Share your CPUZ Benchmarks!

[Space Lynx]

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

 

[NSX05]

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]

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]

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]

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

That looks awesome, good gaming rig.

 

[Space Lynx]

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]

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]

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

 

[NSX05]

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%.

[...] 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]

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

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]

View attachment 99696

 

[fullinfusion]

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]

i7 7700k @ 4.99GHz

 

[Maxima]

1. 

   

   

 

[jboydgolfer]

@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]

Just you know I have no interest in social as for me is wot.

 

[jboydgolfer]

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

 

[NSX05]

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]

1700X @3.7Ghz (memory @2933Mhz)

 

[INT-ELboy]

hello people,that's my baby.......

 

[er557]

1.4v..... you're pushing it

 

[phanbuey]

hello people,that's my baby.......

View attachment 100292View attachment 100293

That's nice!

 

[NSX05]

All up to date.

 

[INT-ELboy]

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]

if that dual core is a baby, mine 36 core is already retired...