Unigine Valley Benchmark Scores Thread + SUPERPOSITION ***Over 1000 Submissions!***

[Vanquisher]

With x299 around the corner what do you guys think of getting a 6850K? I found a good deal I can get a good mobo + 6850k for about 680 total. I was looking into x299 but where i'd want to go likely is going to put me 1k+. I'm satisfied tbh at the moment with my 4790K but definitely a waste to run the titans x8/x8.

[done12many2]

5 minutes ago, Vanquisher said:

With x299 around the corner what do you guys think of getting a 6850K? I found a good deal I can get a good mobo + 6850k for about 680 total. I was looking into x299 but where i'd want to go likely is going to put me 1k+. I'm satisfied tbh at the moment with my 4790K but definitely a waste to run the titans x8/x8.

 

Are you entertaining a 6850k because you need the CPU PCIe lanes?

[Vanquisher]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

 

Are you entertaining a 6850k because you need the CPU PCIe lanes?

 

Indeed. Was only considering 40 lane cpus @ x299. To be fair there is nothing my 4790k lets me down in except benchmarks. 3DMark is always there to remind me my GPUs are there but my cpu didn't come to rumble lol.

[done12many2]

Just now, Vanquisher said:

 

Indeed. To be fair there is nothing my 4790k lets me down in except benchmarks. 3DMark is always there to remind me my GPUs are there but my cpu didn't come to rumble lol.

 

Honestly, if benchmarking is your thing, I'd try to find a used 5960x or 5930k over a 6850k.  The 5960x will give you some pretty damn good physics score in Firestrike and Time Spy, and the 5930k can more then likely outperform a 6850k once they are both overclocked to max.  While the 6850k and 5930k will both increase your physics scores, I don't think they do it enough to justify the expenses associated with the upgrade.

 

Out of the two I recommended, only one continues to make it into the Hall of Fame for both Firestrike and Time Spy.

 

http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.1

 

http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/timespy+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.0

 

 

[Vanquisher]

13 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Honestly, if benchmarking is your thing, I'd try to find a used 5960x or 5930k over a 6850k.  The 5960x will give you some pretty damn good physics score in Firestrike and Time Spy, and the 5930k can more then likely outperform a 6850k once they are both overclocked to max.  While the 6850k and 5930k will both increase your physics scores, I don't think they do it enough to justify the expenses associated with the upgrade.

 

Out of the two I recommended, only one continues to make it into the Hall of Fame for both Firestrike and Time Spy.

 

http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.1

 

http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/timespy+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.0

 

 

I wouldn't say its my thing only that I was looking to get a 40pci-e lane capable cpu to use the full potential of the cards. I agree the 5960X is a great CPU but @ 1000 bucks why not just go with the new x299 i9-7900x which is 10 core. Both require mobo, proc, ram for me. Guess another reason I was looking at the 6850k combo was it got me the pci-e lanes at a cost that makes sense. Although I feel i'd give up some single core performance as I have the 4790K @ 4.7ghz

[done12many2]

9 minutes ago, Vanquisher said:

I wouldn't say its my thing only that I was looking to get a 40pci-e lane capable cpu to use the full potential of the cards. I agree the 5960X is a great CPU but @ 1000 bucks why not just go with the new x299 i9-7900x which is 10 core. Both require mobo, proc, ram for me. Guess another reason I was looking at the 6850k combo was it got me the pci-e lanes at a cost that makes sense. Although I feel i'd give up some single core performance as I have the 4790K @ 4.7ghz

 

I'm sure you can find a 5960x for well under $1k with a board. I'd sell you mine for that much money and it's one of the best out there. Lol

 

If you end up transitioning to Haswell-E, you shouldn't see much of a single-threaded drop if any at all. There are plenty of 6 cores running 4.7 out there. You'd need 4.5 on Broadwell-E to match the single-threaded of your 4790k's 4.7.

[Vanquisher]

40 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

I'm sure you can find a 5960x for well under $1k with a board. I'd sell you mine for that much money and it's one of the best out there. Lol

 

If you end up transitioning to Haswell-E, you shouldn't see much of a single-threaded drop if any at all. There are plenty of 6 cores running 4.7 out there. You'd need 4.5 on Broadwell-E to match the single-threaded of your 4790k's 4.7.

 

I'd be interested in buying it. Let me know. Shoot me a PM if you'd really consider.

[VagabondWraith]

@done12many2

 

You think the 7820X will hang with the 5960X? 7820X will be my first HEDT CPU. Just wondering where you'd ballpark its performance. Thanks bud!

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

You think the 7820X will hang with the 5960X? 

Judging by the 7900X's Cinebench score at 4.5GHz (1.15V!) the 7820X will be a beast and it will probably outperform the 5960X by a considerable margin

[Masada02]

6 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

@done12many2

 

You think the 7820X will hang with the 5960X? 7820X will be my first HEDT CPU. Just wondering where you'd ballpark its performance. Thanks bud!

I'd betting on it being quite a bit faster assuming it OCs well. At stock clocks it will probably still be faster than even the best 5960Xs based purely on all the IPC improvements. Then if it could get to 4.7-4.8 it'd be quite potent. 

 

That being said, if the $849 price rumors on the 16c Threadripper are true that is going to be quite a good value. Though I'll probably just stick with my 5960X until both of the new HEDT platforms mature (and get better OCs :D) 

[done12many2]

49 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

@done12many2

 

You think the 7820X will hang with the 5960X? 7820X will be my first HEDT CPU. Just wondering where you'd ballpark its performance. Thanks bud!

 

As @PCGuy_5960 and @Masada02 said, the 7820X will be better in all ways with the exception of CPU PCIe lanes for use with GPUs and possibly temperatures.  That's not to say that the 7820X won't have plenty of lanes as it has 28 CPU PCIe lanes + 24 chipset lanes for a total of 52 compared to the 5860x at 40 CPU PCIe lanes + 8 chipset lanes.  So the 7820X actually has more total lanes, but it's limited with regards to allocations to GPUs.

 

As far as temps, that's the big unknown.  All initial speculation is that Skylake X is going to be hot.  Delidding may be required for moderate overclocks and will almost certainly be required for the higher clock speeds.  We'll see.

 

Based on the one video (Cinebench R15) and what I've read to date, Skylake X is looking to bring on roughly the same IPC improvements that Broadwell-E added to Haswell-E.  The IPC difference between Haswell-E and Broadwell-E resulted in roughly a 200 MHz clock speed difference to achieve the same performance.  That's to say if a Broadwell-E chip was running at 4.4 GHz, it would take a Haswell-E chip just over 200 additional MHz to do the same thing.  Add just over another 200 MHz to that for a total of 400+ MHz when comparing Haswell-E to Skylake-X.  

 

With all of that said, if you could get a 7820X to run at 4.5 GHz, you'd be achieving the same performance or more of a 5960x running at 4.9 GHz.  Just keep in mind that you may need one hell of a cooler to get there.   I'd argue that it will be easier to get a 7820X to run 4.4 GHz then it would be to get a 5960x to run 4.8 GHz.  A 7820X may actually be stable at 4.4 GHz, but almost no 5960x will be stable at 4.8 GHz.  Who knows at this point?

 

If the rumors are true about Threadripper pricing, you may want to entertain that as well.  While it won't be great at single-threaded operations in any way, it's hard to turn your back on that level of multi-threaded performance for the money.  If you know for a fact that you will not be taking advantage of any real multi-threading, the it really doesn't matter how great of a value it is.  

 

GPU lanes, cooling and performance.  I guess you need to think of those and go from there. 

 

You can see two things in the video below.  Outstanding performance and iffy temperatures (note the LED display on the board chilling in the mid 80's).  The thing with x99 and x299 is that if you are seeing mid 80's for core or CPU temps, that means you are actually running 90c + package temperatures.  Not good at all.    Package temps are what matter on higher core count chips and it's also why Intel lists Tcase (package) temps for x99 instead of TJunction (core) temps as it does for the smaller 4 core chips. 

 

Hope that helped bud.  

 

 

[VagabondWraith]

Wow great thank you guys! Very in depth @done12many2! I'm not interested in Ryzen Threadripper because I don't need 16c. Besides, I'll pay more for the best that Intel provides.. much like NVidia.  The 7820X is perfect for me. I mostly game but also do some video encoding/editing/streaming that my 6700K struggles at times with. The 6700K is pegged at 80/90% in some games, even at 1440p. I plan to keep the 7820X for at least 5 years (barring any massive CPU advancement) so this is an investment for me which I find perfect for my needs.

