• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Cinebench 10 i7 V X6

zoomee said:
lol - easyrider and his dodgy benchmarks like I said in the other thread. :D

Typical of 980x users to jump in - The X6 was always targeted at the i7 920 - Surely this thread amongst all the others show that clock for clock, they're mostly the same. Wonder if easyrider can live with this, hmmm.
Click to expand...

probably have this thread closed and find something else with a version of a benchmark that doesnt have the x6 optimisations...

i cant believe he dared make the hug thread when its him starting all this crap.

he did it with x264 using a benchmarkwith an outdated codec suddenly x6 is faster when we use the new codec...

then its handbrake oh wait x6 is faster best close the thread.

then he starts cinebench and wants everyone to use an old version yet again........

i see a pattern here....

and people had the cheek to call me a liar when i said anandtech comparrsions are flawed because they dont use the latest versions of the benchmarks a lot of them were done at the x6 release when non of them had the optimisations in.

if anything we have proved i was speaking the truth
 
It's kinda what I thought, they'd trade places depending on applications and setup.

In the end it just shows both owners should be pretty pleased with their purchases.
 
Dark_Angel said:
It's kinda what I thought, they'd trade places depending on applications and setup.

In the end it just shows both owners should be pretty pleased with their purchases.
Click to expand...

yea and people shouldnt just discount x6.

this whole thing started because people kept saying by i7 if you do encoding/rendering it goes to show whichever you buy the performance is almost identicle and the extra cost for i7 doesnt really get you anything like people assumed.

if you want i7 go for it but dont claim x6 is an inferior product because it costs less
 
No what it goes to show is that AMD's horizontal scaling(adding two extra cores) brings the x6 right on the doorstep of the i7.

However the vertical scaling gap still remains the i7 core by core is supremely much faster than AMD's offering.

IMHO both platforms are great but the one you choose will depend on much multi-threading you need. It's a pity really as although horizontal cpu scaling is here right now in your face, optimized software still lags behind the hardware potentials.

I too think the x6 is great offering but my software usage favours high clock per core (at the moment) ;)

Let's hold hands (hugs are optional) prey for better software written in the future
 
Doing it for the lulz only:

cinebenchx643600mhz.png
 
Mr Krugga said:
Doing it for the lulz only:
Click to expand...

The only lulz is that my cheap dated hardware at exactly the same clock is only 12% behind your shiny shiny i5 :p

Rendering (Single CPU): 4469 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 15690 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 3.51
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 7807 CB-GFX

Let's create a q9xxx vs i5 thread :rolleyes:
 
Subliminal Aura said:
The only lulz is that my cheap dated hardware at exactly the same clock is only 12% behind your shiny shiny i5 :p

Rendering (Single CPU): 4469 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 15690 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 3.51
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 7807 CB-GFX

Let's create a q9xxx vs i5 thread :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Mine's 14% faster :rolleyes:

I would like to offend you now but being afraid of the banhammer, let's just say my CPU was cheaper and the previous rig had an Athlon X2 in it :eek:

Your rig runs hotter and needs more voltages bump! I'm also prettier and cooler and have the better graphics :D
 
Mr Krugga said:
Mine's 14% faster :rolleyes:

I would like to offend you now but being afraid of the banhammer, let's just say my CPU was cheaper and the previous rig had an Athlon X2 in it :eek:

Your rig runs hotter and needs more voltages bump! I'm also prettier and cooler and have the better graphics :D
Click to expand...

Mine was only £10 more expensive, runs a lot faster and it runs cooler. :D

and my previous rig had an Athlon x2 6000+ ;)

Edit** £3 more expensive now.
 
Last edited:
james.miller said:
6.5% quicker? is that the difference between mediocre and the fastest there is?
Click to expand...

27% slower in single CPU render test though.

Having owned both i7@4ghz and 1090T@4ghz that's where the problem lies in my opinion, in a perfect world the difference would be 6% but not all games/applications are multithreaded properly and the i7's brute force when using only 1 or 2 cores pays off, World of Warcraft is a prime example.
 
Last edited:
mmj_uk said:
27% slower in single CPU render test though.

Having owned both i7@4ghz and 1090T@4ghz that's where the problem lies in my opinion, in a perfect world the difference would be 6% but not all games/applications are multithreaded properly and the i7's brute force when using only 1 or 2 cores pays off, World of Warcraft is a prime example.
Click to expand...

Lol you only need a pentium 3 to run WoW.
 
i7 930 @ 4.2GHz (both benches run @ same clocks)

Cinebench R10:

Single CPU: 6160
Multiple CPU: 24802



(Click to enlarge)

Cinebench R11.5

CPU: 7.25



(Click to enlarge)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom