Post your Cinebench R23 Score

[Det0x]

Compared to anything, i dont think any cpu can beat alderlake in efficiency

Put up or sh*t up

PES | Assessing Power and Performance Efficiency of x86 CPU architectures​

Dear Community,

so this is my first thread here as a long-time lurker - but I felt the desire to share a small hobby-project of mine from the last couple of months with you...

Performance Efficiency Suite - What is it about?
Most Reviewers solely focus on what they consider to be the most important aspect of modern CPUs - the absolute performance. But this is only one side of the equation. Today Power Efficiency is at least as important - or to be more precise: The amount of energy (Wattseconds or Joules) a CPU needs in order to accomplish a given workload. Sadly most Reviewers shy away from the extra mile it needs to assess this aspect. This suite measures the Total Package Power of a CPU while running the Cinebench R23 benchmarks first in single-threaded mode (1 run), then running in multi-threaded mode (for 10 minutes + whatever it takes to finish the last run). The results will be rendered in the provided Results.xlsx Excel file. To combine Efficiency and Performance there is also a score provided called Performance Efficiency Score (how amazingly inspired I am ).

In the meantime I was able to aggregate more than 80 samples from members of the 3DC & CB communities (see below).

How-To

1. Unzip the latest release to wherever you want EXCEPT on your local OneDrive folder.
2. Open Settings.txt and insert your local Cinebench23 Directory.
3. Run PES Start - it will ask for Administrator rights as these are needed for measuring Package Power
4. Wait until the Powershell finishes.
5. Open the Excel file...
6. Allow external connections (to the generated CSV-files with the data)
7. Go to Data -> Refresh all
8. Enjoy and share your results - just take a screenshot of what the Excel renders.
9. If you want to do multiple measurements with different settings just copy the Excel file (inside the root-folder) before running and refreshing the data.

Some explanations about the Suite
SPOILER


Online Resources

• PES GitHub Repo
• 3DCenter.org Forum Thread (German)
• ComputerBase.de Forum Thread (German)

Disclaimer
I am by no means a Powershell professional or a professional Reviewer. I was just sick of the lack of information and wanted to propose a low-effort solution. Any input for further improvement is highly welcomed. Please feel free to use/extend/rip-off this solution as you wish. But please share your findings to the world.

Performance-Consumption-Matrices (Single-Thread & Multi-Thread)
The following charts show the samples with total consumption on the x-axis and performance on the y-axis.
Both axles have logarithmic scaling in order to get straight ISO-performance-efficiency lines (the diagonal ones). So if two results are one the same line, they have the same power efficiency (performance and energy consumption are weighted 50:50).

The more to the left a sample is, the more energy efficient it is in processing the fixed workload.
The more to the bottom a sample is, the faster it processes the workload.

(i can also do some new runs with my better binned 5950x)

 

[JustBenching]

Put up or sh*t up

PES | Assessing Power and Performance Efficiency of x86 CPU architectures​

Performance-Consumption-Matrices (Single-Thread & Multi-Thread)
The following charts show the samples with total consumption on the x-axis and performance on the y-axis.
Both axles have logarithmic scaling in order to get straight ISO-performance-efficiency lines (the diagonal ones). So if two results are one the same line, they have the same power efficiency (performance and energy consumption are weighted 50:50).

The more to the left a sample is, the more energy efficient it is in processing the fixed workload.
The more to the bottom a sample is, the faster it processes the workload.
View attachment 240712View attachment 240713
(i can also do some new runs with my better binned 5950x)

I did put up. I posted a cbr23 run with 360 score per watt on a 12900k. Nothing gets close in terms of efficiency. I mean, go ahead, post your cbr23 with hwinfo open and show us

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Maybe a new thread is in order

I'd suggest
I can alter optimized default bios settings to prove my point of being the most efficient chip on the planet

 

[JustBenching]

Hi,
Maybe a new thread is in order

I'd suggest
I can alter optimized default bios settings to prove my point of being the most efficient chip on the planet

And what exactly is wrong or weird with that? Are you i suggesting we should be comparing stock ram no xmp as well or its okay to alter optimized default bios in this case?

Basically you are saying that every reviewer on the planet is doing it wrong cause they enable xmp... Okay buddy

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
XMP profiles have nothing to do with efficiency this is overclocking so make up your mind what your point is
Make a new thread to prove that point.

 

[JustBenching]

Hi,
XMP profiles have nothing to do with efficiency this is overclocking so make up your mind what your point is
Make a new thread to prove that point.

It has to do with altering bios optimized defaults. So you dont have a problem with altering bios optimized defaults, do you?

And yes, it has to do with efficiency, but it doesnt matter even if it didnt. My pc is way more efficient in gaming with 6600c32 ram then it is with stock no xmp

 

[harm9963]

I did put up. I posted a cbr23 run with 360 score per watt on a 12900k. Nothing gets close in terms of efficiency. I mean, go ahead, post your cbr23 with hwinfo open and show us

A stock 12900k scores around 27000 , uses 241 watts ,and 90c
my 5950X scores 29400, uses 170 watts , and 69c

 

[JustBenching]

A stock 12900k scores around 27000 , uses 241 watts ,and 90c
my 5950X scores 29400, uses 170 watts , and 69c

29400 with 170 watts is pretty bad in terms of efficiency, thats 172 cb points per watt. My 12900k hits 360+ points / watt.

I don't know about stock that much but my 12900k definitely doesnt consume 240 or hit 90c even at stock, its around 190w and 75c

 

[Det0x]

I did put up. I posted a cbr23 run with 360 score per watt on a 12900k. Nothing gets close in terms of efficiency. I mean, go ahead, post your cbr23 with hwinfo open and show us

I really don't understand what you are bragging about

Here are my 5950x @ 51w PPT -> 20681 points in Cinebench r23 = "405 score per watt"

Now show us how many watts you need to break 33k.. Oh wait you cant even break 30k ?
Yeah that's some efficiency, 241watt for ~26k score at stock

Time to move some goalposts now i guess

 

[harm9963]

I really don't understand what you are bragging about

Here are my 5950x @ 51w PPT -> 20681 points in Cinebench r23 = "405 score per watt"

Now should us how many watts you need to break 33k.. Oh wait you cant even break 30k ?
Yeah thats some efficiency, 241watt for ~26k score

5950X is a wolf in sheep's clothing true sleeper from AMD

 

[oobymach]

Dang kids and your 5950's, back when I was a young un we were happy with a commodore 64 and a sega controller, load * ,8,1

 

[JustBenching]

I really don't understand what you are bragging about

Here are my 5950x @ 51w PPT -> 20681 points in Cinebench r23 = "405 score per watt"

That's actually a really good score. Can you try @ 35watts?

 

[harm9963]

29400 with 170 watts is pretty bad in terms of efficiency, thats 172 cb points per watt. My 12900k hits 360+ points / watt.

I don't know about stock that much but my 12900k definitely doesnt consume 240 or hit 90c even at stock, its around 190w and 75c

 

[JustBenching]

Oh wait you cant even break 30k ?

Wait, don't tell me that a CPU with 33% more threads gets higher MT score in cinebench....I won't believe it.

Shall I ask how many watts you need to get 2k ST score? Oh wait, you cant even reach 2k can you?

Im sorry, it's obviously a joke, I just wanted you to realize how stupid what you just said was. Hope it helped

 

[mstenholm]

Hi,
XMP profiles have nothing to do with efficiency this is overclocking so make up your mind what your point is
Make a new thread to prove that point.

A simple like is not enough. Yes let the guy with an issue get his own thread for bragging of whatever makes it better. I for one know how to block so I don’t have to read his rubbish. I liked this thread before.

 

[freeagent]

Wait, don't tell me that a CPU with 33% more threads gets higher MT score in cinebench....I won't believe it.

Shall I ask how many watts you need to get 2k ST score? Oh wait, you cant even reach 2k can you?

Im sorry, it's obviously a joke, I just wanted you to realize how stupid what you just said was. Hope it helped

No offence or anything, but it seemed like you came into this thread to rub the nose of 5000 series owners in the carpet. Obviously ADL is going to be more efficient.. for one it’s newer, and second Intel had to come up with something good to get AMD users to switch back.

 

[JustBenching]

No offence or anything, but it seemed like you came into this thread to rub the nose of 5000 series owners in the carpet. Obviously ADL is going to be more efficient.. for one it’s newer, and second Intel had to come up with something good to get AMD users to switch back.

How? Tell me, in which post starting from the previous page did I do anything like what you are describing. I just posted a cbr23 score, and then everyone started quoting me

 

[shork]

x3440@3615 air

 

[Othnark]

What a hilarious derailment.. we experience units of time in watts per score point right... While I'm waiting on a render/compile, I'll just count my stacks of pennies saved through efficient processing... meanwhile, the hourly rate of work on the PC murders the cost of running the hardware. Absolute nonsense argument.

If power were a realistic metric for the consumer market PC selection, smart phones with bluetooth kb/mouse and USB C to OLED panels would be the standard work device. Ampere would have been rejected by the community immediately and Alder Lake would have been stillborn. Obviously none of those are true so...

PS: Your 12900k has the same number of cores, that argument is invalid. Curious what total package power is during the TVB enabled 2000+ single threaded runs, honestly not sure what draw is in 1t loads.

Coolant above dew point, both PCs on same loop: 5950x on x570 Gaming Wifi II 1.2.0.6c Gentle daily settings and 3900x on C6E 1.2.0.6c Gentle daily settings. Both still using PB + other tweaks

Less gentle is around 1730/32100 for the 5950.


EDIT:
For the sillies I figured, what's a better power consumption comparison than ISO-Score comparison? 27133/10445 composite pic.

5950x Consuming 95 watts matching 241 PL1-PL2 12900k scores, enjoy the Zen 3 dick waving. The whole argument is stupid but here ya go, for production work (aka cinebench type workloads) 5950x is king on non HEDT platforms, like or not, that's reality.

2 minute undervolt at 1v set, .962 get, 1800/3600C14 with no-effort SOC power reduction. I could definitely cut another 10 watts just off the SOC power load. Water to tctl/tdie temp delta of 18c, so essentially could be run on mayonnaise as TIM under a Pentium 4 stock cooler and an occasional exhale for air flow.

I'll also just drop this here since you know, your factually incorrect on 12900k being "most power efficient" and all. Shame they didn't show 5950x power consumption during gaming because it's way under the stock 142 watt limit in most games at 60-80 watts with the heavy hitting titles usually around 110ish. I will concede some of their BM numbers show anomalies I cannot explain, and likely come down to margin of error.

Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Tested at Power Limits between 50 W and 241 W

We test Intel's Core i9-12900K at various TDP levels all the way down to 50 W to determine how much efficiency is really in the new Alder Lake core, and how these power limits affect performance. Competing with the efficiency of AMD's Zen 3 Ryzen lineup is just two settings changes away.

www.techpowerup.com

4k gaming results are particularly cute, 12900k has a 1.6% lead over 5950x lol a margin that can be made up with a single bios setting.

 

[Archmage1809]

Probably this is what I get for a 3200C14 kit and try to tune it slightly at 1.4V.
8k+ is a win for R5 2600 I guess. 4.1GHz, 1.35V Vcore, 1.0125 VSOC (to make it 1.0-ish on ASUS board, thanks ASUS, probably can do 1.15 instead but I wont squeeze them anymore)
Edit: Air cooling, not actually stable cuz TM5 Extreme1 overnight crash at the end of the test.

 

[GRABibus]

5950X : PPT~TDC~EDC = 220~140~140 // Curve Optimizer : -14 Core0, -12 Core1, -28 Core9, -28 Core15, -30 all remaining cores // Max CPU Boost Clock Override = +200MHz.
Cooling => Corsair H115i RGB Platinum
Test @ 23.5°C :

Little improvment of my MC score :

5950X : PPT~TDC~EDC = 220~140~140 // Curve Optimizer : -14 Core0, -12 Core1, -28 Core9, -28 Core15, -30 all remaining cores // Max CPU Boost Clock Override = +200MHz.
Cooling => Corsair H115i RGB Platinum
Test @ 23.2°C.

 

[ir_cow]

Ive been trying to break 31K with the 12900K. So close with 30800~ . I'll post my hwbot submission if I can find it among the many.

Edit: my higher score "Cinebench - R23 Multi Core with BenchMate - 30908 cb - Core i9 12900K @ 5400MHz" was invalidated because I didnt have CPUZ open as well. What a stupid rule.. Its like HWBOT doesn't trust their own BenchMate "authentication" lol.

Second Best

ir_cow`s Cinebench - R23 Multi Core with BenchMate score: 30771 cb with a Core i9 12900K

The Core i9 12900K @ 5400MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the Cinebench - R23 Multi Core with BenchMate benchmark. ir_cowranks #null worldwide and #54 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.

hwbot.org

 

[GRABibus]

Man that twelveseven is lookin good

Been awhile since I ran this.. getting rusty

View attachment 232368

Very nice SC score

 

[GRABibus]

5950X : PPT~TDC~EDC = 220~140~140 // Curve Optimizer : -14 Core0, -12 Core1, -28 Core9, -28 Core15, -30 all remaining cores // Max CPU Boost Clock Override = +200MHz.
Cooling => Corsair H115i RGB Platinum
Test @ 19°C.

 

[The King]

I did put up. I posted a cbr23 run with 360 score per watt on a 12900k. Nothing gets close in terms of efficiency. I mean, go ahead, post your cbr23 with hwinfo open and show us

Alder lake is awesome but definitely not the king when it comes to efficiency. der8auer is one of the world most reputable Overclockers unlike another YT that i wont mentioned in this thread.