Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Benchmark Test & Performance Analysis

[Dragam1337]

Well check this video, it's a 12900k. Look at the CPU usage and tell me what you think would happen if I turned off those ecores?

Buh, there are lot of broken beyond fixing games. Spiderman works better (and I mean, 20-25% better) with HT off. None of that makes sense, on a hardware level Pcores take priority, Ecores are used when P cores are swarmed, HT is used when E cores are also swarmed. Any game that deviates from the rule has something fundamentally f***ed up there in the code.

And I've seen lot of games that completely bypass this, they skip the Pcores, they skip the Ecores and they go straight for the HT cores. That's just asinine. That's why usually if you don't mind losing some MT performance it's better to turn HT off and be done with this nonsense


I just watched the video you mentioned, not a good indicator, we don't know if the issue is caused by ecores or by HT. He should have tested 8+8 with HT off as well.

The last of us is one of few games that fully utilize all cpu resources available.

Most games will perform better with only P cores.

Ps. nice toaster you got there... 250w...

 

[JustBenching]

The last of us is one of few games that fully utilize all cpu resources available.

Most games will perform better with only P cores.

Ps. nice toaster you got there... 250w...

Yeah, thnx for the toaster, that's my 4090

And no, most games will not perform better with only P cores. Have you actually tried or are you talking...you know..

 

[Dragam1337]

"Stunning Visuals"!?!

The title alone gives me the impression that this guy is biased.

Your comment gives me the impression that you are too.

The visuals are objectively stunning.

Yeah, thnx for the toaster, that's my 4090

And no, most games will not perform better with only P cores. Have you actually tried or are you talking...you know..

Riiiight, you just got everything set up oppersite of what everyone else has...

Yes, i have tried it. Your comments makes me think that you haven't.

 

[JustBenching]

Riiiight, you just got everything set up oppersite of what everyone else has...

Yes, i have tried it. Your comments makes me think that you haven't.

Can you tell me the games you tested and E cores off works better? I can try them. Don't tell me star citizen...

EG1. My toaster requires 170 watts for 28k CBR23 score. How much wattage does your non toaster require for 28k score?

 

[Dragam1337]

Can you tell me the games you tested and E cores off works better? I can try them. Don't tell me star citizen...

Star citizen.

 

[unwind-protect]

And I've seen lot of games that completely bypass this, they skip the Pcores, they skip the Ecores and they go straight for the HT cores.

You cannot "skip Pcores and go straight to HT cores". If you don't use the other thread on a given core your thread has the entire core for itself.

 

[JustBenching]

Star citizen.

Star citizen, the game that devs themselves said it is an actual game issue, is "most games". Yeah okay, didn't expect any better from you, makes sense. Not to mention, afaik they patched it?

You cannot "skip Pcores and go straight to HT cores". If you don't use the other thread on a given core your thread has the entire core for itself.

Not true, and easy to test. Try CBR23 single thread and lock it to run on a HT core, it will not match the single core performance of an actual physical core.

 

[Dragam1337]

Star citizen, the game that devs themselves said it is an actual game issue, is "most games". Yeah okay, didn't expect any better from you, makes sense. Not to mention, afaik they patched it?

No, they didn't. And it's an "issue" in alot of games.

There are plenty of games that sees better fps / more consistent frametimes with e-waste cores disabled. Cyberpunk is another.

 

[JustBenching]

No, they didn't. And it's an "issue" in alot of games.

There are plenty of games that sees better fps / more consistent frametimes with e-waste cores disabled. Cyberpunk is another.

No, cyberpunk is definitely not another. That's completely false. Disabling ecores will make performance completely tank in cyberpunk, especially the tom's dinner area which is the heaviest in the game.

You still havent told me how much wattage does your toaster require for 28k cbr23

 

[Dragam1337]

No, cyberpunk is definitely not another. That's completely false. Disabling ecores will make performance completely tank in cyberpunk, especially the tom's dinner area which is the heaviest in the game.

You still havent told me how much wattage does your toaster require for 28k cbr23

Yeah, completely false...

You can add basically any game that isn't completely multithreaded (aka limited by the primary render thread) to the list of games where it runs better with e-waste cores disabled. Aka essentially all ue4 games.

And cute attempt at a diss.

 

[JustBenching]

Yeah, completely false...

You can add basically any game that isn't completely multithreaded (aka limited by the primary render thread) to the list of games where it runs better with e-waste cores disabled. Aka essentially all ue4 games.

And cute attempt at a diss.

