*** The Official OCUK Cinebench R20 benchmark Thread ***

[redkrptonite]

 

[redkrptonite]

Delete Double post

 

[Chrisc]

Thats a realy good score, what clock speeds were you running at? i cant quite see the screenshot

 

[redkrptonite]

Thats a realy good score, what clock speeds were you running at? i cant quite see the screenshot

Thanks CCX 0 - 4.5Ghz, CCX 1 - 4.4Ghz, CCX 0 - 4.350Ghz, CCX 1 -4.3Ghz.

 

[humbug]

Updated

 

[pete910]

About time I added mine

3900x @ stock settings

 

[humbug]

Welcome to Zen 2, about ####'### time
Love the Linux font

Updated.

 

[FredFlint]

Update single threaded run:

Spoiler: 525

 

[humbug]

Updated

 

[peter224722]

Is there a record for the slowest overclocked I7 2600k ( 1251 ) , YES , I`m still faster than a I5 with half the threads !!!!!!

 

[roy23]

finally getting around to this...



3600X on default settings, max clock speed during single core run was 4397 according to ryzen master
16GB ballistix sport lt 3000 at 3733 C16, fabric clock at 1867 coupled at 1:1

 

[humbug]

You've just pushed my Single Thread score of 486 into the 50+ spoiler bin ^^^^^^

When i get AGESA 10004 i'll do another run.

Updated

 

[humbug]

Is there a record for the slowest overclocked I7 2600k ( 1251 ) , YES , I`m still faster than a I5 with half the threads !!!!!!

The only 2600K score we have is this one:

Score 1676: Intel Core i7 2600K at 4.7Ghz, andy_mk3
Score 348: Intel Core i7 2600K at 4.7Ghz, andy_mk3

 

[roy23]

You've just pushed my Single Thread score of 486 into the 50+ spoiler bin ^^^^^^

When i get AGESA 10004 i'll do another run.

Updated

Sorry!

 

[andy_mk3]

The only 2600K score we have is this one:

Score 1676: Intel Core i7 2600K at 4.7Ghz, andy_mk3
Score 348: Intel Core i7 2600K at 4.7Ghz, andy_mk3

My 3900x is doing circa 7900/510....what an upgrade

 

[FloppyPoppy]

My 3900x is doing circa 7900/510....what an upgrade

I think one of the more impressive things about that statement is how well the 2600k holds up in comparison on the per core. I mean okay it's not exactly close but it's not as far behind as one may expect for a chip approaching 8 years old.

 

[andy_mk3]

I think one of the more impressive things about that statement is how well the 2600k holds up in comparison on the per core. I mean okay it's not exactly close but it's not as far behind as one may expect for a chip approaching 8 years old.

No you're right, hence why I held onto it for so long, and why it's moved into another build for my wife, it takes casual gaming and usually duties extremely well.

 

[humbug]

I think one of the more impressive things about that statement is how well the 2600k holds up in comparison on the per core. I mean okay it's not exactly close but it's not as far behind as one may expect for a chip approaching 8 years old.

Its only like a 50% IPC difference

Seriously tho it was an impressive chip when it came out, and yes it holds up well.

 

[FloppyPoppy]

Its only like a 50% IPC difference

Seriously tho it was an impressive chip when it came out, and yes it holds up well.

37%Of course the overclock needs to be factored into the equation but at the same time it's kind of a moot point.

 

[humbug]

37%Of course the overclock needs to be factored into the equation but at the same time it's kind of a moot point.

2600K: 348 @ 4.7Ghz
3600X: 506 @ 4.4Ghz (+45%)

4.4Ghz vs 4.7Ghz (+7%)

2600K vs 3600X IPC = +52%