Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TH] Tom's CPU Architecture Shootout: 16 CPUs, One Core Each, And 3 GHz
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[TH] Tom's CPU Architecture Shootout: 16 CPUs, One Core Each, And 3 GHz - Page 14

post #131 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuell View Post
Considering this test shows an A64 X2 being FAR superior to a PII x4 and PII x6 leaves me unable to take this seriously at all.

But that doesn't mean I don't agree with the end results really. We all know Intel is ahead of AMD, we didn't need a horribly failed test to tell us that though.

So people can stop whining. There are 3 types of people in this thread right now, the reasonable ones which can agree theres some faults with the tests but the general outcome is pretty much as expected (Intels newer archs and bigger updates outpaced AMD's bandaid updates of the A64 arch), then theres AMD fanboys who are freaking out and whining nonstop about how this is messed up and thats messed up and AMD is much better than this shows, toms is garbage idiots (toms is bad, but getting so irritated is unreasonable), then theres the intel fanboys who cherry pick the few bad responses as to why this testing is bad to point out how thats not the case, yet totally ignoring the glaring and obviously flawed test where A64 X2 is nearly double a PII...

Some of us are trying to have a mature conversation, the latter two groups need to grow up and keep their mouths shut me thinks.
We all know the general results are pretty on-target,but the false A64/Phenom II chart really has me wondering the total effect of the rest of the testing rigs and set-up.I think I may run some of these benches under different NB/RAM/HTT speeds to see the difference.
Amelia
(13 items)
 
Professional
(13 items)
 
RCPC#1
(17 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1100t MSI 890FX GD65 MSI Radeon HD5670 GSkill RipjawsX DDR3 PC3 12800 2x4GB CL8 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
WD Black 1TB SATA III Samsung BD Zalman 9900MAX Windows 7 64 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
AOC 22" LED Logitech Kingwin Lazer Platinum 500w Fractal Design R3 
Other
Samsung 470 SSD 128GB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 960T Asus M4A88T-VEVO Asus Strix R7 370 SuperTalent Perfomance 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
GSkill Snipers Monster Daytona Seagate Barracuda 500GB 7,200 RPM 16Mb cache Memorex DVD/RW 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H60 Windows 8N IBM 9494 19" LCD IBM 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair GS500 In Win H-Frame Wolfking OCZ Behemoth 
Audio
JBL Creature 
  hide details  
Reply
Amelia
(13 items)
 
Professional
(13 items)
 
RCPC#1
(17 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1100t MSI 890FX GD65 MSI Radeon HD5670 GSkill RipjawsX DDR3 PC3 12800 2x4GB CL8 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
WD Black 1TB SATA III Samsung BD Zalman 9900MAX Windows 7 64 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
AOC 22" LED Logitech Kingwin Lazer Platinum 500w Fractal Design R3 
Other
Samsung 470 SSD 128GB 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 960T Asus M4A88T-VEVO Asus Strix R7 370 SuperTalent Perfomance 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
GSkill Snipers Monster Daytona Seagate Barracuda 500GB 7,200 RPM 16Mb cache Memorex DVD/RW 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H60 Windows 8N IBM 9494 19" LCD IBM 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair GS500 In Win H-Frame Wolfking OCZ Behemoth 
Audio
JBL Creature 
  hide details  
Reply
post #132 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyladouche View Post
Why would someone care how their system performs with a cut-down FSB or memory speed when they'd never run it like that in the first place?
Because as I've said before, they're trying to compare architectures, not show bandwidth advantages. What the end user "cares" about is irrelevant here, as I've explained to you before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by guyladouche View Post
The goal wasn't to determine the raw calculations-per-clock cycle that a CPU is capable of--you can get that number from the manufacturer.
Where exactly? Point to the source.

Quote:
Originally Posted by guyladouche View Post
There is no relevance in testing real-world applications on configurations that people will never use.
With that mindset, that renders this whole article worthless. That's nonsense. "Real world" configurations flew out of the window when they disabled the extra cores on multi-core processors and downclocked the newer ones...

Quote:
Originally Posted by guyladouche View Post
Again, like I said, if people are so concerned about raw CPU-only power, just monitor small-set superpi calculations, or something where virtually nothing has to leave the CPU to be calculated--I guarantee you that the trends would almost mirror what's shown in this Toms study. Oh, right, then people will complain that the calculation-to-cache communications within the CPU aren't the same either... Or that one CPU doesn't have L1/L2/L3 cache...or that the inter-CPU latencies aren't the same...or some other inane thing to nit-pick and gripe about. Take it at face value.
You're right. It's bad enough that the newer CPUs have a massive bandwidth advantage, but as I've stated before, putting that aside, to actually make the article somewhat valid, they should have removed a lot more of these variables to eliminate as many unfair advantages as possible. When they decide to re-test with one or two DIMMs for each configuration, of around 2GB, bring down the memory clockspeed to be the same, and state the bus speeds for each CPU, then we can compare/evaluate. Until they do that, this article is worthless as far as I'm concerned. I'm not questioning Intel at being the fastest clock for clock, far from it, I'm questioning their uneven tested configurations, which can make a big difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post
More "stress" on the IMC does not reduce performance, only the ability to OC, and usually only by a small amount.
Yeah it does. On a 90nm CPU it makes a big difference, my 65nm 9550 can't take anything over 2 DIMMs without throwing out memory errors.
Edited by Am* - 7/27/11 at 6:02am
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Celeron G530 Haven't decided yet. GTX 460 768MB 4GB Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Samsung F3 1TB (SSD coming later) XP/Windows 7 Same old... Yet to decide. 
Case
Fractal Design Define R3 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Celeron G530 Haven't decided yet. GTX 460 768MB 4GB Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Samsung F3 1TB (SSD coming later) XP/Windows 7 Same old... Yet to decide. 
Case
Fractal Design Define R3 
  hide details  
Reply
post #133 of 223
Thread Starter 
Most of the tests are in agreement. There's one benchmark with an outlier result regarding the Athlon64 X2 vs. Phenom II, this is why they did several benchmarks instead of relying on that single one. You don't throw out all results because one is questionable, if necessary you ignore the outliers and look at the average of the rest.

And to all the butthurt AMD fanboys out there, (ignoring Sandy Bridge which is a major architecture change that AMD will hopefully catch up on with Bulldozer) AMD processors have a measurable deficiency in IPC, which is why current-gen AMD chips typically have more cores and higher clock rates than their Intel counterparts. AMD knew about it and considered it in their design in order to remain competitive.

This whole thread is kinda like two people arguing over the individual horsepower ratings of the cylinders in their car engines when the cars otherwise have the same total horsepower rating.
post #134 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvanPitts;14351144 
The benchmark does not consider price, and around here, Intel products are at least double the price of AMD, perhaps even triple. One can get a pretty good AMD processor for $200, while $600 is some mediocre Intel offering. Of course, AMD gets undercut with the new Celeron offerings - which might be cool if you want inadequate performance, just like the Atom offers inferior performance to AMDs low power offerings.

Speak for your self, you go buy that 200$ amd cpu that is "Pretty good"
And I will rape you in every single aspect with a 180 dollar 2500k. buttkick.gif
Lappy
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsHard Drive
I5 2520M Dell Intel HD3000 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
OSMonitor
Windows 7 Ultimate LED 
  hide details  
Reply
Lappy
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsHard Drive
I5 2520M Dell Intel HD3000 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
OSMonitor
Windows 7 Ultimate LED 
  hide details  
Reply
post #135 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Am* View Post
Yeah it does. On a 90nm CPU it makes a big difference, my 65nm 9550 can't take anything over 2 DIMMs without throwing out memory errors.
The your settings are either incorrect or your CPU/board/memory is defective.

