![]() The SuperMicro case i am using is vintage 2008 i think, and so came with less efficient dual redundant 1000w power supplies (of which i am using only one). This is with windows set to performance power mode. Keep in mind that includes the LCD monitor as well (which is 15w?). ![]() yes, if i have all 24 cores going then generally speaking the kill-a-watt meter is telling me that i am pulling around 475 to 515 watts from the wall socket. around 230w to 260w just doing normal windows stuff (all CPU cores running at full 2.5 GHz under very little load). i only got her going yesterday so i've got her dialed in for minimal power consumption yet. so i'm going to guess brief spikes to 750w when i get all four CPUs in there and going full bore. Each CPU seems to take around 125w or so. That *should* cut down on the noise as well because from what i understand the fans on the newer PSUs throttle based on temperature. i will be swapping it for a newer platinum rated 1400w PSU from the latest revision SC748 case. Ya, that youtuber also showed that on dual Epyc 7601 windows server 2016 got a 15% better score then on windows server 2012 R2, so with these high core count CPU set ups we will need a revised benchmark tuned for higher core counts.I think you are talking to me. Hard to consider this an "end of a benchmark", just another thing people need to take into consideration before using these benchmark results as a be all, end all indicator of performance. I believe there were exploits with 3Dmark as well, in which one could tweak specific settings in Nvidia Inspector/NVCP to obtain significantly higher scores than others (though I believe that was fixed as well). Using ramdisks on benchmarks that tested storage speeds was one way to inflate scores on benchmarks that tested ones entire system. Plenty of other benches have broken elements to them that can be exploited as well. Most people are able to extrapolate where their CPU's should perform though, so it's fairly easy to spot an invalid result. This problem has been a thing for years, and has been brought up on HWbot several times. To make it better they need to make a new version that is hard to run so it takes long enough to become consistent. so the closer it gets to 0 seconds the more variance you will see. the issue is that the test scores based on time. For a long time i thought it was simply background processes stealing processing time, but perhaps, there is also something iffy inside CB code, and how it responds to turbo steppings/overclocking? Now this is highly interesting, and may explain why almost every time i run CB R15 on any system (AMD FX, AMD A10, Intel i7) the results vary from run to run, sometimes a lot, sometimes not. It is the multi hour and day (sometimes longer) renders that creative professionals are trying to reduce. In the professional rendering industry, people do not optimize for 6-7 second renders. At the same time, with such a short runtime and extremely inconsistent results, the workload needs to run longer to make any initialization negligible. From what we can see, the benchmark is pushing work to all 224 threads. We are making the suggestion that Maxon increase the test render scene size. Even tasks like doing large compile jobs in linux are predictable where we have a sub 1% test variance over 100 runs. We have run significantly longer workloads on this machine, the types that take days to run and they are extremely consistent. We are still going to be introducing our 8K version soon simply to get longer run times on large machines.ĥ-7 seconds is an extremely short time to run a “benchmark” on a modern CPU. not one of 100 runs but every run moving significantly), we know it is time to take a look at a benchmark.Īs an example, even though our c-ray “hard” setting we developed in 2012 is starting to run into the same 5-7 window, it is still producing repeatable runs with well under 5% benchmark variance. ![]() Generally when we see that level of variance, and consistent variance (e.g. Along those lines, we are seeing fairly massive differences, at times greater than 20% peak to valley on some runs. That is important as modern CPUs will typically hit an all core turbo mode. One area you will note is that the entirety of runs is in the 5-7 second range.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |