ran the benchmark (1080p; RX 460; medium settings), and got 5 fps MIN / 93 fps MAX / 48 fps AVG)._


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (May 22, 2022)

Is ADL the best single thread performance at the moment?


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Is ADL the best single thread performance at the moment?



Yes. Zen 3 does seem to keep pace somewhat in game benchmarks though.


----------



## DR4G00N (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> Just put together an LGA775 system on Windows 10 21H2 and have 20 CPUs to choose from.
> 
> Here's a very fast 'Cedar Mill' Pentium 4 HT 631 scoring _amazingly_ well.
> 
> And again, but this time with Hyper-Threading disabled:


Cedar mill clocks really high, at least 5GHz is easy on pretty much all of them. Try it and see, 333MHz FSB @ 1.45-1.5V should do it.


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

DR4G00N said:


> Cedar mill clocks really high, at least 5GHz is easy on pretty much all of them. Try it and see, 333MHz FSB @ 1.45-1.5V should do it.



I'm all out of thermal paste at the moment, so I can't do any more tinkering with the system. 

Ordered some and waiting for delivery though. I'm definitely going to try this when I can.


----------



## looniam (May 22, 2022)

hi


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> Yes. Zen 3 does seem to keep pace somewhat in game benchmarks though.



ADL does not match ZEN 5950X in multi, not even the 12900K, I'm still ok with the 12700k. The 5950x is the top Ryzen and is very expensive, but if people really need it or the Epeen it affords, fine.


----------



## dylricho (May 22, 2022)

Tigger said:


> *ADL does not match ZEN 5950X in multi, not even the 12900K*, I'm still ok with the 12700k. The 5950x is the top Ryzen and is very expensive, but if people really need it or the Epeen it affords, fine.



Not in everything, but in most things it does.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (May 22, 2022)

dylricho said:


> Not in everything, but in most things it does.



In single thread ADL is pretty good though, be interesting to see what raptor does against Zen 4


----------



## The King (May 24, 2022)

MSi released AGESA 1.2.0.7 for the B450 recently. PBO +200Mhz


----------



## HD64G (May 24, 2022)

78W power limit, +150MHz boost, -20-25 curve opt.


----------



## The King (May 25, 2022)

I have no doubt I can break 700 ST but had enough fun for today playing with CO.












						AMD Ryzen 5 5600X @ 4773.89 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[2ig51k] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-7NUI23J (2022-05-25 18:36:06) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				




Updated ST.











						AMD Ryzen 5 5600X @ 4698.9 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[dff0b3] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-7NUI23J (2022-05-26 08:30:29) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## dylricho (May 26, 2022)

Hi guys, does anyone have a Lynnfield i7 they can test with Hyper-Threading on and off?


----------



## budget_Optiplex (May 27, 2022)

dylricho said:


> Hi guys, does anyone have a Lynnfield i7 they can test with Hyper-Threading on and off?


Here you go, same as my previous post here (https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/post-4760814) except *HT* is off. Please note too that I disable the Spectre and Meltdown patches using GRC Inspectre program..........


----------



## fevgatos (May 27, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Is ADL the best single thread performance at the moment?


Yeah, it gets 913-927 ST score overclocked


----------



## dylricho (May 27, 2022)

budget_Optiplex said:


> Here you go, same as my previous post here (https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/post-4760814) except *HT* is off. Please note too that I disable the Spectre and Meltdown patches using GRC Inspectre program..........



Thank you for doing that, very much appreciated. 

Interesting. A consistent 33–40% gain... It seems like Nehalem and Westmere benefit more from HTT than anything beyond?


----------



## The King (May 28, 2022)

5600 non X PBO +200Mhz.  (Weird problem took single core boost to 4850Mhz but CPU-Z ST tanked! not sure if its a bug)












						AMD Ryzen 5 5600 @ 4573.93 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[56thia] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-7NUI23J (2022-05-28 11:31:38) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (May 28, 2022)

It is not a bug, it cant hold that frequency with those settings.


----------



## The King (May 28, 2022)

dont whant to set it' said:


> It is not a bug, it cant hold that frequency with those settings.


WIll need to investigate further has even the smallest OC in hydra is causing negative ST in CPUZ even 4700 with no CO applied.
That is not normal behavior. This CPU is going to get close to 700 ST or somewhere near there!

@dont whant to set it"'
Was a software related issue, used Ryzen master to OC 4825 ST so no CO applied yet.


----------



## P4-630 (May 30, 2022)

@ stock


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jun 2, 2022)

Where are the AVX-512 scores?
Come on peps, get that high tech code working! 



P4-630 said:


> @ stock
> 
> View attachment 249370


Is that score with the e-cores enabled?


----------



## Psychoholic (Jun 2, 2022)

Havnt ran this is quite a while.
Pretty much stock with the exception of an undervolt AND +100mhz profile for all core turbo; been that way since pretty much day 1.

Intel Core i9 12900K @ 5000 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)


----------



## phanbuey (Jun 2, 2022)

Psychoholic said:


> Havnt ran this is quite a while.
> Pretty much stock with the exception of an undervolt AND +100mhz profile for all core turbo; been that way since pretty much day 1.
> 
> Intel Core i9 12900K @ 5000 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)


that's such a nice setup.   Undervolt + 5ghz all core...


----------



## Psychoholic (Jun 2, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> that's such a nice setup.   Undervolt + 5ghz all core...



To be fair, before the undervolt the motherboard was feeding it around 1.33v, so the "undervolt" likely puts it where it should be


----------



## phanbuey (Jun 2, 2022)

Psychoholic said:


> To be fair, before the undervolt the motherboard was feeding it around 1.33v, so the "undervolt" likely puts it where it should be


mine did that too... ended up being stable at 5.2 on way less voltage than auto -- scores are a bit low since i have every single app open rn and it hasn't been rebooted in 3 days, but here's the little 6 + 4 in the itx build:


----------



## Psychoholic (Jun 2, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> mine did that too... ended up being stable at 5.2 on way less voltage than auto -- scores are a bit low since i have every single app open rn and it hasn't been rebooted in 3 days, but here's the little 6 + 4 in the itx build:
> 
> View attachment 249609



Man the 12600k has to be up there with the best price/perf value ever..


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jun 2, 2022)

Latest from my RKL setup.


----------



## P4-630 (Jun 2, 2022)

AlwaysHope said:


> Is that score with the e-cores enabled?


Yes, all 12 cores enabled.
CPU at stock speeds.


----------



## X800 (Jun 2, 2022)

This is my setup . I just used the AI-overclocking thing.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jun 2, 2022)

X800 said:


> This is my setup . I just used the AI-overclocking thing.
> 
> View attachment 249670



Nice, i have same board and CPU


----------



## fevgatos (Jun 2, 2022)

Just a tip for people using Apex mobo (or anything with AI oc). You can take the baseline numbers you get from AI oc and then apply your own using the AI numbers as a guideline. Basically, what I used to do when I had the apex ( now I have the unify X), was to , instead of using TVB to boost clockspeeds when the CPU was cold, I was using TVB to drop clockspeeds when the CPU was warm. So basically, I set the CPU to boost to 5.7 on 2 cores and 5.4 in all core workloads. Then I used TVB to drop the clockspeed when the CPU reached 85c to 5.3 and then to 5.2 at 90c (ofcourse you can use your own limits). So basically, the CPU was at 5.4 all core all the time when gaming, but when I run something like cinebench for example, it downclocked to keep the temperatures in check.


