• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

4C/4T vs 4C/8T vs 6C/6T

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
So I've had this discussion with a couple people, and it has been said that the reason Intel hasn't released a 4C/8T processor with Coffee Lake is that it would make the 6C/6T i5 processors pointless, because the Hyperthreading on 4 cores would equal 2 extra real cores. I've even see people here on the forums say this. But I don't believe Hyperthreading is that efficient, so I decided to test if a 4C/8T processor would match a 6C/6T. Mainly to settle an argument between me and a coworker, but I figured I'd share the results here.

Test Bed Setup:
  • Intel i7-8700K @ 4.8GHz on all Cores
    • Hyprethreading disabled in the BIOS for 6C/6T tests
    • 2 Cores disabled in the BIOS and Hyperthreading enabled in the BIOS for 4C/8T tests
    • 2 Cores disabled in BIOS and Hyperthreading disabled in BIOS for 4C/4T tests
  • Corsair H110i GTX AIO Liquid CPU Cooler
  • AsRock Z370 Taichi Motherboard
  • 32GB(4x8GB) Corsair Vengeance DDR4 @ 3000MHz
  • 480GB Crucial MX200 SSD
  • PNY GTX1060 XLR8
  • Corsair HX850v2 PSU
CPUZs.png



The Tests I did:

Cinebench R15 ST: Pretty self explanatory. For this test I ran the "Single Core" test, which only uses a single thread to render the image. Ran 3 times on each configuration and averaged the scores from the 3 runs. The result is the average score.
Cinebench R15 MT: Pretty self explanatory. For this test I ran the test normally, which uses multiple threads to render the image, matching the number of threads use to the number of threads available on the CPU. Also, ran 3 times on each configuration and averaged the scores from the 3 runs. The result is the average score.
HWBOT X265 Benchmark: Another pretty self explanatory test. Again, ran 3 times, and averaged the FPS of the 3 runs.
MP3: For this test I took 456 random MP3s with different bitrates and use dBPoweramp to batch convert them all using LAME Variable Bitrate Q-2. The result is the encoding speed based on CD-ROM speeds. So an encode speed of 1x would be the speed of a 1x CD-ROM(150KB/s), 2x would be the speed of a 2x CD-ROM(300KB/s), etc.
7zip Compress/Decompress: I ran the benchmark in 7zip version 18.01. I let it run until 10 passes had completed. The results is the MIPS after the 10 runs.
Intel Burn Test: I did 3 runs of Intel Burn Test v2.54 using the standard settings. I averaged the results of the 3 runs. The results are the average GFLOPS.

I should note that I didn't do any game tests because I don't believe the GTX1060 is a strong enough GPU to properly do game CPU tests, and I don't have a stronger GPU available right now. Plus, except for a few rare titles, adding threads beyond 4 either by HT or real cores doesn't really boost performance anyway. I also purposely picked tests that are definitely Multi-threaded.

Results:

4C4T4C8T6C6TChart_Values.png


4C4T4C8T6C6TChart_Percents.png


Conclusion:

To me it is pretty clear that in multi-threaded work loads, the 6 real cores outperform the 4C/8T. Hyperthreading just does not provide the performance boost needed to match a 50% increase in core count. Edit: However, after doing the 4C/4T tests, I have to actually admit that Hyperthreading added more performance than I was expecting in some of the tests. I expected HT to add about 25% performance, which we do see in the X265 test, but I was surprised to see over 40% increased in performance.

I also realize that this is a slightly flawed test due to the cache on the i7-8700k. The 6C/6T processors only have 9MB of L3(or 1.5MB per core) while my 8700K has 12MB and the 4C/4T processors currently have 8MB of L3, meaning the 4C/8T processor would also likely have 8MB(or 2MB per core). The extra cache of the 8700K is going to boost the numbers for both 4C/8T and 6C/6T slightly, but it is probably boosting the 6C/6T just a little more. However, I don't believe this actually makes a significant difference. Edit: This is another area where I have to kind of rethink things. While I still think that the cache likely didn't make a large difference. I actually think that it may be helping the Hyperthreading more than I originally thought, to the point where it may actually be a wash. Hyperthreading needs a lot of cache. At the end of the day, the more threads you have the more cache you need. So having 12MB will likely be more beneficial to a processor with 8 Threads than one with 6. That is just what I'm thinking, I could be wrong, but in the end I don't believe the difference cache size made any significant difference.

