-
It's only been 2 days, but you have to add a section of 6 cores (i7-5820K and i7-5930K) and 8 (i7-5960X)
Well, you're taking your time to post any results with any of those micros
-
Well, you're taking your time to post any results with any of those micros
Siiisisi I'm impatient, but I'm missing the board that arrives this week, let's see if it arrives before 3Dmark releases an update and I get the achievement of unknown hardware, the processor and the ram are already in my possession.
Now that I think about it, it looks like I'll be the 1st in 2 categories LOL
-
I won't upload results, I'm very disappointed.. I get worse results than with the 3770k at 4.something, even overclocking the 5960x to 5.2.. in the first one it gives me 9.something seconds, and in the second one 109, but at 33%, so I guess it would take about 400 or so.
Anyway… my first extreme processor, and the last one.... I'll wait a month to see if they release a new driver, and if not, or it doesn't fix it, I'll sell it and continue with the 3770k.
i7-3770K at 4.something GHz, better results than an i7-5960X at 5.2 GHz
-
no subire resultados, estoy mu decepcionado.. consgo peores resultados que con el 3770k a 4,algo, incloousoceando el 5960x hasta 5,2.. en el primero me saca 9,algo segundos, y en el seguno 109, pero al 33%, asi que supongo que tardaria como 400 o por hay.
en fin… mi primer procesador extreme, y el ultimo.... me esperare 1 mes a ver si sacan nuevo driver, y si no, o no lo solucina, lo vendo y seguire con el 3770k.
i7-3770K a 4.algo GHz, mejores resultados que un i7-5960X a 5.2 GHz
No tiene lógica, algo fallará.
Instalaste todos los drivers de la placa base? Tiene la ultima bios?Tiene que haber una explicación. El S.O. esta instalado desde cero?
Como anda de temperaturas? -
Tecnho - i7 3930k (Sansy bridge-E) 3,2@3,3,3 Ghz :troll:- 6,06" / 179.827"
-
Well, trying to use an old micro for 100€, I got this
Tecnho - Xeon x5660 (Gulftown) 2.8@ 4.85 Ghz - 3,855" / 105.423"
-
It doesn't make sense, something will fail.
Did you install all the motherboard drivers? Does it have the latest bios?There has to be an explanation. Is the OS installed from scratch?
How are the temperatures?I'm sorry I haven't replied in so long, but I was so disappointed that I haven't even used that computer until now. The first week I'll upload the results, whatever they are, but I'll leave only the OS hard drive, reinstalling everything from scratch, and doing the benchmark with only the drivers, cpu-z and wPrime.
Yesterday and the day before yesterday, I was messing around to see if I could figure something out, and it seems that, for some reason, now I can make it stable at 4.5 or less, but I've managed to increase the ram speed, which, for some reason, in this motherboard is super-hidden and also it was lowering it to 1666, when it's ddr4 and the minimum is supposed to be 2000 and some.Edit: the first week of December.
-
But man, that micro-processor that costs a fortune and you don't use it?
A friend of mine bought an i7 4790k, I saw the performance and it's beastly!!!
Your micro-processor surpasses it without breaking a sweat...I repeat that something is wrong... what motherboard do you have??
-
Case: Obsidian 900D
Processor: i7-5960X
Motherboard: MSI x99s Gaming7
Graphics: 2x Asus GTX 780 DCII OC
RAM: 4x G.Skill DDR4 8G module
Power supply: Corsair AX 1200i
Processor cooling: Corsair H110
Total fans, 11, 9 in use. 4 for the h110 radiator, two intake that go directly to the hard drives and then push air towards the graphics, one that pulls it out the back, the radiator plus another pull air out the top. And 3 at the bottom, 1 for the power supply, and 2 disconnected because I miscalculated when buying them. -
that's why I'm disappointed, ddr4, at 1066?
-
that's why I'm disappointed, ddr4, at 1066?
But hombreee!! In cpu-Z it shows 1066, but since it's ddr (double data rate) the final speed is 2133 Mhz.
Is that the frequency of your DDR 4? 2133 Mhz?
Everything is correct, even you have them in quad channel.
What I don't understand is how little it performs in Wprime.
Run another benchmark program like Intel Burn Test. Let's see how many gigaflops your Micro gives.According to your photo, my Fx 8350 was faster than your I7. That's not normal...
Wanautentico - AMD FX 8350 (Vishera) 4,0@4,3Ghz - 8,359" / 258.719"
-
Sorry, but I think I'll take a look at that x5960x :facepalm:
-
You should put nutella on it to dissipate better
Would you use Nutella as thermal paste for your processor? - Engadget in Spanish -
I finally managed to solve the problem, I have already achieved my purpose in life! haha
Twikzer- i7-5960X 3.0@ 4.2 Ghz - 7,344" / 102.872"
Troll proposal: could someone put the test with four Xeon E7? :troll::troll:
Question: can the intel phy (I think that's how it's spelled) or the nvidia tesla be used in this test?
-
Question: can the intel phy (i think that's how it's spelled) or the nvidia tesla be used in this test?
Well yes, it would be interesting to see what result it gives, just put two tests, with and without, to compare
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
finally I managed to solve the problem, I have already achieved my purpose in life! haha
Twikzer- i7-5960X 3.0@ 4.2 Ghz - 7,344" / 102.872"
Troll proposal: could someone put the test with four xeon E7? :troll::troll:
Question: can the intel phy (I think that's how it's spelled) or the nvidia tesla, be used in this test?
Isn't 32M a very high time?
-
Isn't 32M a bit high?
It's because of the NB's speed... that OC is misconfigured and there's a bottleneck... it's slower than if it were stock... in fact it's half as fast on the 32M :facepalm:
Intel i7 5960X Haswell-E CPU Review - Overclockers :mudo:
-
It's because of the NB speed... that OC is misconfigured and there's a bottleneck... it's slower than if it were stock... in fact it's half as slow on the 32M one :facepalm:
]ok, I'll look into doing a better OC when I feel like entering the bios, even though it'll already be worth it for this test :V
Edit: by the way, the one in the picture has an OC at 4.6 :V
-
Edit: by the way, the one in the picture has an OC at 4.6 :V
Yes, that screenshot is with OC… there is only one table in the review by default and it is still faster:
In fact, a 4770K which is a quadcore at 3.5Ghz is faster at 32M
At 4.6ghz it is stable OC… for testing they put it at 4.8ghz:
That said, that OC is wrong… check it or leave it by default... sometimes a badly done OC is worse than leaving it by default because either there is some parameter misconfigured or the instability generates failures that are solved by the system's error correction system (by software)... this makes the performance plummet... it's like repeating an addition over and over again until it comes out right (to give an analogy)
-
In fact, a 4770K which is a quadcore at 3.5Ghz is faster in 32M
one thing I don't understand, I started testing with the wprime, and if I put 12 threads, it gives me a better result in the 32M than if I put 16, why? if I put 8 it comes out a little but if I put 16, but only approx 0.100