You should be able to run as much memory as the platform supports without any appreciable reduction in performance, or loss of stability.
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #136 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Am* View Post
Because as I've said before, they're trying to compare architectures, not show bandwidth advantages. What the end user "cares" about is irrelevant here, as I've explained to you before.
Despite what the title of their article claims, they CANNOT compare CPU architectures ACROSS architectures in an apples-to-apples manner, no matter what you try to even out between them. You can compare platforms. Platforms you can use in real life. There's nothing you can do to guarantee even testing across the board, and it doesn't correlate to how a system is run normally--so it's irrelevant to even try.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Am* View Post
Where exactly? Point to the source.
One example: http://www.behardware.com/articles/6...hitecture.html
I didn't bother to look it up for Nehalem, sandy bridge, phenom II, etc., but rest assured, the numbers are known and readily available--I'm not going to waste my time looking all of them up, though I'm sure you're going to gripe about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Am* View Post
With that mindset, that renders this whole article worthless. That's nonsense. "Real world" configurations flew out of the window when they disabled the extra cores on multi-core processors and downclocked the newer ones...
If you paid attention, I pre-empted that point in my previous post, saying that lots of applications are still single-threaded, or cannot properly take advantage of multiple cores, so it IS relevant to see how performance compares with a single core only. What's not relevant is down-clocking memory and FSB speeds, and limiting a system to single-channel memory when no one would ever run a system like that.

Your idea of evening out comparisons would have no bearing on real performance. If someone comes in here asking "what's the difference between *this* setup and *that* setup," do you think they would care about how they perform under configurations that no one would run them at?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Am* View Post
You're right. It's bad enough that the newer CPUs have a massive bandwidth advantage, but as I've stated before, putting that aside, to actually make the article somewhat valid, they should have removed a lot more of these variables to eliminate as many unfair advantages as possible. When they decide to re-test with one or two DIMMs for each configuration, of around 2GB, bring down the memory clockspeed to be the same, and state the bus speeds for each CPU, then we can compare/evaluate. Until they do that, this article is worthless as far as I'm concerned. I'm not questioning Intel at being the fastest clock for clock, far from it, I'm questioning their uneven tested configurations, which can make a big difference.
The "number" differences might slightly change, but the trend would be the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Am* View Post
Yeah it does. On a 90nm CPU it makes a big difference, my 65nm 9550 can't take anything over 2 DIMMs without throwing out memory errors.
Then assume they'd tweak the IMC voltage to achieve stability--it doesn't affect ability of a CPU to run properly.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #137 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjja View Post
Speak for your self, you go buy that 200$ amd cpu that is "Pretty good"
And I will rape you in every single aspect with a 180 dollar 2500k.
+1 Intel kicks AMDs ass in performance.
     
