I7 7700k cinebench scores: Intel Core i7-7700K Cinebench R23 score

Intel Core i7-7700K Cinebench R23 score

Processor performance Intel Core i7-7700K in the Cinebench R23 benchmarking platform.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the link above.

This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.

	Cinebench R23 — Multi-thread & single thread score
AMD Ryzen 5 2600	1.022 8.126
Intel Core i5-10400F	1.116 7. 994
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X	1.091 7.895
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G	1.527 7.778
AMD Ryzen 5 3500	1.343 7.732
Intel Core i5-10400	1.111 7.581
Intel Core i5-11400F	1.390 7.514
Intel Core i7-8700B	1.132 6.784
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X	1.307 6.775
AMD Ryzen 5 3500X	1.166 6.717
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF	915 6. 603
Intel Core i5-9600K	1.175 6.582
Intel Core i3-10325	1.211 6.166
Intel Core i7-7700K	1.207 6.074
Intel Core i5-9400	1.097 6.020
Intel Core i3-10320	1.194 6.011
Intel Core i5-9500	1.127 5.982
AMD Ryzen 3 4100	1.093 5.922
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G	1.174 5.906
AMD Ryzen 3 3100	1. 132 5.845
Intel Core i3-11100B	1.486 5.739
AMD Ryzen 3 4300GE	1.195 5.737
Intel Core i3-10105F	1.180 5.650
Intel Core i3-9350KF	1.257 5.644
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE	1.151 5.612
Intel Core i5-9400F	1.010 5.571

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

Cinebench R23 is cross-platform testing software that allows you to assess the hardware capabilities of a device such as a computer, tablet, server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant. The test scene contains no less than 2,000 objects and more than 300,000 polygons in total.

Disclaimer:

When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

This page includes affiliate links for which the administrator of GadgetVersus may earn a commission at no extra cost to you should you make a purchase. These links are indicated using the hashtag #ad.

Information:

We do not assume any responsibility for the data displayed on our website. Please use at your own risk. Some or all of this data may be out of date or incomplete, please refer to the technical page on the respective manufacturer’s website to find the latest up-to-date information regarding the specifics of these products.

Trading System Forex
W3Ask
W3Ask Brasil
W3Ask Deutschland
W3Ask España
W3Ask France
W3Ask Italia
W3Ask Nederland

Intel Core i7-7700K Cinebench R15 score

Processor performance Intel Core i7-7700K in the Cinebench R15 benchmarking platform.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the link above.

	Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score
AMD Ryzen 3 4100	212 1. 152
Intel Core i7-8700T	176 1.133
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G	212 1.126
Intel Core i5-9600KF	202 1.123
Intel Core i9-9900T	190 1.110
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X	200 1.100
AMD Ryzen 5 3500X	190 1.080
Intel Core i5-9600K	196 1.071
Intel Core i5-10400T	157 1.065
Intel Core i5-8600	180 1. 023
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G	203 1.023
AMD Ryzen 3 3100	180 1.020
Intel Core i3-11100B	262 997
Intel Core i7-7700K	200 995
Intel Core i5-9400F	177 987
Intel Core i5-8500	174 981
Intel Core i5-9400	174 972
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE	199 972
AMD Ryzen 5 2500X	240 966
Intel Core i3-10325	198 965
Intel Core i5-9500F	185 962
Intel Core i3-10320	193 954
Intel Core i5-8500B	177 951
Intel Core i3-9100F	173 945
Intel Core i3-9350KF	177 913
Intel Core i3-10100	184 905

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.

Disclaimer:

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Information:

Trading System Forex
W3Ask
W3Ask Brasil
W3Ask Deutschland
W3Ask España
W3Ask France
W3Ask Italia
W3Ask Nederland

So-So-So and no tick. What is the difference between Intel Core processors of different generations based on the same architecture / Sudo Null IT News The promise to reduce the process technology from 14nm to 10nm remained a promise, the long era of «Taka» Skylake began, during which Kaby Lake (seventh generation) happened, the sudden Coffee Lake (eighth) with a slight change in process technology from 14nm to 14nm + and even Coffee Lake Refresh (ninth). Looks like Intel really needed a little coffee break.

As a result, we have several processors of different generations, which are based on the same Skylake microarchitecture, on the one hand. And Intel’s assurances that each new processor is better than the previous one, on the other. True, it is not very clear what exactly …

So let’s go back to our generations. And let’s see how they differ.

