Lets Frybench!

S

Skyscraper

n00b
Joined
Jun 13, 2014
Messages
63
Lets Frybench!

"What makes fryrender an ideal tool for CPU benchmarking? Since its conception, fryrender has been designed with the aim of being the most muscled engine in its category. As a result, and after several years of intense development, fryrender's core doesn't let a single CPU cycle be wasted. Its routines have been written to be cache efficient, and to take the maximum advantage possible of the new multi-threading capabilities present in modern CPU architectures.

We have walked the extra mile of profiling and even working at assembly level in certain areas of our rendering kernel all the way. Thus, being a highly-optimized and extremely math-intensive application (mostly in floating-point) which makes a very efficient use of the system's cache, we think that fryrender is an ideal tool for measuring 'how much brute computational power' a computer is able to deliver."

http://downloads.guru3d.com/Frybench-download-2709.html



Post your results!

CPU-Z screenshots with CPU and memory settings would be nice so people can compare scores.
 
Xeon E5620 @ 4.2 GHz, Asus P6T Deluxe v2.
Rendertime: 4m 46s

e56204200frybenchsky.jpg
 
Here is another score with a socket 1366 CPU.

Xeon X5670 @ 4750 GHz, Asus P6T Deluxe v2.
Rendertime: 2m 57s

DlpDw1.jpg
 
jon666 said:
Busting out a different CPU with higher clocks eh :mad:...I'll be back.
Click to expand...

I am trying to tempt people to post some scores using 6 core CPUs :)
Dual CPU Xeon systems are also more than welcome so I can see how my dual X5650 stacks up against newer Xeon builds ;).
 
Built a 3960x system for a buddy a while back, but he brought it in to my office for some upgrades. So here's what it can do at 4.8Ghz with 32GB of DDR3 @ 2133 (2:41)

DXnid8s.jpg
 
Capture_zpsc6431be0.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
Is the score the render time? if so it's 3Min 27Sec...still beats quite a few brand new systems;)
Interesting benchmark...good choice!
 
Last edited:
5zqudz.jpg


rendertim: 4m 13s
3770K 4.5ghz rest of specs in sig..
 
Thought i would see if running ram at 1t made any difference......it did shave off 20 seconds/Makes me wonder if i could have been running at that setting the hole time;)
Capture_zps61622191.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]

3Mims 17 Sec time.........not to bad atll....X58 stills holds its own if not beats newer chips and compared to amd its not even close i imagine....cant help but smile:)
 
Last edited:
primetime said:
Thought i would see if running ram at 1t made any difference......it did shave off 20 seconds/Makes me wonder if i could have been running at that setting the hole time;)

3Mims 17 Sec time.........not to bad atll....X58 stills holds its own if not beats newer chips and compared to amd its not even close i imagine
Click to expand...

I think you mean 6 Cores/12threads X58 then yes, it still beat the newer chips 4c/8t specially when heavily overclocked.. 4 more threads and triple channel RAM.. but remember that x58 have to 4c/8t and those do not really can keep up with newer chips after sandy bridge.... and with 3930K/39x0X-4930K/4960X the history its completely different..
 
primetime said:
Thought i would see if running ram at 1t made any difference......it did shave off 20 seconds/Makes me wonder if i could have been running at that setting the hole time;)
[
3Mims 17 Sec time.........not to bad atll....X58 stills holds its own if not beats newer chips and compared to amd its not even close i imagine....cant help but smile:)
Click to expand...

Lots of good scores posted!

6-core socket 1366 CPUs does indeed still perform well although overclocked Sandy/IvyBridge 6-cores are out of reach. If you do not own a 2-CPU system that is :D

SR2x56504400skyscrap.jpg
 
Skyscraper said:
Lots of good scores posted!

6-core socket 1366 CPUs does indeed still perform well although overclocked Sandy/IvyBridge 6-cores are out of reach. If you do not own a 2-CPU system that is :D

SR2x56504400skyscrap.jpg
Click to expand...

1 minute 49 seconds......that's some real power there.....i bet you could almost convert blue rays in real time:D
 
Do me a favor and run the new 3dmark skydiver.....im curious how high a physics score you get.....I be willing to guess around 21000 for a physics score
 
Ran mine with lots of stuff on the background just to be different ;)

Fry_zps468ee434.jpg~original
 
Do me a favor and run the new 3dmark skydiver.....im curious how high a physics score you get.....I be willing to guess around 21000 for a physics score
Click to expand...

The system is buisy running Folding@home at a lower clock at the moment
But I will gladly run 3dmark Skydiver at full throttle as soon as I get the chance.

The power draw at 4.4 GHz is a bit too high for me to think its worth folding at that speed.
At 4 GHz running folding with all 24 threads results in a power draw of 400w - 450w at the wall, at 4.4 GHz it needs 30% more power for 10% extra speed.
Right now I get ~100000 points a day running random work units in Windows 7. I bet I could get much more running Linux and only folding BigAdv.

I will set up the other SR-2 board for folding so I can use this system for gaming, fun and benches at a higher clock but at the moment my team needs the points so the next downtime will not be until the other system is up and running, it could be as early as tomorrow or as late as Monday depending on how long time the performance tweaking of that system will take.


Here is a screen with temps and voltages when folding at 4 GHz.
http://u.cubeupload.com/jonaz81a/folding247.jpg

The ambient temperature is 27C.
 
Last edited:
Well, my FX 8350 did pretty decent for stock speeds with 16GB of DDR3 1600 ram. (8-8-8-24 settings.) 5:30 is good to me for a system that is not overclocked at all. (Yes, this is an Intel thread but I just wanted to draw a comparison.)

Edit: Just did a run at 4.6GHz overclocked and got a time of 4:55. Seems pretty decent to me. (Not going to compare to the 6 core / 12 thread cpu's at all but that is no surprise.)
 
Last edited:
I could run this on a pair of stock X5650's if anyone is interested.
I really need to get an SR-2 :D
 
ebduncan said:
Here is mine currently
AMD FX 8320 @ 4945

Time: 4:22

]
Click to expand...


That score is not bad at all if you consider the price of the FX 8320. Your picture is hard to interper but I guess the rendertime is about 4:16? In the total time there is a warm up period.
This benchmark loves fast cache, low memory latency and "enough" of memory bandwidth which is some of Intels strenghts.

For the socket 1366 CPUs I have benchmarked uncore speed matters more then in most benchmarks.
 
Last edited:
Skyscraper said:
That score is not bad at all if you consider the price of the FX 8320. Your picture is hard to interper but I guess the rendertime is about 4:16? In the total time there is a warm up period.
This benchmark loves fast cache, low memory latency and "enough" of memory bandwidth which is some of Intels strenghts.

For the socket 1366 CPUs I have benchmarked uncore speed matters more then in most benchmarks.
Click to expand...

warm up time was 8 sec.

so it is 4:14

It's not half bad. My memory isn't very optimized right now, just running at XMP settings. I just changed motherboard cause my last one died. So in the process of trying new things.
 
ebduncan said:
warm up time was 8 sec.

so it is 4:14

It's not half bad. My memory isn't very optimized right now, just running at XMP settings. I just changed motherboard cause my last one died. So in the process of trying new things.
Click to expand...

whats wrong with xmp settings? isn't that what we supposed to use? lol its way i been doing it:D
 
ManofGod said:
Well, my FX 8350 did pretty decent for stock speeds with 16GB of DDR3 1600 ram. (8-8-8-24 settings.) 5:30 is good to me for a system that is not overclocked at all. (Yes, this is an Intel thread but I just wanted to draw a comparison.)

Edit: Just did a run at 4.6GHz overclocked and got a time of 4:55. Seems pretty decent to me. (Not going to compare to the 6 core / 12 thread cpu's at all but that is no surprise.)
Click to expand...

your more than welcome to post in this thread.....i actually wish there was a general cpu thread to get more amd vs. intel stats...as im sure the amd chips will do better in some apps, maybe not to many but there's got to be some....at any rate i think it makes the comparisons more interesting
 
primetime said:
whats wrong with xmp settings? isn't that what we supposed to use? lol its way i been doing it:D
Click to expand...

Nothing is wrong with XMP settings. mine are 9-11-9-27 2T DDR3 2000 @ 1.65volts.

These sticks can run at 9-9-9-24 1T@ DDR3 2133. Not a huge difference, but shows up in benchmarks.
 
Robstar said:
07:19 for an i5-4570 (non-k) at stock with ddr3-1600.
Click to expand...

wow....no disrespect but i5's are slow as shit...from a cost point of view i cant see the logic in people using them when the older tech outperforms them so bad...it used to be newer was better...the only advantage is they use less power and if you had a 100 of them running 24/7 it would save money on the power bill..... but dam an 80 dollar 1366 chip outperforms them so bad....its just kinda weird
 
primetime said:
wow....no disrespect but i5's are slow as shit...from a cost point of view i cant see the logic in people using them when the older tech outperforms them so bad...it used to be newer was better...the only advantage is they use less power and if you had a 100 of them running 24/7 it would save money on the power bill..... but dam an 80 dollar 1366 chip outperforms them so bad....its just kinda weird
Click to expand...

??

Are you serious?

It's a stock 4570...

Compare it to a 4670K , OC'ed at the same speed as your current processor, it will wipe the floor with yours in terms of applications like gaming or benchmarks that do not focus on multi-threaded performance.

You can enjoy high performance video rendering or uncompressing .rar files or whatever you may do with your processor... but others may have different agendas. Just saying.

source: i went from a i7 920 @ 3.8 (not a 6 core w/e) to a 4770k @ 4.2 and that shit was night and day difference for my purposes (gaming)
 
Suprfire said:
??

Are you serious?

It's a stock 4570...

Compare it to a 4670K , OC'ed at the same speed as your current processor, it will wipe the floor with yours in terms of applications like gaming or benchmarks that do not focus on multi-threaded performance.

You can enjoy high performance video rendering or uncompressing .rar files or whatever you may do with your processor... but others may have different agendas. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Yes? So? My stock FX 8350 gets 5:30 and even though he did not say so, he may have been specifically speaking only of the non overclocked ones anyways. However, although the 4570 is probably good for most things, including gaming, frybench is not one of them.
 
Suprfire said:
??

Are you serious?

It's a stock 4570...

Compare it to a 4670K , OC'ed at the same speed as your current processor, it will wipe the floor with yours in terms of applications like gaming or benchmarks that do not focus on multi-threaded performance.

You can enjoy high performance video rendering or uncompressing .rar files or whatever you may do with your processor... but others may have different agendas. Just saying.

source: i went from a i7 920 @ 3.8 (not a 6 core w/e) to a 4770k @ 4.2 and that shit was night and day difference for my purposes (gaming)
Click to expand...

ok how many years newer is your cpu?.....i make you a formal challenge in skydiver to see who scores the highest physics score...but your right people do use pcs differently as not everyone knows how to shrink blue rays to dvd size which make use of extra cores/ threads a real time savor ....overclock do what you want i put my ancient system against your much new system...and i been drinking so don't be offended...but i think my older pc can outmatch yours:D or just post your best fry render score
 
Last edited:
My i5-4570 does the job I want it to, for a price I wanted to pay ($159) and is a HUGE ugprade from my old x6. It also doesn't eat all that much power either.....

You can keep your old tech, I'll stick with my i5 :)

Edit: Primtetime -- I find it actually funny you consider it a win that your 6 thread, 12 core chip @ 4.2ghz is slightly more than 2x as fast as my 4 core, 3.2ghz chip. Whatever floats your boat I guess.
 
Last edited:
Robstar said:
My i5-4570 does the job I want it to, for a price I wanted to pay ($159) and is a HUGE ugprade from my old x6. It also doesn't eat all that much power either.....

You can keep your old tech, I'll stick with my i5 :)

Edit: Primtetime -- I find it actually funny you consider it a win that your 6 thread, 12 core chip @ 4.2ghz is slightly more than 2x as fast as my 4 core, 3.2ghz chip. Whatever floats your boat I guess.
Click to expand...

like you said..its how we use our pc's.....i do blueray conversions and the extra power really speeds things up...but i also built this x58 system when it was a huge leap in cpu tech at the time, and i never expected to be able to buy xeon hexa core cpus so cheap to cheaply upgrade it...as time moved forward. super stable, and 99% problem free...coming from an older amd dual core pc it was night and day difference and its all about doing it with as little expense as possible but i guess you went from one setup to what you have now....nothing wrong with that. benchmarks aside is one thing but your right most games wont benefit one way or the other....i really wasn't trying to insult you...was just teasing
 
I wanna check this out, run it with my 8350 see how it measures up. I have never tried Frybench before, excited to do so. Hopefully I don't run into problems, I did with P95, never had a single issue before, one day I just launched it and tried to run it and when I started the test it just shut off 5 cores and then the rest shortly after. Has anyone on here had anything similar happen with Fry on an 8350 or any AMD chip for that matter?

Thanks in advance I'll post my scores soon as I run it. (maybe in the amd thread, don't wanna ruffle any feathers here.) :D

Stay [H]
 
extremely unfair comparison, a 3 year old high end overclocked hexa core 1500$ chip vs an actual locked stock speed quad core 150$ chip?.. its really unfair i know you are proud of your X5670 primetime, but if you want to challenge people, why not challenge at least a 4930K in the i7 category..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top