|ASUS P8P67 LGA1155 Motherboard|
|Reviews - Featured Reviews: Motherboards|
|Written by Olin Coles and David Ramsey|
|Monday, 03 January 2011|
Page 11 of 17
CINEBENCH R11.5 Benchmarks
Maxon CINEBENCH is a real-world test suite that assesses the computer's performance capabilities. 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. CINEBENCH Release 11.5 includes the ability to more accurately test the industry's latest hardware, including systems with up to 64 processor threads, and the testing environment better reflects the expectations of today's production demands. A more streamlined interface makes testing systems and reading results incredibly straightforward.
The CINEBENCH R11.5 test scenario comprises three tests: an OpenGL-based test that models a simple car chase, and single-core and multi-core versions of a CPU-bound computation using all of a system's processing power to render a photo-realistic 3D scene, "No Keyframes", the viral animation by AixSponza. This scene makes use of various algorithms to stress all available processor cores, and all the rendering is performed by the CPU: the graphics card is not involved except as a display device. The multi-core version of the rendering benchmark uses as many cores as the processor has, including the "virtual cores" in processors that support Hyper-Threading. The resulting "CineMark" is a dimensionless number only useful for comparisons with results generated from the same version of CINEBENCH.
First, let's look at the OpenGL results.
Although this test relies on the graphics card and its OpenGL driver, we still see the top-clocked ASUS P8P67 EVO/2600K combination returning 44% more frames per second than the bottom-scoring Core i7-950. It's a reminder that while your graphics card matters the most in games and tests like this, the processor still contributes a lot.
The single-core rendering test results might seem very close, but that's an artifact of the scaling in this chart: the stock-clocked Intel Core i7-2600K is 33% faster than the Core i7-950, and that's a substantial difference any way you look at it. The difference (at stock clock speeds) drops to 24% with the multi-core rendering test, and the AMD 1100T's performance here is very impressive given that it can only render six tiles at once, rather than the 8 tiles the Hyper-Threaded Intel processors can manage. Remember: the "virtual cores" provided by Hyper-Threading are not the same as "real cores".