![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
What software tests 100% CPU and GPU simultaneously?
- Thread starter eurgbp
- Start date
unholythree
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2011
- Messages
- 234
Why not just run two at the same time? I've run prime (using enough workers to load all my cores) and furmark simultaneously when trying to figure out my max power draw.
Spartacus09
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2018
- Messages
- 1,930
OCCT i believe has an option to run both
This is what I do to test my loop integrity.
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1707758471){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,819
I usually put Heaven on a loop and then fire up prime 95
VanGoghComplex
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2016
- Messages
- 2,286
Yep, just run one of each.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,819
Interesting. I stopped using Furmark years ago when the GPU manufacturers started calling it an "unrealistic test" and started using driver cheats to downclock the GPU when it was launched. Since then I have been doing GPU stability and temp tests with Heaven Benchmark.
VanGoghComplex
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2016
- Messages
- 2,286
What a bummer that was. Imagine if Intel and AMD did the same thing for utilities like Prime95.
Prime95 + furmark
still brings out the most wattage of anytihng ive tested
if you want to tweak prime95 for max cpu hammerings.
select custome
Min FFT: 8
Max FFT: 8
Time to run : 30 min
This will be more CPU core intensive than smallFFT's
It pulles out out 3-5 watt more during testing
still brings out the most wattage of anytihng ive tested
if you want to tweak prime95 for max cpu hammerings.
select custome
Min FFT: 8
Max FFT: 8
Time to run : 30 min
This will be more CPU core intensive than smallFFT's
It pulles out out 3-5 watt more during testing
Last edited:
pendragon1
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 51,976
OP, you should stick to one thread. you have already made two others about the same situation/system and we already gave you this answer in one of them.
one of my smal lteste on cpu stress testing tools
as you can see in the 4.5Ghz testing prime95 and linpack Maximum is the way to test everythign else will just risk skipping instability
anything that even go so far as to miss detection in 4.6Ghz should be totally avoided
it also funny to see how much a fucking joke Passmark burnintest is
Code:
Core I7 2700K 4.4GHz +0.030v 4.4GHz +0.20v 4.5GHz +0.20v 4.6GHz +0.20v 4.7 +0.20v
Status temp Power Status temp Power Status temp Power Status temp Power
Asus RealBench OK 79-84 318w* OK 80-85 318w* OK 80-87 303-319/326* C 0:22 76-83 xxx/325* C 0:00 XX-XX xxx/315*
Aida64 Extreme OK 74-81 181w OK 73-79 176-180w OK 7:40 74-81 180-185/187 OK 4:50 76-82 182-186/190 C 0:15 73-82 xxx/193
Core Damage 0.8h OK 76-82 180w OK15:28 79-85 184/188 OK 9:50 79-85 186/190 C 1:16 79-85 xxx/192
Cpu Burn-in 1.01 OK 4:05 73-77 181/184 OK 8:15 81-77 185/187 C 0:06 73-78 xxx/190
Folding@Home OK 73-78 182w OK 73-79 179w OK 9:30 73-79 180/182 C 2:49 74-81 xxx/186 C 0:00 31-31 xxx/185
HeavyLoad OK 72-76 184w OK 72-76 182w OK 4:20 73-78 187/189 C 2:59 74-80 xxx/193 C 0:00 xx-xx xxx/193
Handbrake 1.0.2 OK 71-76 165-177w OK 72-76 96-180 OK 8:08 73-77 95-180/185 OK 6:30 73-80 160-182/186 C 0:29 72-76 xxx/186
IBT 2.54 Standard OK 78-88 167-211w OK 4:00 80-90 171-215/216 C 0:02 71-79 xxx/218 C 0:00 xx-xx xxx/215
IBT 2.54 Maximum OK 80-91 106-212w C 1:19 83-94 xxx/220 C 0:02 72-82 xxx/217 C 0:01 63-68 xxx/206
LinPack V11.2.2.010 OK 78-90 191-210w OK 78-89 162-207w OK 4:15 80-91 161-211/213 c 0:05 78-88 xxx/218 C 0:00 xx-xx xxx/210
LinPack V11.2.2.010 x2 OK 84-96 220w OK 81-92 169-216w C 0:55 82-94 xxx/223 c 0:01 73-76 xxx/223 C 0:00 xx-xx xxx/182
OCCT 4.4.3 (Own/large) OK 78-88 211w OK 76-84 185-204w OK 4:00 77-87 198-205/211 C 0:06 73-81 XXX/212 C 0:00 31-31 xxx/193
OCCT 4.4.3 (Linpack90%) OK 82-93 207-214 OK 4:05 74-83 191-196/199 C 0:48 76-85 xxx/204 C 0:02 37-53 xxx/199
Prime95 26.6 (small) OK 4:05 77-85 195/198 C 0:12 76-85 xxx/201 C 0:00 xx-xx xxx/195
Prime95 28.5 (8-8-30) OK 84-93 217w C 0:40 82-93 xxx/218 C 0:00 68-76 xxx/215 C 0:00 xx-xx xxx/213
Prime95 28.5 (small) OK 79-89 212w OK 80-90 211w C 1:52 xxx/219 C 0:00 63-72 xxx/214 C 0:00 xx-xx xxx/215
Prime95 28.5 (Blend OK 82-92 215w OK 84-94 201w C 2:26 83-93 xxx/226 C 0:03 67-71 XXX/196 C 0:00 36-36 xxx/194
Passmark BurnInTest 8.1 OK 67-72 104-180 OK 67-72 103-178w OK 69-73 105-179w/183 OK 6:35 69-74 108-175/182 OK 4:25 70-74 109-183/187
XTU (CPU) OK 73-79 176-190w OK 7:25 73-79 173-186/188 C 2:17 73-81 xxx/210 C 0:04 67-73 xxx/191
Winrar OK 60-67 151w OK 60-67 150w OK 61-67 15-/155/177 OK11:00 62-69 155/156 C 1:20 61-67 xxx/165
7-zip OK 68-71 124-173 OK 68-72 126-171w OK 9:20 70-74 126-175/178 OK 9:40 71-74 128-177/179 OK 6:40 71-76 134-179/181
* This uses OpenCL to put load on GPU as well.
Not direct comparable against other candidates
Status key
OK = Did not find any errors
C = Crash/BSOD
R = Reboot/Reset
D = Error detectedas you can see in the 4.5Ghz testing prime95 and linpack Maximum is the way to test everythign else will just risk skipping instability
anything that even go so far as to miss detection in 4.6Ghz should be totally avoided
it also funny to see how much a fucking joke Passmark burnintest is
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,819
I've been running the same CPU since 2011, so I ahvent had to do that much stability testing lately.
Back then - however - I used to find that the harshest CPU test was a piece of software called "Intel Burntest". It would usually tease out instabilities in 15 minutes that Prime95 would take several hours to find.
Sad part is, most kids don't care about [H] levels of stability anymore. They go for in game stability and move on, and those games may only task the CPU to 35%...
Araxie
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2013
- Messages
- 6,463
not really... real world gaming has prove to be in some cases harder to find stability than synthetic stress test... there are many games that work better as stability test than Prime95/Aida/IBT/linpack and so on.. sometimes some machines can be 100% stables at 100% load for extended periods of times because voltage will be basically fixed at an specified amount, but not in real gaming scenarios, where per core load vary, thus causing fluctuations in voltages and due the way Load Line Calibration works, voltage can be lower than expected causing game crash.. it's the reason why lot of people complaint about 100% stable CPUs with prime95 running for 24hours but still have game crashes to happen.. worse is with some manufacturers (as MSI) that doesn't work with a typical LLC method but with Vdroop (idle and low load voltages tend to be higher than full load and stress) those are a nightmare to reach stability at mid and low loads while having a sane idle voltage if want to work with adaptive or offset methods.
in the past pretty much everyone just used to set a fixed voltage for 24/7 operations and forget it.. nowadays with more modern CPUS and tech people tend to use, adaptive and offset voltage settings, accompained from different methods of LLC which can be harder to reach an stable overclock in real world scenarios.. i've found games as Crysis 3 or Far cry 5 as few examples to be better stability test than anything else.. in fact actually Far Cry 5 and Kingdom Come Deliverance are my go to stability test as those are games that really push CPU and GPU to the limits and have exposed way more instabilities than any other app both for CPU and GPU..
Its on the list
the claim of 15mins of IBT = hours for prime95 is based and non empericala data and probably just a single case.
IBT is pretty good thoug it just doenst scale well in low memory usage configurations. ( it looses power)
I highly disagree
in all case so far where people have made this claim it could be traced back to the persons lack of understading of test ability and comparing oranges to apples.
Like comparing prime95 (CPU) vs games (CPU+GPU) and then thinking its prime95 that is weak to test when in reality it is there psu/mobo/gpu whatever that cant handle the load that is not part of the prime95 test.
But please mention me one of those game that test the CPU better than prime95/IBT and of possible back it up with some correct comparison/evidence
also of the 3 you mentioned only aida64 is synthethic. Prime95 is rael world application and IBT is based on realworld code.
That you don't use them for its real purpose does not mean its not realworld application
Last edited:
Furious_Styles
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,515
I'm going to agree with Araxie here. And I'm a seasoned user of many stress tests. I've run a stress test for many hours and it was stable. Then in warframe I've had a hard lock after being up for a good week+ Tweak the voltage another .10-.20 and it's all good. Could I have run the stress test for several days straight and found this out? Perhaps but that would be a waste of time imo.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,819
I don't usually proclaim stability unless I have 48+ hours of Prime95 under my belt in one run uninterrupted, without any crashes.
What was the stress test ? thats kinda way vauqe and non emperical data right there?
im guessign that you feel into the above statemnts
of either
1: testing orangs to apples
2: using bad test software
Furious_Styles
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,515
You need to utilize some proof-reading before hitting that post button. I'm using a variety of stress tests there are no apples to oranges. I also don't have bad test software, I've got P95, OCCT, RealBench, IBT, x264 loop, and others. I just don't want to spend countless hours stress testing when I could be gaming. Chances are I already spent a lot of time dialing in the OC as it stands.
is thiasa "I dont have any real argument so now I'm attacking the person instead" strategy ? its cute. but it doesn't really strengthen your claim.
You didn't answer my question/request for more information about your claim. just listing test software you HAVE does not tell me how you compared. But so far the ones you have mentioned clearly underlines what i said from the beginning
You are comparing oranges to apples you are comparing CPU test with a strest test of multiple components. with the exception of maybe realbench. But i already covered how horrible realbench is because it using 7zip for its CPU part wihih is mostly intergers and as seen in my above test just fair pretty bad for testing a cpu
So TY for proving my argument and so far keeping it at 100% of ppl claiming games beat prime95 is because they do wrong comparisons and just simply dont understand stress testing to begin with.
Furious_Styles
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,515
No I'm asking you to put a little more effort into editing your posts so they are easier to read and not full of errors.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,819
I'm not basing it on any large sample or study, just my own anecdotal evidence from stability testing my own systems years ago.
prime2515102
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2003
- Messages
- 1,597
If they did that I would switch to a Cyrix chip.