----------



## DoLlyBirD (Jun 2, 2022)

4.7GHz Ryzen 5500 needed 1.4v to be stable, seems like decent scores


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jun 14, 2022)

Fresh install of win 10.


----------



## wally_1973 (Jun 26, 2022)

Got me a great deal on a Ryzen 7 5800X for an upgrade.


----------



## Blaeza (Jun 26, 2022)

Hmm...


----------



## QuietBob (Jun 26, 2022)

CO -30 on all cores using PBO2 tool. MT went up by 3%:


----------



## wally_1973 (Jun 26, 2022)

PBO pushing 5Ghz


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jul 2, 2022)

Wanted 5.7Ghz but was too scared to run 1.6v and degrading what seems to be a good CPU. Temps were good @ 5.6GHz 70-80c

No Ecores or HT

SP 93
P 102
E 75




*Edit: Untuned DDR5


----------



## ARF (Jul 3, 2022)

My Ryzen 5 2500U tested on the classic CPU-Z:





My Ryzen 5 2500U tested on a new CPU-Z:





My Ryzen 9 5900X:


----------



## AMF (Jul 3, 2022)

My CPU


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 7, 2022)

Just disabled the E cores on my 12700k for a test to see what difference it makes, and the E cores certainly contribute.

just a quick CPUz test and it is slower without E cores, ST 758 vs 836 and MT 7807 vs 10178 So the E cores certainly contribute


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jul 7, 2022)

Tigger said:


> E cores certainly contribute



I'm surprised. Will have to test this later.

Did you manually put a multiplier or let it Auto boost?


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 7, 2022)

Outback Bronze said:


> I'm surprised. Will have to test this later.
> 
> Did you manually put a multiplier or let it Auto boost?



Did nothing but disable E cores

Auto boost i guess sorry


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jul 7, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Did nothing but disable E cores
> 
> Auto boost i guess sorry



Would you mind re-trying with a locked in multi for me please?


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 7, 2022)

Outback Bronze said:


> Would you mind re-trying with a locked in multi for me please?



P cores, 47 multi E cores disabled?


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jul 7, 2022)

Tigger said:


> P cores, 47 multi E cores disabled?



Yes please 

So 47x with and without E's


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 7, 2022)

Outback Bronze said:


> Yes please



Ok 2 ticks

Here you go


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jul 7, 2022)

And now with E core's on with a 47x yeah?

BTW your 12700K is slightly better than mine @ SP 73.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 7, 2022)

Did another run, slight change in memory timings, however my single core score dropped a bit compared to the first run.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jul 7, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> Did another run



I see your multi is @ 47x with both P & E core's and your ST score is more in line with what I would expect with @Tigger score without E cores. 

So I'm pretty sure his ST score before with E cores on was running a higher multi than when they were off.

Cheers.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 7, 2022)

It seems the ST is not really effected by the E cores, so they are really only bumping the MT, by a fair bit too tbh seemingly around 3k


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jul 7, 2022)

Tigger said:


> It seems the ST is not really effected by the E cores, so they are really only bumping the MT, by a fair bit too tbh seemingly around 3k



Yep, confirms my suspicions. Pretty sure you were just boost clocking more with your E's on.

Thanks.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 7, 2022)

Funny how people call the E cores all sorts of dumb names when in reality they are pretty good for MT related tasks. Can't understand anyone whining about something that boosts the performance of their machines MT performance. Mostly AMD users i think who have no hands on experience with a ADL CPU.


----------



## ezmafl (Jul 7, 2022)

I hope you are all sitting down...  Feast your eyes on this Celeron Ivy Bridge mobile goodness!    

Asus X551CAP Laptop, 4GB RAM, Windows 10.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 7, 2022)

ezmafl said:


> I hope you are all sitting down...  Feast your eyes on this Celeron Ivy Bridge mobile goodness!
> 
> Asus X551CAP Laptop, 4GB RAM, Windows 10.
> 
> View attachment 253979View attachment 253980



Wow that MT score


----------



## anfazi54 (Jul 8, 2022)

so many processor that idk, wow


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jul 8, 2022)

This threads too messy to sort through & compare. Needs a leaderboard on 1st page.


----------



## oobymach (Jul 8, 2022)

My new media center pc, HP Compaq 6305.


----------



## AMF (Jul 9, 2022)

here ya go current running



Outback Bronze said:


> Wanted 5.7Ghz but was too scared to run 1.6v and degrading what seems to be a good CPU. Temps were good @ 5.6GHz 70-80c
> 
> No Ecores or HT
> 
> ...


i hate intel   because of high prices and heat  .. but how can u  not like the perfromance


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 9, 2022)

After some tweaking, very simple PBO auto, CO -25, BO +100  stable and not too hot. On a normal aircooler.


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 10, 2022)

> AlwaysHope said:
> 
> 
> > This threads too messy to sort through & compare. Needs a leaderboard on 1st page.
> ...


----------



## dylricho (Jul 14, 2022)

AlwaysHope said:


> This threads too messy to sort through & compare. Needs a leaderboard on 1st page.



I had kept up with everything with one of my websites up to CPU-Z 1.87 I think it was. Then I got quite busy, but I'm back again.

I am working on redesigning said website, so in the meantime things may look odd.

----

My thermal paste finally arrived so I can now test out some more LGA775 CPUs that I have.

Since I have 21 LGA775 CPUs now, I figured it might be more economical to use something other than Thermalgrizzly, so after some research I decided to purchase two 30 g tubes of GD900. It's compared favorably to the likes of Arctic Silver 5, but we'll see how it performs for me. Temperatures in the UK exceeding 35°C recently have me wondering what to expect.


----------



## AMF (Jul 15, 2022)

Im current cpuz-record holder for this processor.       http://valid.x86.fr/p96ks5 http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442...f203337303020382d436f72652050726f636573736f72


----------



## Blaeza (Jul 15, 2022)

AMF said:


> Im current cpuz-record holder for thiss processor


Where is the proof please?  Can't state that without evidence!


----------



## AMF (Jul 15, 2022)

Blaeza said:


> Where is the proof please?  Can't state that without evidence!


http://valid.x86.fr/p96ks5 http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442...f203337303020382d436f72652050726f636573736f72

i wish i could afford a bench test on ln2


----------



## Blaeza (Jul 15, 2022)

AMF said:


> http://valid.x86.fr/p96ks5 http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442...f203337303020382d436f72652050726f636573736f72
> 
> i wish i could afford a bench test on ln2


Not wishing to shoot you down, but they say anonymous.  If I saw "AMF" all would be good.

I just submitted this.


----------



## AMF (Jul 15, 2022)

Blaeza said:


> Not wishing to shoot you down, but they say anonymous.  If I saw "AMF" all would be good.


ya but its me ... i forgot to change the damm name.ill see if  i can duplicate it .   gimmie a bit.


----------



## mclaren85 (Jul 15, 2022)

HP Pavilion g6


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jul 15, 2022)

dylricho said:


> I had kept up with everything with one of my websites up to CPU-Z 1.87 I think it was. Then I got quite busy, but I'm back again.
> 
> I am working on redesigning said website, so in the meantime things may look odd.
> 
> ...


Thanks, having that board on the 1st page is nice incentive for healthy competition. 21 conroe basad CPUs? wow! must have a board or two to run them well, yes? think I got somewhere around that amount tucked away somewhere down here too. With 35C in the UK nowadays, sounds like you guys up there swapped weather with us Aussies down here.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 15, 2022)

would it run on my socket A thunderbird 1333?


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jul 15, 2022)

Tigger said:


> would it run on my socket A thunderbird 1333?


Surely there'd be a version of CPU-Z for that old platform? maybe 1.00


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 15, 2022)

AlwaysHope said:


> Surely there'd be a version of CPU-Z for that old platform? maybe 1.00



I think the Tbird would need to be on win98 though, not sure if it will run anything else.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 15, 2022)

AMF said:


> http://valid.x86.fr/p96ks5 http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442...f203337303020382d436f72652050726f636573736f72
> 
> i wish i could afford a bench test on ln2



Or buy a better CPU


----------



## TheHunter (Jul 15, 2022)

AlwaysHope said:


> Fresh install of win 10.
> View attachment 250973



Nice sp score for 5ghz. Im usually stuck at 680 @5ghz.

What memory do you have or how did you manage that?


The only time i crossed 700 points was with cpu @5.1ghz


----------



## AMF (Jul 15, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> Or buy a better CPU


ya well having the fastest one of thesae is quite a feat. ienjoy the challenge of beating my own records. ill upgrade in about 5 or 10 years


----------



## Blaeza (Jul 15, 2022)

AMF said:


> ya well having the fastest one of thesae is quite a feat. ienjoy the challenge of beating my own records. ill upgrade in about 5 or 10 years


I know it's you I can tell by the build, well done.


----------



## TheHunter (Jul 15, 2022)

101Blck @ 4300mhz, gear2 4266 profile, cl16-16-16-36 1.50v





Probably my max 4326mhz, cpu all core 5070mhz 1.35v is a bit on the limit for h115i pro rgb, since it has slower fans








EDIT: gear1 scores similar SP ~ 680 MT ~ 6950 just like 4266 with base 5000Mhz


----------



## DR4G00N (Jul 15, 2022)

Tigger said:


> would it run on my socket A thunderbird 1333?


It should but only in 32-bit of course and XP should work for that also. I've run XP on an Athlon 700 TB & PII 300 so I'm sure your 1333 will do fine.  
Win98 may do better though, there's also a specific cpuz version for Win98.


----------



## dylricho (Jul 15, 2022)

Dumping all of my LGA775 results here that I've collected so far:


*Celeron 450 @ stock*






*Celeron 450 @ 3,000 MHz (273 MHz FSB)*





*Core2 Duo E8500 @ stock*





*Core2 Duo E8500 @ 3,800 MHz (400 MHz FSB)*





*Core2 Quad Q9505 @ stock*





*Core2 Quad Q9505 @ 3,400 MHz (400 MHz FSB)*





*Core2 Quad Q9550 @ stock*





*Core2 Quad Q9550 @ 3,400 MHz (400 MHz FSB)*





*Pentium 4 HT 631 @ stock*





*Pentium 4 HT 631 @ stock without HTT*


----------



## Blaeza (Jul 15, 2022)

dylricho said:


> Dumping all of my LGA775 results here that I've collected so far:
> 
> 
> *Celeron 450 @ stock*
> ...


Last one did it for me... 87.2 makes me appreciate my ikkle Ryzen so much more...


----------



## DoH! (Jul 15, 2022)

http://imgur.com/TOhG0ds


----------



## german199 (Jul 15, 2022)

I'll keep my i7-3930k until the end!


----------



## Markoz (Jul 15, 2022)

Trustworthy 4790k still living on


----------



## mclaren85 (Jul 15, 2022)

And this is my desktop rig. Powered by AMD.


----------



## dylricho (Jul 15, 2022)

Blaeza said:


> Last one did it for me... 87.2 makes me appreciate my ikkle Ryzen so much more...



I can get it lower. 

Interested to see how the Pentium D 830 and 930 compare. Waiting for those to arrive.


----------



## Blaeza (Jul 15, 2022)

Here we go...








dylricho said:


> I can get it lower.
> 
> Interested to see how the Pentium D 830 and 930 compare. Waiting for those to arrive.


Everyone else is ocing their ram, CPU, testicles and you claim you can go SLOWER than 87.2!!!  Do it, I dare you!


----------



## dylricho (Jul 15, 2022)

Blaeza said:


> Everyone else is ocing their ram, CPU, testicles and you claim you can go SLOWER than 87.2!!!  Do it, I dare you!



I think I've already gotten the most out of my 3600 sadly. I have ignored tinkering with the memory because any memory timing changes in the past via something like 1usmus DRAM Calculator have all blue-screened.

And I believe I can beat 87.2. I have a few ideas.  




AlwaysHope said:


> Thanks, having that board on the 1st page is nice incentive for healthy competition. 21 conroe basad CPUs? wow! must have a board or two to run them well, yes? think I got somewhere around that amount tucked away somewhere down here too. With 35C in the UK nowadays, sounds like you guys up there swapped weather with us Aussies down here.



21 LGA775 CPUs and 17 Socket P CPUs, apparently.    Plus some others including AMD. The LGA775 board is an ASUS P5Q-PRO.

Our roads are melting with the extreme heat we're having lately. Spain is supposed to be 45°C from next week.


----------



## Blaeza (Jul 15, 2022)

dylricho said:


> I think I've already gotten the most out of my 3600 sadly. I have ignored tinkering with the memory because any memory timing changes in the past via something like 1usmus DRAM Calculator have all blue-screened.
> 
> And I believe I can beat 87.2. I have a few ideas.
> 
> ...


There are some very helpful people on here who'd help you with ocing your ram.  They helped me loads.  I can't use 1usmus as it doesn't support my ram.  

If you beat the 87.2, I'll send you an e-cookie!


----------



## dylricho (Jul 16, 2022)

Blaeza said:


> There are some very helpful people on here who'd help you with ocing your ram.  They helped me loads.  I can't use 1usmus as it doesn't support my ram.
> 
> If you beat the 87.2, I'll send you an e-cookie!



I might see what others suggest. Thanks.

----

Interesting comparison between the Q6700 and Q8300, and the Q9505 and Q9550 from my previous post. What's going on there?

*Celeron 440 @ stock*





*Core2 Duo E6600 @ stock*





*Core2 Duo E6600 @ 3,000 MHz (333 MHz FSB)*





*Core2 Quad Q6700 @ stock*





*Core2 Quad Q6700 @ 3,333 MHz (333 MHz FSB)*





*Core2 Quad Q8300 @ stock*





*Core2 Quad Q8300 @ 3,000 MHz (400 MHz FSB)*





*Pentium D 930 @ stock*


----------



## Blaeza (Jul 16, 2022)

dylricho said:


> I might see what others suggest. Thanks.
> 
> ----
> 
> ...


Too much power, we need LESS!


----------



## dylricho (Jul 18, 2022)

Blaeza said:


> Too much power, we need LESS!



Will get around to it eventually, but nothing for a few days while the ambient temperature indoors is a nasty 33°C!


----------



## Blaeza (Jul 18, 2022)

The air feels like soup, it's horrible.  It's hit 36 here today and I feel like I'm maybe losing a pound or two.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Jul 19, 2022)

Don't laugh, it's a fun platform to OC with!


----------



## oobymach (Jul 22, 2022)

Got the 5500 in the living room pc.


----------



## phill (Jul 23, 2022)

Some for fun as I find it gives a rough estimate of load temps when messing about with the CPUs 

Threadripper 3970X


Intel 10500T


Threadripper 2990WX
e 

Intel E5-2683 V4


I'll see what else I can find shortly


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 30, 2022)

Upgraded to Skythe Mugen 5 with arctic 1400rpm pwm-fan. Bios update and stuffs. 
Some more headroom on the powerlimit.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jul 30, 2022)

@wally_1973 That score looks about right , tough I am impressed by the ram config and its timings.
As a followup to the ram timings , your config set up with 2 single sided~single rank 32GB dimms runing a 1T timing?


----------



## wally_1973 (Jul 30, 2022)

dont whant to set it' said:


> @wally_1973 That score looks about right , tough I am impressed by the ram config and its timings.
> As a followup to the ram timings , your config set up with 2 single sided~single rank 32GB dimms runing a 1T timing?


no 4x 16GB (dualsided i think)
G.Skill 16384 MB (DDR4-2133) - XMP 2.0 - P/N: F4-3600C16-16GVKC


----------



## Tarte (Jul 31, 2022)

My CPU-Z Benchmarks:


----------



## dylricho (Aug 2, 2022)

Can someone please run the benchmark with SMT disabled on a 5800X?


----------



## oobymach (Aug 2, 2022)

dylricho said:


> Can someone please run the benchmark with SMT disabled on a 5800X?


I can show you what a 5600x looks like with SMT disabled.


----------



## johnspack (Aug 17, 2022)

Thread needs more dinosaurs!  Here's my latest oldie:


----------



## A Computer Guy (Aug 17, 2022)

Stock settings, No PBO, Water cooled.


----------



## wally_1973 (Aug 20, 2022)

A Computer Guy said:


> Stock settings, No PBO, Water cooled.
> 
> View attachment 258339


Still a monster CPU.


----------



## The King (Aug 21, 2022)

The King said:


> WIll need to investigate further has even the smallest OC in hydra is causing negative ST in CPUZ even 4700 with no CO applied.
> That is not normal behavior. This CPU is going to get close to 700 ST or somewhere near there!
> 
> @dont whant to set it"'
> ...


Hit 695.3 ST with another run @ 4975Mhz but forgot to save that.


----------



## ezmafl (Aug 21, 2022)

A friend of mine ran CPU-Z on my old, old i7-860 that I sold to him 10 years ago.  Glad to see it's still working.  Gigabyte GA-P55A-UD4P w/8gb DDR3 1600 (4x2gb).


----------



## freeagent (Aug 28, 2022)

Been awhile since I ran this on a fresh 10 install..


----------



## ARF (Aug 29, 2022)

Good and fast


----------



## mclaren85 (Aug 29, 2022)

from my lenovo laptop bought in jan 2021


----------



## ARF (Aug 29, 2022)

Look at this:


----------



## freeagent (Aug 29, 2022)

ARF said:


> Look at this:
> 
> View attachment 259900
> 
> ...


You should probably update to the latest version


----------



## mclaren85 (Aug 29, 2022)

my 3900x system:


----------



## bgeneto (Aug 29, 2022)

Intel® Core™ i5-12600K processor overclocked with my custom BIOS from cheap Chinese MaxSun MS-TZZ Z690M board.

CPU-Z BENCHMARK

Single-Thread    858
Multi-Thread (16T)    7828



(focused on ST performance)


----------



## mclaren85 (Aug 29, 2022)

Here is my old Fujitsu-Siemens notebook. Bought in 2007. It was 1000$ at the time it was purchased


----------



## Athlonite (Aug 31, 2022)

mclaren85 said:


> Here is my old Fujitsu-Siemens notebook. Bought in 2007. It was 1000$ at the time it was purchased
> View attachment 259928View attachment 259929


um where's the benchmark score no point in posting in this thread if you're not going to also post it's CPU-z benchmark score


----------



## regs (Aug 31, 2022)

5800X B2 stock, N5105 - 11,5 W


----------



## phanbuey (Aug 31, 2022)

Intel Core i5 12600K @ 5400 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)


----------



## Athlonite (Aug 31, 2022)

Ryzen 7 5800X @ 4.75Ghz all core


----------



## P4-630 (Aug 31, 2022)

Latest BIOS


----------



## mclaren85 (Aug 31, 2022)

Athlonite said:


> um where's the benchmark score no point in posting in this thread if you're not going to also post it's CPU-z benchmark score


Ahh It was my mistake sorry.. Here is the benchmark of the old laptop. Amd Turion 64x2


----------



## bgeneto (Aug 31, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> View attachment 260137
> 
> Intel Core i5 12600K @ 5400 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)



Insane scores for an ITX build!!! Congrats man... I could only do this  with my poor 120mm radiator in a 12L SFF build. 
What kind of cooler do you have?


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 1, 2022)

bgeneto said:


> Insane scores for an ITX build!!! Congrats man... I could only do this  with my poor 120mm radiator in a 12L SFF build.
> What kind of cooler do you have?
> 
> View attachment 260186


I have a 280MM AIO intake... 2x120mm top exhaust and gfx on the bottom shooting heat out the side - there is a little bit of recirculation between graphics pumping heat out the side and the intake, but honestly not that much and it cools great for how quiet it is.





Needs a dusting in that shot.  13.5L so a bit bigger than the jonsbo.


----------



## ezmafl (Sep 5, 2022)

i9-12900K o/c to P-Cores at 54x2, 53x3, 52x4, 51x 8 with all E-Cores at 40x.  Fixed voltage at 1.285v with LLC 6; Ring/Uncore also at 40x.  MSI Z690 Edge WiFi DDR4.  My scores seemed to have gone down a bit since the last few bios revisions.  Have been running stable in this configuration for months.

