Productivity benchmarks - Core i7 8700K vs Core i5 8600K vs Ryzen 7 2700X vs Ryzen 1700 vs Xeon E5-2680 V4

[bogmali]

To be fair, reviews and benchmarks always get scrutinized for validity and real-world application. There will be disagreements all the way around and as long as the discussion/argument is presented in a civil and tasteful manner (and with proof/source) nobody should be telling people to leave unless they are obvious trolls.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

To be fair, reviews and benchmarks always get scrutinized for validity and real-world application. There will be disagreements all the way around and as long as the discussion/argument is presented in a civil and tasteful manner (and with proof/source) nobody should be telling people to leave unless they are obvious trolls.

speaking of trolls....

 

[John Naylor]

Exactly: in a corporate environment - says your IT department.

Individuals may OC as much as they want.
But expecting a workstation owner to overclock is like expecting a van driver to tune the engine.

If you're a typical working photographer, video editor, scientist et cetera working on your private PC - chances are you're spending time doing your job, not overclocking. More importantly: you most likely don't have the knowledge needed.
Most PC enthusiasts who spend time reading CPU reviews, overclocking and benchmarking are not using their PCs for work.
PC enthusiasts may do amateur renders, they may crunch for WCG, they may do all other stuff that takes advantage of powerful PCs... but it isn't working, right?

From a practical standpoint, gains from OC are way too small to be worth the fuss and the risk of PC breaking down.

But some IT department's especially in CAD arena buy dozens of boxes this way. This goes back to DOS CAD days in early 90s where every box came with 3rd party memory management and a set of 6 config.sys and autoexec.bat files. Yes, if they use dell, not gonna have nothing. The only folks I have met doing video editing as a hobbyist are all using tweaked boxes. But moe to the point, the folks you are talking about are not reading this forum. And that being the case, shouldn't the info posted here be geared to the audience here, rather than folks who will never come here ?

 

[Artas1984]

Video made today.

 

[Artas1984]

I have sold every last CPU, including my own Core i7 5775C (problems with Iris Pro graphics, iGPU crashes Windows when drivers are installed). Whatever... Replaced it with Core i7 4770K, that runs 4.5 GHz at 1.33 V. My next test will be NVIDIA drivers test - 5 different NVIDIA WHQL drivers, which were released over the span of 4 years will be tested on GTX 780 to see if this gimping thing exists or not on older NVIDIA GPU. Tests will be ready this weekend.

 

[dirtyferret]

To be fair, reviews and benchmarks always get scrutinized for validity and real-world application. There will be disagreements all the way around and as long as the discussion/argument is presented in a civil and tasteful manner (and with proof/source) nobody should be telling people to leave unless they are obvious trolls.

What?! Reviews scrutinized for validity?! Never! Just make sure you abide by the scorch earth policy of reviews so that any peace of hardware falls into one of two camps; the greatest PC hardware ever created or the biggest peace of junk made- you should be ashamed of even thinking of buying it. Of course make sure your reviews are in the former category of any hardware I personally own and any comments not praising my hardware only goes to prove your bias and invalidity to your tests.

 

[lexluthermiester]

My next test will be NVIDIA drivers test - 5 different NVIDIA WHQL drivers, which were released over the span of 4 years will be tested on GTX 780 to see if this gimping thing exists or not on older NVIDIA GPU. Tests will be ready this weekend.

This has actually been tested by Phil over at Phil's Comptuer Lab on Youtube for older gen Geforce cards and found to be the case.

Newer gen cards with newer OS and driver sets should be very interesting.

 

[Artas1984]

I must have missed something... Just checked the retailers in my country and:

Ryzen 7 1700 ~ 220 Euro
Ryzen 7 1700X ~ 230 Euro
Ryzen 7 2700 ~ 310 Euro
Ryzen 7 2700X ~ 350 Euro
Core i7 8700 ~ 470 Euro
Core i7 8700K ~ 520 Euro

Concluding to my benchmark results, in which Ryzen 7 1700 at 3.8 GHz is basically trading blows to Core i7 8700K at 5 GHz and Ryzen 7 2700X at 4.2 GHz is the definitely superior CPU above the all tested, i am thinking myself jumping in the Ryzen boat, at least they are supported by Windows 7 certified drivers, unlike 8 generation Intel processors no less. Pathetic.

 

[phill]

I paid £150 for my Ryzen 1700X's each, was a bargain I could not turn down at all

 

[Artas1984]

Intel Xeon E5-2683 V4 tested. 16 cores/32 threads, 4 MB L2, 40 MB L3. Another engineer sample, that manages 2.3 GHz turbo boost on cores. Since i am on a new Windows 10 computer, i could not test the full list of the previous benchmarks, so here what's been tested:

CPU-Z MULTI THREAD 5070 points.
CINEBENCH R15 1940 points.
V RAY 1:09 s.
CORONA 1:58 s.
BLENDER BMW 4:47 s.
BLENDER CLASSROOM 15:19 s.
BLENDER PAVILLON 16:46 s.
BLENDER SPLASH 9:05 s.
BLENDER BENCHMARK 36:58 s.

In the previous test, the 14 core Xeon managed to win only in 4K video conversion, but was close enough with Core i7 8700K and Ryzen 7 2700X everywhere except photo conversion and SPEC. Now the 16 core Xeon at least wins in Cinebench R15, Corona and Vray, while in Blender it now is more/less equaling the 5 GHz Core i7 8700K.