Featured Articles

5th Generation Broadwell 14nm family comes in three lines

5th Generation Broadwell 14nm family comes in three lines

Intel's 5th Core processor family, codenamed Broadwell, will launch in three lines for the mobile segment. We are talking about upcoming…

More...
Broadwell Chromebooks coming in late Q1 2015

Broadwell Chromebooks coming in late Q1 2015

Google's Chromebook OS should be updating automatically every six weeks, but Intel doesn't come close with its hardware refresh schedule.

More...
New round of Nexus phone rumour kicks off

New round of Nexus phone rumour kicks off

Rumours involving upcoming Nexus devices are nothing uncommon, but this year there is a fair bit of confusion, especially on the…

More...
Nvidia officially launches the 8-inch Shield Tablet

Nvidia officially launches the 8-inch Shield Tablet

As expected and reported earlier, Nvidia has now officially announced its newest Shield device, the new 8-inch Shield Tablet. While the…

More...
Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool is well known for its gamer cases with aggressive styling. However, the Dead Silence chassis offers consumers a new choice,…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Monday, 09 May 2011 11:02

Intel Sandy Bridge put to the test - Benchmarks

Written by Eliot Kucharik
i3i5i7_small recommended08_75

Review:
Intel's new generation sees the light

 

Benchmarks:


All benchmarks are 64bit applications. We deviated from the benchmarks by using more cpu-intensive applications, so we hope WinRAR and TrueCrypt will give you a better idea. All benches with AVX optimizations show a rather dramatically improve of performance especially compared to its predecessor or AMD. TrueCrypt also supports AES-NI, but Intel has fused off these extensions on the 2100T which hurt the CPU dramatically but at least you get the new AVX instruction set.

CineBench R11.5:
As you can see, AVX support does show.

SandyBridge_CB

SandyBridge_CBOGL

 

Farcry2:
We stayed with the FarCry2 Benchmark, but now with DX10. As you can see even with 1920x1080 and ultrahigh settings, the GPU reaches its limit and there is almost no difference between stock speeds on a i7-2600K and 4.8GHz. Still, even a 2100T offers very playable framerates but the same is valid for the L3 cacheless quad core AMD Phenom X4 840.

SandyBridge_FarCry2

 

x264:
As usual Hyperthreading does hurt performance with a CPU with four cores and HT enabled in the first pass. In the second pass HT does help and HT enabled/disabled reach nearly the same results. If you have a batch to encode, we would recommend to disable HT for the first pass and after finishing, enable HT and do all second passes. In our slow test we use a GPU filter, which runs completely inside the graphics card and loads our 6870 with about 50%. A faster card may gain you some fps but the 6870 was sufficient. We stayed with our Babylon 5 DVD episode and will list the settings we used. For these benches, we used build 1913 of x264 64-bit edition but increased the bitrate to 1220Mbps. Of course encoding 720p or 1080p material will slow down the encoding considerably - 720p will be about 45% while 1080p would end up with about 16.6% speed of the DVD encoding. We ran this bench three times and used the fastest result.

fast.avs:
# PLUGINS
LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth 2.5\plugins64\DGDecode.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth 2.5\plugins64\LeakKernelDeint.dll")
# SOURCE
MPEG2Source("D:\work\b5_64bit.d2v")
# FILTERS
LeakKernelDeint(order=1)

fast encode:
x264_x64_1913 --pass 1 --bitrate 1220 --stats "D:\work\b5_x64_fast.stats" --quiet --profile high --preset fast --tune film --bframes 16 --b-pyramid strict --direct auto --sar 16:11 --threads 4 --thread-input --frames 62932 --output NUL "D:\work\B5_x64_4_fast.avs"
x264_x64_1913 --pass 2 --bitrate 1220 --stats "D:\work\b5_x64_fast.stats" --quiet --profile high --preset fast --tune film --bframes 16 --b-pyramid strict --direct auto --sar 16:11 --threads 4 --thread-input --frames 62932 --output "D:\work\B5-x264-fast.mp4" "D:\work\B5_x64_4_fast.avs"

slow.avs:
# PLUGINS
LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth 2.5\plugins64\DGDecode.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth 2.5\plugins64\Undot.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth 2.5\plugins64\FFT3DGPU.dll")
LoadCPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth 2.5\plugins64\Yadif.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth 2.5\plugins64\TIVTC.dll")
# SOURCE
MPEG2Source("D:\work\b5_64bit.d2v")
# FILTERS
tfm(d2v="D:\work\b5_64bit.d2v")
MT("Yadif(mode=0,order=1)",4,4)
MT("Undot()",4,4)
FFT3DGPU(bt=4,sigma=2,precision=2,mode=2,bw=48,bh=48)

slow encode:
x264_x64_1913 --pass 1 --bitrate 1220 --stats "D:\work\B5-AVC-slow.stats" --quiet --profile high --preset fast --tune film --rc-lookahead 64 --bframes 16 --b-pyramid strict --direct auto --sar 16:11 --threads 4 --thread-input --frames 62932 --output NUL "D:\work\B5_x64_4_slow.avs"
x264_x64_1913 --pass 2 --bitrate 1220 --stats "D:\work\B5-AVC-slow.stats" --quiet --profile high --preset fast --tune film --rc-lookahead 64 --bframes 16 --b-pyramid strict --direct auto --sar 16:11 --threads 4 --thread-input --frames 62932 --output "D:\work\B5-x264-slow.mp4" "D:\work\B5_x64_4_slow.avs"

Even with AVX extensions the i3-2100T can't cope with the L3-cacheless Phenom II X4 which is surprising. With real four cores Intel leads way ahead, but with AMD optimizing the Phenoms aren't that bad either.

SandyBridge_x264

 

TureCrypt:
TrueCrypt is a very CPU intensive program. It encrypts parts of your HDD and can slow down your HDD performance considerably. With the i5 and higher you have AES-NI extensions which will enable the program to use special instructions for en- and decrypting. We used AES-Twofish, which needs AES and CPU-power. The i3 Series does not offer AES which shows. Even a Phenom II 840 without L3 cache and without AES is nearly twice as fast.

SandyBridge_TrueCrypt

 

WinRAR:
WinRAR is one of the most popular compression programs and since version 3.90, it supports multi-threading and 64bit. The results seem to indiciate it's optimized for Intel. We used various files, mostly our benches which consist of 6849 files and 408 directories weighing in at 724MB.

SandyBridge_Winrarbench

 

SandyBridge_RARenc

 

SandyBridge_RARdec

 

Lame:
We also stayed with LAME, but this time we compared single threaded vs. dual threaded. Unfortunately, there is no encoder which can really do multi-threading encoding. You may encode two, four, six or even eight files in a batch, so one file per core, but it's not the same compared to real multi-threading.

SandyBridge_Lame

 

 

 

(Page 5 of 7)
Last modified on Tuesday, 10 May 2011 02:44
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments