Post your Cinebench R20+15+R11.5+2003 Scores **Don't Read The OP PLZ**

[Jumper118]

I just haven't gotten the balls to go there again, sorta scared. Don't wanna kill this board

Yes, i know what you mean, anything over 1.5v is very high for any board or cpu. When you do pluck up the courage to do it, take the frequency and voltage up in really small steps and if it start acting weird then you'll know you haven't gone way over the top. When i was getting my i5 to 5.25ghz i took it up 25mhz at a time and did smaller voltage increases then i normally would because i really didnt want to kill it as its only just over a month old.

[Jumper118]

Meh that power consumption seems to be a waste for that crappy single core performance. I3's 4340 get nearly 50% better than your cpu@4.8GHz -> http://img.hwbot.org/u17956/image_id_1037456.png

Lol its no where near 50% faster single thread its nearly 30%faster and it could even be within 20% if he wanted it to.

[bamerx98]

Meh that power consumption seems to be a waste for that crappy single core performance. I3's 4340 get nearly 50% better than your cpu@4.8GHz -> http://img.hwbot.org/u17956/image_id_1037456.png

Last time I check all the games I play and with all the rendering I do my 8350 will rape a i3 everday all day, there seriously is no true next generation game that's going to get better proformance on a duel core. So what if the 8350 costs 10 dollars more a year, I don't pay for the power I don't care, I enjoy the benifts of the amd platform and I enjoy overclocking and seeing how far I can push my chip. Let's be honest here if someone was going to get a gaming PC these days on a budget I get the 8300 series everytime. There amazing chips and overclock like crazy. I know Intel's got them stronger core but they are seriously dog like on overclocking. Anything after Sandy bridge there's no point almost.

Edit - not to mention you cant even break 400 cb, I know I'm good for 800cb with a bit more of a overclock making my "CPU 2x faster"

[Faa]

Last time I check all the games I play and with all the rendering I do my 8350 will rape a i3 everday all day, there seriously is no true next generation game that's going to get better proformance on a duel core. So what if the 8350 costs 10 dollars more a year, I don't pay for the power I don't care, I enjoy the benifts of the amd platform and I enjoy overclocking and seeing how far I can push my chip. Let's be honest here if someone was going to get a gaming PC these days on a budget I get the 8300 series everytime. There amazing chips and overclock like crazy. I know Intel's got them stronger core but they are seriously dog like on overclocking. Anything after Sandy bridge there's no point almost.

Edit - not to mention you cant even break 400 cb, I know I'm good for 800cb with a bit more of a overclock making my "CPU 2x faster"

It's only faster in a few games such as BF4/BF3/Crysis 3 (really depends on gpu setup) that's all about it. MMO/RPG games the 8350 is being blown away and 99% of the games we have now aren't using more than 2 cores so overall an i3 seems to be the best choice and you don't need expensive PSU's or coolers just a stock one and a 430W psu (35amps 12V) should take a 7970+i3 so pretty much a cheaper solution. An i3 comes with an IGP that renders a shitload faster than a 8350@5GHz. When 4 cores are used you just have 2x256bit FP's when an i3 will have 2x256bit per 2 cores. If you cheaped out on the CPU cooler and PSU you could easily afford an i5 that won't even require OC's to beat your chip at 5GHz.

Also the amount of clocks you can get means nothing; it's just all about what you performance you get per clock -> HW@4.2GHz = IB@4.5GHz = SB@4.8GHz so imagine a nice binned 4.8GHz HW 4770K passing a 3930K@stock in CB.

 

Lol its no where near 50% faster single thread its nearly 30%faster and it could even be within 20% if he wanted it to.

Nah 200MHz is just 4% OC so pretty much 4% performance gain and yes it works like that -> IPC * clock = cpu performance. So still 26% behind. This means in a cpu limited game bound to 2 threads the i3 will just have 26% more FPS because the CPU instructs the GPU by 26% faster.

[Jumper118]

It's only faster in a few games such as BF4/BF3/Crysis 3 (really depends on gpu setup) that's all about it. MMO/RPG games the 8350 is being blown away and 99% of the games we have now aren't using more than 2 cores so overall an i3 seems to be the best choice and you don't need expensive PSU's or coolers just a stock one and a 430W psu (35amps 12V) should take a 7970+i3 so pretty much a cheaper solution. An i3 comes with an IGP that renders a shitload faster than a 8350@5GHz. When 4 cores are used you just have 2x256bit FP's when an i3 will have 2x256bit per 2 cores. If you cheaped out on the CPU cooler and PSU you could easily afford an i5 that won't even require OC's to beat your chip at 5GHz.

