Intel Burn Test

File: 9690e031d671290a0a7b839ce808a5e7.png (204KB, 1597x626px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1597x626px

Good enough ig

File: 14029654142086.jpg (59KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 640x480px

>>55105912
>Tfw your CPU is more than 11x slower than this

Das a good score, mayne.

File: Capture.png (30KB, 511x360px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 511x360px

>>55105827

>Windows only
Wrong board, friend.

>you need to install .net framework 3.5!

Hello darkness, my old friend.

File: picture.png (3KB, 481x180px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 481x180px

I've got a pretty shitty CPU, but for its cost its bretty good. AMD Athlon II X2 B28

File: ibt.png (14KB, 482x330px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 482x330px

CPU cores reached 75C, CPU stayed 100Mhz above its regular clock speed, i7 4770.

>Intel burn test
Good goy

>>55106103
Of course everything is a Jewish conspiracy. How could it not be?

You should leave your basement sometime. It's a big world out there.

File: burntest.png (25KB, 560x863px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 560x863px

>>55105827
I want to try and delid this CPU.

>>55105912
>>55106379
Even a mild overclock of a 4770 clearly makes an enormous difference to performance. You're a full 20Gflops ahead of the firs guy.

File: jzXnAlk[1].png (261KB, 1381x698px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1381x698px

Temperature at about 50C after 4 runs.

>>55106397
Would't call that mild but yes, it's a really powerful CPU and usually overclocks like a dream. I lost in silicon lottery a bit. These aren't stable voltages for me while running something that really pushes the CPU like Prime95 max heat test. I'd need 1.40 V core or more. I haven't tried as the temps immediately jump to 100c if I do. Hence I want to delid this and apply liquid metal thermal paste to keep the temps in check and push it harder.

>>55106422
>50C
>1.472V core
How? What kind of cooling are you running?

>>55106460
Running a water loop with a Fractal Design S36 and an added EKWB XTX 240 radiator. Both only cooling the CPU.

>>55106460
You can probably get yourself to 120Gflops if you go ahead with delidding. It's not a scary or even risky process so long as you're careful and use the right tools for the job. If this is your only computer and your first attempt, you might want to practice on an old CPU that's broken or just really slow before doing it for real just to be safe.

File: liquid_pro.png (32KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 800x800px

>>55106503
I've decided that if I'm going to be delidding the CPU, I'll have to do it under the acceptance that if I broke something, I'm fine at purchasing a new CPU or mobo, CPU and RAM which I think I am already.

>>55106581
If you use the vice method it's pretty much impossible to fuck up.

>>55106589
That's what I'll be doing yes. Fuck it, ima order that paste right now and visit a buddy who has a vice to do it.

File: Capture.png (43KB, 1035x362px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 1035x362px

3930k at stock with h110 cooler

peaked at 64

>>55106602
Which one are you getting? I used Liquid Ultra on a 4690k and saw a drop of about 10-20C if I recall correctly.

File: ss+(2016-06-16+at+03.40.47).png (17KB, 486x331px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 486x331px

Old i5-3570k at 4.5GHz. Haven't reapplied paste in over 2 years, not sure If I can be arsed to remove the cooler

>>55106651
Liquid Pro most likely. Some graphs are showing next to no difference between Pro and Ultra though. Probably because the heat conductivity of both is more than good enough. I've seen similar as you are reporting from many places if you use the paste on a delidded CPU. Just replacing the stock paste on top of the heat spreader doesn't seem to do much.

>>55106701
There's a lot of variation in your scores. Might be time to reapply because that's outside normal variation ranges. Either that or you need to disable speedstep in BIOS to prevent unusually low scores resulting from dynamic clocks.

File: Untitled.png (117KB, 1110x560px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1110x560px

It kept jumping from 95 to 78 degrees

>>55106460
P95 is no way a real world scenario.

File: Burn Test 2.png (125KB, 1368x768px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1368x768px

I decided to give it a proper run on my tablet since the first time was only a single pass. Unsurprisingly, a passively cooled CPU under maximum load in a tiny plastic chassis will begin to thermal throttle quite quickly and performance dropped drastically once the heat started to build up.

Also, do not keep Speccy running during the test! If you open task manager with Speccy active you'll notice that it eats up a ton of CPU cycles that could have otherwise gone into increasing your score.

The scores in my pic may seem pretty low, but just a few years ago the first generation Atom N270 could only manage 0.4Gflops before it thermal throttled. These tiny passive computers have come a long way since those days in terms of performance.

File: Screenshot_2.png (361KB, 1082x501px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 1082x501px

is my cpu a shit?
>bout this computer off a friend cause he needed money and i was in need of a computer

>>55107089
It's not exactly a speed demon, but it'll do the job for most things you'll want to do. You should be able to edit HD videos and play fairly recent games on that machine provided you have a decent graphics card.

>>55105968
Yeah, don't use a functional OS, make sure you conform to a hodge podge of NSA developed standards and SystemD

File: Screenshot_3.png (167KB, 850x428px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 850x428px

>>55107176
all games rum preddy gud actually

>>55107089
for encoding videos or any software that can actually use all 8 cores correctly that thing is a beast.

Games with DX12 can use all eight cores correctly I believe. So make sure to upgrade to Windows 10 man.

>>55107212
b-but the botnet...

File: LoveMen.png (363KB, 1141x529px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1141x529px

Reached max 63 C.

>tfw 1080 delayed delivery until July

File: ibt2.png (207KB, 917x633px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 917x633px

I should replace my TX3 Evo with a proper cooler and push this baby to the max.

File: cpu.png (17KB, 493x346px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 493x346px

>>55105827
i5 4440, 45C

File: 5945679.png (31KB, 664x421px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 664x421px

4770 non-K, probably gonna replace it with a 4790K now that I don't need perfect VM CPU support

File: intelburntest.png (437KB, 980x503px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 980x503px

cpu temps max out at ~57C. can someone please tell me why the gflops are so low?

File: ibt.png (110KB, 874x408px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 874x408px

i5-6600k @ 4,7GHz

>>55106713
Holy shit this fucking post.

File: ibt.png (18KB, 482x330px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 482x330px

6700K @ 4.6

Could push it higher, but I'm pretty comfy at a low voltage.

File: Untitled.png (156KB, 907x476px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 907x476px

Ended at 70C, I've never seen it exceed that temperature.

It's more than enough for browsing and streaming. Even full hd youtube videos work without 100% cpu usage.

File: tvnviewer_2016-06-16_11-19-46.png (309KB, 1504x582px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 1504x582px

>several years old midrange desktop with 4770 beats my fairly new laptop with 6700HQ

File: 97b8f0aea75b1c5e24c00f0049a52cb8.png (19KB, 486x325px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 486x325px

4790k @ stock with a stock cooler

>>55108522
Desktops will always be superior to laptops though

>>55106103
Go back to /pol/

>>55105827
>have to install wangblows
Sorry

>>55108559
apparently so!

Pretty impressed that my old desktop is hanging in there

>>55108522
Because they're usually shitty mobile versions.

>>55108572
Go back to /oven/.

File: Screenshot (35).png (493KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 1920x1080px

How did I do?

>>55108642
it just twerks

File: Speccy.png (23KB, 496x434px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 496x434px

>>55108754
It does. Wonder when I will have to upgrade.

File: ss.jpg (357KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 1920x1080px

Temps were lower 60s

>>55108787
I have a i5 2400 and don't see the point in upgrading.

>>55108839
True at least not now, maybe for the 8th generation of chips.

File: Screenshot (39).png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

Did another test. Surprised at how low my voltage on my CPU is, but then again it is stock.

>>55108892
If zen is any good I'll consider going for something with moar cores.

File: asdf.jpg (151KB, 485x737px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 485x737px

70°C

File: test.png (419KB, 1129x898px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1129x898px

[email protected]

With Steam, SpeedFan, Logitech Gaming software and Corsairlink open.


If I close everything I can hit 120GFLops, temps just barely under control, but look at that voltage (VIN12) 1.432V thats was overboard to the 1.251V I have set on the bios.

>>55109024
Why? Zen IPC is still not gonna be great.

File: 2500k.jpg (70KB, 501x352px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 501x352px

2500k @ 4.5

>>55107743
anyone?? cpu-z benchmarks seem fine (2238 singlecore, 8751 multicore). Is this some kind of bug due to the non-k skyoc?

>>55109230
If you need moar cores without wanting to pay out your ass Zen might be just what you want.

>>55109301
But 4 is plenty

>>55109468
>my requirements should match your requirements

Okay m8

>>55109468
>But 4 is plenty

4u

>>55109468
Fuck off kid

>>55106994
Of course but I like to test my overclocks at the absolute worst case scenario and run them for least six hours before considering one stable.

>>55107036
jesus, I knew atoms were bad, but that's insane.

File: rip.png (28KB, 787x322px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 787x322px

2520m

File: Xeon IBT runs.png (69KB, 972x656px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 972x656px

Did 3 batches of 10 since each batch didnt take more than a couple of minutes. IBT apparently doesnt like hyperthreading.

File: image.jpg (60KB, 496x375px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 496x375px

Meanwhile my core 2 duo T6400 is 83 degrees

>>55107217
>botnet
Damn it son it's everywhere you can't hide from it

>>55110606
I'm gonna hazard a guess and say you haven't cleaned it?

File: BurnTest.png (132KB, 492x756px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 492x756px

My processor is good for awhile.

File: intelburn.png (596KB, 981x529px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 981x529px

fx-8320 @4.5 ghz, 1.35v
peaked at 44°C, room temp is 27°C
got a nepton 280l

File: ib.png (66KB, 531x371px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 531x371px

3570K 4.5GHz hit 70C

File: burnin.jpg (1MB, 2736x1824px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2736x1824px

Surface Pro 4 :(

File: Image2.png (238KB, 792x774px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 792x774px

80-86 GFlops. Not bad considering - this chip can't overclock for shit (needs 1.45V to reach 4.3GHz), so instead I undervolted it, since it's fast enough for anything I do.

>>55111166
oh, and I have a hyper212 set to low mode on it, plus it is delidded and has LiquidPro under the IHS.

>>55109831
OH look at you, what do you do that requires more than 4 core 8 threads faggot?
>>55109544
>>55109618
For 99% of /g/ it is. All you fuckers do is play vidya, program, and watch anime/porn.

File: burntest.png (13KB, 484x330px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 484x330px

6600K at stock

File: Screen Shot 2016-06-16 at 22.49.53.png (121KB, 734x672px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 734x672px

>>55105827 Why not use original linpack? https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-mkl-benchmarks-suite

File: Screenshot_36.png (17KB, 481x329px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 481x329px

fx 6300 at 4.4ghz

>>55111582
Absolutely disgusting

File: temps.png (666KB, 1441x887px) Image search: [Google]

666KB, 1441x887px

>temps go back to 50C seconds after stopping the test

File: still going stong after all these years.jpg (49KB, 496x341px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 496x341px

>>55105827
Phenom II 940 @3GHZ
Maybe I should finally overclock this thing, I've had it for ages but never bothered to do it.

>>55111582
>new AMD CPU is as fast as a Q6600 from 9 years ago

>>55111650
What is disgusting?

>>55111709
the scores

File: take out the trash.gif (382KB, 372x500px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 372x500px

>>55111696

>>55111703
>new Intel CPU is as fast as an Intel CPU from 5 years ago

>>55111696
Dont expect to get much more than 3.6-3.7 out of it and not without a fuckton of volts. C2 stepping phenom IIs werent the best overclockers.

>>55111703
>new
>fx 6300 release date: 2012

File: trump[1].jpg (28KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 640x400px

Does this test produce maximum heat for the CPU? Would I ever reach the same temperatures in games for instance as this test?

>>55111772
Yes. Most likely no.

>>55111721
>muh cores.
i cant believe a 6 core cpu clocked at 4.4 scored that low :O

File: ibt.png (31KB, 492x487px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 492x487px

I don't think my temps are representative of the cooler I have installed. Maybe I should reinstall it.

File: ibt.png (314KB, 1637x987px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 1637x987px

this shit got pretty hot

should I reduce my voltage/oc/get a new cooler?

>>55111837
i5 4690k
1.24v
btw

>>55111825
Although it did score higher than someone's 8320 at 4.5 up there.

>>55111859
Ok I just saw that. I dont think the test works well with amd cpus, the results seem very very poor.

File: burn i guess.png (14KB, 481x329px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 481x329px

A phenom.

>>55111913
It's either
a) _Intel_ burn test
b) lol AMD

File: asdf.png (19KB, 496x342px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 496x342px

>>55112010
Some more runs.

It's a [email protected] btw.

>>55111837
Kinda yeah

I have an average cooler and get 64° peak with my [email protected]@1.17

Isn't 72° already a critical temp for desktop haswells?

File: hf.png (13KB, 478x324px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 478x324px

[email protected]

>>55112428
wtf
how is this beaten by 4670 at 4.2 here >>55112054


and came close to by a 4690k at 4.4 here >>55112010

>>55112454
4690k here >>55111837*

>those AMD 4.5ghz monsters scoring 30 GFlops

What happened?

>>55112153
Na, they won't even return to their rated clocks until after 80C.

intel-burn-test
intel-burn-test: command not found

sudo apt-get install intel-burn-test
[sudo] password for anon: 
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
E: Unable to locate package intel-burn-test

How is do?

File: Untitled.png (34KB, 1152x648px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 1152x648px

i5 6600k at Stock

File: 1446245448049s.jpg (4KB, 123x125px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 123x125px

>>55112710
>apt-get
there's your problem

>>55105968
>one specific operating system isn't technology because I say it isn't
Wew lad.

File: bernvictim.png (77KB, 669x428px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 669x428px

>>55105827
witness me
6600k

File: Capture.png (43KB, 984x336px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 984x336px

stock 6600k and a 2540m.

>>55112983
what clock m80?

File: IntelBurn_Results.png (314KB, 929x641px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 929x641px

Bleh.

>>55112846
>>55113019
my 6600k can beat up your 6600k ;)

File: 1454196964413.jpg (28KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 400x400px

>>55113032
4.6

>>55113052
nice

>>55113049
to be fair my CPU was a little limited just as i remoted in to it. but it's not too bad though.

>>55113052
>>55113049
My 4690K can beat your 6600k (^: >>55109059

File: 1448418875239.jpg (10KB, 152x225px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 152x225px

>>55113088
Why do you fuckers run your K series at stock?

File: 1452403436606.jpg (42KB, 400x370px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 400x370px

>>55113105
Well hold on a damn minute, maybe if I ran 1.42v I could. I would probably hit 4.8 on that. Hold on.

>>55113111
i can't get the voltage offset to work and auto voltage goes too high for my liking.

File: 2016-06-16.png (19KB, 482x330px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 482x330px

6700 non-K

File: now what.png (74KB, 674x440px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 674x440px

>>55113105
ha

>>55113173
DELETE THIS

also
>one run

coward, fight like a man.

File: 1446242252978s.jpg (3KB, 125x93px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x93px

>>55113188
My pooter dosent like [email protected] I have a nhl-12 poop fan, which is not really good at all, idk.

File: hf2.png (102KB, 885x397px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 885x397px

>>55112454
>>55112428

[email protected] fixed.

RAM was at 1400Mhz(!) instead of 2400, had Asus auto overclock enabled instead of manual... Test run.

>>55113565
Hmm... a 4790K at 4.8GHz is still a way off a 6700K at 4.6GHz according to >>55108448

Would probably need 5GHz to match up I guess.

>>55113608
and yet literally every other evidence out there says the 4790k is better than the 6700k

>>55111913
>>55111954
Try it with that patch that changes the AuthenticAMD CPUID string to GenuineIntel. It is said a lot of apps get massive speedups that way, due to intel compilers cheating.

>>55113656
You're truly delusional if you believe that.

>>55113656
umm..no?

File: bticon.png (13KB, 481x329px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 481x329px

gg mining bitcoins for op
Xeon X5650

>>55113656
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sx1kLGVAF0

Nice meme.

>>55113608
Still not worth upgrading though. The 4790K is fine and will be fine for a long time to come.

>>55113656
Retard.

>intel burn test
people still using that 5 year old piece of shit?
there are way better benchmarks

File: 1453587188854.jpg (38KB, 465x600px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 465x600px

>>55113664
>Intel develops specialized instructions to optimize for the best performance

And somehow, it's all a conspiracy that AMD is incompetant

File: IBT.png (20KB, 482x330px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 482x330px

my poorfag 3570K @ 4.3

>>55113778
It isn't a benchmark, retard. It's a stress testing program, and still one of the best around.

My new i5 6500. It went up to 56C.

File: burntest.png (14KB, 482x330px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 482x330px

>>55113988
Forgot pic.

>>55112929
>not knowing this meme
Lad.... just... wew

I have an i7 3770k at 4,3.
Do you still want me to post?

>>55114133
I never wanted you to post

>>55108231
HAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHA

>>55108472
Fucking hell what a potato

File: Capture.png (39KB, 840x399px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 840x399px

Good enough for a cheap i5.

>4790k
>only getting like 101gflops

is my shit broken

>>55107743
>>55109249
I think that bclk overclock disables avx instruction set, so every program using that will run slower. Same thing happens to amd cpus which score poorly in this test because they lack avx. But you don't have to worry about it because very few programs can make use of that, so your gayms and video encodings are not affected and will receive the boost given by a 4.5ghz i5. If you are the kind of guy who is making use of avx you would also surely be aware that it isn't convenient putting that kind of workload on a overclocked consumer CPU and non-ECC ram

File: burn.png (29KB, 494x339px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 494x339px

How's this?

File: Untitled.png (461KB, 1155x819px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 1155x819px

Jamal'd this CPU from a school PC.

>>55106487

Then you are doing something wrong..

>>55107230
you file name makes sense after seeing what CPU u are running

>>55108642
I hope your family gets raped by Richard Stallionman for not using free software. He won't use a condom because they are proprietary.

File: giphy.gif (1MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x240px

>>55114957
thanks for the explanation smartfrend. I googled avx and bclk overclocking and it seems you are correct.