Edit: This is hopefully the last edit unless I decide to run more tests and add more data. I wanted to address the single threaded test. I added that because in the past there has been talk about how Hyperthreading hurts single threaded performance, even recommendations to disabled it to boost performance, especially in games. So, really, I was just curious how it behaves on modern processors. You can take away from it that, yes, it does slightly lower single threaded performance. It can be said that less than 1.5% difference is probably within margin or error. However, I will say that the scores were extremely consistent in this test. As I pointed out, I ran Cinebench 3 times on each configuration. For the 4C/4T test the score was 204-204-204. All three times, it ran and gave the exact same score. The 6C/6T test was the exact same story, 206-206-206, the same score all 3 runs. The only test that wasn't perfectly consistent was the 4C/8T test, it gave scores of 200-202-201, still pretty darn consistent. So I can say that I'm confident in saying that Hyperthreading does slightly reduce single threaded performance. However, I would not recommend ever disabling it at this point. The very minor performance impact is not going to be noticeable. However, the loss in multi-threaded performance will definitely be noticed. And it is just not worth the hassle to go into the BIOS regularly to disable and enable Hyperthreading.

Finally, if there is one thing these test do show, it is that on a 4 Core processor, Hyperthreading provides a definite noticeable performance boost in multi-threaded workloads. To me, it seems foolish that Intel didn't release the 8th Gen i3 lineup without Hyperthreading and left no real spot in the product lineup to add 4C/8T processors. Even if it was only the i3-8350K that had Hyperthreading, and the lower i3 processors didn't, that at least should have been done.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
20,780 (5.97/day)
Location
The Washing Machine
Processor i7 8700k 4.6Ghz @ 1.24V
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) ASRock RX7900XT Phantom Gaming
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Gigabyte G34QWC (3440x1440)
Case Fractal Design Define R5
Audio Device(s) Harman Kardon AVR137 + 2.1
Power Supply EVGA Supernova G2 750W
Mouse XTRFY M42
Keyboard Lenovo Thinkpad Trackpoint II
Software W10 x64
Even though I knew this and it IS super obvious if you know a bit of how things work under the hood, its nice to see the numbers.

Thanks

HT will always play second fiddle in performance, because it shares core resources and only works if those resources aren't saturated in any way. It also adds overhead that you don't get when threads run on a physical core.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
3,817 (0.81/day)
Location
in a van down by the river
Processor faster than yours
Motherboard better than yours
Cooling cooler than yours
Memory smarter than yours
Video Card(s) better performance than yours
Storage stronger than yours
Display(s) bigger than yous
Case fancier than yours
Audio Device(s) clearer than yours
Power Supply more powerful than yours
Mouse lighter than yours
Keyboard less clicky than yours
Benchmark Scores up yours
I think typically the 6/6 wins out but the real issue is few Intel 4/8 & 6/6 are apples to apples as often the 4/8 are higher clocked like the 7700k to current 6/6 coffee lake like the 8400 or soon to be released 8500. Obviously that will changed down the road.

It really depends on the exact CPU options and their intended use but I love the tests you posted!
 
D

Deleted member 67555

Guest
I've always kind of looked at HT as a way to add an inch to your epeen.
However I would like to see compared with AMD as well even if just to see a 2% difference.
Thanks bro... Nice to see.
 
Joined
May 28, 2005
Messages
4,994 (0.73/day)
Location
South of England
System Name Box of Distraction
Processor Ryzen 7 1800X
Motherboard Crosshair VI Hero
Cooling Custom watercooling
Memory G.Skill TridentZ 2x8GB @ 3466MHz CL14 1T
Video Card(s) EVGA 1080Ti FE. WC'd & TDP limit increased to 360W.
Storage Samsung 960 Evo 500GB & WD Black 2TB storage drive.
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG278QR 27" 1440P 165hz Gsync
Case Phanteks Enthoo Pro M
Audio Device(s) Phillips Fidelio X2 headphones / basic Bose speakers
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 750W G3
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cherry MX Board 6.0 (mx red switches)
Software Win 10 & Linux Mint
Benchmark Scores https://hwbot.org/user/infrared
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
2,986 (0.96/day)
Location
Argentina
System Name Ciel
Processor AMD Ryzen R5 5600X
Motherboard Asus Tuf Gaming B550 Plus
Cooling ID-Cooling 224-XT Basic
Memory 2x 16GB Kingston Fury 3600MHz@3933MHz
Video Card(s) Gainward Ghost 3060 Ti 8GB + Sapphire Pulse RX 6600 8GB
Storage NVMe Kingston KC3000 2TB + NVMe Toshiba KBG40ZNT256G + HDD WD 4TB
Display(s) Gigabyte G27Q + AOC 19'
Case Cougar MX410 Mesh-G
Audio Device(s) Kingston HyperX Cloud Stinger Core 7.1 Wireless PC
Power Supply Aerocool KCAS-500W
Mouse Logitech G203
Keyboard VSG Alnilam
Software Windows 11 x64
Nice test, I would like to see the same methodology teste on a Ryzen, just to see the SMT scaling compared to HT.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
I think typically the 6/6 wins out but the real issue is few Intel 4/8 & 6/6 are apples to apples as often the 4/8 are higher clocked like the 7700k to current 6/6 coffee lake like the 8400 or soon to be released 8500. Obviously that will changed down the road.

It really depends on the exact CPU options and their intended use but I love the tests you posted!

Yeah, the clock speed is definitely a thing to consider, but I just wanted to show the affects of HT vs 2 extra cores. Which is why I left the CPU clock the same.

Plus, the 7700k is clocked higher than the 8400 because they are two different product classes. The 7700K was the high end aimed at enthusiasts processor, the 8400 is a mid-range that isn't aimed at enthusiasts. A more accurate comparison would be between the i7-7700(non-k) and i5-8400. In that case, the clock speed difference is only 200MHz, and I believe that difference will be 0 with the i5-8500 and the i5-8600(non-k) will actually be clocked 200MHz faster than the i7-7700.

And while I'd normally say that in this forum most of us are overclockers, so the 4C/8T processor might actually be a better overclocker and that is worth considering. However, with Coffee Lake, it seems the 4C processors just aren't hitting the clock speeds the 6C processors are. And maybe that points to a yield issue with the first batch of 4C Coffee Lake processors? I don't konw. That could very well be why HT was disabled on those processors in the first place, to improve yields, especially on the first run.

Nice test, I would like to see the same methodology teste on a Ryzen, just to see the SMT scaling compared to HT.

If I had a Ryzen system to test with, I'd totally do it.

And now that I think about it, I really wish I would have done the test with 4C/4T too, to see exactly how much HT really adds. I might just go back tonight and do that and update the chart.
 
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
1,159 (0.28/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 3700x
Motherboard asus ROG Strix B-350I Gaming
Cooling Deepcool LS520 SE
Memory crucial ballistix 32Gb DDR4
Video Card(s) RTX 3070 FE
Storage WD sn550 1To/WD ssd sata 1To /WD black sn750 1To/Seagate 2To/WD book 4 To back-up
Display(s) LG GL850
Case Dan A4 H2O
Audio Device(s) sennheiser HD58X
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse MX master 3
Keyboard Master Key Mx
Software win 11 pro
My curiosity got the better from me and i've tried the cinebench, and the x265 test on a 1700x 4c/8T and 6c/6T. (same method of three run).

Cinebench :
6c/6T : 793
4c/8T : 757

x265 :
6c/6T : 24,30
4c/8T : 20,08

my sample might be too small, but i wasn't expecting a gap so small in cinebench. Meanwhile the scaling of SMT on x265 seems similar to HT, only better by roughly 3%.
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
10,881 (1.63/day)
Location
Manchester, NH
System Name Senile
Processor I7-4790K@4.8 GHz 24/7
Motherboard MSI Z97-G45 Gaming
Cooling Be Quiet Pure Rock Air
Memory 16GB 4x4 G.Skill CAS9 2133 Sniper
Video Card(s) GIGABYTE Vega 64
Storage Samsung EVO 500GB / 8 Different WDs / QNAP TS-253 8GB NAS with 2x10Tb WD Blue
Display(s) 34" LG 34CB88-P 21:9 Curved UltraWide QHD (3440*1440) *FREE_SYNC*
Case Rosewill
Audio Device(s) Onboard + HD HDMI
Power Supply Corsair HX750
Mouse Logitech G5
Keyboard Corsair Strafe RGB & G610 Orion Red
Software Win 10
Huh... I'm skeptical and think the Cache has something to do with it, but like you said, it shouldn't be that much! Any way you can disable cache and test the same core configuration? In any case... nice work @newtekie1
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Huh... I'm skeptical and think the Cache has something to do with it, but like you said, it shouldn't be that much! Any way you can disable cache and test the same core configuration? In any case... nice work @newtekie1