Also the amount of clocks you can get means nothing; it's just all about what you performance you get per clock -> HW@4.2GHz = IB@4.5GHz = SB@4.8GHz so imagine a nice binned 4.8GHz HW 4770K passing a 3930K@stock in CB.

 

Nah 200MHz is just 4% OC so pretty much 4% performance gain and yes it works like that -> IPC * clock = cpu performance. So still 26% behind. This means in a cpu limited game bound to 2 threads the i3 will just have 26% more FPS because the CPU instructs the GPU by 26% faster.

what cpu do you have. you might want to look at the doc with all the scores on before trying to guess how many points it could get single core. 141/118 is 1.1949152 which is under 20% less and this has been achieved with a 8350@4.925ghz which we know bamerx98's cpu could do as it has done a muti-thread run at over 5ghz. he isn't going to change his cpu to an i3 either so it really doesn't matter if it is faster in some older games.

[FireFox]

Looks like I've lost the crown as the fastest Core i3 on the forum , still happy that it beat a newer gen anyway so that is something

[Jumper118]

Looks like I've lost the crown as the fastest Core i3 on the forum , still happy that it beat a newer gen anyway so that is something

well i'm not sure if thats his cpu,because its on hwbot and he has no pc spec, on his profile or sig to check against. there is nobody called faa on hwbot, so its looks like you're still top i3 for now. i think he was using the screenshot to back up his point.

[FireFox]

well i'm not sure if thats his cpu,because its on hwbot and he has no pc spec, on his profile or sig to check against. there is nobody called faa on hwbot, so its looks like you're still top i3 for now. i think he was using the screenshot to back up his point.

 

Cool, unfortunately I won't be able to push her anymore, might be able to scrape another point but I'm done to be honest

[Jumper118]

Cool, unfortunately I won't be able to push her anymore, might be able to scrap another point but I'm done to be honest

we'll just have to wait till you get a 2500k then for some more scores   

[FireFox]

we'll just have to wait till you get a 2500k then for some more scores   

 

Yup sounds like a plan lol

[Faa]

what cpu do you have. you might want to look at the doc with all the scores on before trying to guess how many points it could get single core. 141/118 is 1.1949152 which is under 20% less and this has been achieved with a 8350@4.925ghz which we know bamerx98's cpu could do as it has done a muti-thread run at over 5ghz. he isn't going to change his cpu to an i3 either so it really doesn't matter if it is faster in some older games.

His score was 109 and that i3 141 so (141-109)/109 * 100 makes 29%. My 3930K does somewhere in 1100 with 4.2GHz and single is 140 so you clearly see the performance per clock awesomeness of Haswell.

[Jumper118]

His score was 109 and that i3 141 so (141-109)/109 * 100 makes 29%. My 3930K does somewhere in 1100 with 4.2GHz and single is 140 so you clearly see the performance per clock awesomeness of Haswell.

Yes obviously haswell is much faster single thread but if he ran it again he could get a higher score. The per clock perform on haswell doesn't matter anyway because most of them don't overclock very well anyway. Compared with the amd they are expensive and compared to the other intels they run hot and cost more. 

[bamerx98]

Well, I'm getting back into it again I hit a 774 but lost the run so, I guess my 773 run is good enough.

[Faa]

Yes obviously haswell is much faster single thread but if he ran it again he could get a higher score. The per clock perform on haswell doesn't matter anyway because most of them don't overclock very well anyway. Compared with the amd they are expensive and compared to the other intels they run hot and cost more. 

The performance per clock doesn't matter on Haswell? Why is an I3 4130 or 4340 clocked at 3.6GHz performing close to a 3930K@4.2GHz in single thread performance? People always wanted more IPC resulting in better per clock performance so it's all about that. An i5 is better for the price for gaming; people forget using this stupid formula performance/price and it doesn't require anything better than a 212 evo because of the thermal wall saving some money here. 

All of those games here don't take advantage of more than 4 cores so an i5 performs exactly the same as an i7 & AMD is like up to 100% slower and the Intel doesnt need an OC at all to beat a 9590: http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k-4-8ghz-multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html

[Priller]

Well, I'm getting back into it again I hit a 774 but lost the run so, I guess my 773 run is good enough.