 

 

[VagabondWraith]

Oh about the temperatures, I'm going to wait til August-October to switch platforms. That'll give time for the new platform bugs to get sorted out plus any temperature issues and such. Hopefully Intel has good reason to go with TIM and no major issues arrive.

[done12many2]

Just now, VagabondWraith said:

Wow great thank you guys! Very in depth @done12many2! I'm not interested in Ryzen Threadripper because I don't need 16c. Besides, I'll pay more for the best that Intel provides.. much like NVidia.  The 7820X is perfect for me. I mostly game but also do some video encoding/editing/streaming that my 6700K struggles at times with. The 6700K is pegged at 80/90% in some games, even at 1440p. I plan to keep the 7820X for at least 5 years (barring any massive CPU advancement) so this is an investment for me which I find perfect for my needs.

 

Awesome man.  Sounds like you have a plan.  

 

Just as a reference.  My 5960x at 4.6 GHz can run a video through Handbrake just under twice as fast as my 7700k can do it at 5.3 GHz.  Cores matter there for sure.  During the actual edit of a video in Premiere single-threaded performance is important as well.  The 7820X will have the ST performance advantage in the bag.  

[Jumper118]

the top threadripper with 16 cores is only $849 as well

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, Jumper118 said:

the top threadripper with 16 cores is only $849 as well

Not confirmed tho

[done12many2]

48 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

the top threadripper with 16 cores is only $849 as well

 

@Masada02  sometimes I wonder if @Jumper118 is on the same planet as the rest of us?

[done12many2]

49 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Not confirmed tho

 

If that is true though, that would be incredible.  

[VagabondWraith]

Thanks again bud @done12many2! You should be hired here as a forum consultant answering everybody's questions. Haha.

 

By chance, do you know if Skylake-X will support 4K playback much like the mainstream Kaby Lake does? I want to be able to play 4K movies to my TV from my PC. Thanks again!

[Masada02]

2 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

@Masada02  sometimes I wonder if @Jumper118 is on the same planet as the rest of us?

He's not. He's in the UK  

[done12many2]

16 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

Thanks again bud @done12many2! You should be hired here as a forum consultant answering everybody's questions. Haha.

 

By chance, do you know if Skylake-X will support 4K playback much like the mainstream Kaby Lake does? I want to be able to play 4K movies to my TV from my PC. Thanks again!

 

I couldn't tell you for sure, but I doubt it and I'll explain why as I share my experience with Kaby Lake and Netflix 4k with you.

 

The thing that they conveniently leave out is that it's far from as compatible as it sounds.  Every component en route from the CPU to the display must be HDCP 2.2 compliant or it simply will not work.  It will not work via your discrete GPU at all.  The only way you can output 4k Netflix is via the CPU's iGPU, which must route to a HDCP 2.2 compliant version of HDMI or DisplayPort on the motherboard outputs.  Finally, that output must route to a HDCP 2.2 compliant display.  The last part got me as neither of my fairly new Samsung monitors meet the requirements due to their lack of HDCP 2.2 support on the inputs.  Both monitors have HDMI and DisplayPort inputs, just not HDCP 2.2 compliant.  

 

Considering that x299 will not have onboard graphics due to the CPU not having an iGPU, I doubt Skylake X will support 4k Netflix and the like.  

 

**Oops forgot.  Thank you and you're welcome.  

 

16 minutes ago, Masada02 said:

He's not. He's in the UK  

 

Good point.  

[PCGuy_5960]

21 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

If that is true though, that would be incredible.  

Of course it would! And it would mean that the 10-12 core parts will be dirt cheap.

(And it would also mean that AMD will get my money )

[done12many2]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

Of course it would! And it would mean that the 10-12 core parts will be dirt cheap.

(And it would also mean that AMD will get my money )

 

Same. 

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, done12many2 said:

Same. 

Yeah, I really like Intel and their amazing performance, but 10-12 cores for $600? IDGAF who makes it, if it's decent, I'll buy it!

[Alice Anderson]

i5 4300U, igpu oc @1200mhz......

1.5fps 1440p ... 

 

 

Unigine_Valley_Benchmark_1.0_20170602_1758.html