cbjaust Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Is coming: https://www.techspot.com/news/83424-amd-announces-threadripper-3990x-64-cores-128-threads.html Will need some new benchmarks ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeph8n Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Plenty of benchmarks support the thread count Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3urner Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 6 hours ago, keeph8n said: Plenty of benchmarks support the thread count Yeah your right with that but thats not the point. Even though we have plenty of bm which scale with core count most of them arent made for that high cc and finished within seconds. 3970x finishes r20 within 25 seconds... 3950x finishes r15 in 5sec. (depending on frequency) I think it would be more appealing to have benchmarks which take just like superPi or gpuPi more time. Think about for which cc r15 was designed and how long it took to finish an r15 back then with a 7740x... Which was at that time considerd a high end cpu... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splave Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 more 2d worth global and or even WR points would be nice thx... some 3d subs are worth like 300 points alone 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmuckley Posted January 8, 2020 Share Posted January 8, 2020 Just now, Splave said: more 2d worth global and or even WR points would be nice thx... some 3d subs are worth like 300 points alone DJ will handle that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmuckley Posted January 8, 2020 Share Posted January 8, 2020 7 hours ago, der8urner said: Yeah your right with that but thats not the point. Even though we have plenty of bm which scale with core count most of them arent made for that high cc and finished within seconds. 3970x finishes r20 within 25 seconds... 3950x finishes r15 in 5sec. (depending on frequency) I think it would be more appealing to have benchmarks which take just like superPi or gpuPi more time. Think about for which cc r15 was designed and how long it took to finish an r15 back then with a 7740x... Which was at that time considerd a high end cpu... You fool no one, Roman! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l0ud_sil3nc3 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Fucking magic is coming! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Strunkenbold Posted January 17, 2020 Crew Share Posted January 17, 2020 Feel free to submit: https://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/ryzen_threadripper_3990x/ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l0ud_sil3nc3 Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 6 hours ago, Strunkenbold said: Feel free to submit: https://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/ryzen_threadripper_3990x/ 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumper118 Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Cinebench r15 extreme is on the list of benchmarks, how long does that take? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeph8n Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 57 minutes ago, Jumper118 said: Cinebench r15 extreme is on the list of benchmarks, how long does that take? It isn't released yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumper118 Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 20 minutes ago, keeph8n said: It isn't released yet How do you mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeph8n Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 59 minutes ago, Jumper118 said: How do you mean? The 3990X hasn't been released to the public yet. Therefor anyone who may or may not have one can't comment on its performance as its not available yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumper118 Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 hours ago, keeph8n said: The 3990X hasn't been released to the public yet. Therefor anyone who may or may not have one can't comment on its performance as its not available yet. Well someone could run on a 3970x and divide it by 2 to get a rough idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splave Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 r15 is 2s / r20 like 8s I'll try extreme tonight maybe easy to adapt to benchmate 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l0ud_sil3nc3 Posted February 6, 2020 Share Posted February 6, 2020 (edited) Run GB3 and after you wait and wait and wait for dj to pass, only then to get slayed by my boy ray then only then can you wish this one would finish quicker . . . but the best is the red X upon opening BM, nothing better than waiting 2+ minutes for a worthless run and that's if you even pass running the gauntlet. Edited February 6, 2020 by l0ud_sil3nc3 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_mat_ Posted February 6, 2020 Share Posted February 6, 2020 (edited) The red X is due to the many threads using a lot of timer calls during Geekbench, which had the possibility to colide inside BM's kernel driver and produce a skew error, which will ultimately get blocked. This has been already fixed of course, but not in BenchMate 0.9.3. This is exactly what happens when I'm not allowed to support Geekbench with the latest BenchMate versions. People go back using old versions with bugs that have already been fixed, mixing up BenchMate versions that leave artifacts due to crashing and inevitably fuck the installation up (unless you know what you are