 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I added a 2.8Ghz 6 core i5 to the farm this week.
( http://www.buckosoft.com/bsac/meta/ )
$500 including a nice 23" HD monitor.
I expected it to be slighty faster than my 3.4 Ghz i7 (4 core/8 thread)
and 50% faster than my (3) 3.2Ghz 4 core i5s.
No.
It is 50% faster than my i7 and more than twice as fast as my other i5(s).
I'm not complaining ( :) ) but sheesh. Shouldn't intel call this an i6
or something? Clearly it is a newer/faster breed than the other boxes
that have an i5. It seems that intel is really underselling themselves
here.
--
dik
Rendered 920576 of 921600 pixels (99%)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.08.2018 um 05:26 schrieb dick balaska:
> I'm not complaining ( :) ) but sheesh. Shouldn't intel call this an i6
> or something? Clearly it is a newer/faster breed than the other boxes
> that have an i5. It seems that intel is really underselling themselves
> here.
The digit behind the "i" has nothing to do with absolute computing
power, and instead denotes the marketing segment the CPU is designed
for: office/low-end (i3), mid-range (i5), high-end (i7) or
super-high-end (i9). As CPU power increases in general over time, so
does the CPU power in each marketing segment.
You /can/ be reasonably sure that e.g. a brand-spanking-new i7
- does more computations per second
- eats up more Watts per computation
- eats up more dollars per computations per second
than an equally brand-spanking-new i5, but that's about it.
Intel has moved away from trying to convey absolute computing power in
their CPU names; and rightly so, I think, because the performance of
modern CPUs greatly depends on the application to be executed: For some
applications brute integer computing power is key, for others it is
brute floating point computing power, for yet others it is vector
computing power, and for some it is branch prediction; for some the
speed of the cache is key, for others it is the size of the cache, for
yet others it is sequential access RAM performance, and for some it is
random access RAM performance; for some the speed of the individual
cores is key, for others it is the combined speed of the physical cores,
and some benefit from hyperthreading while others don't. There's so much
you can optimize in a modern CPU to get better performance for /some/
applications that the idea of naming CPUs according to their performance
is moot these days.
Not to mention that pure computing speed has long ceased to be
everything that matters in comparing CPUs. Fiscal efficiency - i.e. how
many computations per second you get per buck - has probably been a
factor as long as computers exist, and energy efficiency - i.e. how many
computations you get per Watt - is becoming ever more important.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 21/08/2018 à 05:26, dick balaska a écrit :
> I added a 2.8Ghz 6 core i5 to the farm this week.
> ( http://www.buckosoft.com/bsac/meta/ )
> $500 including a nice 23" HD monitor.
>
>
> I expected it to be slighty faster than my 3.4 Ghz i7 (4 core/8 thread)
> and 50% faster than my (3) 3.2Ghz 4 core i5s.
>
> No.
>
> It is 50% faster than my i7 and more than twice as fast as my other i5(s).
>
> I'm not complaining ( :) ) but sheesh. Shouldn't intel call this an i6
> or something? Clearly it is a newer/faster breed than the other boxes
> that have an i5. It seems that intel is really underselling themselves
> here.
>
Was this speed measured with povray benchmark ?
Same binary ?
What about the memory speed ? (and CL values)
Beware of the cache effect.
From an old i7 measure (on i7-980X), thread without core are between
20% and 25% of thread with core, when rendering with 3.7.
Not only the new generation is faster, it is also smaller and use less
power. Yet no one wants to break the 4GHz barriers.
(but on the other hand, the new generation has a backdoor on the
network, even in suspended state and it cannot be closed)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.08.2018 um 13:08 schrieb Le Forgeron:
> From an old i7 measure (on i7-980X), thread without core are between 20%
> and 25% of thread with core, when rendering with 3.7.
I guess you mean, "thread with virtual core" (i.e. hyperthreading) and
"thread with physical core".
A literal "thread without core" (setting `+wt` higher than the number of
virtual cores) will typically give you 0% performance gain (or even a
performance loss) in POV-Ray.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/21/2018 07:08 AM, Le Forgeron wrote:
> Was this speed measured with povray benchmark ?
> Same binary ?
Same binary. Not the benchmark, building frames for my animation.
>
> What about the memory speed ? (and CL values)
> Beware of the cache effect.
I don't care about any of that. All I care is that POV-Ray finishes
twice as fast. :)
>
> From an old i7 measure (on i7-980X), thread without core are between 20%
> and 25% of thread with core, when rendering with 3.7.
Yes, I typically see around 20% increase in throughput with my i7 vs. an
i5. It *can* float to near 100% on occasion, depending on what I'm
looking at. One thing I always thought odd, my kitchen volcano scene,
where I'm looking at the floor (superellipsoid tiles with a box for
grout) the i7 is actually 5-10% slower than an i5.
(This floor: http://www.buckosoft.com/tteoac/video/frames/ttko0524.png )
>
> Not only the new generation is faster, it is also smaller and use less
> power. Yet no one wants to break the 4GHz barriers.
I've noticed a Ghz decrease in my last couple of boxes. From 3.4Ghz to
3.0Ghz and now 2.8Ghz. Certainly that will run "cooler".
The box is in the living room and is silent, as opposed to my i7 which
has dual fans that have a teeth-floating harmonic.
> (but on the other hand, the new generation has a backdoor on the
> network, even in suspended state and it cannot be closed)
um...
--
dik
Rendered 920576 of 921600 pixels (99%)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/20/2018 11:26 PM, dick balaska wrote:
> I added a 2.8Ghz 6 core i5 to the farm this week.
> ( http://www.buckosoft.com/bsac/meta/ )
> $500 including a nice 23" HD monitor.
>
$500 for the whole computer, or just the CPU + monitor?
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/21/2018 11:03 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
> On 8/20/2018 11:26 PM, dick balaska wrote:
>> I added a 2.8Ghz 6 core i5 to the farm this week.
>> ( http://www.buckosoft.com/bsac/meta/ )
>> $500 including a nice 23" HD monitor.
>>
>
> $500 for the whole computer, or just the CPU + monitor?
>
>
> Mike
Best Buy. $519. 12GB RAM 1TB hard drive.
--
dik
Rendered 920576 of 921600 pixels (99%)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/22/2018 2:27 AM, dick balaska wrote:
> On 08/21/2018 11:03 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>> On 8/20/2018 11:26 PM, dick balaska wrote:
>>> I added a 2.8Ghz 6 core i5 to the farm this week.
>>> ( http://www.buckosoft.com/bsac/meta/ )
>>> $500 including a nice 23" HD monitor.
>>>
>>
>> $500 for the whole computer, or just the CPU + monitor?
>>
>>
>> Mike
>
> Best Buy. $519. 12GB RAM 1TB hard drive.
>
Do you have a link? There are some good deals at BB in a "salvage parts
from an old PC to help build a new one" sense. I.e. I have an SSD and
graphics card already that I could put into one of these machines.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/22/2018 06:18 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
> On 8/22/2018 2:27 AM, dick balaska wrote:
>> On 08/21/2018 11:03 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>>> On 8/20/2018 11:26 PM, dick balaska wrote:
>>>> I added a 2.8Ghz 6 core i5 to the farm this week.
>>>> ( http://www.buckosoft.com/bsac/meta/ )
>>>> $500 including a nice 23" HD monitor.
>>>>
>>>
>>> $500 for the whole computer, or just the CPU + monitor?
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>> Best Buy. $519. 12GB RAM 1TB hard drive.
>>
>
> Do you have a link? There are some good deals at BB in a "salvage parts
> from an old PC to help build a new one" sense. I.e. I have an SSD and
> graphics card already that I could put into one of these machines.
>
>
> Mike
Pretty weird. This is the box I bought, the link is from my history.
But, I did *not* pay $800 with monitor. I would have gone for a lesser
machine.
Technically, the machine is for the 6 year old to play minecraft. :)
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/dell-inspiron-desktop-intel-core-i5-12gb-memory-1tb-hard-drive-black-with-silver-trim/6228201.p?skuId=6228201
--
dik
Rendered 920576 of 921600 pixels (99%)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/23/2018 06:07 AM, dick balaska wrote:
>
>
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/dell-inspiron-desktop-intel-core-i5-12gb-memory-1tb-hard-drive-black-with-silver-trim/6228201.p?skuId=6228201
>
"Smart six-core, twelve-way processing performance"
No it doesn't.
$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-8400 CPU @ 2.80GHz
cpu MHz : 3799.999
cache size : 9216 KB
siblings : 6
cpu cores : 6
My 4 core / 8 thread i7
$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz
cpu MHz : 3492.055
cache size : 8192 KB
siblings : 8
cpu cores : 4
--
dik
Rendered 920576 of 921600 pixels (99%)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
