• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Share your CPUZ Benchmarks!

Here is the slowest Core-based processor I have for comparison -- a Celeron 450.

Interesting. Despite it scoring lower, I will say that the Pentium 4 with Hyper-Threading enabled feels more responsive.

Validation link

cpuz-450.png


Also, I decided to run the 64-bit version of Cinebench R10 to see how they compare. Nearly 8 minutes for each CPU to complete the render. I didn't get a score for the Pentium 4 HT 631 without Hyper-Threading though, so it's 1C/2T vs. 1C/1T. The Pentium scored 2,080 and the Celeron scored 1,906.

I feel like it might be safe to assume the Pentium score without Hyper-Threading might be around half. NetBurst seems to really gain from it.

--------

Overclocked to 3.00 GHz (+ 36%) using a 273 MHz front-side bus. More responsive now too.

Validation link

Also scoring 2,424 (+ 27%) in Cinebench R10 overclocked.

cpuz-450-3000mhz-273fsb.png
 
Last edited:
Intel Core2 Duo E8500 at stock. This particular sample runs extremely cool.

Validation link

cpuz-e8500.png
 
AMD 3600 @ PBO +200, I have background stuff running.

1653190493572.png
 
phanbuey said:
These are awesome. I remember owning the e8400 from an sempron thinking it was insanely fast with an oc. Amazing to see how one core today does the work of that entire chip.
Click to expand...

I have a particular soft spot for the Core2 processors. I never owned an LGA775 system as I used my trusty Socket P laptop for nearly a decade. Loved the T9300. This era was Intel's peak, in my opinion. AMD wasn't too far behind with Phenom II, but the fact that you could go from a Pentium 4 up to a Core2 Quad in one socket...

Of course, you could argue that if the Pentium 4 didn't suck so much, that the improvement wouldn't be as noticeable, but still. :laugh:

Today, that kind of improvement seems trivial — Pentium → Core i9, or Athlon → Ryzen 9, for example.


Lenne said:
AMD 3600 @ PBO +200, I have background stuff running.

View attachment 248383
Click to expand...

That looks like a 2019 silicon sample. Nice result.
 
dylricho said:
That looks like a 2019 silicon sample. Nice result.
Click to expand...
Bought this in September 2020, can't remember the production date though..
 
Lenne said:
Bought this in September 2020, can't remember the production date though..
Click to expand...

If that's 2020+ silicon, you're potentially leaving a lot on the table.
 
dylricho said:
If that's 2020+ silicon, you're potentially leaving a lot on the table.
Click to expand...
It's stable at 4.4GHz, but how much voltage is safe for 24/7..?
 
Lenne said:
It's stable at 4.4GHz, but how much voltage is safe for 24/7..?
Click to expand...

You could run something like Cinebench to see what your stock all-core voltage is, and basically stick to that. I prefer to stick to this method for Ryzen. For mine, it was 1.3 V and it's stable at 4.40 GHz. I've been running it like this since I bought it in August 2020. No problems.

For brief periods, I had it reach 4.55 GHz using 1.45 V, but I absolutely didn't intend on keeping it there.

For Zen 2 and Zen 3, I wouldn't go beyond 1.35 V for a daily overclock.

--------

I couldn't resist. I overclocked the E8500. :laugh:

Two minutes in the BIOS, and it's up to a 1,600 MT/s FSB.

Validation link

cpuz-e8500-3800-400fsb.png
 
dylricho said:
You could run something like Cinebench to see what you're stock all-core voltage is, and basically stick to that. I prefer to stick to this method for Ryzen. For mine, it was 1.3 V and it's stable at 4.40 GHz. I've been running it like this since I bought it in August 2020. No problems.

For brief periods, I had it reach 4.55 GHz using 1.45 V, but I absolutely didn't intend on keeping it there.

For Zen 2 and Zen 3, I wouldn't go beyond 1.35 V for a daily overclock.
Click to expand...
Hm, thanks for the tips, I'll try it later today. :)
 
Updated to AGESA 1.2.0.6c seems it be faster than previous BIOS 1.2.0.3c. PBO +200Mhz

5600X CPUZ PBO +200c crop.jpg
 
Alright, I put 4.4GHz @ 1.334V :)

1653193860718.png
 
My laptop celeron.

cpuz max.jpg
 
dylricho said:
I have a particular soft spot for the Core2 processors. I never owned an LGA775 system as I used my trusty Socket P laptop for nearly a decade. Loved the T9300. This era was Intel's peak, in my opinion. AMD wasn't too far behind with Phenom II, but the fact that you could go from a Pentium 4 up to a Core2 Quad in one socket...

Of course, you could argue that if the Pentium 4 didn't suck so much, that the improvement wouldn't be as noticeable, but still. :laugh:
Click to expand...
I agree with your thoughts, love me some Core 2 as well. Only recently retired my LGA 771 to 775 Xeon E5450 system mostly because of being limited to 8GB of DDR2. Even at stock speeds I played a lot of modern games on it such as Metro Exodus, Wolfenstein New Colossus, Doom Eternal, Far Cry 5/New Dawn! My Dell Inspiron 1545 laptop still chugs along upgraded to a Core 2 P8700 I paid a whopping four dollars for.

Anyways here is a CPU-Z benchmark for my current daily driver which is still an ancient 2010 relic that I put together for less then one hundred dollars a few months ago, reusing most of the stuff from my Core 2 system. It holds it's own for being a Socket 1156 Lynnfield at stock speeds. Currently playing Far Cry 6 and having no real complaints even on my low end overclocked GTX 745 4GB GDDR3.o_ORuns game at a smooth 30-35 FPS at 1360x768 with low/medium settings - good enough to have an enjoyable experience as I'm a low-end gamer and proud of it.
 

Attachments

  • CPU-Z.jpg
    CPU-Z.jpg
    342.5 KB · Views: 471
X5675 @ 4.5GHz
4.5GHz X5675 vs Ryzen 5 1600.PNG



E5-2690 @ stock (3.3GHz all core turbo)
pyf5htczss.png



i7-3770 @ 4.22-4.43GHz
NVIDIA_Share_ES94QFQ8On.png
 
my 5950X but not at stock settings.

5950X cpu-z.jpg
 
QuietBob said:
Good ST performance for a 14-year-old processor! This CPU could be used comfortably in a family PC even today. My FX 8300 gets the same ST score at 4.5 GHz.
Click to expand...

Especially since it really enjoys being overclocked. 3.80 GHz was barely scratching the surface from how it was performing. It felt super snappy at this frequency and browsing this forum to post results from it was easily acceptable.

Your FX might score similarly here, but if you had a game that used AVX, I would expect the Core2 to fall drastically behind. Or any program with an instruction that Penryn lacks.

Or, you know, if you just played a game that used more than two cores, like Grand Theft Auto V. Out of curiosity, I ran the benchmark (1080p; RX 460; medium settings), and got 5 fps MIN / 93 fps MAX / 48 fps AVG).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top