Hardlimit test bank

[Xevipiu]

I have already posted the results with the processor fully in stock

[cobito]

@xevipiu The truth is that they are interesting results. Comparatively speaking, the closest processor found is the Ryzen 7 2700X. As usual, AMD scores in AVX2 but at the lowest mode, Zen has a slight advantage over Coffee Lake.

The base frequency of both is similar as well as the cache, the number of cores and the HT/SMT (although, the Ryzen has double the L2 cache than the i9). The 5GHz boost frequency doesn't seem to help much for Intel's micro compared to AMD's 4.3Ghz since the single-thread performance differences are not very noticeable. In fact, in AVX2 those extra 700MHz are doing absolutely nothing.

For optimized software, the Ryzen gets 25% less performance so in games and other, the i9-9900K is clearly superior to the 2700X. Here it is important to know what the micro will be used for. If it's for a server, for example, Zen is probably the best option. If it's for gaming, video editing, rendering... Coffee Lake is superior without a doubt.

Considering that the i9 costs double the Ryzen 7, it seems that Intel hasn't come out with a very competitive CPU this time.

[Xevipiu]

The differences are in the architecture, the AMDs go up to 4.3/4.35Ghz is their physical barrier, while the Intels have no limit :women_wrestling:

Today I have raised the 7980XE again after Lapping on its DIE, I have lost some small transistor, but it works perfectly


[Xevipiu]

It will surely go up even more

[cobito]

@krampak brings us a couple of new CPUs to our database tested in all modes: an i3 Skylake and an i5 from 6 years ago.

The first one is a Core i3-6100T released in 2015. It has two cores with HT, 3 Mb of cache and 35W TDP. In multicore it has a performance similar to an i5-7200U, which although it is of a "higher" category, is actually a U series (castrated in all ways to contain consumption). In single core it approaches a portable Haswell although this time from a higher range (for real): an i7-4720HQ.

The second one is an i5-3317U. Considering that this is starting to be a mature CPU, not much can be expected from it. With its 2 cores without HT, in the end it is comparable to CPUs of the same branch: portable processors of more or less a couple of generations of difference.

[Xevipiu]

Hello, well I have almost 200 micros of all classes, I am already uploading little by little to fill the table Hello holidays!

[cobito]

Perfect @xevipiu, that will motivate me a lot. Thanks for the contributions!

[Xevipiu]

We have uploaded the first results of a 3570k pata negra, at only 5Ghz at 1.33v

[Xevipiu]

The joot has not had enough! It heats up like crap, which doesn't even have lapping, and even less delid

[Xevipiu]

Another one, a very decent 3770k for watercooling

[cobito]

A couple of days ago, @krampak brought us a micro from AMD that will be 8 years old next summer. It's a portable Bobcat APU (intended more for netbooks).

The processor is not great. The closest thing I've found is a Core Duo (without the 2) that I haven't even found a release date for. In short, it has two cores at 1.6GHz with a relatively high TDP of 18W.

And I'll stop there because the truth is I'm starting to write this with a certain animosity towards that architecture. I have a AMD C-60 (the little brother of the E-450) that are basically identical only that the C series runs a few MHz slower. Speaking quickly and clearly, it has been the worst processor I have ever tested. The netbook that comes with it was supposed to replace an Atom N450 (considerably older and with only one core) and although in certain places it was said that it increased performance by 50% compared to the Atom while reducing consumption, the reality is that its performance is tedious. And that's even though this PC has been used exclusively to handle a fairly simple Calc sheet and the web browser on Linux.

The curious thing (and it's something that I find quite annoying) is that on Windows 7 it works reasonably (within what is possible if compared to Linux). But on Linux it is completely horrible. Now that's true, the battery lasted more than double.

[garfield]

@xevipiu said in Hardlimit test bench:

ttps://es.aliexpress.com/item/Hielo-CPU-abridor-abierto-Protector-de-la-cubierta-de-Delid-morir-para-LGA115X-para-Intel-CPU/32858889426.html?cv=47843&af=358162&aff_platform=aaf&mall_affr=pr3&cpt=1542529725642&afref=&sk=VnYZvQVf&aff_trace_key=86aa289337064a34a537bd7912d68b2c-1542529725642-07505-VnYZvQVf&dp=d4c6ba8922752d89b0d23ffbe9212627&terminal_id=9e40d863efaf4ff0af0090ace35179df]Direct Direct on Aliexpress series 4/5/6/7/8/

Xevipiu, I was giving you something while you were doing the lapping on the i9. But I have several questions:
Where do you work to be able to measure the height of the die with that precision?
How do you know that you have lost some transistors?

200 micros, what a pass... and I don't have time for anything

[cobito]

@krampak brings us a new micro again. This time it's a Pentium 4415U, which is a two-year-old Kaby Lake.

With the typical 15W TDP of the U series, the 2 cores with HT and 2 Mb of L3 cache, it's a modest micro intended for office laptops. Its performance does not stand out from the rest of the laptop models and is on par with the i3-6100U, a supposedly superior model a couple of years older.

And in the end, if there are no major changes in CPI, the TDP is restricted to those 15W and the gate width is not reduced from 14nm, we find CPUs that have essentially been offering practically the same thing in recent years. In the end, the characteristics of that Pentium are a copy of those of the i3-6100U except for the i3's extra mega cache. However, it is also true that if we look at the list of processors similar to the Pentium, to find similar performance in previous generations, we have to go up the range. So I suppose that is an advance.

[krampak]

@cobito said in Hardlimit test bench:

@krampak brings us a new micro again. This time it's a Pentium 4415U, which is a Kaby Lake from two years ago.