doing and remove the BenchMate services manually). Worst case scenarios that all fall back to BenchMate, exactly as I predicted. Geekbench needs to either allow the integration or lose its points. This is not fun for anyone of us. Edited February 6, 2020 by _mat_ 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l0ud_sil3nc3 Posted February 6, 2020 Share Posted February 6, 2020 24 minutes ago, _mat_ said: The red X is due to the many threads using a lot of timer calls during Geekbench, which had the possibility to colide inside BM's kernel driver and produce a skew error, which will ultimately get blocked. This has been already fixed of course, but not in BenchMate 0.9.3. This is exactly what happens when I'm not allowed to support Geekbench with the latest BenchMate versions. People go back using old versions with bugs that have already been fixed, mixing up BenchMate versions that leave artifacts due to crashing and inevitably fuck the installation up (unless you know what you are doing and remove the BenchMate services manually). Worst case scenarios that all fall back to BenchMate, exactly as I predicted. Geekbench needs to either allow the integration or lose its points. This is not fun for anyone of us. I completely understand that this is not a BM problem mat, it's a GB problem and due to the nature of Primate Labs not wanting to cooperate the only thing to do is ditch GB from all point rankings. I also never install multiple versions on the same system since you've mentioned early on this will lead to a bad time lol. The only issue I have ever had with BM is a hardware detection issue with super old vga cards and the solution is simple. . . change the vga :) Looking forward to v11 keep up the good work man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GeorgeStorm Posted February 6, 2020 Members Share Posted February 6, 2020 Or it keeps hwpoints as it's quite a popular bench, or it stays but isn't allowed to be run on win8/10, or maybe other options, no need to be so dramatic. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 6, 2020 Crew Share Posted February 6, 2020 GB will only keep hwpoints but that's it.... more than enough drama, no need to stir it up once more... changes changes changes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l0ud_sil3nc3 Posted February 6, 2020 Share Posted February 6, 2020 22 minutes ago, GeorgeStorm said: Or it keeps hwpoints as it's quite a popular bench, or it stays but isn't allowed to be run on win8/10, or maybe other options, no need to be so dramatic. Get rid of globals and hwpoints and we will see how popular it really is 4 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said: GB will only keep hwpoints but that's it.... more than enough drama, no need to stir it up once more... changes changes changes 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 6, 2020 Crew Share Posted February 6, 2020 Tell that to Judge Mohammed George.... I dare you ? HWboints will always be,, too many peeps spend time on this, no need to get that undone.... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex@ro Posted February 6, 2020 Share Posted February 6, 2020 20 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said: GB will only keep hwpoints but that's it.... more than enough drama, no need to stir it up once more... changes changes changes Eventually you will remove all tweakable benchmarks and let the click and run max freq wins only. It is not the first time you remove points for people that worked hard for them, i don't mean you Alby but hwbot. Why do you remove geekbench3 and not make a poll and vote for example. Also, has anyone else from hwbot beside _mat_ tried to reach geekbench developers? Every problem can be fixed with the right words, maybe he needs a little bit of tickling to make him cooperate lol. I'm just saying 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GeorgeStorm Posted February 6, 2020 Members Share Posted February 6, 2020 24 minutes ago, l0ud_sil3nc3 said: Get rid of globals and hwpoints and we will see how popular it really is Well yeah that applies to all benches really, but I was also meaning that I think people like the bench. Certainly true for myself, compared to others that also offer globals etc, I prefer gb Also of course, remember there's nothing forcing you guys to bench it if you don't like it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fasttrack Posted February 6, 2020 Share Posted February 6, 2020 I am one of the members that has invested lot of time in Geekbench 3 and 4. Possibly my opinion is not of high importance - I am an amateur bencher on DICE. One point that impresses the most is that top binners selling cpu's and mem sets, use Geekbench 3 to show to potential buyers what their HW can do ( especially memory sets ). Personally, two top sets that I have purchased from Michael ( @websmile ), one Galax HOF 2018 A1 and one G.Skill A2, were basically advertised using Geekbench 3. I have also paid for licences for all Geekbench benchmarks. I have no reason at all to interfere with _mat_'s work or Mr.Poole. I suppose I can see and understand both sides. Still, it is pretty annoying to remove global or HW points, when such popularity exists. Finally, is the final target of Benchmate to reach a point where, as @Alex@ro said, we "click and run " ? - ALL benchmarks. Pretty demotivating to say the least. Benchmate to replace or minimize moderators work ? Not my taste unfortunately Just my 2 cents folks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.