#I5 7600k cinebench full#
#I5 7600k cinebench Pc#

over the last years has become a cesspool of fake videos on anything covering tech.

RyanSmithAT: RT I am actually really proud of the test suite I made here of 10 different image quality aspects.

I don't see Ryzen being the gaming top dog - remember, current productivity and gaming demos have been against slower clocked CPUs with double the cores of your garden variety, highly clocked i5 and i7 - but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that it'll bury the FX series. Reality: In what test? Even the 8350 couldn't boast this. Reality: Up to 40% slower per clock after the TLB bug needed Phenom II to really close the gap. Phenom: '40% faster than Core 2 Quad at the same clock speed' You mentioned Phenom, so let's take a trip down memory lane:

#I5 7600k cinebench Pc#

If the Canard PC leaks aren't fake, there's every chance that AMD have achieved this, and possibly exceeded it. In fact, the only thing I can see in print is the '40% faster than Excavator' claim. Potentially massively optimised benchmarks aside, at least they tested Ryzen engineering samples against Intel's more expensive offerings in public without resorting to slides containing unsubstantiated performance claims.

silverblue - Wednesday, Janulink I don't think it's unreasonable to get excited about Zen, at least in terms of AMD's current product lines.

The built-in TrueCrypt test does a mass encryption on in-memory data, giving results in GB/s.

#I5 7600k cinebench full#

When TrueCrypt was in full swing, the introduction of AES accelerated hardware dialed the performance up a notch, however most of the processors (save the Pentiums/Celerons) now support this and get good speed. This lends itself to cores, frequency and IPC: the more, the better.Дespite TrueCrypt no longer being maintained, the final version incorporates a good test to measure different encryption methodologies as well as encryption combinations. Ray-tracing is a typical multithreaded test, with each ray being a potential thread in its own right ensuring that a workload can scale in complexity easily.

The Core i7-7700K shows the benefits of frequency over a stock i7-6700K, however at the same frequency they perform roughly the same as expected. As a utility, similar to WinRAR, high thread counts, frequency and UPC typically win the day here. 7-zipДЄs an open source compression/decompression tool, 7-zip is easy to test and features a built-in benchmark to measure performance. Out of the box the i5-7600K hits above a 2.00 on the single threaded test and above 8.00 on the multithreaded test, showing that the scaling with cores on CB11.5 is very reasonable. We run the benchmark in an automated fashion three times in single-thread and multi-thread mode and take the average of the results. Cinebench R11.5Д¬B11.5 has been popular for many years as a performance test, using easy to read and compare numbers that arenвЂ™t in the 1000s. When more threads come to play, the Core i5-7600K sits atop all the other i5 parts, and because hyperthreads have little effect here, the combination of IPC and frequency pushes the Core i5-7600K above previous top performers such as the Core i7-4770K. With high frequency in tow, the Core i5-7600K matches that of the previous generation i7-6700K, and goes above the DevilвЂ™s Canyon i7 as well.

The benchmark is similar to that of the newest R15 version, albeit with a simpler render target and a different strategy for multithreading. The R10 version of Cinebench is one of our oldest benchmarks, with data going back more than a few generations. Nonetheless, our benchmark database spans to a time when that is all we had! We take a few of these tests for a pin with the latest hardware. At AnandTech, IвЂ™ve taken somewhat of a dim view to pure synthetic tests, as they fail to be relatable.