SMT dropped score by 1000 points.
Overclocking has to wait until water block gets here.
Thanks for trying, it was worth a go as the futuremark benches don't use CPUs with loads of cores very well.
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.
SMT dropped score by 1000 points.
Overclocking has to wait until water block gets here.
Thanks for trying, it was worth a go as the futuremark benches don't use CPUs with loads of cores very well.
Agreed, scaling is terrible on Firestrike, and poor on Timespy. Timespy Extreme should be better though.Future mark need to patch this stuff to get the best out if hcc cpu's. Above 10 is diminished returns.
Agreed, scaling is terrible on Firestrike, and poor on Timespy. Timespy Extreme should be better though.
"Time Spy was designed for systems with up to 8 cores / 16 threads. It has a bottleneck (as intended) that means it does not scale much beyond that. This is not really a bug - it benchmarks the type of PCs it was designed for just fine. Most games do not scale much beyond this either, so it realistically reflects the gaming performance of these systems - you see exact same lack of scaling in games as well. Currently we have no plans to modify the test. Instead we will be adding Time Spy Extreme test soon that will have a redesigned CPU test (and otherwise graphics tests bumped to 4K) that will support the "core wars" that have started. Current plan is that it should scale to at least 28 cores / 56 threads, possibly to 32 / 64. On Fire Strike the CPU test also does not scale to this type of core counts. Same thing applies as to Time Spy. "
https://community.futuremark.com/fo...0x-Low-CPU-Score-in-Timespy-Firestirk-Any-fix