• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Share your CPUZ Benchmarks!

Zyll Goliath said:
Nice...here is my Xeon 2697 V2 result(single-socket)
3,45GhzAll Cores/4,03GhzTurbo
Click to expand...

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 :D

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.
 
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)

But of course, this doesn't apply to your overclocked Xeon. That would definitely take down a 2696 v2 :D

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.
Click to expand...
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:
Xeon_E5-2600v2_Turbo_Boost_in_Detail.png

(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
 
Last edited:
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
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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
 

Attachments

  • s1.png
    s1.png
    476.5 KB · Views: 112
  • s2.png
    s2.png
    47.8 KB · Views: 119
  • s3.png
    s3.png
    257.2 KB · Views: 109
Last edited:

Attachments

  • Capture6893150.PNG
    Capture6893150.PNG
    120.4 KB · Views: 129
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
1610105783869.png
 
Did some testing lowering my TDC/EDC limits to 135 (se prior settings below)and Scalar to 2x
1610198276293.png


That gave a much better result in both multi and single core
1610198314213.png
 
New BIOS 5821 BETA ,Asus Prime Pro.
 

Attachments

  • Capture210210140.PNG
    Capture210210140.PNG
    1.3 MB · Views: 115
2vPBOsettingsCurvenegative10andEDC100w130.jpg

So close to that 700 single core score
 
How about this old post of a dual socket board with two quad cores @Knoxx29?
www.techpowerup.com

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 www.techpowerup.com
 

Attachments

  • 1610381673595.png
    1610381673595.png
    23.3 KB · Views: 105
  • 1610387611609.png
    1610387611609.png
    22.9 KB · Views: 125
  • 1610399086848.png
    1610399086848.png
    23.6 KB · Views: 90
  • 1610400422812.png
    1610400422812.png
    24.3 KB · Views: 95
Last edited:
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
 

Attachments

  • cpuz10900k.jpg
    cpuz10900k.jpg
    683.5 KB · Views: 175
Final , good balance , st and mt , happy !
 

Attachments

  • Capture13384.PNG
    Capture13384.PNG
    300.5 KB · Views: 132
1610620458748.png

Cold weather in Denmark below 0c gave better result :D
 
doing some more cold weather testing
1610781000762.png


Best single core result
CPUz712v2.jpg

Best multi core result
CPUz712.jpg

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 :D
 
Under normal conditions do I understand that 5950x over 690? hahaha or these data with what weather are we talking at 0 degrees?
 
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?
Click to expand...
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
 
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 :peace:

CPU-Z.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top