Welp, we are up past 25 entries, time for a new round??!!
PPL - Performance Per Liter, Round 2!
- Thread starter Duality92
- Start date
What about Cinebench R20 for CPU benchmarking?
Idk if there is a 'modern equivalent' to Time Spy, or just stay with it.
Idk if there is a 'modern equivalent' to Time Spy, or just stay with it.
Last edited:
If considering storage I wouldn't necessarily count storage performance since that typically doesn't have an impact on volume, but rather storage amount that does.
I agree about using newer Cinebench, R15 runs so quickly on modern high performance CPUs that when I did my submission I noticed that you could make an unrealistic tiny case with terrible cooling that would throttle like mad in sustained loads but finishes R15 quickly enough that it doesn't just for the purpose of ranking high.
I agree about using newer Cinebench, R15 runs so quickly on modern high performance CPUs that when I did my submission I noticed that you could make an unrealistic tiny case with terrible cooling that would throttle like mad in sustained loads but finishes R15 quickly enough that it doesn't just for the purpose of ranking high.
Last edited:
Also vote for R20, it's a must.
I vote against storage capacity or speed, each ITX board can fit m.2 drive, so it is not a matter of space optimization but only a matter of who can afford 2TB m.2 drive. Similar story for RAM.
GPU, CPU, and PSU to power all of that is where it's at for volume and space optimization.
I vote against storage capacity or speed, each ITX board can fit m.2 drive, so it is not a matter of space optimization but only a matter of who can afford 2TB m.2 drive. Similar story for RAM.
GPU, CPU, and PSU to power all of that is where it's at for volume and space optimization.
How about we fork this in to a several different competitions:
1. FPS per liter. For gaming machines. Where not the number of cores but the "per core frequency" is important.
2. Storage and streaming capacity per liter. For NAS that can do streaming (Plex, Emby). There can be a lot of fun with GPU and CPU based trans-coding. OS and file systems.
3. Compute per liter. Where sustain CPU + GPU compute power should be important.
I think that will provide knowledge and fun for a lot more people.
1. FPS per liter. For gaming machines. Where not the number of cores but the "per core frequency" is important.
2. Storage and streaming capacity per liter. For NAS that can do streaming (Plex, Emby). There can be a lot of fun with GPU and CPU based trans-coding. OS and file systems.
3. Compute per liter. Where sustain CPU + GPU compute power should be important.
I think that will provide knowledge and fun for a lot more people.
@Aux : Thanks for catching my graphics score mistake.(I used total score)
Edit: Also, I guess you can remove my old score. It's #18 now.
no worries
its ok, its a record of peoples computer building over the last year and a half . . . its interesting to see the changes
Nope.It is X instead of K
pure R7 2700
2700X is 105W TDP and can not be properly cooled by an NH-L9a. And was more expensive.
You got 3 CCD MI-6 up there. Well done, I'd say.
Wow, that is impressive. How long can you run it with a 48mm cooler?
My next dream build is a 3900X, but I thought it would need a 65 or 70mm or H2O...
48mm? The 645LT is an AIO.
I was dailying with that setup (for portability) but I would by lying if I said I was 100% satisfied with the thermals.
I was dailying with that setup (for portability) but I would by lying if I said I was 100% satisfied with the thermals.
I need portability and power . . . just not so many cpu cores. . . the thermals are always killing me in my case I have designed . . struggling to get it to cool
So for the next round?
Cinebench R20 for CPU benchmarking
3. Compute per liter. Where sustain CPU + GPU compute power should be important.
This is my area of interest, more single core than multi core
Similar threads