Kaby Lake

The appearance of processors in retail took place in early 2017. What is new in this family relative to its predecessor? First of all, this is a new graphics core — Intel UHD 630. Plus support for Intel Optane memory technology (3D Xpoint), as well as a new 200 series chipset (the 6th generation worked with the 100 series). And that’s all of the really interesting innovations. nine0003

Coffee Lake

The 8th generation codenamed Coffee Lake was released at the end of 2017. The processors of this generation added cores and proportionally to the third level cache, raised Turbo Boost by 200 MHz, added support for DDR4-2666 (before that it was DDR4-2400), but cut off support for DDR3. The graphics core remained the same, but it was given 50 MHz. For all the frequency increases, I had to pay with an increase in the heat pack to 95 watts. And, of course, the new 300-series chipset. The latter was not at all necessary, since soon enough the specialists were able to launch this family on 100-series chipsets, although Intel representatives said that this was impossible due to the peculiarities of building power circuits. Later, however, Intel officially admitted that it was wrong. So what’s new in the 8th family? In fact, it looks more like a regular refresh with the addition of cores and frequencies. nine0003

Coffee Lake Refresh

Ha! And here is our refresh! In the fourth quarter of 2018, 9th generation Coffee Lake processors were released, equipped with hardware protection against some Meltdown/Spectre vulnerabilities. Hardware changes made to the new chips protect against Meltdown V3 and L1 Terminal Fault (L1TF Foreshadow). Software and microcode changes protect against Specter V2, Meltdown V3a and V4 attacks. Protection against Specter V1 will continue to be patched at the operating system level. The appearance of fixes at the chip level should reduce the impact of software patches on processor performance. But Intel implemented all this joy with protections only in processors for the mass market segment: i5-9600k, i7-9700k, i9-9900k. Everything else, including server solutions, did not receive hardware protection. For the first time in Intel’s consumer processor history, Coffee Lake Refresh processors support up to 128GB of RAM. And that’s it, no more changes.

What do we have in the bottom line? Two years of refreshes, games with cores and frequencies, plus a set of minor improvements. I really wanted to objectively evaluate and compare the performance of the main representatives of these families. Therefore, when I had a kit from the seventh to the ninth generation at hand, fresh i7-8700, i7-9 were recently added to our i7-7700 and i7-7700k700k and i9-9900k, I took advantage of the situation and forced five different Intel Core processors to show what they can do.

Testing

Five Intel processors participate in testing: i7-7700, i7-7700k, i7-8700, i7-9700k, i9-9900k.

Performance characteristics of platforms

Intel i7-8700, i7-9700k and i9-9900k processors have the same basic configuration:

Motherboard: Asus PRIME h410T, 5BIOS, 140 (5BIOS), 1400044
RAM: 16 GB DDR4-2400 MT/s Kingston 2 pieces, total 32 GB.
SSD: 240 GB Patriot Burst 2 in RAID 1 (a habit developed over the years).

Intel i7-7700 and i7-7700k processors also work on the same platform:

Motherboard: Asus h210T (BIOS 3805),
RAM: 8 GB DDR4-2400MT/s Kingston 2 pieces, total 16 GB.
SSD: 240 GB Patriot Burst 2 in RAID 1.

We use custom-made chassis with a height of 1.5 units. They house four platforms.

Software part: OS CentOS Linux 7 x86_64 (7.6.1810).
Kernel: 3. 10.0-957.1.3.el7.x86_64
Made optimizations relative to the standard installation: added kernel launch options elevator=noop selinux=0.

Testing is performed with all patches against Specter, Meltdown and Foreshadow attacks backported to this kernel. It is possible that the results of testing on newer and more recent Linux kernels may differ from those received, but the performance will be better. But, firstly, I personally prefer CentOS 7, and, secondly, RedHat is actively backporting innovations related to hardware support from new kernels to its own, LTS. I hope so 🙂

Tests used for research

Sysbench
Geekbench
Phoronix Test Suite

Sysbench test

Sysbench is a package of tests (or benchmarks) for evaluating the performance of various computer subsystems: processor, RAM, storage devices. The test is multi-threaded, for all cores. In this test, I measured two indicators:

CPU speed events per second — the number of operations performed by the processor per second: the higher the value, the more productive the system. nine0044
General statistics total number of events — the total number of completed events. The higher the score, the better.

Geekbench test

Single-threaded and multi-threaded test suite. The result is a performance index for both modes. Below are links to test results. In this test, we will look at two main indicators:
— Single-Core Score — single-threaded tests.
— Multi-Core Score — multi-threaded tests. nine0007
Units of measurement: abstract «parrots». The more «parrots», the better.

Phoronix Test Suite

The Phoronix Test Suite is a very rich test suite. Despite the fact that all the tests from the pts/cpu package were carried out, I will give the results of only those that I personally found particularly interesting, especially since the results of the missed tests only reinforce the general trend.

Almost all the tests presented here are multi-threaded. The only exceptions are two of them: single-threaded Himeno and LAME MP3 Encoding tests. nine0003

In these tests, the higher the score, the better.

John the Ripper multithreaded password guessing test. Let’s take Blowfish cryptalgorithm. Measures the number of operations per second.
The Himeno test is a linear Poisson pressure solver using the Jacobi point method.
7-Zip Compression — 7-Zip test using p7zip with integrated benchmarking feature.
OpenSSL is a set of tools that implement the SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) and TLS (Transport Layer Security) protocols. Measures RSA 409 performance6-bit OpenSSL.
Apache Benchmark — This test measures how many requests per second a given system can handle with 1,000,000 requests, with 100 requests running concurrently.

And in these, if less, then better

C-Ray tests CPU performance on calculations with floating point numbers. This test is multi-threaded (16 threads per core), will shoot 8 rays from each pixel for anti-aliasing, and generate a 1600×1200 image. The test execution time is measured. nine0044
Parallel BZIP2 Compression — The test measures the time required to compress a file (Linux kernel source .tar package) using BZIP2 compression.
Encoding audio and video data. The LAME MP3 Encoding test runs in a single thread, while the ffmpeg x264 test is multi-threaded. The test time is measured.

As you can see, the test set consists of purely synthetic tests that allow you to show the difference between processors when performing certain tasks, for example, clicking passwords, encoding media content, cryptography. nine0003

A synthetic test, unlike a test that is carried out under conditions close to reality, is able to provide a certain purity of the experiment. Actually, that’s why the choice fell on synthetics.

It is possible that when solving specific tasks in combat conditions, you will be able to get extremely interesting and unexpected results, but still the “general temperature in the hospital” will be as close as possible to what I got from the test results. It is also possible that when protection against Specter/Meltdown is disabled when testing processors 9th generation, I could get better results. But, looking ahead, I will say that they have shown themselves so well.

Spoiler: cores, threads and frequencies will rule the ball.

Even before testing, I carefully studied the architecture of the families of these processors, so I expected that there would be no significant differences between the test subjects. Moreover, not so much significant as extraordinary: why wait for interesting indicators in tests if you are measuring on processors built, in fact, on one core. My expectations were met, but something still turned out not quite as I thought …

And now, actually, the test results.

The result is quite natural: those who have more streams and higher frequency get points. Accordingly, the i7-8700 and i9-9900k are ahead. The gap between i7-7700 and i7-7700k is 10% in single-threaded and multi-threaded test. The i7-7700 lags behind the i7-8700 by 38% and from the i9-9900k by 49%, that is, almost 2 times, but at the same time the lag behind the i7-9700k is only 15%.

Links to test results:

Intel i7-7700
Intel i7-7700k
Intel i7-8700
Intel i7-9700k
Intel i9-9900k

Test results from The Phoronix Test Suite

% in favor of «k», due to the difference in Turbobust. The i7-8700 and i7-9700k processors have a very slight difference. The i9-9900k outperforms everyone with more threads and higher clock speeds. Twins almost 2 times.

The result of the C-Ray test seems to me the most interesting. The presence of Hyper-Treading technology in i9-9900k in this multi-threaded test is only marginally better than the i7-9700k. But the twins lagged behind the leader by almost 2 times.

In Himeno’s single-threaded test, the difference is not that great. A noticeable gap between the 8th and 9th generation from the twins: the i9-9900k overtakes them by 18% and 15%, respectively. The difference between the i7-8700 and i7-9700k is within the margin of error.

7zip compression test twins pass 44-48% worse than the leader i9-9900k. i7-8700 overtakes i7-9 due to more threads700k by 9%. But this is not enough to overtake the i9-9900k, so we see a lag of almost 18%.

The BZIP2 compression time test shows similar results: streams win.

MP3 encoding is a «ladder» with a maximum margin of 19.5%. But in the ffmpeg test, the i9-9900k loses to the i7-8700 and i7-9700k, but bypasses the twins. I redid this test several times for the i9-9900k, but the result is always the same. This is already unexpected 🙂 In the multi-threaded test, the most multi-threaded of the tested processors showed such a low result, lower than that of 9700k and 8700. There are no clear explanations for this phenomenon, and I don’t want to make assumptions.

The openssl test shows a «ladder» with a gap between the second and third rungs. The difference between the twins and the leader i9-9900k is from 42% to 47%. The gap between the i7-8700 and i9-9900k is 14%. The main thing is flows and frequencies.

The Apache i7-9700k outperformed everyone in the test, including the i9-9900k (6%). But in general terms, the difference is not significant, although there is a 24% gap between the worst result of the i7-7700 and the best result of the i7-9700k. nine0003

In general, the i9-9900k leads in most tests, only ffmpeg fails. If you are going to work with video, take the i7-9700k or i7-8700 better. The i7-9700k is in second place in the overall standings, slightly behind the leader, and even ahead in the ffmpeg and apache tests. So I boldly advise him and the i9-9900k to those who regularly experience large influxes of users to the site. Processors should not fail. I already mentioned the video.