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel i7 6700HQ Nvidia GTX 970m 8GB's Micron DDR4 2133 Samsung SM951 256GB m.2 SSD 
Hard DriveOSAudio
Seagate 500GB SHDD Windows 10 Enterprise x64 Soundblaster X-Fi 5 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel i7 6700HQ Nvidia GTX 970m 8GB's Micron DDR4 2133 Samsung SM951 256GB m.2 SSD 
Hard DriveOSAudio
Seagate 500GB SHDD Windows 10 Enterprise x64 Soundblaster X-Fi 5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #138 of 223
Can't we all just get along and laugh at the Pentium 4?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-2600K 4.6GHz @ 1.336V MSI Z68A-GD65 (B3) EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Classified 32GB G.Skill Ares DDR3-2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
256GB Crucial M550 SSD 512GB Crucial M550 SSD 5TB Toshiba PH3500U-1I72 HDD Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14S Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate N x64 Acer Predator X34 with Dell 2707WFP Stand 1st Generation Microsoft Natural Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair Professional Series Gold AX850 Custom Painted MY1996 Gateway 2000 ATX Full Tower Logitech MX518 with Blue MX510 Shell Flexiglow X-Raider with Custom RGB LED Controller 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Wharfedale Diamond 10.0 Speakers TSC T100-110 10" Ported Downfiring Subwoofer SMSL Q5 Pro Amplifier Chaintech AV-710 Sound Card 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-2600K 4.6GHz @ 1.336V MSI Z68A-GD65 (B3) EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Classified 32GB G.Skill Ares DDR3-2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
256GB Crucial M550 SSD 512GB Crucial M550 SSD 5TB Toshiba PH3500U-1I72 HDD Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14S Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate N x64 Acer Predator X34 with Dell 2707WFP Stand 1st Generation Microsoft Natural Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair Professional Series Gold AX850 Custom Painted MY1996 Gateway 2000 ATX Full Tower Logitech MX518 with Blue MX510 Shell Flexiglow X-Raider with Custom RGB LED Controller 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Wharfedale Diamond 10.0 Speakers TSC T100-110 10" Ported Downfiring Subwoofer SMSL Q5 Pro Amplifier Chaintech AV-710 Sound Card 
  hide details  
Reply
post #139 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakecharmed View Post
Can't we all just get along and laugh at the Pentium 4?
how dare you, im still using it!
AVARIS REBORN
(13 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570K @ 4.4Ghz ASRock Z77 Extreme4 Galaxy GeForce GTX 670 Corsair Sniper (2x4GB) DDR3-1600  
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
SanDisk Extreme SSD 240GB Antec Kuhler H2O 620 Liquid Cooling System Windows 8  DELL U2412M 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Leopold FC700R (Brown Cherry) seasonic G-550w Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech Performance MX 
Audio
Aktimate Micro 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 920 @ 3.78ghz 1.325v Asus P6T Deluxe V1 MSI GTX 570 6GB Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital Green 1TB LG DVD Windows 7 Acer AL22W16 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Wireless Media Desktop 1000 Antec Quattro 850w CM 690 II Plus Logitech Performance Mouse MX 
  hide details  
Reply
AVARIS REBORN
(13 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570K @ 4.4Ghz ASRock Z77 Extreme4 Galaxy GeForce GTX 670 Corsair Sniper (2x4GB) DDR3-1600  
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
SanDisk Extreme SSD 240GB Antec Kuhler H2O 620 Liquid Cooling System Windows 8  DELL U2412M 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Leopold FC700R (Brown Cherry) seasonic G-550w Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech Performance MX 
Audio
Aktimate Micro 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 920 @ 3.78ghz 1.325v Asus P6T Deluxe V1 MSI GTX 570 6GB Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital Green 1TB LG DVD Windows 7 Acer AL22W16 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Wireless Media Desktop 1000 Antec Quattro 850w CM 690 II Plus Logitech Performance Mouse MX 
  hide details  
Reply
post #140 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjja View Post
Speak for your self, you go buy that 200$ amd cpu that is "Pretty good"
And I will rape you in every single aspect with a 180 dollar 2500k.
this lol.
Sandy Bridge owner reunite!
Dream PC
(17 items)
 
Surface Pro 3
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
INTEL Core i7 6700K ASUS Maximus VIII Hero Z170 MSI Geforce GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6G G.SKILL Ripjaws 4 series 16GB DDR4 3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
SAMSUNG SM951 NVMe 512GB SAMSUNG 850 EVO 1TB COOLER MASTER Nepton 280L MICROSOFT Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
BENQ XL2420TE DELL UltraSharp U2415 WASD V2 custom CORSAIR HX850i 
CaseMouseAudioOther
NZXT H440 white CORSAIR Vengeance M95 CREATIVE Sound Blaster Z CPU Delid 
Other
LED Lighting 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 4300U Microsoft Surface Intel HD Graphics 4400 8 GB DDR3L 
Hard DriveOSKeyboardMouse
256 GB SSD Windows 10 Pro x64 Surface Pro 4 Type Cover with Fingerprint ID Microsoft Arc Mouse Surface Edition 
  hide details  
Reply
Dream PC
(17 items)
 
Surface Pro 3
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
INTEL Core i7 6700K ASUS Maximus VIII Hero Z170 MSI Geforce GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6G G.SKILL Ripjaws 4 series 16GB DDR4 3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
SAMSUNG SM951 NVMe 512GB SAMSUNG 850 EVO 1TB COOLER MASTER Nepton 280L MICROSOFT Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
BENQ XL2420TE DELL UltraSharp U2415 WASD V2 custom CORSAIR HX850i 
CaseMouseAudioOther
NZXT H440 white CORSAIR Vengeance M95 CREATIVE Sound Blaster Z CPU Delid 
Other
LED Lighting 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 4300U Microsoft Surface Intel HD Graphics 4400 8 GB DDR3L 
Hard DriveOSKeyboardMouse
256 GB SSD Windows 10 Pro x64 Surface Pro 4 Type Cover with Fingerprint ID Microsoft Arc Mouse Surface Edition 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TH] Tom's CPU Architecture Shootout: 16 CPUs, One Core Each, And 3 GHz