The difference is like 2%, and he is running the game without RT which makes it much heavier on the CPU.

And it was you that started the diss with your toaster mentions when your CPU is way less efficient than mine

 

[Dragam1337]

The difference is like 2%, and he is running the game without RT which makes it much heavier on the CPU.

And it was you that started the diss with your toaster mentions when your CPU is way less efficient than mine

Yes, the difference in average fps is 2% - the difference in frametime consistency is alot bigger...

And yes, way less efficient than yours...

And unlike your vid, my screenies is taken at the most cpu heavy place in the game...

 

[JustBenching]

Yes, the difference in average fps is 2% - the difference is frametime consistency is alot bigger...

And yes, way less efficient than yours...

And unlike your vid, my screenies is taken at the most cpu heavy place in the game...

80 freaking degrees at 65w playing games, holy mother of God that's insane lol.

And please, show me how much wattage your toaster needs to hit 28k in cbr23. Surely less than mine since it's more efficient. Right? Right?

EG1. While using a 360 radiator as big as my actual fridge, wtf? What kinds of cooling does that thing need to reach normal temperatures?

 

[Dragam1337]

80 freaking degrees at 65w plating games, holy mother of God that's insane lol.

And please, show me how much wattage your toaster needs to hit 28k in cbr23. Surely less than mine since it's more efficient. Right? Right?

You really are grasping at anything you can, huh.

So the conclusion was : my cpu is both faster and uses alot less watt.

As for cinebench, have fun playing with your synthetic benchmark - in games, which is the purpose of these cpu's (or mine at least), yours is way worse.

 

[JustBenching]

You really are grasping at anything you can, huh.

So the conclusion was : my cpu is both faster and uses alot less watt.

As for cinebench, have fun playing with your synthetic benchmark - in games, which is the purpose of these cpu's (or mine at least), yours is way worse.

I didn't buy it for games, but even there I get the exact same fps as you are (according to the SS you posted), while not having to run it at 80+C with a triple radiator watercooler, LOL. I'm using a tiny single tower air cooler

Are the 3ds really running at boiling temperature even in games?

 

[Dragam1337]

I didn't buy it for games, but even there I get the exact same fps as you are (according to the SS you posted), while not having to run it at 80+C with a triple radiator watercooler, LOL. I'm using a tiny single tower air cooler

Are the 3ds really running at boiling temperature even in games?

No you don't - you get the same fps in an area that is way less demanding.

As for the temps, im running an silent setup, with fans spinning at 800 rpm on the radiator - that game with uncapped fps is the only one that gets the temps that high, while not increasing fanspeed.

This is the typical scenario

 

[THU31]

I didn't buy it for games, but even there I get the exact same fps as you are (according to the SS you posted), while not having to run it at 80+C with a triple radiator watercooler, LOL. I'm using a tiny single tower air cooler

Are the 3ds really running at boiling temperature even in games?

The CPU temperature is completely irrelevant, though. As long as it doesn't hit Tjmax, it will never throttle, so the temperature doesn't affect you in any way. Wattage on the other hand directly affects the heat output in your room.

 

[JustBenching]

No you don't - you get the same fps in an area that is way less demanding.

Νο, the warehouse i've posted the video from is much more demanding than what you posted.. I mean in 5 minutues ill post some screenshots from the same area you did showing I get the same fps but you won't admit you were wrong as is your usual

The CPU temperature is completely irrelevant, though. As long as it doesn't hit Tjmax, it will never throttle, so the temperature doesn't affect you in any way. Wattage on the other hand directly affects the heat output in your room.

Of course it affects you, it affects what type of cooler you need. He has a 360 rad watercooler, imagine using a single tower small air cooler on that oven, it will melt.

 

[Dragam1337]

Νο, the warehouse i've posted the video from is much more demanding than what you posted.. I mean in 5 minutues ill post some screenshots from the same area you did showing I get the same fps but you won't admit you were wrong as is your usual

/facepalm

Sure it is...

The CPU temperature is completely irrelevant, though. As long as it doesn't hit Tjmax, it will never throttle, so the temperature doesn't affect you in any way. Wattage on the other hand directly affects the heat output in your room.

Indeed - water in my radiator only gets to 35c, so it barely emits any heat.

 

[JustBenching]

/facepalm

Sure it is...

Yeap, surely it is. This is a stock 12900k, lol

 

[Dragam1337]

Yeap, surely it is. This is a stock 12900k, lol

View attachment 294695

I'm surprised you aren't just head right against the wall, but you're still trying to cheese it. If you are going to do it, then do the same angles, in particular the 2nd screenie i linked.