I adjusted the bus clock to 100.25 to counter the prior reading of 99.76/5087.56, which now shows 100/5100.

Going to try the Thermalright ILM frame replacement, after I receive my Arctic Liquid Freezer AIO replacement gasket.

Link to validation specs summary.


----------



## ezmafl (Sep 7, 2022)

OK, so I replaced/upgraded an NVMe drive and, thus, freshly reinstalled Win11 as a result.  My scores went back up.  

I can't seem to edit/delete my prior post (#2,196), so sorry for the duplicate.

Revised validation specs summary.


----------



## AleXXX666 (Sep 25, 2022)

Ryzen 5600X@4.8
compared to stock 12400F lol


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 25, 2022)

AleXXX666 said:


> Ryzen 5600X@4.8
> compared to stock 12400F lol
> View attachment 262905


What lol, the difference is 4%


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 25, 2022)

Single Core Champ Checking in! team 12600k
AIO frozen ii 280 
dog shit micron ddr5 @ xmp 1 only
shes not even turned up.. can boot and complete cpuz bench @ 5.5/4.1/4.2 (but 5.4 seems to cover the belt  )  and 5600mem....but it DOES fails cinebench multi.. but passes cine single
https://valid.x86.fr/fmnte6


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 25, 2022)

Challenge accepted.





Intel Core i5 12600K @ 5521.5 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)






12600k is a nutty chip.  If I had better cooling this would run at 5.6  Problem is there are no auto voltage profiles at 55/56x and none of the stock ones work with high bclk so it's hard to put a backoff in to get 5.6 on 2 cores and 5.4 on all core.  volts stick at max ratio volts all the time.


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 25, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> Challenge accepted.
> 
> View attachment 262954
> Intel Core i5 12600K @ 5521.5 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)
> ...


Can the 12900k participate? Got you both at 927


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 25, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> Can the 12900k participate? Got you both at 927



Turn that 9 upside down  - are you going to go for the 13900K?


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 25, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> Turn that 9 upside down  - are you going to go for the 13900K?


Probably not, unless it hits some uber mega oc clocks, i dont really see the point. Id rather wait for meteor


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 25, 2022)

gimme a minute, i've got your single beat in cr23/cpu-z, but I cannot get the multi stable for either, my thermal grizz contact frame doesnt come till tomorow, and im not guna lie, last week, I was def seeing some light under my straight edge when i checked the cpu. IDK if that effects the cpu OC but it def feels like it, the mem is def low...you might have me whipped till this frame comes. Ill give it a few more tries... i got 22.3k on multi cr23 prior to the bend, I could barely crack 21k this morning...so shes not firing on all cylinders, you guys got the contact frame?


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 25, 2022)

I hit the lottery said:


> gimme a minute, i've got your single beat in cr23/cpu-z, but I cannot get the multi stable for either, my thermal grizz contact frame doesnt come till tomorow, and im not guna lie, last week, I was def seeing some light under my straight edge when i checked the cpu. IDK if that effects the cpu OC but it def feels like it, the mem is def low...you might have me whipped till this frame comes. Ill give it a few more tries... i got 22.3k on multi cr23 prior to the bend, I could barely crack 21k this morning...so shes not firing on all cylinders, you guys got the contact frame?



Yeah I'm running a cheapo one I found on eBay.  It didn't make a ton of difference in my case - but my chip was pretty straight.  I think delidding would be a worthwhile experiment but I'm a bit scared lol, those resistors on top of the chip look fragile.


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 25, 2022)

No contact frame for me, never used one


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 25, 2022)

yeah I sprung for the thermal.. Idk why, I know the much cheaper thermalrite is just fine, but w.e....Delidding looks amazing, but you seen these first few people who are making the tools to do this crap? The heat and force needed is insane i'm confident in my hands but, it looks nuts... Tell ya what..with raptor coming...and the 13600k beating the 5950x stock.....If you decide to do it, Ill go to the looney bin with ya!  Yours and mine are two of the best 'home' non liquid nitrogen overclocks i've seen, bar none....... You down? I heard good things about this gear, https://pcper.com/2022/04/delid-your-alder-lake-rockit-cool-12th-gen-intel/   from consumer and reviewer  ... oh and here, WHELP....I did 904 single whilst getting 8720 multi....and 898 single whilst getting 8842 multi.....But could not get both, and not one clean pass of cine, she def bowed a bit. hahahah....... No excuses though, Keep it shiny for me sir, Ill be back for it


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 25, 2022)

I hit the lottery said:


> yeah I sprung for the thermal.. Idk why, I know the much cheaper thermalrite is just fine, but w.e....Delidding looks amazing, but you seen these first few people who are making the tools to do this crap? The heat and force needed is insane i'm confident in my hands but, it looks nuts... Tell ya what..with raptor coming...and the 13600k beating the 5950x stock.....If you decide to do it, Ill go to the looney bin with ya!  Yours and mine are two of the best 'home' non liquid nitrogen overclocks i've seen, bar none....... You down? I heard good things about this gear, https://pcper.com/2022/04/delid-your-alder-lake-rockit-cool-12th-gen-intel/   from consumer and reviewer  ... oh and here, WHELP....I did 904 single whilst getting 8720 multi....and 898 single whilst getting 8842 multi.....But could not get both, and not one clean pass of cine, she def bowed a bit. hahahah....... No excuses though, Keep it shiny for me sir, Ill be back for it
> 
> View attachment 262968


Once raptor lake is out I am in for sure.


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 25, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> Once raptor lake is out I am in for sure.


Bet!  See the leaked 375$ price for the 13600kf? lol 5950x and 12900k performance for that price at stock is not a bad deal man.


----------



## ARF (Sep 26, 2022)

Ryzen 9 5900X:

AVX2 vs default:



vs




And Ryzen 5 2500U:

AVX2 vs default:



vs



Usually the Ryzen 5 2500U scores around 380/395 - 1800/1900 on the default bench.
But I have open browsers, so it takes some CPU time.


----------



## AleXXX666 (Sep 27, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> What lol, the difference is 4%


the price difference of same-brand and same-"possibilities" motherboard is 65%... yeah, 12400F is no-brainer solution..


----------



## next3r (Sep 27, 2022)

MSI GT75 7RE
notebook 7820hk - 4.5ghz  ,,.but still limited by notebook / FW 
+
AVX2 "custom FIX" ,.,.not works well on defaults config.


----------



## The King (Sep 29, 2022)

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 4448.96 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[i9b1qj] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-SRC5DS8 (2022-09-29 20:00:05) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## bgeneto (Sep 29, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> Challenge accepted.
> 
> View attachment 262954
> Intel Core i5 12600K @ 5521.5 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)
> ...







Indeed... no point in upgrading to Raptor Lake or even zen 4 for you. 
I was able to get 873 points (single) with my 12600 (*non-K*) air cooled (original box from Intel). 
*Thing is*: I'm getting high scores only in the first two or three runs, then scores drops to near 800 points. 
Do you have any ideia why is this happening? It seems some kind of throttling, but thermals and power are OK, not exceeding. 
Do your scores also drops after a few consecutive runs? TIA.


