• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Good Benchmark software?

C

Copyright

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 17, 2000
Messages
6,004
I just need something to get some numbers to verify my setup is performing as it should. I upgraded from an 860 @ 4ghz to a 2600K at 4.4ghz and my 3dmark 2011 benchmark wetn down about 150 points. I honestly expected it to go up a bit. I am running some Budget 1333mhz ram at the moment and my 860 had 2000mhz Dominator GT.
 
PCMark 2004

PCMark 2005

PCMark Vantage

PiFast

SisoftSandra

SuperPi

SuperPi 32m

wPrime 1024m

wPrime 32m

Videocard:

3DMark 99 Max

3DMark Vantage - Performance

3DMark03

3DMark05

3DMark06
3DMark11 - Entry
3DMark11 - Extreme
3DMark11 - Performance

3DMark2000

3DMark2001
SE
Aquamark

Unigine Heaven - Basic Preset (DX9)

Unigine Heaven - Xtreme Preset (DX11)

Motherboard:

Reference Clock


Memory:

MaxxMem

Memory Clock
 
Just checking to make sure its running as it should. I got 8.66 on cinebench. Still more room to oc.
 
Copyright said:
I just need something to get some numbers to verify my setup is performing as it should. I upgraded from an 860 @ 4ghz to a 2600K at 4.4ghz and my 3dmark 2011 benchmark wetn down about 150 points. I honestly expected it to go up a bit. I am running some Budget 1333mhz ram at the moment and my 860 had 2000mhz Dominator GT.
Click to expand...

Run 3DMark 11 @ 800x600!! That's where the 2600K shines :D

Nah just kidding...

I always liked Everest for memory.

I like PC Mark Vantage for general PC / Office type benchmarking.

For graphics I just load up one of my favorite games, and use FRAPS.

Any DVD for DVD movies or DVD fab for Blu-Rays, if you don't want to rip/burn just run Cinebench 11.5 and look @ THE NUMBERS OOOOOOoooOOOooo WOW!!!! THE NUMBERS!! :p
 
teletran8 said:
Run 3DMark 11 @ 800x600!! That's where the 2600K shines :D

Nah just kidding...

I always liked Everest for memory.

I like PC Mark Vantage for general PC / Office type benchmarking.

For graphics I just load up one of my favorite games, and use FRAPS.

Any DVD for DVD movies or DVD fab for Blu-Rays, if you don't want to rip/burn just run Cinebench 11.5 and look @ THE NUMBERS OOOOOOoooOOOooo WOW!!!! THE NUMBERS!! :p
Click to expand...

My point was to verify its performing as it should because so far I am not impressed over my 4ghz i7. I don't play the numbers game but I do like to use synthetic benches to see if my systems is performing as it should.
 
Try IntelBurnTest and see how many GFlops your CPU averages. :D

My Q9450 Core2Quad Yorkfield (w/ 12MB L2 Cache) gets about 55 GFlops at 3.6GHz.
 
Copyright said:
My point was to verify its performing as it should because so far I am not impressed over my 4ghz i7. I don't play the numbers game but I do like to use synthetic benches to see if my systems is performing as it should.
Click to expand...

Well in all honesty, right now isn't any i7 Quad Core the high end anyway? Your comparing 2 of the most high end Desktop Quad Core CPU's against one another. I would think they are similar in most situations, and the SB is faster in a few.

When it comes to DVD/Blu Ray/Movie encoding I believe the biggest difference from my experience is how many CPU Cores your CPU has, and then 3-4 ghz is the sweet performance spot. So comparing Single Core to Dual Core is a huge difference, Dual Core to Quad Core is a huge difference... etc. But Quad vs Quad would barely be different with just 500 or so MHZ difference on the clock. I would say 10 pct @ most if not less, possibly 20 percent in some extreme situation I haven't heard of... like comparing an AMD Quad Core clocked at 3.0 ghz stock cooling vs a OC'ed water cooled 2600k @ 5.0 ghz or something like that.

Spiderman 3 Blu Ray took my e6600 over 4 hours to encode to a 23 GB file size and backup lol then 20 minutes to burn. That's why I got a Quad for encoding + Quads push your graphics card(s) harder than a Dual Core. So you get more performance/FPS than dual cores. I don't see how going from Quad to Quad makes a dramatic effect, but Dual to Quad is easily noticeable.

So you trying to verify it's performance using an encoding test (Cinebench) will not show the 2600K true potential when compared to another i7 Quad, i3 Dual core yeah your CPU would crush it. Maybe that's what you should be comparing it to when it comes to encoding. Or games running @ 1024x768 like all the benchmark sites I've seen.:rolleyes: The only reason I would get a 2600k over my AMD Quad Core is for smoother Wii/PS2 emulation or online gaming on big servers BFBC2 or B3, Crysis Warhead, Metro, Oblivion 5, Rage or sum upcoming titles. Most of those games wont be out for awile so I'll just hang on, or not max the graphics on Crysis/Warhead or Metro when I play them.:) (but at this moment I mostly play TF2 which is an older game, and my AMD Quad handles 30 people servers just fine for my tastes 120+ fps with 30-35 pings = I'm usually at the top so I'm good for now)

Everyone's different so whatever. You could also see what 3DMark Vantage gets or like someone else said 3DMArk 05,06. Or a built in game benchmark like RE5. :) Good luck man!
 
Last edited:
3dmark 05 and 06 are the only benchmark where a balance system counts. You can have a highly overclocked cpu but if something else is lacking it won't be of any use. I7 9xx purely beats the 2600k with video editing due to the setup possible on it. Even a 920 lower clocked beats it. Not due to a better clock for clock cpu but the amount of bandwidth and the configuration possible for it.

Funny thing is nothing has manage to topple the E8600 of 3dmark 01 yet. Just shows you how our hardware is govern by the software that runs it
 
Teletran8, you bring up some good points. I had some issues with this build so comparing others results to my own to verify functionality was all I was really looking for. Seeing one bench about the same as my old setup kinda had me worried since i had other issues. Everything seems good now and my benches seem to be inline with others who have my setup. I think this build made me paranoid lol. Also Cinebench for my old setup was slower when comparing the two. Not by a huge amount but slower. Waiting on my G.skill 2133mhz ram to show up... im running some Dell 1333mhz I borrows from work until this ram comes in.
 
Copyright said:
Teletran8, you bring up some good points. I had some issues with this build so comparing others results to my own to verify functionality was all I was really looking for. Seeing one bench about the same as my old setup kinda had me worried since i had other issues. Everything seems good now and my benches seem to be inline with others who have my setup. I think this build made me paranoid lol. Also Cinebench for my old setup was slower when comparing the two. Not by a huge amount but slower. Waiting on my G.skill 2133mhz ram to show up... im running some Dell 1333mhz I borrows from work until this ram comes in.
Click to expand...

Go here

http://ppbm5.com/index.html

Download it run it

Results. That's people real 24/7 setups.

The test tests all aspect of your system so you can see if its balanced and where its lacking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top