Originally Posted by rdr09
Quote from one of the comments . . .
"Just for a quick comparision, my 12-core 3900x ( which is admittedly a consumer and not a server part ) scores 48,000 to 50,000 on Geekbench 4.3 for the multi-core test.
This score at 27k, even for a 12-core efficiency-focused / engineering part doesn't seem that good at all. Interesting to see the final results after release."
Don't forget the part in the article where they think 27,926 is "nearly as high", or is "just as fast" as 32,937, as if it isn't only 84.7%.
Without knowing the all core boost of the Ice Lake chip.
While assuming that the Cascade Lake Xeons were able to run at their full turbo for the entire bench without hitting power limits.
While calling the Xeon Gold 6226 a 24-core chip when it is a 12c/24t chip and they have two of them, because clearly QPI never hurt anyone.
While ignoring that the GeekBench reads the Ice Lake part as 2x6c/12t.
While ignoring that they are different versions of the benchmark.
All that and, yes, the 3900X has scores ranging from 42,000 to 50,000+, with a 9900KS at 34,000-41,000, which actually makes this Ice Lake part right around the same IPC as the 9900KS; (28,000 / 12 / 2.2 = 1060, 40,000 / 8 / 5 = 1000).
So uh... Cool I guess?
Oh also, they sure picked a funny Xeon Gold 6226 for it to fight against...
Their pick (32937): https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13136084
Another result (65214); https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/15165382
Guess NotebookCheck is the new WCCFTech.