----------



## ezmafl (Sep 30, 2022)

Kill most of the system tray programs on the taskbar, and did you wait several minutes after booting into Windows before running?  Maybe Windows is checking for and/or applying updates in the background?


----------



## The King (Sep 30, 2022)

The King said:


> View attachment 263644
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Slight improvement using CO. Should break 690 maybe 700 ST after some further tunning.











						AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 4448.96 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[mc1unu] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-SRC5DS8 (2022-09-30 04:02:38) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## gwynbleidd997 (Sep 30, 2022)

The King said:


> Slight improvement using CO. Should break 690 maybe 700 ST after some further tunning.
> View attachment 263689
> 
> 
> ...


Try booting into safe mode, you'll probably reach 700 1T there.
I gain like 8-10 points in 1T in CPUZ when I'm in safe mode (5600X at 4.85Ghz).


----------



## Athlonite (Oct 1, 2022)

A little tinkering with PPT TDC EDC and hey presto a wee bit more for a little bit less


----------



## INSTG8R (Oct 1, 2022)

I don't think this is too bad for a CPU that can't take an OC


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Oct 1, 2022)

Here is one that is OC'ed.

LE: SMT off, scores from a cold boot.


----------



## INSTG8R (Oct 1, 2022)

dont whant to set it' said:


> Here is one that is OC'ed.
> 
> LE: SMT off, scores from a cold boot.
> View attachment 263850


Nice OC BUT my scores are slightly better? Your ST score is definitely better


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Oct 1, 2022)

@INSTG8R , Well , I have set SMT off in BIOS/UEFI , so 8C/8T.


----------



## INSTG8R (Oct 1, 2022)

dont whant to set it' said:


> @INSTG8R , Well , I have set SMT off in BIOS/UEFI , so 8C/8T.


Fair enough why your ST score is better, plus you got a good little OC. Any reason you disabled SMT? My board compensates for the lack of OC with a setting called Kombo Strike which basically allows it to hold full boost better under MT loads.


----------



## Athlonite (Oct 1, 2022)

INSTG8R said:


> Fair enough why your ST score is better, plus you got a good little OC. Any reason you disabled SMT? My board compensates for the lack of OC with a setting called Kombo Strike which basically allows it to hold full boost better under MT loads.


I've heard quite good things about that Kombo Strike Jayztwocents seems to think it's great on 7000 series cpu's where he got it to undervolt and maintain a 5.1GHz allcore in CB23 all at a 10 degrees less than stock


----------



## INSTG8R (Oct 1, 2022)

Athlonite said:


> I've heard quite good things about that Kombo Strike Jayztwocents seems to think it's great on 7000 series cpu's where he got it to undervolt and maintain a 5.1GHz allcore in CB23 all at a 10 degrees less than stock


It's made a huge difference just in normal usage because it's kinda a PBO/Curve Optimizer so on that front it's really lowered my temps quite a bit, I was genuinely concerned at the temps I was seeing initially and was even questioning my WC Block mount. I knew it would run warmer but it was a little too warm for my liking but the Kombo Strike has made a huge difference and calmed my concerns. I mean fully stock under full MT load it was touching 90 with Kombo Strike on it's low 80s max and as I said even under normal gaming usage(all I use it for) Temps all round have improved. I would agree I get about a 10C improvement as well.


----------



## freeagent (Oct 1, 2022)

Hmm maybe I will keep my fans installed if it runs that warm.. mine should be here in a few hours. It’s in my city and a delivery agent has been assigned to my shipment, and the Amazon facility is about 1.5km from my door.


----------



## INSTG8R (Oct 1, 2022)

freeagent said:


> Hmm maybe I will keep my fans installed if it runs that warm.. mine should be here in a few hours. It’s in my city and a delivery agent has been assigned to my shipment, and the Amazon facility is about 1.5km from my door.


That 3D cache is apparently 12nm so it’s a “Toasty  Boy” totally manageable but just be prepared for higher than normal temps.  Even at idle it’s pretty warm.


----------



## freeagent (Oct 1, 2022)

INSTG8R said:


> That 3D cache is apparently 12nm so it’s a “Toasty  Boy” totally manageable but just be prepared for higher than normal temps.  Even at idle it’s pretty warm.


No way.. not at all. I have yet to see 75c out of it. I am only running the two stock fractal fans up front and a single TY-143 on the cooler. In R23 30 min test it was only doing 4335MHz though at about 72c. Aida and stuff it will hit 4550. Can’t do 2000 fclk stable, now switching to dual rank because I couldn’t nail 3933 either. I pretty much have no control over the core clocks.. and fclk isn’t stellar  in a 1R config, so might as well add another pair and run at whatever I get 

The system is super quiet though.. should be I only saw 120w ish PPT, maybe a bit more.


----------



## INSTG8R (Oct 1, 2022)

freeagent said:


> No way.. not at all. I have yet to see 75c out of it. I am only running the two stock fractal fans up front and a single TY-143 on the cooler. In R23 30 min test it was only doing 4335MHz though at about 72c. Aida and stuff it will hit 4550. Can’t do 2000 fclk stable, now switching to dual rank because I couldn’t nail 3933 either. I pretty much have no control over the core clocks.. and fclk isn’t stellar  in a 1R config, so might as well add another pair and run at whatever I get
> 
> The system is super quiet though.. should be I only saw 120w ish PPT, maybe a bit more.


I’m not saying it’s not a manageable CPU just saying it runs warmer than average. I totally gave up on any kind or memory/IF OC it just doesn’t take even maxing out the SoC to a safe limit(1.1) I have zero issues getting 4550 in R23 and yeah maybe topped out at 75C. But I mean I’m used to 30C idle not 37 and getting over 40 at the slightest poke. 
 Don’t misunderstand that I think it’s a hot CPU I”m just saying on average it runs warmer than normal considering the boost is 4450 and the voltage only maxes out at 1.26 compared to my previous 5600X at 4850 at 1.35V comparing the 2 the 5800X3D does run warmer on considerably less power across the board


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 1, 2022)

bgeneto said:


> View attachment 263648
> 
> Indeed... no point in upgrading to Raptor Lake or even zen 4 for you.
> I was able to get 873 points (single) with my 12600 (*non-K*) air cooled (original box from Intel).
> ...



I've tried it out -- it doesn't drop for me unless something starts running then it drops by a few points.  It kind of sounds like a software is running in the background?  Maybe indexing or defender or something that is causing that.


----------



## ezmafl (Oct 2, 2022)

Agreed; programs are typically running in the background, possibly Windows updates, Anti-malware updates, system interrupts, service hosts, etc.  I'm probably stating what you already know, but if cold booting, let the system rest for about 5 minutes or so, close unneeded tray applications, don't have HWInfo or other monitoring programs up, etc.  I see fluctuating single threaded scores, too, but not 8-10%.

Mine are more like 10-15 points for single-thread.  For me, this happened after cleaning installing Win11 via Media Creation Tool.  Everything was fine until I installed MSI Afterburner (with it configured to load a default profile on Windows startup).   Not sure if this helps any...


----------



## Det0x (Oct 3, 2022)

Zen4 @ 6ghz
CPU-Z AVX 512 single threaded:


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 3, 2022)

Det0x said:


> Zen4 @ 6ghz
> CPU-Z AVX 512 single threaded:
> View attachment 264109


Shouldn't AVX 512 be faster than AVX2?





Avx 2 at 5.2


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Oct 3, 2022)

It might be a bug: reported operating frequency is higher, yet scores are lower.
I've experienced it with regular Zen 2/3 , when tuning PBO /Curve optimizer / power limits and curent limits.


----------



## The King (Oct 9, 2022)

Will try to break 7000 MT and 700 ST soon! Once I get my AIO 











						AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 4498.95 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[5gy6qi] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-SRC5DS8 (2022-10-09 13:47:39) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Outback Bronze (Oct 22, 2022)

My First 6GHz on 8 Cores : )

Untuned stock 4800Mhz on DDR5 and CPU voltage. Quick and dirty.

Would def go higher on water. This was on Air with a U9S Noctua for HTPC.


----------



## ezmafl (Oct 22, 2022)

Pretty remarkable difference between the 10th and 12th gen mobile CPUs -- i5-1035g1 (4C/8T) vs. i5-1235u (2P/8E/12T).  The single thread on the 12th Gen beat my old i7-10700K at 5ghz (607) and i9-10850K at 4.9ghz (621).


----------



## BetrayerX (Oct 24, 2022)




----------



## bgeneto (Oct 24, 2022)

Outback Bronze said:


> My First 6GHz on 8 Cores : )
> 
> Untuned stock 4800Mhz on DDR5 and CPU voltage. Quick and dirty.
> 
> ...


E-cores and hyperthreading disabled, right? Well done! Keep pushing, even a 12600 can hit 900 ST points under those conditions.... I think your 13th-Gen can break the 1000 barrier easily if you focus on ST performance. Just Let us know when you break the thousand barrier


----------



## Outback Bronze (Oct 24, 2022)

bgeneto said:


> E-cores and hyperthreading disabled, right? Well done! Keep pushing, even a 12600 can hit 900 ST points under those conditions.... I think your 13th-Gen can break the 1000 barrier easily if you focus on ST performance. Just Let us know when you break the thousand barrier



Can't push any further atm. I'm happy with that on a HTPC cooler!

I'll leave the rest to the Hardcore OC's.


----------



## bgeneto (Oct 26, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> Shouldn't AVX 512 be faster than AVX2?
> 
> View attachment 264112
> 
> Avx 2 at 5.2



My AVX-2 is slightly faster (and consumes more power) than AVX-512:

AVX-2:




AVX-512:


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Oct 26, 2022)

It would be hard beat this one...


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Oct 26, 2022)

My 5 year old laptop still does the job albeit at a much slower rate compared to the best out there!


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 26, 2022)

current undervolted / 220W limited 13700KF with +2 boost offset:





Loving this chip so far - super stable and boost works much better out of the box - 5.5Ghz all core in games is nice.  Undervolting doesn't make the chip unstable, just cuts effective clock - easiest OC/tune of my life.


----------



## Franz (Oct 26, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> current undervolted / 220W limited 13700KF with +2 boost offset:
> 
> View attachment 267322
> 
> Loving this chip so far - super stable and boost works much better out of the box - 5.5Ghz all core in games is nice.  Undervolting doesn't make the chip unstable, just cuts effective clock - easiest OC/tune of my life.


Wait, did you overclocked with undervolt?


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 26, 2022)

Franz said:


> Wait, did you overclocked with undervolt?


it's auto voltage, so the chip uses it's own voltage table, I just tuned it as low as it would go without losing performance - and then basically found that my mb was overvolting and put a -20mv undervolt to it - and then just started testing the best offsets - +2 gave the best performance with minimal increase in wattage/power and still stayed under the power cap unless I was cinebenching.

Capped it to 220W so it doesn't go above 85C at full load and so I have headroom for 7900XT(X?), but it loses no performance in gaming and still gets 27500 in cinebech, 22K timespy cpu score, 10K timespy extreme (with pretty quiet fans).

Pretty great chip - won't match Zen4 Vcache but will be great for a while nontheless.


----------



## bgeneto (Oct 26, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> it's auto voltage, so the chip uses it's own voltage table, I just tuned it as low as it would go without losing performance - and then basically found that my mb was overvolting and put a -20mv undervolt to it - and then just started testing the best offsets - +2 gave the best performance with minimal increase in wattage/power and still stayed under the power cap unless I was cinebenching.
> 
> Capped it to 220W so it doesn't go above 85C at full load and so I have headroom for 7900XT(X?), but it loses no performance in gaming and still gets 27500 in cinebech, 22K timespy cpu score, 10K timespy extreme (with pretty quiet fans).
> 
> Pretty great chip - won't match Zen4 Vcache but will be great for a while nontheless.


I think (for gaming) you can cap way below 220W without almost any fps drop. Check out the 13900K efficiency der8auer video on this topic.


----------



## igralec84 (Oct 26, 2022)

Curve optimizer -10 all cores, boost override +100, memory manually set from 5600 CL40 to 6000 CL32.


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 26, 2022)

bgeneto said:


> I think (for gaming) you can cap way below 220W without almost any fps drop. Check out the 13900K efficiency der8auer video on this topic.


I tested it in my games and there is a max spike of 190w in cyberpunk so that’s why I set it at 220w - also that still gives me room to cram a 420w vga in there and not worry about popping the sf750


----------



## Franz (Oct 29, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> I tested it in my games and there is a max spike of 190w in cyberpunk so that’s why I set it at 220w - also that still gives me room to cram a 420w vga in there and not worry about popping the sf750


After a ton of psus diyng with no reason here, I bought a 550w with national guarantee and dont care about. Overvolt? Yes! Pushing 560W? Yes! 

I miss my ancient EG365P-VE it lived 15+ years


----------



## glnn_23 (Nov 12, 2022)

13900k
MSI Z790i
G.Skill  2 x 32Gb  5600c28


----------



## Franz (Nov 12, 2022)

glnn_23 said:


> 13900k
> MSI Z790i
> G.Skill  2 x 32Gb  5600c28
> 
> View attachment 269619


WTF? Almost 18k?


----------



## glnn_23 (Nov 12, 2022)

Small bump with 5.9


----------



## OkieDan (Nov 12, 2022)

Everything stock except PBO curve optimizer -15 all core.


----------



## phanbuey (Nov 12, 2022)

Got some time to tweak stuff - Capped @ 220W w/ -0.020v adaptive offset


----------



## Det0x (Nov 13, 2022)

This benchmark really don't scale with / like Zen4 ( ~0% IPC increase over Zen3)











						AMD Ryzen 9 7950X @ 5498 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[6ye0za] Validated Dump by domdtxdissar (2022-11-12 23:36:25) - MB: Asus ROG CROSSHAIR X670E HERO - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Nov 18, 2022)

glnn_23 said:


> Small bump with 5.9
> 
> View attachment 269639


I know this scores only thread but can you also share temp and power figures for the 13900k?



P4-630 said:


> Latest BIOS
> 
> View attachment 260177


Very Good scores for a 12700k. Undervolted?


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 18, 2022)

Tech_fanatic said:


> I know this scores only thread but can you also share temp and power figures for the 13900k?
> 
> 
> Very Good scores for a 12700k. Undervolted?


Actually it ran at 4,7 Ghz that run I think


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Nov 18, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> Actually it ran at 4,7 Ghz that run I think


Its still close to my undervolted 7900x score


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Nov 18, 2022)

PBO Curve Optimizer for cpu set to all cores negative 50 and windows performance mode maximum processor state to 100%. Boost is also set to -1000. PPT Power limit was set to 75000mW. Hence the 76W of peak power only.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Nov 18, 2022)

@Tech_fanatic I do not understand the mid 600 point score for the single core result, unless you had Core Performance Boost off. Followup would it be simpler to just set PPT to 75000mAamps , so retaining extra boosting for some amount of cores ,past the stock freq. ?


----------



## INSTG8R (Nov 18, 2022)

Not sure I posted my new CPU


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Nov 18, 2022)

dont whant to set it' said:


> @Tech_fanatic I do not understand the mid 600 point score for the single core result, unless you had Core Performance Boost off. Followup would it be simpler to just set PPT to 75000mAamps , so retaining extra boosting for some amount of cores ,past the stock freq. ?


Yes you are correct the boost is off. Infact it was set to negative 1000 and not "100" as I had mistakenly written so the peak being 5.6GHz - 1000MHz = 4.6GHz approx. which is what the hwmonitor is displaying. This is just the processor at its base basically.


----------



## mama (Nov 18, 2022)

Tech_fanatic said:


> PBO Curve Optimizer for cpu set to all cores negative 50 and windows performance mode maximum processor state to 100%. Boost is also set to -1000. PPT Power limit was set to 75000mW. Hence the 76W of peak power only.


How do you get -50 all core with PBO2?  I'm pretty sure the steps get to -30 only.


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Nov 18, 2022)

mama said:


> How do you get -50 all core with PBO2?  I'm pretty sure the steps get to -30 only.


My Asrock X670E Steel Legend with 1.11 BIOS allows a maximum positive/negative all core value of  "100" but at -100 the system doesn't boot at all. So I settled at -50. It may go lower than -50 upto -100 but in my case -100 is not feasible as the system refused to boot


----------



## Chomiq (Nov 18, 2022)

-5C outside, balcony door open, for the lulz:






Who needs AIO when you get idle temps like this :


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 18, 2022)

Chomiq said:


> -5C outside, balcony door open, for the lulz:
> View attachment 270590View attachment 270591
> 
> Who needs AIO when you get idle temps like this :
> View attachment 270592


----------



## Athlonite (Nov 19, 2022)

Chomiq said:


> -5C outside, balcony door open, for the lulz:
> View attachment 270590View attachment 270591
> 
> Who needs AIO when you get idle temps like this :
> View attachment 270592


I would have thought you'd have gotten better perf with lower temps but you seem to be missing out on the multi core a wee bit


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Nov 19, 2022)

Chomiq said:


> -5C outside, balcony door open, for the lulz:
> View attachment 270590View attachment 270591
> 
> Who needs AIO when you get idle temps like this :
> View attachment 270592





P4-630 said:


> View attachment 270595


If my region had those kind of ambient temps I would have gone for the 13900k as it would have also acted as a room heater


----------



## The King (Nov 19, 2022)

Athlonite said:


> I would have thought you'd have gotten better perf with lower temps but you seem to be missing out on the multi core a wee bit
> 
> View attachment 270607


Only 22C here will get close to 0-5C next month. Im still hitting 80C in this test so not good need more cold.
Are you running static 4750 on this? ST seems low.


----------



## glnn_23 (Nov 19, 2022)

Tech_fanatic said:


> I know this scores only thread but can you also share temp and power figures for the 13900k?


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Nov 19, 2022)

glnn_23 said:


> View attachment 270666


The peak temp of 92°C is really impressive (it can go upto 100° so you are well under that) for an all p-core boost of 5.9GHz but the power draw is less so. What cooler are you using for the 13900k?


----------



## Athlonite (Nov 19, 2022)

The King said:


> Only 22C here will get close to 0-5C next month. Im still hitting 80C in this test so not good need more cold.
> Are you running static 4750 on this? ST seems low.
> View attachment 270647


Yeah static 4750 barely makes 60c and as I don't do a heck of alot that's single thread I didn't really care about it that much


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 22, 2022)

BIOS F21


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Nov 23, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> BIOS F21
> 
> View attachment 271334


You are inching closer to the 9.5k mark with each BIOS Update. Hopefully next one will make it cross 9.5k and eventually 10k at some point in time.


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 23, 2022)

Intel Core i9 13900K @ 5500 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[16ieu4] Validated Dump by Solaris17 (2022-11-23 08:08:57) - MB: EVGA Corp. Z690 DARK KINGPIN - RAM: 65536 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				













Nice looks like I'm about where I should be.


----------



## mama (Nov 23, 2022)

7900x stock.


----------



## The King (Dec 5, 2022)

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 4773.89 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[2prh7p] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-0PSJOQD (2022-12-05 10:11:05) - MB: MSI B450M MORTAR MAX (MS-7B89) - RAM: 16384 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Chomiq (Dec 7, 2022)

Some cold weather benching with balcony door open at 1 deg C outside:








25 deg C idle


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 8, 2022)

Middle of summer here idling at 33°C with ambient of 22°C seeing as it's 11:15 pm here





@Chomiq what clocks do you get when running this


----------



## Tech_fanatic (Dec 12, 2022)

PBO CO = -25 on all Cores : : Thermal Throttle Limit = 70°C : :


----------



## ezmafl (Dec 31, 2022)

My in-law's Microsoft Surface with an i5-4300u.


----------



## freeagent (Dec 31, 2022)

My trusty, not quite rusty 5900X


----------



## Dan.G (Jan 1, 2023)

Air cooling: SilentiumPC Spartan 5 (with its' Pactum PT-3 thermal paste pre-applied) and a front-mounted 120 mm Deepcool (came with the case) static pressure fan that blows over MB's VRMs. Below the 120 mm cooler I have a 140 mm high airflow fan from Arctic Cooling: the F14. That's it - I don't have fans mounted in the back. System is very quiet and runs at fairly low temperatures (below 75C).


----------



## arabus (Jan 2, 2023)

8 Thread Raptor.


----------