Unfortunately, I don't know of any way to adjust the cache size.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2013
Messages
1,248 (0.31/day)
System Name Gentoo64 /w Cold Coffee
Processor 9900K 5.2GHz @1.312v
Motherboard MXI APEX
Cooling Raystorm Pro + 1260mm Super Nova
Memory 2x16GB TridentZ 4000-14-14-28-2T @1.6v
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 LiquidX Barrow 3015MHz @1.1v
Storage 660P 1TB, 860 QVO 2TB
Display(s) LG C1 + Predator XB1 QHD
Case Open Benchtable V2
Audio Device(s) SB X-Fi
Power Supply MSI A1000G
Mouse G502
Keyboard G815
Software Gentoo/Windows 10
Benchmark Scores Always only ever very fast
Hyperthreading on 4 cores would equal 2 extra real cores
Well, you shut'em up for good. HT performance is quite volatile, and really performs best where there are sufficieint memory or I/O stalls to take advantage of it. I would never pick HT over real cores.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
8,863 (3.36/day)
System Name Good enough
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 7900 - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora Edge
Motherboard ASRock B650 Pro RS
Cooling 2x 360mm NexXxoS ST30 X-Flow, 1x 360mm NexXxoS ST30, 1x 240mm NexXxoS ST30
Memory 32GB - FURY Beast RGB 5600 Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 7900 XT - Alphacool Eisblock Aurora
Storage 1x Kingston KC3000 1TB 1x Kingston A2000 1TB, 1x Samsung 850 EVO 250GB , 1x Samsung 860 EVO 500GB
Display(s) LG UltraGear 32GN650-B + 4K Samsung TV
Case Phanteks NV7
Power Supply GPS-750C
Hyperthreading on 4 cores would equal 2 extra real cores. I've even see people here on the forums say this.

I got to say , that is some flawless logic.

They found the secret formula. :laugh:
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
I updated the original post with 4C/4T results as well as adding in a single threaded test to the mix just to satisfy my curiosity. I also added a second chart that show the actual percentage difference.
 
Last edited:

rtwjunkie

PC Gaming Enthusiast
Supporter
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
13,909 (2.43/day)
Location
Louisiana -Laissez les bons temps rouler!
System Name Bayou Phantom
Processor Core i7-8700k 4.4Ghz @ 1.18v
Motherboard ASRock Z390 Phantom Gaming 6
Cooling All air: 2x140mm Fractal exhaust; 3x 140mm Cougar Intake; Enermax T40F Black CPU cooler
Memory 2x 16GB Mushkin Redline DDR-4 3200
Video Card(s) EVGA RTX 2080 Ti Xc
Storage 1x 500 MX500 SSD; 2x 6TB WD Black; 1x 4TB WD Black; 1x400GB VelRptr; 1x 4TB WD Blue storage (eSATA)
Display(s) HP 27q 27" IPS @ 2560 x 1440
Case Fractal Design Define R4 Black w/Titanium front -windowed
Audio Device(s) Soundblaster Z
Power Supply Seasonic X-850
Mouse Coolermaster Sentinel III (large palm grip!)
Keyboard Logitech G610 Orion mechanical (Cherry Brown switches)
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (Start10 & Fences 3.0 installed)
Thanks for the update. Hard numbers to sell support anecdotal knowledge most of us “knew” about single thread and HT is great!!
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
7,412 (3.05/day)
Location
Poland
System Name Purple rain
Processor 10.5 thousand 4.2G 1.1v
Motherboard Zee 490 Aorus Elite
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory 16GB 4133 CL16-16-16-31 Viper Steel
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio
Storage SU900 128,8200Pro 1TB,850 Pro 512+256+256,860 Evo 500,XPG950 480, Skyhawk 2TB
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG
Case P600S Silent w. Alpenfohn wing boost 3 ARGBT+ fans
Audio Device(s) K612 Pro w. FiiO E10k DAC,W830BT wireless
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G903 lightspeed+powerplay,G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard HyperX Alloy SilverSpeed (w.HyperX wrist rest),Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
You're spot on. 6c/6t > 4c/8t, though not by much. HT works really well on 4c CPUs.
 

HTC

Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
4,601 (0.79/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name HTC's System
Processor Ryzen 5 2600X
Motherboard Asrock Taichi X370
Cooling NH-C14, with the AM4 mounting kit
Memory G.Skill Kit 16GB DDR4 F4 - 3200 C16D - 16 GTZB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 480 OC 4 GB
Storage 1 Samsung NVMe 960 EVO 250 GB + 1 3.5" Seagate IronWolf Pro 6TB 7200RPM 256MB SATA III
Display(s) LG 27UD58
Case Fractal Design Define R6 USB-C
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair TX 850M 80+ Gold
Mouse Razer Deathadder Elite
Software Ubuntu 19.04 LTS
If i may make a suggestion to OP: have you considered doing these tests while there's something else running in the background? What exactly, i leave to you, but suggest you choose something that is a bit CPU / cache "heavy" while doing the tests mentioned in OP.

