Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Core i7 6800K Benchmarks On Ubuntu + Linux 4.8

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Michael do you know for which kernel turbo boost max 3 patches are available?

    I got a 6900k if you want it's data too I can provide you with a test.

    Comment


    • #12
      Is AMD ZEN even meant to compete with intels highend market control?

      Comment


      • #13
        There's good evidence that electrostatic discharge (ESD) damage may not show up immediately but can take some time. When the manufacturer subsequently looks at a failed part under a microscope, they see that the ESD caused some damage to the semiconductor around the wire bonding point, which then progresses to a failure due to thermal cycling stress, or electromigration effects.

        So if you find you get failed components for no good reason, quite a while after building or working on the computer, it could be the latent ESD damage.
        linux addict, got the scars, the grey beard and the t-shirt.

        Comment


        • #14
          Now, you might ask "don't these components have some anti-static protection", and yes they try and protect them, BUT, when you consider the signal frequencies - many gigahertz (a 2GHz square wave has odd harmonics so there will be 10GHz components) - it's hard to block the spikey ESD pulses without "damaging" the signals.
          linux addict, got the scars, the grey beard and the t-shirt.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Thaodan View Post
            Michael do you know for which kernel turbo boost max 3 patches are available?

            I got a 6900k if you want it's data too I can provide you with a test.
            it's on my TODO list tomorrow to play with the patches.
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #16
              humm.. how can some test run better with lower speed ram ? is there any explanation why ddr 2133 can do better than the very same with dd 2400 or do i miss read some test ?

              Comment


              • #17
                Michael : why are the test results "reversed"?
                We now have better systems at the bottom and slowest at top... added to the smallest "Lower is better" possible it it really, really misleading...
                Interresting results anyway.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by gadnet View Post
                  humm.. how can some test run better with lower speed ram ? is there any explanation why ddr 2133 can do better than the very same with dd 2400 or do i miss read some test ?
                  Possibly because 2133 has lower latency which is more important in some tests.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    I run your test on my MSI notebook with i7-5700HQ and the results are little surprised to me.

                    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...BATH-160926937

                    It is mobile processor, one year older than i7-6800k with lower turbo speed (3.5GHz vs 3.6 GHz), lower cache (6MB vs 15MB) and for some tests my CPU is winner and for some tests the results are almost the same. I cannot fully explain it to me - maybe it shows, that new processors have only slight performance grow (which is not good and maybe it shows, that there is almost no difference between desktop vs mobile processors in case of speed of core.
                    What do you think about this?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X