The i7-8700 performs well in Sysbench, 7zip and ffmpeg tests. nine0007
In all tests i7-7700k is better than i7-7700 from 2% to 14%, in ffmpeg test 16%.
Let me remind you that I didn’t do any optimizations other than those indicated at the beginning, which means that when you install a clean system on a newly purchased Dedicated drive from us, you will get exactly the same results.

Cores, threads, frequencies — our everything

In general, the results were predictable and expected. In almost all tests, a “ladder to heaven” appears, demonstrating the dependence of performance on the number of cores, threads and frequencies: more of this, better results. nine0003

Since all the test subjects are actually refreshes of the same core on the same process technology and do not have any fundamental architectural differences, we were unable to obtain «staggering» evidence that the processors are qualitatively different from each other.

The difference between the i7-9700k and i9-9900k processors in all tests, except for Sysbench, tends to zero, since in fact they differ only in the presence of Hyper-Threading technology and a hundred additional megahertz in Turbo Boost mode for i9-9900k. In the test, Sysbench is just the opposite: it decides not the number of cores, but the number of threads.
There is a very large gap in multi-threaded tests between the i7-7700(k) and i9-9900k, in some places as much as twice. There is also a difference between the i7-7700 and the i7-7700k — the extra 300 MHz adds agility to the latter.

Also, I can’t talk about the qualitative effect of the cache memory size on the test results — we have what we have. Moreover, the included protection of the Specter/Meltdown family should greatly reduce the impact of its volume on the test results, but this is not certain. If a dear reader demands «bread and circuses» from our marketing department, I will gladly download you testing with disabled protection. nine0003

Actually, if they asked me: what processor would you choose yourself? — I would first count the money in my pocket, and choose the one that is enough. In short, you can also get from point A to point B in a Zhiguli, but a Mercedes is still faster and more pleasant. Processors based on the same architecture will one way or another cope with the same range of tasks — someone is just good, and someone is excellent. Yes, as testing has shown, there are no global differences between them. But the gap between i7 and i9it doesn’t go anywhere.

When choosing a processor for some specific highly specialized tasks, such as working with mp3, compiling from sources or rendering 3D scenes with light processing, it makes sense to focus on the performance of the relevant tests. For example, designers can immediately look at the i7-9700k and i9-9900k, and take a processor with Hyper-Threading technology for complex calculations, that is, any other than the i7-9700k. Streams run here.

So I advise you to choose what you can afford, taking into account the specification, and you will be happy. nine0003

Servers based on i7-7700, i7-7700k, i7-8700k, i7-9700k and i9-9900k processors from 1dedic.ru were used in testing. Any of them can be ordered with a 5% discount for 3 months — contact the sales department with the code phrase «I’m from Habr». If you pay for the year minus another 10%.

All evening at the Trashwind arena, system administrator FirstDEDIC

Comparison of Intel Core i7-11700K and Intel Core i7-10700KF in games and benchmarks from HYPERPC

On March 30, sales of Intel Rocket Lake-S processors started. One of these days we
wrote about the first in Russia assembly of a personal computer with a new 8-core 16-thread desktop platform Intel Core i9-11900K from HYPERPC. As promised, after the embargo was lifted, a video appeared on the YouTube channel comparing the new generation chip with its predecessor.

For comparison, we took the Intel Core i7-11700K processor. He received eight cores with a nominal frequency of 3.6 GHz and multithreading support. The peak frequency is 5.0 GHz. The chip is compared with the Intel Core i7-10700KF with a frequency of 3.8-5.1 GHz.

ASUS TUF Gaming Z59 motherboard was also used for tests0-PLUS WIFI, 32GB RAM @ 3200MHz and reference NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Founders Edition graphics card. The power of the power supply was 750 watts.

Read and write speeds were tested using a Samsung 980 PRO SSD that supports PCI Express 4.0. In the Intel Core i7-11700K, these figures were 6,560 MB/s and 5,000 MB/s, respectively. In the case of the tenth generation Core i7, the write and read speeds were approximately the same — 3,500 MB / s. As you can see, here the advantage of the novelty is significant.
nine0003

In 3DMark Time Spy Extreme, the Intel Core i7-11700K outperformed its predecessor by 10%, scoring 5,376 points. The result of the previous generation processor was a little less than 4,800 points. The new product completed rendering in Blender in a minute and a half, while the Core i7-10700KF took about 15 seconds longer.

In CPUID in single-threaded mode, a novelty also won — 670 «parrots» against 535 «parrots». The difference was 20%. The Intel Core i7-11700K took the lead in two performance tests for Microsoft Office-related tasks. In Word and PowerPoint — 10,000 points versus 7,000 points and 15,000 points versus 10,000 points, respectively.