The purpose is to figure out how much, if any, is the performance hit. I'd expect the biggest hit will obviously go for the 4c/8t but, how much? That's the question!
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
If i may make a suggestion to OP: have you considered doing these tests while there's something else running in the background? What exactly, i leave to you, but suggest you choose something that is a bit CPU / cache "heavy" while doing the tests mentioned in OP.

The purpose is to figure out how much, if any, is the performance hit. I'd expect the biggest hit will obviously go for the 4c/8t but, how much? That's the question!

I actually thought about this. The problem was I couldn't come up with something that would run in the background that didn't just try to eat up all the CPU. I thought about having a video encode running in the background, but that just loads the CPU to 100% by itself. I couldn't really find anything that could consistently load down the CPU, but also was happy to share the CPU and didn't use the CPU to 100%.
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
7,412 (3.05/day)
Location
Poland
System Name Purple rain
Processor 10.5 thousand 4.2G 1.1v
Motherboard Zee 490 Aorus Elite
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory 16GB 4133 CL16-16-16-31 Viper Steel
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio
Storage SU900 128,8200Pro 1TB,850 Pro 512+256+256,860 Evo 500,XPG950 480, Skyhawk 2TB
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG
Case P600S Silent w. Alpenfohn wing boost 3 ARGBT+ fans
Audio Device(s) K612 Pro w. FiiO E10k DAC,W830BT wireless
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G903 lightspeed+powerplay,G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard HyperX Alloy SilverSpeed (w.HyperX wrist rest),Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
I'd be very interested in 6c/6t on DDR4 3000 vs 6c/12t on DDR4 2133.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.65/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
It's always going to come down to the application. If the application can saturate 12 logical processors, a 6c/12t processor is going to finish it faster than 6c/6t and any number of reduced cores. If the application cannot then fewer, higher clocked logical processors will be faster. Encoding falls in the former group; gaming usually falls in the latter group.

I actually thought about this. The problem was I couldn't come up with something that would run in the background that didn't just try to eat up all the CPU. I thought about having a video encode running in the background, but that just loads the CPU to 100% by itself. I couldn't really find anything that could consistently load down the CPU, but also was happy to share the CPU and didn't use the CPU to 100%.
BOINC. When you set it to "use at most 60%," it pulses the CPU so it only uses 60% of the available clocks by rapidly swapping between thread run and wait states.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
It's always going to come down to the application. If the application can saturate 12 logical processors, a 6c/12t processor is going to finish it faster than 6c/6t and any number of reduced cores. If the application cannot then fewer, higher clocked logical processors will be faster. Encoding falls in the former group; gaming usually falls in the latter group.

Even then, with encoding it can come down to what you are encoding. When I do encoding on my main rig, 720p and higher will use 100% of the CPU when doing x265 encoding. But if I do DVD rip encodes at 480p it only uses between 60 and 80% of the CPU, it jumps around.

BOINC. When you set it to "use at most 60%," it pulses the CPU so it only uses 60% of the available clocks by rapidly swapping between thread run and wait states.

Yeah, that might work. I was also thinking of F@H set to use half the available threds to keep the usage at 50%. I might have to consider this later when I have more time to re-do all the tests.
 

HTC

Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
4,601 (0.79/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name HTC's System
Processor Ryzen 5 2600X
Motherboard Asrock Taichi X370
Cooling NH-C14, with the AM4 mounting kit
Memory G.Skill Kit 16GB DDR4 F4 - 3200 C16D - 16 GTZB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 480 OC 4 GB
Storage 1 Samsung NVMe 960 EVO 250 GB + 1 3.5" Seagate IronWolf Pro 6TB 7200RPM 256MB SATA III
Display(s) LG 27UD58
Case Fractal Design Define R6 USB-C
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair TX 850M 80+ Gold
Mouse Razer Deathadder Elite
Software Ubuntu 19.04 LTS
Even then, with encoding it can come down to what you are encoding. When I do encoding on my main rig, 720p and higher will use 100% of the CPU when doing x265 encoding. But if I do DVD rip encodes at 480p it only uses between 60 and 80% of the CPU, it jumps around.



