Silly Cpu Chart

M

Mishkin

New Member
Was bored, so decided to make a little chart of some common processors since the time of the Pentium 4. I used the cpu benchmarks found on Tom's hardware to do this, and gave the processors a Ghz speed based off the Intel Pentium 4 3.00Ghz processor. (score of 491) I simply divided each processor's score by 491 to tell me how many times faster it was than the P4 3.0Ghz base. Then I took that number and multiplied it by 3 to find its "Ghz."

Now obviously, the Ghz speeds of current processors is completely correct, however much the architecture and supporting components have changed. Modern-day cpus do not run at 50 or 60 Ghz. This is just a simple chart where I translated the processor scores into Ghz, based on the Pentium 4. Many of these processors will score differently in relation to each other, depending on which specific benchmark you run - in part due to how many cores it has and how many cores a specific program or game can utilize and in what way. Obviously, there are simply way too many variables at play to consider the below chart to be at all viable. The only real value of the below chart, when considering the Ghz speeds, would be the processors' relation to each other concerning this one benchmark. However, I figured it would be a decent rough indicator of each processor's power, albeit with many exceptions and conditional factors, such as multiple cores or usage.

Note: I favor AMD cpus as I'm much more familiar with them than Intel. I am well aware that Intel completely dominates the high-end market right now, and have obviously left out many processors. The processors I have picked are merely ones I am more familiar with and/or are interested in. My selections are in no way an implication of anything.

Intel Core i7 980X --------------------64.86 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T-------------38.70 Ghz
Intel Core i7 870---------------------37.38 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T-------------37.08 Ghz
Intel Core i7 930---------------------35.67 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X6 1075T-------------35.64 Ghz
Intel Core i7 920---------------------34.02 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T-------------31.77 Ghz
Intel Core2 Quad Q9650--------------28.23 Ghz
Intel Core i5 760---------------------27.99 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X4 975---------------27.42 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X4 970---------------27.21 Ghz
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550--------------26.73 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X4 965---------------26.16 Ghz
Intel Core2 Quad Q9450--------------24.63 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X4 955---------------24.12 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X4 840---------------23.31 Ghz
AMD Athlon II X4 645----------------22.59 Ghz
Intel Core2 Quad Q8400--------------22.50 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X4 940---------------22.50 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X4 945---------------22.05 Ghz
Intel Core2 Quad Q9300--------------21.90 Ghz
AMD Athlon II X4 640----------------21.27 Ghz
AMD Athlon II X4 630----------------19.86 Ghz
AMD Athlon II X4 620----------------18.24 Ghz
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600--------------18.21 Ghz
AMD Phenom 9850 Quad-Core --------18.06 Ghz
Intel Core i3 530---------------------16.74 Ghz
AMD Phenom 9650 Quad-Core--------16.20 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X3 720---------------15.90 Ghz
Intel Core2 Duo E8400---------------13.77 Ghz
AMD Phenom II X2 550---------------11.55 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 6400+---10.89 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 6000+---10.05 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5600+---9.39 Ghz
Intel Core2 Duo E6600---------------9.21 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5200+---8.70 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5000+---8.31 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4800+---8.04 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+---7.74 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4400+---7.29 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+---7.05 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4000+---6.72 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 3800+---6.42 Ghz
Intel Pentium D 3.40GHz-------------5.67 Ghz
Intel Pentium D 3.00GHz-------------4.95 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 FX-57----------------4.62 Ghz
Intel Pentium D 2.80GHz-------------4.53 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 4000+----------------3.99 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 3700+----------------3.63 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 3500+----------------3.45 Ghz
Intel Pentium 4 3.40GHz --------------3.36 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 3200+----------------3.24 Ghz
Intel Pentium 4 3.20GHz --------------3.21 Ghz
AMD Athlon 64 3000+----------------3.00 Ghz
Intel Pentium 4 3.00GHz --------------3.00 Ghz

We've come a long way. :)
 
Last edited:
StrangleHold said:
Well I am upset. Read the whole thing and at the end you tell me none of it means anything.:D
Click to expand...

Lol. I'll amend that to "My selections are in no way an implication of anything for or against Intel or AMD."

Other than the fact that I like AMD better, of course. :)
 
Haha, that's pretty cool! :good: I've always kinda wondered how my C2Q would perform in "Netburst GHz." :) You should change the title to "Epic CPU Chart."
 
I think what he did is use the base score for P4 3.0GHz to compair the processors not only to it but themselves. It makes sense in theory, and possibly in practice.

OP: Why is it that some of the higher P4's that you listed were higher or lower than their clock rate? Being the same design, shouldnt their clock rate be the same as advertised compaired to the 3.0GHz P4?
 
wolfeking said:
I think what he did is use the base score for P4 3.0GHz to compair the processors not only to it but themselves. It makes sense in theory, and possibly in practice.

OP: Why is it that some of the higher P4's that you listed were higher or lower than their clock rate? Being the same design, shouldnt their clock rate be the same as advertised compaired to the 3.0GHz P4?
Click to expand...

Yeah, all I did was use the P4 3.0 as a base score.

I find it interesting how some of the higher P4's were "off." Same deal with the Athlon 64's, although their 3200+, 3500+, etc tags I've always thought were guidelines comparing them to P4 speeds, rather than a definitive speed.

I did round off everything to two decimal-places, so that could easily explain the P4 3.2 I listed at 3.21. The 3.4 is a little different, as I have it listed at 3.36. Unsure if my rounding could fully account for being 40 Mhz off. You also have supplemental components of a system to factor in, such as memory, motherboard, etc.

Here is some copy/paste from the benchmark page:

"CPU Benchmark results (“Baselines”) were gathered from users’ submissions to the PassMark web site as well as from internal testing. PerformanceTest conducts eight different tests and then averages the results together to determine the CPU Mark rating for a system.

To ensure that the full CPU power of a PC system is realized, PerformanceTest runs each CPU test on all available CPUs. Specifically, PerformanceTest runs one simultaneous CPU test for every logical CPU (Hyper-threaded); physical CPU core (dual core) or physical CPU package (multiple CPU chips). So hypothetically if you have a PC that has two CPUs, each with dual cores that use hyper-threading, then PerformanceTest will run eight simultaneous tests...."

then later,

"Rarely is a graph completely accurate in what it is representing. There are many factors that can skew the results and make a graph misleading. As such it is necessary to have some background understanding of the data being presented.

In the case of these CPU Benchmarks there are several factors to consider, such as different OS’s the CPU’s are running on and the possibility that users have overclocked their systems...."

So while this is hardly a lab-controlled test to determine the speed of a processor, you would also think the sheer VOLUME of submissions has to count for something. Lots of room to negate the "bad" submissions, so to speak.

A little bit about the viability of the findings. Obviously, for the vast majority of the processors in my list, the Ghz rating in the right column is totally false. The actual benchmark scores (which in my specific context is completely synonymous with my Ghz rating, other than my rounding) are of course "accurate." Back in the days of the P4, we thought of the power of a processor pretty much completely based on its speed alone. Things have gotten much more complex since then, and I figured it would be cool to give modern-day processors a "composite" Ghz rating, based off their benchmarks, since in a way the benchmark scores ARE viable to determine each processor's overall "power."

As for Daisy saying they are meaningless, I'm not so sure. Obviously the Ghz moniker is false, that has been established. But to say my Ghz ratings mean nothing I think is going too far. I really changed nothing at all. You could already see that "A" processor was 12.35 times more powerful than "B" processor and so on, I simply used a calculator to give the end result in "Ghz," based off the P4 3.0. In my copy/paste paragraphs above, it says that they theoretically DID measure the total performance of the multi-core processors, and there were eight different tests done for all processors, which were averaged together for each submission.

If one is able to get past the notion of me using the term "Ghz" and is aware of what I did, I don't find the chart meaningless. I simply gave the benchmark scores more "tangible-ness," in a way. At least for some people.
-----
"It is meaningless... Different architecture of CPU perform differently. You can't look at GHz and tell."

I agree that it would be impossible (at least for me) to even come close to accurately give a modern-day processor a "composite Ghz" speed rating, due to all the architectural differences. That's why I used these benchmarks.
 
Last edited:
Wheres the Semprons? :D

How dare you not mention the Sempron....good little processors!
 
Nevakonaza said:
Wheres the Semprons? :D

How dare you not mention the Sempron....good little processors!
Click to expand...

Oh God, I've angered a Sempron fanboy.

AMD Sempron 145----------5.58 Ghz

AMD Sempron 140----------4.68 Ghz

^^The two single-core AM3 "Sargas" Semprons currently on Newegg.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top