graysky Posted October 3, 2007 Posted October 3, 2007 (edited) Thanks for the data... don't melt your CPU Edited October 3, 2007 by graysky Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graysky Posted October 30, 2007 Posted October 30, 2007 Updated the Intel table. It now contains several Yorkfield ES chips including: Xeon E5330 (Dual board) Q9550 Q9350 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardnrg Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 CPU: E6600 @ 8x445=3560 Chipset: nVidia 680i RAM: 2x1GB @ 445, 4-3-3-10-2T OS: XP Pro SP2 ---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 103.36 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 103.84 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 103.64 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 103.64 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 103.55 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 25.00 fps, 1826.37 kb/s ---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 25.02 fps, 1826.36 kb/s ---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 25.03 fps, 1826.38 kb/s ---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 25.06 fps, 1826.26 kb/s ---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 25.06 fps, 1826.36 kb/s nice, from a 68.90, 16.59 on my Opteron 170 to a 103.71, 25.05 on my E6600, a 51% increase in x264 encoding power Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graysky Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 Got it, thanks for the data! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdingeling Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 E6400 @ 3.2GHz Gigabyte GA-965P-DS4 (Intel P965 Express) 2x1GB Mushkin HP2-6400 @ 400MHz @ 4-4-4-11-2T Gigabyte HD2900XT 512MB Windows XP Pro SP2 ---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 87.93 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 87.86 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 88.21 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 88.14 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 88.14 fps, 1850.89 kb/s ---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 21.69 fps, 1826.26 kb/s ---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 21.65 fps, 1826.37 kb/s ---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 21.68 fps, 1826.37 kb/s ---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 21.68 fps, 1826.37 kb/s ---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG encoded 1749 frames, 21.71 fps, 1826.21 kb/s Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graysky Posted November 21, 2007 Posted November 21, 2007 Updated the tables with another 45 nm chip: the QX9650 -- both at stock levels and @ overclocked to 4.2 GHz! With it, and the others (Xeon E5330 (Dual board), Q9550, and Q9350) there is now data on 4 different 45 nm chips. One thing that I found striking about these new chips is that they are only marginally faster than their 65 nm counterparts when encoding x264 (about 5-6 % faster with all other factors being equal or close to equal). Have a look at the general trends table for the Kentsfield vs. Yorkfield comparison at the official host. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philbrown23 Posted November 21, 2007 Posted November 21, 2007 I put together a self-contained x264 video encoding benchmark. Techarp kindly agreed to host the file and results at this URL. Basically, you run the test encode and it will report back frames-per-second values for your machine @ it's clock/overclock level. You can run it at your stock settings and at your overclock settings to see how your machine compares to others in the database. The database is small right now (as of 08-sep), but as you guys report in results, I will populate it. My goal is to have a representative set of data for many different chips and chipsets. Hopefully, we'll get some Penryn and Phenom data when they become available. Also, if anyone out here has some of the high end AMD chips, please contribute. Instructions and the file are at that url. Also, please report your results here in this thread. I will keep the data at that url to keep things simple. Thanks all. For some reason my pc won't let it run???? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graysky Posted November 21, 2007 Posted November 21, 2007 For some reason my pc won't let it run???? Did you read the first section of the FAQ, odds are it's one of those 3 things. Also, you'll need to give me a little more info as to what's going wrong. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graysky Posted February 24, 2008 Posted February 24, 2008 First off, thanks to all who contributed data. 24-Feb-2008 - Finally updated the data tables on the x264 benchmark page. They are now html based (not .gif images) which makes my life updating them much easier and I will keep this tables up-to-date daily as people post results. Have a look at the 'Data Tends' table that contains a look at the Phenom quad vs. both Kentfield and Yorkfield quads. There are also some comparisons of Wolfdale dual vs. Conroe dual, and some other good stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now