Share your CPUZ Benchmarks!

[Deleted member 163934]

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]

Intel Xeon W5580 3.20ghz 4 cores 8 threads ( 8 cores 16 threads)

 

[Morgoth]

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]

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Probably because your CPU-Z is outdated.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]

updated cpu -z

 

[phanbuey]

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]

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]

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]

That chip is still impressively fast... that's awesome.

I have no complains so far

 

[Deleted member 163934]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

my second pc

https://valid.x86.fr/6fyu16

 

[er557]

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]

Whoah!

 

[Andy Acord]

My pc is old!

 

[RealNeil]

My pc is old!

I have one of those CPUs sitting on the shelf! Talk about a room heater,....

 

[kniaugaudiskis]

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]

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]

Best I can do with a stock dell.

 

[Zyll Goliat]

My Every day use RiG.....@E5645 at 3986Ghz -24Gb DDR3

 

[kniaugaudiskis]

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]

I7-770K @ 5.1Ghz Ram at 3600