• 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.

Most accurate way to compare CPU's? single/multi core

Brumboy

Brumboy

Brumboy

Associate
Joined
11 Jan 2011
Posts
2,358
So I downloaded Cinebench yesterday to run some benchmarks to see where my CPU currently compares to all the new CPU's. Is Cinebench a good way to compare single core and multi core performance between CPU's, specifically for gaming purposes? Pretty much every review out there contains a Cinebench benchmark test.

For example here are some Cinebench scores from TechSpot and TechPowerUp for a range of CPU's, with my CPU (4690k at the bottom):

10900k - single = 540 = 33% faster than 4690k
10900k - multi = 6400 = 407% faster than 4690k

9900k - single = 510 = 25% faster than 4690k
9900k - multi = 4870 = 310% faster than 4690k

3700x - single = 508 = 25% faster than 4690k
3700x - multi = 4900 = 312% faster than 4690k

3600 - single = 488 = 20% faster than 4690k
3600 - multi = 3740 = 238% faster than 4690k

4690k (4.2) - single = 405
4690k (4.2) - multi = 1570

Is it a fairly accurate way to compare these results and use them for a comparison for choosing a CPU for gaming?
 
Well it gives you the numbers for single and multi threaded increases. In terms of choosing a gaming CPU I don't think you can go wrong with any of them, even the 3600 has 3x as many threads as your 4690k and from what I remember with my 2500k on my son's machine, thats what made the biggest difference.

Rocking a 3700X now and not looked back :-)
 
welshrat said:
Well it gives you the numbers for single and multi threaded increases. In terms of choosing a gaming CPU I don't think you can go wrong with any of them, even the 3600 has 3x as many threads as your 4690k and from what I remember with my 2500k on my son's machine, thats what made the biggest difference.

Rocking a 3700X now and not looked back :)
Click to expand...

It was more of a general question, because comparing fps benchmarks isn't always accurate since the test setups are completely different to my own. But using synthetic benchmarks I assume would be a fairer comparison.

Yeah I've been looking at an upgrade for months but thought I would benchmark my own CPU and compare it to what's out there.

Nice, was close to getting a 3700x!
 
Cinebench multicore is not indicative of gaming load at all. Single core is somewhat relevant.
 
Not without testing a load of games and checking your framerate. Steve at Gamers Nexus doesn't do testing marathons for the fun of it. It really is the best way.

Are you actually unhappy with the framerate of your current CPU?
 
Rossuk89 said:
It was more of a general question, because comparing fps benchmarks isn't always accurate since the test setups are completely different to my own. But using synthetic benchmarks I assume would be a fairer comparison.

Yeah I've been looking at an upgrade for months but thought I would benchmark my own CPU and compare it to what's out there.

Nice, was close to getting a 3700x!
Click to expand...

Apologies, yes its as good as any I guess, I wouldn't get too hung up on single core these days as long as its in the ball park, threads are far more important especially with the arrival of the new consoles, unless you are chasing the 1080p dream, then I guess its intel
 
I had a 4690K running at 4.6Ghz, compared with the 3600 i have now the difference is huge.

What GPU do you have?
 
It is about as good as it gets - you really need to look at your workload these days to get an idea what CPU is best - it isn't like it used to be where there was a clear progression - for some tasks in some cases even slightly lower down number convention wise CPUs can be faster than the next couple of models above them for some tasks, etc.

TBH I rarely find I'm CPU limited these days - when it comes to bottlenecks mostly GPU or IO limited with any reasonably modern CPU.
 
Rroff said:
It is about as good as it gets - you really need to look at your workload these days to get an idea what CPU is best - it isn't like it used to be where there was a clear progression - for some tasks in some cases even slightly lower down number convention wise CPUs can be faster than the next couple of models above them for some tasks, etc.

TBH I rarely find I'm CPU limited these days - when it comes to bottlenecks mostly GPU or IO limited with any reasonably modern CPU.
Click to expand...

I wish I could say the same I have 32 threads, 64gb of fast DDR4 and still find myself limited by core count and memory :( Will see if work will let me jump on 4000 series TR next year or at least see if I can wiggle it out of the budget.
 
When testing CPU benchmarks, you will typically find that the benchmark is done with top end GPU & RAM, and the CPUs they're comparing.

E.g. if you're looking at a benchmark for 10600K, 10700K, 3600X, 3700X then they will usually be paired with a 2080 Ti.

They do this because they're trying to measure the maximum potential differences, by reducing any potential bottlenecks from the GPU and RAM and putting it onto the CPU. In addition, you will notice that some people will review CPUs at 1080p medium or low settings - another way of pushing the load onto the CPU, helping the reviewer to measure maximum differences.

While this does indeed provide the best insight into how good the CPU actually is, it isn't always representative. Why? Well, not everyone would pair a 3600X with a 2080 Ti - these differences will be less pronounced as you move to a less powerful GPU, where the GPU again becomes more of a bottleneck.

As a result, you might find that the differences between your 4670K, 3600X and a 9900K at 1080p max settings with a 2060, for example, are much lower (4-5%).

I don't know of any benchmarks that use midrange GPUs for CPU gaming tests, but it might be worth checking out.
 
Vince said:
I wish I could say the same I have 32 threads, 64gb of fast DDR4 and still find myself limited by core count and memory :( Will see if work will let me jump on 4000 series TR next year or at least see if I can wiggle it out of the budget.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I’m a little CPU limited just now on both desktop and notebook.
 
jigger said:
Yeah, I’m a little CPU limited just now on both desktop and notebook.
Click to expand...

My notebook is a joke, 8705g so 4 core 8 threads but heavily thermally limited because of the chassis. I love the machine but for proper work you wouldn't want to use it. I mean it's fine if your not up against it but a drag if you are.
 
Vince said:
My notebook is a joke, 8705g so 4 core 8 threads but heavily thermally limited because of the chassis. I love the machine but for proper work you wouldn't want to use it. I mean it's fine if your not up against it but a drag if you are.
Click to expand...

Same here, I have an i7 dell with 16gb ram notebook from work and 6 core macbook pro. The macbook pro is fine for all the iOS / Xcode stuff etc but I have pretty much not used the dell for a good year, I do all my coding on my desktop at home now and it just flies through stuff. Just secured working at home as a permanent solution now as well so wont have to deal with that scenario very often.
 
welshrat said:
Same here, I have an i7 dell with 16gb ram notebook from work and 6 core macbook pro. The macbook pro is fine for all the iOS / Xcode stuff etc but I have pretty much not used the dell for a good year, I do all my coding on my desktop at home now and it just flies through stuff. Just secured working at home as a permanent solution now as well so wont have to deal with that scenario very often.
Click to expand...

Performance really can make work that much easier. I'm also full time at home until some unspecified time but certainly for the next year I don't see myself in the office. My laptop only really gets used these days for when i'm kicking back on the sofa or playing a little tfl/civ you know low rent sort of games. It also comes on holiday and as much as my wife hates it sometimes gets used as sadly i'm in one of those roles where if something goes really wrong I can be called in to pick up the pieces. Really at home for me is no different to at work, I have a permanent tunnel between home and all locations in the business via hardware firewalls so am on the same network and I route all my calls from the office to an avaya handset at home when im at home and the office when I am at the office.
 
I tried my 3950x on cinebench20, scores well over 9000, no other desktop cpu comes close; the ones beating it are crazy high core cpus thats cost 1000s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom