Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › i7-4960X, biggest flop CPU-wise?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

i7-4960X, biggest flop CPU-wise? - Page 16

post #151 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

Then you should fully well know that HT will definitely help with tasks like that. And the increases aren't small either.

Then bench it and show the results. I wrote a small Java program just for testing HT, so you have chance to use it. Don't forget to vary RAM speed, because I still don't have numbers on how RAM latency changes the behavior.

It works up to 12 cores. There are instructions http://www.overclock.net/t/1392721/a-small-benchmark-request

From what I seen HT gains are negligible, and considering Tablets and other small platforms are watt limited, the increased power consumption isn't worthy.
post #152 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raghar View Post

Then bench it and show the results. I wrote a small Java program just for testing HT, so you have chance to use it. Don't forget to vary RAM speed, because I still don't have numbers on how RAM latency changes the behavior.

It works up to 12 cores. There are instructions http://www.overclock.net/t/1392721/a-small-benchmark-request

From what I seen HT gains are negligible, and considering Tablets and other small platforms are watt limited, the increased power consumption isn't worthy.

There are various benchmarks showing how HT can improve performance in well threaded applications.

i.e:

Single Thread - Small advantage to the 4770K due to a small bump in frequency


Multithread - The i5 trails behind every single generation of i7 including a 965X, and yes, that's HT at work.


And while you won't see similar gains in 99% of the games currently out, you will definitely see a boost in performance in tasks such as content creation, media encoding, encryption and the likes as long as the software was developed to take advantage of more than 4 cores/threads.
Warchief
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3930k @4.5 ghz - 1.280v Asus Sabertooth X79 EVGA GTX 980 ACX 2.0 Corsair Vengeance 16gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB Seagate 31000528AS 1tb LG DVDRW Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 Pro Dell S2340L 23" Corsair K50 Sentey Golden Steel Power 850W 
CaseMouse
Corsair Carbide 500R Corsair M95 
  hide details  
Reply
Warchief
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3930k @4.5 ghz - 1.280v Asus Sabertooth X79 EVGA GTX 980 ACX 2.0 Corsair Vengeance 16gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128GB Seagate 31000528AS 1tb LG DVDRW Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 Pro Dell S2340L 23" Corsair K50 Sentey Golden Steel Power 850W 
CaseMouse
Corsair Carbide 500R Corsair M95 
  hide details  
Reply
post #153 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raghar View Post

Then bench it and show the results. I wrote a small Java program just for testing HT, so you have chance to use it. Don't forget to vary RAM speed, because I still don't have numbers on how RAM latency changes the behavior.

It works up to 12 cores. There are instructions http://www.overclock.net/t/1392721/a-small-benchmark-request

From what I seen HT gains are negligible, and considering Tablets and other small platforms are watt limited, the increased power consumption isn't worthy.

Intel reintroduced HT with Nehalem precisely because it added 2%+ of overall performance for every 1% of increase in power consumption, in there tests.

The extra threads don't use any extra power if they aren't in use (indeed, they are parked by default on most consumer OSes), and they should not be used in the minority of scenarios where they do not improve performance or performance per watt.

I'm not able to run your benchmark (possibly because I use JRE6, not 7, since the only things I need Java for stop working correctly with 7), but I do know that threaded memory benchmarks bear almost no resemblance to most real-world workloads.

I am able to test a number of real world programs, and these programs tend to bear out the idea that HT generally helps performance per watt in any scenario you'd want it to be used for in the first place.

Edit: I just did a couple of tests, and on my primary signature system, in Blender I see an ~18% increase in performance with HT for a ~14% increase in power consumption (CPU only measured via the part's ammeter though HWmonitor, which is fairly close to what I see on a clamp ammeter on the EPS12v connector). In 7-zip, I see more than a 38% increase in performance for only 18.3% more power. With TrueCrypt 7.1's AES encryption HT gives me 29% more performance for only 11% more power.

Still doing more tests.
Edited by Blameless - 9/9/13 at 8:00am
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
Vishera Testbed
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3GHz, 1.225v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F4m) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.35v 
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 CM Storm Spawn Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 1600MT/s 7-8-8-19-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 1600MT/s 7-8-8-1... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 2x Seagate 7200.10 RAID 0 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Prolimatech Genesis + 2x140mm Cougar 1200rpm Windows Server 2008 R2 Antec TP-750 Antec P182 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9590 @ 5GHz, 1.55v ASUS Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 Reference NVIDIA GTX 780 2x8GiB G.Skill DDR3-1866 10-11-10-30-T1, 1.5v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial M500 480GB 2x Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB XSPC RX360 + X20 750 + Raystorm Windows 7 Pro SP1 x64 
MonitorPowerCase
Dell S2740L Seasonic SS-860XP2 Coolermaster HAF-932 
  hide details  
Reply
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
Vishera Testbed
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3GHz, 1.225v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F4m) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.35v 
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 CM Storm Spawn Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 1600MT/s 7-8-8-19-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 1600MT/s 7-8-8-1... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 2x Seagate 7200.10 RAID 0 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Prolimatech Genesis + 2x140mm Cougar 1200rpm Windows Server 2008 R2 Antec TP-750 Antec P182 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9590 @ 5GHz, 1.55v ASUS Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 Reference NVIDIA GTX 780 2x8GiB G.Skill DDR3-1866 10-11-10-30-T1, 1.5v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial M500 480GB 2x Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB XSPC RX360 + X20 750 + Raystorm Windows 7 Pro SP1 x64 
MonitorPowerCase
Dell S2740L Seasonic SS-860XP2 Coolermaster HAF-932 
  hide details  
Reply
post #154 of 154
If you are trying to use that Java benchmark make sure you have java setup in your Windows Environment Variables. Then it should actually output some results.

Here is my 4960X at 4.5Ghz HT On, 2133Mhz Ram 10-10-11-29-2T

Not sure if it even clocked up considering how quick the bench ran. I have C States enabled.

6C
3916135 4179871
4403091 4179871
4201425 4179871
3841611 4179871
3987812 4179871
3841327 4179871

8C
3426049 4179871
3403293 4179871
3409551 4179871
3407560 4179871
3408982 4179871
3412111 4179871

12C
3306015 4179871
3302319 4179871
3297198 4179871
3303740 4179871
3290657 4179871
6211259 4179871

It only took a few seconds to run so not sure if its still right?
Edited by jasjeet - 9/10/13 at 7:10am
Lounge Gaming
(13 items)
 
NAS
(14 items)
 
Beast
(17 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 6700k 4.5Ghz 1.32v Asus Z170i Pro Gaming MSI GAMING GTX 970 1545/3900Mhz 1.23v G.Skill Trident Z 2x8GB 3000Mhz 14-14-32 1.35v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Toshiba DT01ACA300 Intel X25-M 160GB RAID0 Thermalright Venomous X Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
Pioneer PDP4280XD Corsair RM650x Fractal Node 304 B&W 602S2's, B&W M1 Surround, Arendal Sub1 
Audio
Yamaha RX-A1010 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
i7 3770 4.38Ghz 1.12v Asus P8Z77-I DELUXE Kingston HyperX FURY Series 16GB (2x 8GB) 2200M... Crucial M4 128GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Western Digial 3TB ACA Seagate Enterprise 2TB Western Digital Black 2TB Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 10 Pro BenQ 24" Monitor Seasonic M12II 620W Fractal Design Node 304 
  hide details  
Reply
Lounge Gaming
(13 items)
 
NAS
(14 items)
 
Beast
(17 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 6700k 4.5Ghz 1.32v Asus Z170i Pro Gaming MSI GAMING GTX 970 1545/3900Mhz 1.23v G.Skill Trident Z 2x8GB 3000Mhz 14-14-32 1.35v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Toshiba DT01ACA300 Intel X25-M 160GB RAID0 Thermalright Venomous X Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
Pioneer PDP4280XD Corsair RM650x Fractal Node 304 B&W 602S2's, B&W M1 Surround, Arendal Sub1 
Audio
Yamaha RX-A1010 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
i7 3770 4.38Ghz 1.12v Asus P8Z77-I DELUXE Kingston HyperX FURY Series 16GB (2x 8GB) 2200M... Crucial M4 128GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Western Digial 3TB ACA Seagate Enterprise 2TB Western Digital Black 2TB Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 10 Pro BenQ 24" Monitor Seasonic M12II 620W Fractal Design Node 304 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › i7-4960X, biggest flop CPU-wise?