 

Glad to see that I have helped ya.

 

Somehow it still seems off. You should be in the 790s at that freq. (I did 789@ 5.00 & 803@5.09)

 

Have you tried that same run with 1.525 volts?

 

Also check your CPU NB voltage. I bet it is still low and I would raise it to 1.3 volts for the run.

[bamerx98]

Glad to see that I have helped ya.

 

Somehow it still seems off. You should be in the 790s at that freq. (I did 789@ 5.00 & 803@5.09)

 

Have you tried that same run with 1.525 volts?

 

Also check your CPU NB voltage. I bet it is still low and I would raise it to 1.3 volts for the run.

Well, I went for the yolo's and well, lets just say dat score mate. Finally freaking got 800 so happy about it, sadly I went cocky and tried to run the single core run and didn't notice that my temps were over 80C on the 8350 shes fighter. I tried to run it a second time can't seem to get that score but, still that is now the second fastest 8350 on LTT. 

 

[Faa]

If you want higher scores in Cinebench just change the process affinity to realtime and run it. Yes your system won't respond and you can't do anything untill the benchmark is done.

Raising volts wont give you a better score, usually when a cpu makes an error it can be corrected quickly and shouldn't impact performance noticeably in CB. If it can't be corrected; the PC bluescreens.

[JamieSinn]

Both oc'd 

CPU to 4.3 and gpu +150 mhz offset.

 

[Jumper118]

The performance per clock doesn't matter on Haswell? Why is an I3 4130 or 4340 clocked at 3.6GHz performing close to a 3930K@4.2GHz in single thread performance? People always wanted more IPC resulting in better per clock performance so it's all about that. An i5 is better for the price for gaming; people forget using this stupid formula performance/price and it doesn't require anything better than a 212 evo because of the thermal wall saving some money here. 

All of those games here don't take advantage of more than 4 cores so an i5 performs exactly the same as an i7 & AMD is like up to 100% slower and the Intel doesnt need an OC at all to beat a 9590: http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k-4-8ghz-multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html

a sandy i5 with a 212 evo would be much faster than a 4670k with the same cooler, because you could oc way further. also the only game i have that doesn't really use all my cores are bioshock and dirt 2 and i get over 120fps anyway so its irrelevant if my cpu isn't quite fast enough single thread. 

 

Well, I went for the yolo's and well, lets just say dat score mate. Finally freaking got 800 so happy about it, sadly I went cocky and tried to run the single core run and didn't notice that my temps were over 80C on the 8350 shes fighter. I tried to run it a second time can't seem to get that score but, still that is now the second fastest 8350 on LTT. 

 

nice one! 800 is good although like priller said i'm not sure why you get a lower score per clock. to do the single thread do it with all but 2 cores disabled to put less stress on your cooler and untick the boxes for mutli thread and gpu, that way it will only do the single thread test and shouldn't get too hot 

 

Both oc'd 

CPU to 4.3 and gpu +150 mhz offset.

 

thanks i've added your score 

[Faa]

a sandy i5 with a 212 evo would be much faster than a 4670k with the same cooler, because you could oc way further. also the only game i have that doesn't really use all my cores are bioshock and dirt 2 and i get over 120fps anyway so its irrelevant if my cpu isn't quite fast enough single thread. 

For godsake stop your nonsense posts. A 4670K@4.2GHz performs the same as 2500k@4.8GHz. Look up the cinebench results. You clearly don't understand what IPC is so I suggest you have a nice read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_cycle

[Jumper118]

For godsake stop your nonsense posts. A 4670K@4.2GHz performs the same as 2500k@4.8GHz. Look up the cinebench results. You clearly don't understand what IPC is so I suggest you have a nice read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_cycle

Most 2500k 0will do 4.8ghz under a 212. 

[deathjester]

For godsake stop your nonsense posts. A 4670K@4.2GHz performs the same as 2500k@4.8GHz. Look up the cinebench results. You clearly don't understand what IPC is so I suggest you have a nice read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_cycle

 

??? I am pretty sure Jumper knows what IPC is. Have a look at the single core results. 5ghz Sandy is like a 4.4 Haswell that many people can't even get on dual rad water.

