Post your Cinebench score

Shane

Shane

Super Moderator
Staff member
Hey guys,

We have"Post your 3D Mark 06" and "Post your Super Pi" so thought we could have a "Post your Cinebench score"

Exept, this post will not have a score system like the above threads mentioned do,Your probably thinking well whats the point?

Just so that we can compare our system scores to others,we dont realy need a ranking system its just for a general idea :)

And not only that ranking systems are a nightmare because you have to keep updating them all the time :D

What is CINEBENCH?

CINEBENCH is a real-world test suite that assesses your computer's performace capabilities. MAXON CINEBENCH is based on MAXON's award-winning animation software CINEMA 4D, which is used extensively by studios and production houses worldwide for 3D content creation. MAXON software has been used in blockbuster movies such as Spider-Man, Star Wars, The Chronicles of Narnia and many more.
Click to expand...

Download here,

http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/Benchmarks/CINEBENCH.shtml

It includes the 32 bit or 64 bit version of Cinebench,No need to install.

Please provide screenshots as proof to your score.


Please run the "Start all tests" on the left side of the application like pictured.

settings.jpg


Then post your final score like this :)

score-1.jpg


Thanks all :)
 
CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************

Tester : Chibici Tiberiu

Processor : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.06GHz
MHz :
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : WINDOWS 32 BIT 5.1.2600

Graphics Card : ATI Radeon 9550 / X1050 Series
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 1258 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 1796 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.43

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 992 CB-GFX


****************************************************
 
Here's my first submission from the new processor. Got another 4870 on the way to crossfire to take a shot at the top 10, or maybe 5, on the 3DMark thread. Am gonna need another cooler to get up in the 4.3-4.4 range though.

Cinebench.jpg
 
Bodaggit23 said:
Cinebench.jpg
Click to expand...

thats strange... with your pc, you have four cores. in a perfect scanario, those cores would each be 1ghz and be perfectly efficient, putting out 1x each. but with yours, the four cores end up with 4.1x. the cores working together actually makes them faster?

whats also strange is how you managed to get a 5900 gfx with a GTX260 when my 8800gt gets 5750
 
Last edited:
lovely? said:
thats strange... with your pc, you have four cores. in a perfect scanario, those cores would each be 1ghz and be perfectly efficient, putting out 1x each. but with yours, the four cores end up with 4.1x. the cores working together actually makes them faster?

whats also strange is how you managed to get a 5900 gfx with a GTX260 when my 8800gt gets 5750
Click to expand...

His cores are at 3.43 Ghz, not 1Ghz. Also,it's an i7 so its got the magic juice. :D Maybe has something to do with the hyperthreading...i dunno.

Also, I hope someone with a Phenom 2 would do this, it would be interesting to see how they bench with software 3D rendering.
 
Last edited:
gamerman4 said:
His cores are at 3.43 Ghz, not 1Ghz. Also,it's an i7 so its got the magic juice. :D Maybe has something to do with the hyperthreading...i dunno.

Also, I hope someone with a Phenom 2 would do this, it would be interesting to see how they bench with software 3D rendering.
Click to expand...

i didnt literally mean his were 1ghz... what i meant, was if you add his 1ghz cores together, they would equal 4 not 4.11 lol.
 
lovely? said:
i didnt literally mean his were 1ghz... what i meant, was if you add his 1ghz cores together, they would equal 4 not 4.11 lol.
Click to expand...

Multithreading doesn't work like that. The performance shown in this benchmark reflects that because 3D rendering is infinitely thread-able with very little overhead. Under normal circumstances, a quad core at 1Ghz would not equal a 4Ghz cpu.
Also, the 4.11x discrepancy could be caused by variations in the core speeds. Even on the same CPU, different cores will have variations in their speed which can reflect in benchmarks. If the single-threaded benchmark used a core that was slower than the other cores, the multi-threaded result could easily reach above 4x. Also the hyper-threading probably helps as well.
 
gamerman4 said:
Multithreading doesn't work like that. The performance shown in this benchmark reflects that because 3D rendering is infinitely thread-able with very little overhead. Under normal circumstances, a quad core at 1Ghz would not equal a 4Ghz cpu.
Also, the 4.11x discrepancy could be caused by variations in the core speeds. Even on the same CPU, different cores will have variations in their speed which can reflect in benchmarks. If the single-threaded benchmark used a core that was slower than the other cores, the multi-threaded result could easily reach above 4x. Also the hyper-threading probably helps as well.
Click to expand...

lol nevermind, its hopeless :rolleyes:
 
Phenom II X4 965 @ 3.617 Ghz

Also, I hope someone with a Phenom 2 would do this, it would be interesting to see how they bench with software 3D rendering.
Click to expand...

Ask and ye shall receive...

Phenom II X4 965 @ 3.617Ghz
4870 1GB 790Mhz/1100Mhz
2 x 2GB Mushkin @ 1600 7-7-7-27
 

Attachments

  • Capture.JPG
    Capture.JPG
    36.6 KB · Views: 30
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top