With the typical 15W TDP of the U series, the 2 cores with HT and 2 Mb of L3 cache, it is a modest micro intended for office laptops. Its performance does not stand out from the rest of the laptop models and is on par with the i3-6100U, a supposedly superior model a couple of years older.

And in the end, if there are no big changes in CPI, the TDP is restricted to those 15W and the gate width is not reduced from 14nm, we find CPUs that have essentially been offering practically the same thing in recent years. In the end, the characteristics of that Pentium are a copy of those of the i3-6100U except for the extra mega cache of the i3. However, it is also true that if we look at the list of processors similar to the Pentium, to find similar performance in previous generations, we have to go up the range. So I suppose that is something that has advanced.

It is precisely from some NUCs that we put together that usually come with the i3-6100U, which these have come to me with these 4415U.

[cobito]

@rul3s and @JuezDred bring us a Zen+ from 10 months ago. It's a Ryzen 5 2600.

In short, it's a processor with 6 cores and SMT that runs at 3.9Ghz and dissipates 65W. The closest processor is an i5-8500 as seen here. Both perform equally in multi-thread, although in single-thread, the Coffe Lake has a noticeable advantage over Zen+, both being roughly the same age. As expected, SMT helps a lot in this case, as at a frequency 12% lower than Intel, it manages to match the performance in multi-thread. Basically, both architectures seem to be very close and get similar performance per MHz, just as both get a similar score in efficiency (performance/TDP).

Unfortunately, there is no data in mode 0, where AMD usually gets better scores (at least in Zen without the +). The closest AMD we have data for is a Ryzen 5 1600X. In this case, in multi-thread, the Zen+ has a not insignificant advantage, although in single-thread, both are basically the same. Considering that the Zen+ runs at a slightly lower frequency and has a TDP of 30W less, it seems that there has been an important improvement between generations.

[cobito]

A few days ago I uploaded the results of an industrial Skylake PC. It has a Celeron G3900TE with two cores at 2.3GHz. The overall performance is pretty fair and I guess it's enough for tasks like office work. Being a fanless computer, I'm surprised that this particular model has a TDP of 35W when the U series is only 15W. With the cost of the machine, I don't understand this skimping. But in the end, its performance turns out to be comparable to the U series precisely, being the closest a i3-6100U. Nothing particularly noteworthy about this CPU.

On the other hand, a certain @ignacio00 has uploaded the result of an AMD FX from the Piledriver era. As a plus, it has passed the AVX test, so at least it has a decent set. On the other hand, for a micro at almost 4GHz, with 6 cores and a TDP of no less than 95W, it turns out to be comparable to Intel's run-of-the-mill portables like the i3-6006U.

[krampak]

I have uploaded another variant of the HP NUCs that we receive. After moving from the 6100U to the 4415U, we now have one with a 7130U. I think there was some Windows process that was not up to par, but the result is quite consistent with the previous ones.

[cobito]

@krampak Here is the datasheet.

It seems that this time it does represent some improvement because the differences between the 6100U and the 4415U are imperceptible. It's not that it's a huge leap, but at least it's no longer listed as the most similar CPU. With this update they've made, there's an improvement of between 15 and 25% depending on the number of threads and mode, which is quite a lot given the current times.

Overall, the processor isn't bad considering it's an "i3 U". I'm surprised that in single-thread it gets the same performance as an i7-4720HQ, which is only two years older and which, with twice the cores, has a TDP three times higher.

[cobito]

This weekend, @krampak has brought us a new portable micro to our database: a Core 2 Duo T6600.

This processor turned a decade old earlier this year. Its performance is comparable to processors from the era like the famous Core 2 Duo E6600. But it doesn't look anything like or remotely current.

The most exotic micro that's similar is a Xeon E5504, which has the same single-threaded performance and with double the cores gets double the performance. Now that yes, with a TDP 2.5 times higher. In that Xeon it seems that even double the cache compared to the Core 2 Duo T6600 doesn't seem to help. And the most curious thing is that both are separated by only 3 months. Either the Core 2 Duo came out very good or that Xeon doesn't even move backwards.

Apart from that, nothing more to highlight.

[krampak]

Hello @cobito

I'm trying to pass the bench on a Windows Server 2008 Standard (not R2) and it crashes when I start it. I was going to add a Xeon E3-1230v5 that is not in the BDD.

Signature with problems:
Name of the problem event:\tAPPCRASH
Name of the application:\thlbm-launcher.exe
Version of the application:\t0.0.0.0
Timestamp of the application:\t5a23e342
Name of the module with errors:\thlbm-launcher.exe
Version of the module with errors:\t0.0.0.0
Timestamp of the module with errors:\t5a23e342
Exception code:\tc000001d
Exception displacement:\t0001f3d6
Version of the operating system:\t6.0.6003.2.2.0.272.7
Regional ID:\t3082
Additional information 1:\tfd00
Additional information 2:\tea6f5fe8924aaa756324d57f87834160
Additional information 3:\tfd00
Additional information 4:\tea6f5fe8924aaa756324d57f87834160

Read our privacy statement:
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=50163&clcid=0x0c0a

The Windows Event Viewer doesn't say much more:

Error application hlbm-launcher.exe, version 0.0.0.0, timestamp 0x5a23e2fc, module with errors hlbm-launcher.exe, version 0.0.0.0, timestamp 0x5a23e2fc, exception code 0xc000001d, error displacement 0x0001e426, Process ID 0x25c0, application start time 0x01d5107e91a938aa.