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlC81MjwelBgdEZNV3l6aHl1eUNwSUR4Rml0MXMzN1E&usp=sharing#gid=1

 

Yeah the Haswell is of course faster per clock. It is two generations ahead. On average though? There isn't a whole lot of difference between the 3 (Haswell, Ivy, Sandy) on retail chips on a max overclock.  On average? He is probably right. On a evo 212? The Sandy probably does end up ahead most of the time. There are exceptions. Mine does 4.5 on a evo with acceptable rendering temps, but that isn't average. High 4's and lots of 5's happens a lot on Sandy. With better temps to boot.

 

Haswell has some newer instructions like AVX2 so yeah I would buy a Haswell over a Sandy, but it isn't like Sandy is trash. A high clocked Sandy is about as good as it gets for gaming. Only a few Ivy's, Haswell's beat them. It isn't like all Haswell's do 4.4 plus and all Ivy's did 4.8-4.9. Not at safe temps/voltage as 24/7's.

[Jumper118]

??? I am pretty sure Jumper knows what IPC is. Have a look at the single core results. 5ghz Sandy is like a 4.4 Haswell that many people can't even get on dual rad water.

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlC81MjwelBgdEZNV3l6aHl1eUNwSUR4Rml0MXMzN1E&usp=sharing#gid=1

 

Yeah the Haswell is of course faster per clock. It is two generations ahead. On average though? There isn't a whole lot of difference between the 3 (Haswell, Ivy, Sandy) on retail chips on a max overclock.  On average? He is probably right. On a evo 212? The Sandy probably does end up ahead most of the time. There are exceptions. Mine does 4.5 on a evo with acceptable rendering temps, but that isn't average. High 4's and lots of 5's happens a lot on Sandy. With better temps to boot.

 

Haswell has some newer instructions like AVX2 so yeah I would buy a Haswell over a Sandy, but it isn't like Sandy is trash. A high clocked Sandy is about as good as it gets for gaming. Only a few Ivy's, Haswell's beat them. It isn't like all Haswell's do 4.4 plus and all Ivy's did 4.8-4.9. Not at safe temps/voltage as 24/7's.

Thanks for explaining fully i cba

[Faa]

 

??? I am pretty sure Jumper knows what IPC is. Have a look at the single core results. 5ghz Sandy is like a 4.4 Haswell that many people can't even get on dual rad water.

 

If he did then he wouldn't be saying this:
 

 

a sandy i5 with a 212 evo would be much faster than a 4670k with the same cooler, because you could oc way further. 

 

 

 

Yeah the Haswell is of course faster per clock. It is two generations ahead. On average though? There isn't a whole lot of difference between the 3 (Haswell, Ivy, Sandy) on retail chips on a max overclock.  On average? He is probably right. On a evo 212? The Sandy probably does end up ahead most of the time. There are exceptions. Mine does 4.5 on a evo with acceptable rendering temps, but that isn't average. High 4's and lots of 5's happens a lot on Sandy. With better temps to boot.

 

Haswell has some newer instructions like AVX2 so yeah I would buy a Haswell over a Sandy, but it isn't like Sandy is trash. A high clocked Sandy is about as good as it gets for gaming. Only a few Ivy's, Haswell's beat them. It isn't like all Haswell's do 4.4 plus and all Ivy's did 4.8-4.9. Not at safe temps/voltage as 24/7's.

 

Sandy's are doing average 4.7GHz if you don't go above 1.40V and you shouldn't. Bringing scenario's of 1.5V 5GHz shouldn't be compared to HW and one of the best binned chips of 1 billion shouldn't be compared either with each other. Anything higher than 1.45V you're sitting in a electromigration zone, used to have a 2600K 5GHz with 1.5V degraded after a few months while with HW's you aren't in that zone since the voltage is most likely max 1.3V (?). Compare the average clock that a platform can do with another platform's average clock so in this case a HW@4.2 beats SB@4.7. HW at 4.4GHz will beat a 2500K@5GHz -> http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/06/12/intel-core-i5-4670k-haswell-cpu-review/6

Another point why he was wrong, with an evo 212 you most likely get 1.35V out of a sandy bridge would be averagely an OC of 4.5GHz that will nowhere match a haswell@4.2GHz thats easily to do under an 212 evo. 

And no I didn't try to imply that Sandy bridge is "trash", I'm on my 2nd SB (3930K) now.

[retsel007]

can i join the parteh