Yeah, that might work. I was also thinking of F@H set to use half the available threds to keep the usage at 50%. I might have to consider this later when I have more time to re-do all the tests.

Suggest you pick one of the tests. Then, if the difference justifies it VS no program in the background, do the rest.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2018
Messages
301 (0.13/day)
Location
HSV and SFO
Very nice to see the numbers behind something like this. My initial hunch was that the hyperthreading wouldn't help so much, but turns out that it does and that's why a 4c8t cpu is such a threat for a 6c6t in terms of marketshare.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Very nice to see the numbers behind something like this. My initial hunch was that the hyperthreading wouldn't help so much, but turns out that it does and that's why a 4c8t cpu is such a threat for a 6c6t in terms of marketshare.

I really don't think the 4c/8t is close enough to the 6c/6t results to threaten it's marketshare. There is still a pretty significant gap between the two. If we assume the 4c/8t part was a little more expensive than the 8350k and cost about $200, the 8600k is $250 and I think the extra $50 is worth it if you do a lot of multi-threaded work.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
6,874 (1.02/day)
Location
USA
System Name Computer of Theseus
Processor Intel i9-12900KS: 50x Pcore multi @ 1.18Vcore (target 1.275V -100mv offset)
Motherboard EVGA Z690 Classified
Cooling Noctua NH-D15S, 2xThermalRight TY-143, 4xNoctua NF-A12x25,3xNF-A12x15, 2xAquacomputer Splitty9Active
Memory G-Skill Trident Z5 (32GB) DDR5-6000 C36 F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RK
Video Card(s) EVGA Geforce 3060 XC Black Gaming 12GB
Storage 1x Samsung 970 Pro 512GB NVMe (OS), 2x Samsung 970 Evo Plus 2TB (data 1 and 2), ASUS BW-16D1HT
Display(s) Dell S3220DGF 32" 2560x1440 165Hz Primary, Dell P2017H 19.5" 1600x900 Secondary, Ergotron LX arms.
Case Lian Li O11 Air Mini
Audio Device(s) Audiotechnica ATR2100X-USB, El Gato Wave XLR Mic Preamp, ATH M50X Headphones, Behringer 302USB Mixer
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex Platinum SE 1000W 80+ Platinum White
Mouse Zowie EC3-C
Keyboard Vortex Multix 87 Winter TKL (Gateron G Pro Yellow)
Software Win 10 LTSC 21H2
For the typical gamer type the 6 core 6 thread 8600K is perfectly adequate and should be for several years. It also can clock very high. Plenty of people on Overclock.net are in the 5.0Ghz+ range with it.
 

las

Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
1,533 (0.37/day)
System Name Obsolete / Waiting for Zen 5 or Arrow Lake
Processor i9-9900K @ 5.2 GHz @ 1.35v / No AVX Offset
Motherboard AsRock Z390 Taichi
Cooling Custom Water
Memory 32GB G.Skill @ 4000/CL15
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX 4090 Phantom / Undervolt + OC
Storage Samsung 990 Pro 2TB + WD SN850X 1TB + 64TB NAS/Server
Display(s) 27" 1440p IPS @ 280 Hz + 77" QD-OLED @ 144 Hz VRR
Case Fractal Design Meshify C
Audio Device(s) Asus Essence STX / Upgraded Op-Amps
Power Supply Corsair RM1000x / Native 12VHPWR
Mouse Logitech G Pro Wireless Superlight
Keyboard Corsair K60 Pro / MX Low Profile Speed
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
For the typical gamer type the 6 core 6 thread 8600K is perfectly adequate and should be for several years. It also can clock very high. Plenty of people on Overclock.net are in the 5.0Ghz+ range with it.

Pretty much all of those have delidded. 5.0 is easy with delid and proper paste - It can be archieved with very cheap air cooling. It's much harder and impossible on some without delid - This is why many settles with 4.7-4.8 GHz.

I've seen several 8700K's and 8600K's hit TJ MAX using 240-280mm AIO (H110's + H115i with PERFORMANCE preset + a few Noctua NH-D14/D15) ... Same CPU's did 5.2 and 5.3 after, with much much lower temps (around 75-85C avg load during burn in vs 100C+ aka throttling before)

This is how bad Intel's TIM is (the GAP does not help). USELESS for serious OC.

Delidding is a must if you want decent overclocks with good temps. Sad but true. Some people on this forum does not agree tho (LOL) ... Ask if Intel's TIM is good on overclock.net and see what people will say. 90% or more have delidded. And for good reason.
 
Last edited:
Top