Regardless, you're still using 50% more watt, so your original claim of my cpu being "way less efficient" is kinda mute.

 

[JustBenching]

I'm surprised you aren't just head right against the wall, but you're still trying to cheese it. If you are going to do it, then do the same angles, in particular the 2nd screenie i linked.

Regardless, you're still using 50% more watt, so your original claim of my cpu being "way less efficient" is kinda mute.

Ι can do whatever angle you want, framerate is between 173 and 189 in that scene.

Never said it's more efficient in games, I said it's more efficient. In general. Which it is. By a lot. Both in heavy multithreadiing and light loads. As i'm writing this my cpu is consuming 4 to 6 watts. Yours is probably 25w+. So yeah...

Gaming efficiency is great on the 7800x 3d, anything else not so much


EG1. In your 2nd ss im getting between 128 and 133. Want an SS as well to prove it?

I'm surprised you aren't just head right against the wall, but you're still trying to cheese it. If you are going to do it, then do the same angles, in particular the 2nd screenie i linked.

Regardless, you're still using 50% more watt, so your original claim of my cpu being "way less efficient" is kinda mute.

So, I repeated the test with a 70w power limit. The 3d is 22% faster at same wattage. Consider the 12900 is a 2 year old CPU, yeah not bad.

 

[Dragam1337]

Ι can do whatever angle you want, framerate is between 173 and 189 in that scene.

Never said it's more efficient in games, I said it's more efficient. In general. Which it is. By a lot. Both in heavy multithreadiing and light loads. As i'm writing this my cpu is consuming 4 to 6 watts. Yours is probably 25w+. So yeah...

Gaming efficiency is great on the 7800x 3d, anything else not so much


EG1. In your 2nd ss im getting between 128 and 133. Want an SS as well to prove it?


So, I repeated the test with a 70w power limit. The 3d is 22% faster at same wattage. Consider the 12900 is a 2 year old CPU, yeah not bad.

View attachment 294836

Not quite 25+ W at idle... more like 16w. But i generally have my pc turned off when i don't use it anyways.

But yes, the intel processors are a bit more reasonable when they aren't being pushed as hard.

The 3d cpu's can go even lower in power though, while barely losing any performance.

 

[JustBenching]

Not quite 25+ W at idle... more like 16w. But i generally have my pc turned off when i don't use it anyways.

But yes, the intel processors are a bit more reasonable when they aren't being pushed as hard.

The 3d cpu's can go even lower in power though, while barely losing any performance.

Well obviously I can also reduce it further. But efficiency comparisons should be done at same wattages, and in same wattages the 7800x 3d is around 20% more efficient in games. Not bad, not great either.

 

[Wolverine2349]

No, cyberpunk is definitely not another. That's completely false. Disabling ecores will make performance completely tank in cyberpunk, especially the tom's dinner area which is the heaviest in the game.

You still havent told me how much wattage does your toaster require for 28k cbr23

CyberPunk is way better with e-cores off certainly on WIN10. Spiderman Remastered and Hitman 3 have special engines to use them so they are a little better with them on.

Though extreme examples are a lot worse with e-cores on then them off where as games that benefit have only minor ones from e-cores. Star Citizen and Wo Long: Fallen Dynasty come to mind as games that are horrible with e-cores on.

The hybrid arch is just too new of tech and so different from the traditionally SMP way of doing things in X86 ecosystem with multiple CPUs this century since Windows 2000 that there are bound to be games and apps that are disastrous with e-cores on.

Tech the last 10 years with the modern WIN7 to present arch has produced like no major compatibility issues until e-cores introduced as once again it is such an unusual and drastic shift of the way of doing things.

Its like the change from DOS to 32-bit Windows NT in the mid 90s to 2001. That happened so much faster so much less ecosystem to deal with.

But last 10-13 years we just needed more of same type of cores (meaning no heterogeneous arch of different core types for multicore CPUs in X86 space) and faster clocks and IPC and faster RAM and storage and GPUs.

We did not need such a drastic change in the way things are scheduled to introduce the pain of transitioning from DOS to 32-bit Windows NT based OS. Especially when the length of time for such an X86 ecosystem and amount of software was/is far longer in the 32-bit and 64-bit SMP world than we had in the short consumer DOS world from the late 80s to mid 90s which was less than 10 years comared to nearly 20 with Windows NT 6.0 and above SMP ecosystem.