CINEBENCH
is a real-world test suite that assesses your computer's performance
capabilities. CINEBENCH runs several tests on your computer to measure the
performance of the main processor under real world circumstances. The benchmark
application makes use of up to 16 CPUs or CPU cores to render a photo-reaslistic
image. The scene makes use of various CPU-intensive features such as reflection,
ambient occlusion, area lights and procedural shaders. In the first run, the
benchmark only uses one CPU (or CPU core), to ascertain a reference value. On
computers that have multiple CPUs or CPU cores and on those who simulate
multiple CPUs (via HyperThreading or similar technolgies), MAXON CINEBENCH will
run a second test using all available CPU power. Higher results are best.
Cinebench is multi-threaded.
Cinebench R10 |
1 CPU (split between cores) |
Points |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
3066 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
3475 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
3306 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
2920 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
2565 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
2570 |
|
x CPU (full load all cores) |
Points |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
12640 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
6732 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
6339 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
10455 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
7064 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
7104 |
| |
Here the Core 2 Duo E8500 leads in single core
performance, and is just behind the Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition during the
multi-core test. 3D rendering like this scales very well with additional cores.
Bibble 5 is a multi-threaded photographic workflow
application that can be used to demonstrate the ability to scale work load
across 4, 8, 16 or more processor cores. The basic process we will use for
benchmarking is to convert a batch of 50 RAW image files from a digital SLR
camera from their original RAW format to JPEG's at full resolution, using the
applications default image settings. Lower results are best.
Bibble 5.0 |
Batch RAW-to-JPEG Conversion: (sec/Image) |
Seconds/image |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
0.261 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
0.585 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
0.61 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
0.377 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
0.6969 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
0.623 |
|
Time to Complete 50 Photos: (sec) |
Seconds |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
13 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
29.2 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
30.5 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
17.9 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
20.6969 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
31.2 |
| |
Bibble is a good indication of what the future will bring
us - multi-threaded applications that are good at doing everyday computing tasks
like converting and re-sizing photos. While the dual-core Intel processors are
able to process individual photos quite quickly, they can't keep up with the
likes of quad-core processors. The key number to pay attention to is the batch
RAW-to-JPEG conversion time; the Core 2 Duo E8500 does it in 0.585
seconds/image, while the Core i7 920 is faster at just 0.261 seconds/image.
POV-Ray 3.7 Beta
30 |
Source: POV-RAY |
|
Ray-tracing is a rendering technique that calculates an
image of a scene by simulating the way rays of light travel in the real world.
In the real world, rays of light are emitted from a light source and illuminate
objects. The light reflects off of the objects or passes through transparent
objects. This reflected liht hits our eyes or perhaps a camera lens. Because the
vast majority of rays never hit an observer, it would take forever to trace a
scene. Ray-tracing programs like POV-Ray start with their simulated camera and
trace rays backwards out into the scene. The user specifies the location of the
camera, light sources, and objects as well as the surface texture properties of
objects, their interiors (if transparent) and any atmospheric media such as fog,
haze, or fire.
Lower render times are better, however higher Pixel Per
Second rendering values are best. Pov-ray is multi-threaded.
Pov-Ray 3.7 BETA
30 |
Render Time (sec) |
Seconds |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
113.8 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
360.42 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
382.88 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
98.69 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
445.26 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
444.24 |
|
Render Average (Pixels Per Sec) |
Pixels/Second |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
2303.61 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
1445.39 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
1357.27 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
2656.37 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
1751.71 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
1753.53 |
| |
The additional speed of the Core 2 Duo E8500 gives it a
+20 second advantage over the Core 2 Duo E8400 in Pov-Ray 3.7. Stepping up to
the next level of processing can have some real world advantages. Also note the
increase in the number of pixels rendered per second, 1445pps, vs 1357 for the
E8400 CPU.
The SPECgpc project group develops and distributes
SPECviewperf, which measures the 3D rendering performance of systems running
under OpenGL. SPECviewperf measures the 3D rendering performance of systems
running under OpenGL. The SPECopcSM project group has worked with independent
software vendors (ISVs) to obtain tests, data sets and weights that constitute
what is called a viewset. Each viewset represents the graphics rendering portion
of an actual application. The ISVs that develop SPECopc viewsets have provided
percentage weights for each test for which a performance number is reported.
ISVs have defined these percentages to indicate the relative importance of a
test within the overall application.
Higher results are better.
SPECviewPerf 10 |
2core Catia |
Points |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
19.19 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
15.43 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
16.47 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
20.47 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
14.91 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
14.41 |
|
2core Maya |
Points |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
38.57 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
33.21 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
34.3 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
34.08 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
25.04 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
25.87 |
|
2core PROe |
Points |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
13.85 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
9.75 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
13.03 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
12.75 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
10.34 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
12.94 |
|
4core Catia |
Points |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
13.54 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
0 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
0 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
15.3 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
15.6969 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
11.4 |
|
4core Maya |
Points |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
35.4 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
0 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
26.44 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
27.18 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
27.6969 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
21.9 |
|
4core PROe |
Points |
Ranking |
Intel Core i7 920 |
11.2 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 |
7.77 |
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
8.78 |
|
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition |
10.06 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR2) |
10.6969 |
|
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition (DDR3)
|
8.13 |
| |
These tests actually show the reverse, with the E8500
trailing the E8400 by a small margin. This could be due to the switch
in motherboards for testing the E8400 and E8500 chips - the MSI X48
Platinum wasn't compatible with the E0 stepping of the Core 2 Duo E8500.