WPrime, SuperPi, Cinebench, and AIDA64
WPrime is first up and being a multi-threaded benchmark. We know it will scale with any CPU we throw at it. You can manually set the number of workers or threads you want to allocate to the calculation, which we did the total thread count for each CPU to ensure we measure the maximum performance the CPU can offer.
The 32M test is the shorter one and shows how each CPU performs with a quick burst multi-core loading. Here we see the 10900K fall right in line with the 3900X, which has a four-thread advantage over it, but that clock speed really helps it gain some ground here. The 10600K falls just behind the 8700K and 3600K, which is admittedly a bit surprising.
The 1024 test is the longer version and can take form as short as under half a minute up to several minutes depending on thread count and frequency of the CPU being tested. The longer 1024 test now shows the 10980XE jump ahead with its massive thread advantage. This is due to the time needed to start the workers, which hurts the 32M test.
Here we see the 10900K fall a bit more in line behind the 3900X, while also easily outpacing the 7900X HEDT 10-core. This is likely due to its frequency advantage. The 10600K falls right in line with the 8700K leading it, which once again is a surprise being that the 10600K has a 100MHz advantage on paper with the same amount of "intel smart cache."
SuperPi is a much older test, but it's worth including as it is a single-threaded computation workload that really can show in granular detail differences in the computational ability of the silicon being tested. One thing to note is that this aging application tends to favor intel architecture, so don't be surprised when you see much better results by some chips, like the same chips you will see get beaten in other tests.
SuperPi shows the 10600K now take a jump over the 8700K and trails the faster 9900K and 10980XE, while the 10900K tops the chart here. That 5.3GHz TVB is showing a defined gain here.
Cinebench is a long-standing render benchmark that has been heavily relied upon by both Intel and AMD to showcase their newest platforms during unveils. The benchmark has two tests, a single-core workload that will utilize one thread or 1T. There is also a multi-threaded test which uses all threads or nT of a tested CPU
Here we see the 10900K fall a bit behind the 3900X, while the 10600K falls a bit behind the 3600X. Overall since Cinebench is heavily threaded, the nT result is showing how we would expect it to.
Moving to the 1T Cinebench test and we see that the 10900K easily tops the chart. The 3900X, 3600X, and 9900K round out the trailing pack. The 10600K falls to the 3300X and the others, which trailed the pack following the new 10900K. The 10600K easily outpaces the 8700K, which is now showing the improvements we expected from the CPU.
Aida's memory read test shows that the new 10th gen CPUs picked up a bit of throughput with the memory with the same kit. The Ryzen offerings show strong here with the 3900X pulling a convincing 55GB/s over the 10900k 51GB/s. the 10600K pulls 50.8GB/s, which is a marked gain over the previous-gen parts or the comparable 8700K at 49GB/s.
Memory write speed is where Intel jumps forward, passing all of the Ryzen parts slightly to 54GB/s for the 10600K. The leading 3900X from the read test shows a close lead at over 53GB/s, while the 8700K jumps past the 10900K at 53GB/s while the 10900K terminates at 52.6GB/s.
Memory copy results shuffle again with the mainstream platform results being led by the Ryzen 3900X at 57GB/s. the 10900K once again shows a trailing position here at 51GB/s. The 10600K falls just below 49, hitting 48.9GB/s.
Now we have the latency test, which shows the memory, as expected, have exceptionally low latency (45.7 and 46.9 respectively) for the mainstream intel platforms. The Ryzen parts fall into the HEDT parts category exceeding 60ns.
AES encryption performance we will see a massive shuffle as Ryzen has shown notoriously robust performance in these types of workloads. We see the 10900K pull a nice gain over the outgoing 9900K; however, it falters to the 3600X. The 10600K falls to the Ryzen 3100, while still outpacing the 8700K.
For FPU testing, we have 32-bit single-precision first. Here we see the mainstream platform leader in the 3900X with the 10900K trailing closely behind. The 10600K takes its position between the 8700K below it and the 3600X, which outpaces it.
Now with the next level, we have the 64-bit double-precision test. This time, 7900X jumped ahead of the 10900K while the 3900X still carries the top end for the mainstream. The 10600K still sits in between the 8700K below it and the 3600X above.
Lastly, we have an 80-bit extended precision, and here we see the same positioning as the previous test for our 10900K. The 10600K, however, falls a bit now, losing some ground to the 3600X and even the previous-gen 2600X. Of note here would be the 3300X, which is now nipping at the heels of the 8700K.
- Page 1 [Introduction, Specifications, and Pricing]
- Page 2 [CPU, New Tech, Packaging, and Test Setup]
- Page 3 [WPrime, SuperPi, Cinebench, and AIDA64]
- Page 4 [Handbrake, Blender, POV-Ray, CoronaRender, 7-Zip, and WebXPRT]
- Page 5 [Unigine and UL Benchmarks]
- Page 6 [Gaming Benchmarks]
- Page 7 [Storage Performance]
- Page 8 [Clocks, Overclocking, Thermals, and Power Consumption]
- Page 9 [Final Thoughts]