Intel Core i5 750, Core i7 870 Linux Benchmarks

[AdrenalineJunky]

Well maybe you need a much better cpu cooler to enable higher turbo boost or the bios is bad. Maybe there is a newer beta one.

since you meantioned you didn't read what the problem was

enabling turbo boost led to erratic/poor performace, test results varied greatly from one run to the next and all of them were worse then with it off. also the cpu wasn't actually scaling up like it should (thats what micheal had happen any)

[Kano]

Thats not really logical to me when this would be a Win only feature. That is not really predictable that is partly clear as it depends on the core temp.

[justapost]

Updated the bios to the lates available version..

Then I played with Turbo, C-State and Eist settings. For the higher turbomodes in windows all C-State options must be enabled. Without turbo behaves like I thought it behaved under linux yesterday and the max multi was 21x (2.8GHz).
Looking at the linux results it seem higher multis where in effect yesterday but the correct frequencies are not reported under /proc/cpuinfo.
With EIST/Turbo and CS off the result looks like 2.66GHz. Once I enable Turbo but leave C-States disabled it looks moore like 2.8GHz and with C-States enabled the frequency should have been 3.2GHz.

11.46*2.66GHz = 30.48
10.91*2.8GHz = 30.54
9.55*3.2GHz = 30.56

A sidenote, results are repeatable here.

[Kano]

Could you do 7zip benchmarks? I like those as they are really fast to test - maybe with EIST on too.

[justapost]

The system is busy running universe-cli here atm, but 7zip already ran.

i5 750 Turbo/CS/Eist On: 8647,66 MIPS
955BE CnQ On: 7553.00 MIPS

[Kano]

64 bit i guess, that's intersting my 3.16 s775 cpu beats that.

http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=kano-11623-26178-18490

[justapost]

He He you ran the pts-livecd. Can it be your test file was on a ramdisk.

Update: Can't be looking at the second result. 8GB may have an impact.

Found those intel results.

http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=powtrix-22206-11719-16230

I need 3.8GHz on the 955BE with 8GB ram to reach your results.

http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=justapost-6742-23762-13556

[Kano]

That was a test PTS vs. Kanotix 64 Excalibur. Kanotix was faster in that one, but slower in some others. Btw. i have got results with 3.8 GHz too.

http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=kano-12032-23210-22346

http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=kano-6627-14842-17066

To be fair, the EIST was enabled in BIOS, but Linux was set to use performance mode.

[justapost]

Thank you for the 3.8GHz data, I like comparisons.

Here are a few more results, this time universe-cli.

http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=justapost-5358-5083-22089

Currently I run the first serie again with C-States And C-Satetes+Turbo disabled. Will have to rerun the test with both enabled because the newer bios runs with an slightly higher BCLK (~136MHz vs. ~133MHz).
One of those nas benchmarks (IS.c) cause the system to hang, once during the 955BE test and once during the i5 750 test with C-States disabled.

[justapost]

Enough for today.

http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=justapost-18550-16695-143

I ran with Turbo and C-States enabled twice, to show the results are consistent. Also I ran with C-States disabled, which means the cpu ran at 2.8GHz and also in addition with turbo disabled.

In the comparison I used the reciprocal for time results and calculated the score increase over the 955 results for each test and average over all results.



Overall with that selection of benchmarks an 955BE performs like an i5 750 at ~2.75GHz. I do not think this selection is representative for daily usage.