CineBench R11.5

CineBench R15

CineBench R20

CineBench R23 ---> with BenchMate only

Y-Cruncher Pi-2.5B ---> BenchMate only version

Y-Cruncher Pi-10B ---> BenchMate and Y-Cruncher wrapper

At least as of the time of writing this these seem to be the best sources currently for what IBOT does. The hard part is that there really isn't much technical details as to exactly what optimizations have been made. Some other things that we do know:

• intel said they won't be changing what instruction set extensions are being used at least right now

• this will expand going forward

The big question for xoc would be how does the actual workload get affected. As far as I can tell it affect the actual bytecode after being loaded into memory. In a sense it acts closer but not quite as far as a JIT compiled benchmark would be. GPUPI is in this realm where the actual instructions being executed depends on how the kernel is JIT compiled (1) by the opencl driver.

Superscalar cpus already do a lot of this internally at a microcode level and have done for generations. I think that IBOT in a way represents a pretty natural idea. But if every benchmark can become quite a moving target through runtime changes to the code.... that definitely can present an interesting problem...

To give some background on code optimization for c/c++ binaries:
MSVC doesn't do specific architectural flags
GCC/CLANG do, with -march=znver5 or -march=graniterapids or -march=raptorlake for some examples

When you take the same c++ source code and compile with different flags the optimizer in the compiler will reorganize things to better align with what it knows performs well on the platform. However it still doesn't know what the actual data going into your program looks like. Usually this is taking into account what instructions the cpu can execute simultaneously, and allowing the cpu to decode more instructions at once. It also often enables the instruction sets that the cpu supports (2).

Profile guided optimization usually works like this: you compile your program with some extra stuff included to collect performance data, you run it with generates a file with performance counters, and specific info about where you had branch misses / cache misses. The compiler can then use that info to compile your program again, without the extra overhead part for collecting data, taking that profiled data into account. Usually that means re-ordering things in a way that better hints to the cpu about branch perdiction, has better performance when the cpu does predict branches correctly, unroll loops in a better way(3), inline functions, ... etc... (4)

Profile guided optimization used to having to distribute a new entire binary though. Think of it like ycruncher adding a new option for specific uarch. It is fundamentally different than even just ucode which doesn't quite match the scope of what this is able to do, at least today.

So the big unknowns are:
1. What optimizations are actually being made?
2. What is intel going to do with this in the future?
3. Is this detectable?
4. What if someone else other than intel starts doing basically the same thing?

I think IBOT is a really interesting technology, but it has the potential to make other benches act more like how yc saw massive improvements with new releases. I think HWBOT doesn't need to ban IBOT, but we need to be realistic about what not banning it could mean. And if it is possible to detect it in enough circumstances to make banning it feasible. Even if Intel isn't massively shifting the instructions today does that mean that they won't eventually? What if someone swaps the ffmpeg out in x265 in memory with one compiled with avx512 support for a specific uarch in memory? Is that different than doing it on disk really? IMO until there's more info its really hard to say what the best decision is here.

I mostly just wanted to put the info out for everyone to understand what's going on at least with the info that's currently available. IMO banning IBOT for now is probably the best step until we understand the implications a bit more. Once there's a ton of IBOT enabled subs its harder to turn it off fully.... I can try to answer any uarch / optimization questions to the best of my knowledge in more detail if people have them.

(1) there's maybe some minor differences between it and other JIT compiled stuff but not important here

(2) There are differences between -march=, -mcpu=, -mtune= .... lots more to go into potentially but out of scope here
(3) Loop unrolling allows the cpu to more easily process multiple iterations of the loop simulataneously. Basically going from: for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {f(i)} to for (i = 0; i < n; i+=2) {f(i); f(i+1)}
(4) Modern compiler optimization is extremely impressive, especially when you combine pgo and lto, and a way to big topic to cover here

GEEKBENCH4 ---> Geekbench4; version 4.4.4 or newer

GEEKBENCH5 ---> Geekbench5; version 5.2.1 or newer

GEEKBENCH6 ---> Geekbench6; version 6.0.0 or newer

GEEKBENCH NO LONGER  REQUIRES BENCHMATE TO BE USED IF YOU USE ONE OF THE ABOVE  LISTED VERSION

What's the status today ?

How does HWBOT handles these results ?
Are "Unchecked results" fully acceptable with no limitations ?

HWBOT X265 - 4K

Version 2.3 only from 2021

Exception: HWBOT X265 V2.2 and no HPET required for Socket A, LGA478, S754,939 and 940

So how is a submission valid without both tabs? I'm not trying to start trouble - in fact I'm thinking that I'm totally misunderstanding the requirements myself wouldn't mind knowing so I don't state something that isn't true.

Thanks in advance!

Marco

It depends on what different memory for you means, but otherwise it sounds unfinished. memory? Memory capacity, kit, or memory Type? These things differ massively. Also, Many users don't mention the specs of their memory in a seperate box for their submission.

Is there a clear answer?

I recently build a new PC, nothing flashy but okay for what I need.  For the past couple of years it has been AMD all the way so I am using a cheap AMD Ryzen 5 7500F as it works really well.  Now I tested it with many of the benchmarks but I noticed when I use it with Aquamark my file saved for the result cannot upload.  When I read the rules I noticed that Windows 8 and 10 is not allowed with AMD cpu.  I am using Windows 11 so I figured that might be why it will not upload but I will wait on your response.  

However, I find it really bad that AMD cpu's is not allowed with Windows 8 or Windows 10 when it is really problematic to install Windows 7 with and AMD cpu and chipset right now.

3DMark Fire Strike Series

3DMark Ice Storm Series

3DMark Night Raid

3DMark Port Royal

3DMark Sky Diver

3DMark Time Spy Series

3DMark Wild Life

3DMark Speed Way

3DMark Storage Benchmark

A heads up for newcomers and a bump for older members.

p.s.

@Leeghoofd

Any changes regarding paragraph 1.2 ?
I see non-elite members uploading ES results and getting points.
and there are also previous gen ES hardware with points (but they were not previous gen when they submitted them).

I used to run win7 on said machine, which ran fine. However, that machine only has 4GB RAM, which used to be enough, but now it's just sad. Since I don't have much RAM to work with, would it be okay if I used win7 on that machine? Does Benchmate support win7?

Unfortunately, win10 would be pushing it and I need some headroom to work with, to start the cpu-z thing 7000 times and if possible maybe a benchmark would be nice.

UNIGINE SUPERPOSITION SERIES

same drivers same windows

my RTX 4090 validation

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/95692606

my RTX 4080 validation

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/97892629

Thanks a lot! Sergio

https://hwbot.org/submission/5202803_

https://benchmark.unigine.com/results/rid_28d6c7935e89408ba5907a04905db38b

I noticed that on for example 12900ks there are subs with 2 cores active in the top rank. but its clearly 2 performance cores. Thus effectively those subs should be in the 12900ks(8p) category.

Thus to qualify in the 12900ks pure category minimum 1 P core and 1 E core would have to be active otherwise it must be in the (P) only category. I am sure the OC performance might be very different as we go forward with this new topology.

Meanwhile we might need a third category (E) where all P cores are turned off ?

Also , in your results submitted , do you have to show you used default values ?

Just curious ?

Can you apply your preferred windows settings to get max performance ?

Can you use optimiser programs?

Delete app data/caches etc?

Thanks,

SilvaGi

3DMark 2000

3DMark 2001 SE

3DMark 03

3DMark 05

3DMark 06

3DMark 11 Series

3DMark Vantage Series

3DMark-Vantage-CommandLineGuide.pdf

Superpi 32M