# Wprime v 2.10 benchmark competition



## JSHamlet234

5960X @ 4.6

PS: Remember to set the thread count to as many logical cores as your processor has. It always defaults back to 4.


----------



## storm-chaser

JSHamlet234 said:


> PS: Remember to set the thread count to as many logical cores as your processor has. It always defaults back to 4.
> 
> View attachment 2525875


@JSHamlet234 
Thanks for that useful information. I updated the original post accordingly.


----------



## storm-chaser

9600KF @ 5.1GHz
seems Im having some flow rate problems with this loop because I have run this benchmark at 5300mhz before with no issues. Consequently, I have another pump and 120mm radiator and new lines on the way... Oh well, this is the best I can do for now...


----------



## Dziarson

Prime 2.1 is buggy. and 2 thing why you not use BenchMate 
then you will see if someone not cheting hapet enabled and hasch rate valid 2 screen
From that program you can send results on Hwbot .


----------



## Dziarson

And third thing you can do multiple benchmarks and send results after all .


----------



## Mahigan




----------



## storm-chaser

We can have verifications for the leaders here to make sure the scores are legit. I am inclined to keep this benchmark as is for now, however, we can use benchmate in other, future competitions. Thanks for the recommendation.


----------



## JSHamlet234

Dziarson said:


> Prime 2.1 is buggy. and 2 thing why you not use BenchMate
> then you will see if someone not cheting hapet enabled and hasch rate valid 2 screen
> From that program you can send results on Hwbot .


Benchmate uses version 1.55. I'm not sure why, but it's around 15% faster than 2.10 on everything I've run it on.


----------



## Dziarson

@JSHamlet234 becosue ver 2.1 is buggy, and not work propetly.
Same reason he is not used on Hwbot


----------



## JSHamlet234

Just for fun, here it is on one of those amazing dual-core i7s from yesteryear.

2640M @ 3.3


----------



## storm-chaser

Dziarson said:


> @JSHamlet234 becosue ver 2.1 is buggy, and not work propetly.
> Same reason he is not used on Hwbot
> View attachment 2525918


It's not "buggy" the scores simply don't translate over from older versions of wprime. Everyone here has to use version 2.1, so the results will still be legit and consistent because we are all running the same test engine. In other words, the results will be meaningful here, even with v2.10

HWBOT uses one authorized version of numerous benchmarks to avoid apples-to-oranges comparisons. *If everyone is using the same version then the results are meaningful.* As an example, you will notice similar differences with Unigine Heaven 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0. You have to pay close attention to the software version before you get overly excited or disappointed when comparing your score to someone else's because the difference in scores can be fairly great running a different software version than the person you are comparing scores with.

So we will keep the benchmark open as is. I encourage you to submit your results here and if you want to continue chatting about version variations, please PM me.


----------



## Redwoodz

r5 2600


----------



## storm-chaser

So far so good... thanks for the interest guys. 

I will start building a leaderboard tomorrow.


----------



## Imprezzion

MSI Z490 Ace
10900KF 5.3 all-core 4.8 cache 1.416v before LLC / AC/DC droop
2x16GB Trident-Z Neo @ 4400 17-17-17-38-328-2T
Full custom water with EK XRES 140 w/ sleeved D5 PWM @ 100%, Nemesis GTX 420 + 240 push-pull + Supremacy EVO direct-die with Liquid Ultra










Score isn't as high as it can be since it was throttling slightly. I have OCTVB -2 set to 75c and it hit 75c a few times so it limited to 5.1 a few times.
I'll re-run it without OCTVB throttling to see how high it gets on full 5.3.

EDIT: It barely throttled at all but it is half a second faster without OCTVB


----------



## Krzych04650

6900K 4.4 with 4.5 at the best core, 3400 C13 RAM with tuned subtimings


----------



## rdr09

OC'ed using Bus Speed set to 101.


----------



## Imprezzion

rdr09 said:


> OC'ed using Bus Speed set to 101.


That RAM don't go tighter then that? I expected a 5900x to slam my 10900KF way harder then it did lol.


----------



## rdr09

Imprezzion said:


> That RAM don't go tighter then that? I expected a 5900x to slam my 10900KF way harder then it did lol.


I noticed. LOL. That RAM is 90$, so i don't expect much from it. My B-Dies are in another rig that needs it more. CPU is pretty much stock. Everything is cheap including the cpu block for 35$.

EDIT: Here you should be able to match this at 5.4GHz.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

@cstkl1 @sugi0lover @Jwick @Groove2013 where you at?


----------



## Mr.N00bLaR

Does memory speed factor into this benchmark or is it mainly core? I haven't seen this one in a very long time.


----------



## storm-chaser

Mr.N00bLaR said:


> Does memory speed factor into this benchmark or is it mainly core? I haven't seen this one in a very long time.


This benchmark is much more CPU dependent and to my knowledge not much effected by memory speed. From the wprime website:

*About wPrime*
wPrime uses a recursive call of Newton's method for estimating functions, with f(x)=x2-k, where k is the number we're sqrting, until Sgn(f(x)/f'(x)) does not equal that of the previous iteration, starting with an estimation of k/2. It then uses an iterative calling of the estimation method a set amount of times to increase the accuracy of the results. It then confirms that n(k)2=k to ensure the calculation was correct. It repeats this for all numbers from 1 to the requested maximum.

*Threading*
Our aim was to make a perfectly threaded benchmark, such that it would consistantly use 100% of the CPU while in use. This is achieved by using CPUz to detect the CPU count and use exactly that many processing threads to avoid any performance losses due to multiple threads running on any single physical thread. Each thread is designed to do 1/n of the work, where n is the number of threads. For example, if you're calculating 16 roots on 4 CPU's, each CPU will calculate 4 roots. Some might argue that this style of threading is unrealistic in real-time performance, but in fact is quite indicative of performance in several real world tasks such as [email protected] which allows you to run several instances of the work at any one time.

*Hardware Information*
wPrime retreives most hardware information thanks to CPUz. It retreives CPU information such as clock speed, code name, cache size, voltage, etc. It retreives the motherboard model and the amount, speed and timings of your memory.

*Name*
So what's 'Prime' got to do with square roots? Well nothing, initially I had planned a Prime number calculator but no logical pattern for each prime number is known so it's difficult to confirm accuracy of the results. Square roots however, have a logical and simple reverse (the square).


----------



## cstkl1

0451 said:


> View attachment 2526001
> 
> 
> @cstkl1 @sugi0lover @Jwick @Groove2013 where you at?


70s for 52|47

what i am wondering. hwbot that dude did 5.3 58sec on 11900k.. hmm


----------



## geriatricpollywog

cstkl1 said:


> 70s for 52|47
> 
> what i am wondering. hwbot that dude did 5.3 58sec on 11900k.. hmm


I did it in 57s on wprime version 1.55. This competition is for version 2.10.


----------



## cstkl1

0451 said:


> I did it in 57s on wprime version 1.55. This competition is for version 2.10.


oh that explains that.
hmm looking at the load. shouldnt gear 2 win..
test later.

edit gear 2 lost.
edit .. hmm no but wprime seems to vary.


----------



## mllrkllr88

Dziarson said:


> Prime 2.1 is buggy. and 2 thing why you not use BenchMate


1000%


----------



## storm-chaser

mllrkllr88 said:


> 1000%


We can absolutely do this. I can see it's a highly valuable tool for benchmarking. 

Just a matter of coming to a public consensus on exactly what choice we will make....

For now, i have updated the first post with the initial version of the leaderboard, strictly for this v2.10 comp.

Thanks for the interest so far. And if you see any problems with stats let me know


----------



## o1dschoo1

Definitely posting a few cpus this weekend


----------



## Mr.N00bLaR

3700x locked at 4.2ghz









3900xt - auto / mobo defaults (some threads boosted as high as 4250-4300)


----------



## Imprezzion

Mr.N00bLaR said:


> 3700x locked at 4.2ghz
> View attachment 2526063
> 
> 
> 3900xt - auto / mobo defaults (some threads boosted as high as 4250-4300)
> View attachment 2526064


Stock 3900XT actually matches a 4.6Ghz 5900X? Lol. That's odd to say the least.


----------



## Tehone

heres my entry


----------



## Dziarson

@storm-chaser it is buggy wersion ustable cpu can give fake result.


----------



## JSHamlet234

Imprezzion said:


> Stock 3900XT actually matches a 4.6Ghz 5900X? Lol. That's odd to say the least.


If you browse through HWBot results for different tests and filter the results to include only AMD at specific core counts, there is actually more than one bench where Zen 2 seems to match or slightly beats Zen 3 on IPC. It's rare, but it happens. It tends to go unnoticed because it usually gets lost in Zen 3's big clock speed advantage. It will be interesting to see what times the TR guys get in this one.


----------



## Tehone

Dziarson said:


> @storm-chaser it is buggy wersion ustable cpu can give fake result.


Buddy i sincerely doubt a unstable cpu would complete the test ateast without any errors and if there are errors it wont show the results


----------



## o1dschoo1

Tehone said:


> Buddy i sincerely doubt a unstable cpu would complete the test ateast without any errors and if there are errors it wont show the results


Hes probably talking about whea errors due to 2000 fclk aka it isnt stable. It will still finish the test


----------



## JSHamlet234

I had a chance to run this on my 2 Ryzen systems.

5800H @ 4.0











1700 @ 3.8


----------



## Mr.N00bLaR

I left the clock settings to auto but I did have 3 fans rigged up on a mugen 5. I normally encode for weeks at a time, I would say my setup is stable.


----------



## storm-chaser

Dziarson said:


> @storm-chaser it is buggy wersion ustable cpu can give fake result.
> View attachment 2526093


Okay I can see where there may be a problem here. But I think for all intensive purposes we will let this comp continue as is, and perhaps have the top rigs go through a second round to assure accuracy, but we can discuss that later. For now guys, just take these results with a grain of salt, I think for the most part our results are accurate and for the disputed CPUs we can deal with that later. If people want to cheat to win, that's just lame for them not in the spirit of the comp and they wont get the same satisfaction. So continue to post results and I will continue to update the leaderboard.


----------



## Bartouille

CPU-Z doesn't tell the whole story, it's actually 11x 4900MHz, 5x 4800MHz, 1x 4700MHz and 1x 4600MHz. So like 4.85GHz average.


----------



## storm-chaser

Now things are starting to heat up, pun intended 

I just updated the leaderboard...

Intel back on top, but for how long?


----------



## MadGoat




----------



## Dziarson




----------



## rdr09

Dziarson said:


> View attachment 2526192


I benched my R5 3600 stock and I got, if I recall correctly, 111. Something is off.


----------



## Dziarson

@rdr09 show screen









I think there is no diffrent whit those 2 cpus in this bench .
but 3600 and 5600 run on 570x now i have B550
and much faster ram .
default ram xmp it is 121S
maybe 3600 is faster or my windows 10 is to long on my ssd 4 years


----------



## rdr09

Dziarson said:


> @rdr09 show screen
> View attachment 2526221
> 
> 
> I think there is no diffrent whit those 2 cpus in this bench .
> but 3600 and 5600 run on 570x now i have B550
> and much faster ram .
> default ram xmp it is 121S
> maybe 3600 is faster or my windows 10 is to long on my ssd 4 years


Here is one of my R5 3600 at stock on an A320 with 3200 RAM DOCP.


----------



## BlackScout

Ryzen 5 1600AF @ 4.0Ghz 1.281V










More info on my sig.


----------



## Dziarson

rdr09 said:


> Here is one of my R5 3600 at stock on an A320 with 3200 RAM DOCP.


How much tweaked is your win ?


----------



## rdr09

Dziarson said:


> How much tweaked is your win ?


This particular machine is not tweaked at all. The Win10 Pro 1909 was installed Aug 2020 it says. Drive is almost full with 300GB left out of 1T. I set priority affinity on my other machine but not this one. I just checked and it was still set to normal.

This is a newer R5 3600, tho. My other one does not boost to 4.2GHz at stock on all cores. This one does on all 6 cores.

My 5900X got beat by a 3900XT as you can see in the chart.


----------



## storm-chaser

rdr09 said:


> My 5900X got beat by a 3900XT as you can see in the chart.


@rdr09 
@Mr.N00bLaR 
Please download and run the same benchmark on wprime v 1.55 please, that should tell us what's going on. So you make an identical run with that version and post your results here, and with that information we should be able to figure out whats going on there, and if v 2.10 is buggy. Please keep the processor config identical to your runs last night.

Thanks


----------



## rdr09

storm-chaser said:


> @rdr09
> @Mr.N00bLaR
> Please download and run the same benchmark on wprime v 1.55 please, that should tell us what's going on. So you make an identical run with that version and post your results here, and with that information we should be able to figure out whats going on there, and if v 2.10 is buggy. Please keep the processor config identical to your runs last night.
> 
> Thanks


pm'ed.


----------



## Mr.N00bLaR

rdr09 said:


> pm'ed.


Mine finished in 49.285 seconds on 1.55


----------



## rdr09

Mr.N00bLaR said:


> Mine finished in 49.285 seconds on 1.55


Got 44.119.


----------



## Tehone

So after reading all this i ran 1.55 on the same OC and got more then 10 sec slower


----------



## JSHamlet234

Maybe we can run 1.55 next competition and compare. I have a feeling my 5960X and 5800H will trade places in the ranking.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Tehone said:


> So after reading all this i ran 1.55 on the same OC and got more then 10 sec slower
> View attachment 2526360


Lol the weather widget on the taskbar is not something I leave enabled in competitive CPU benchmarks.


----------



## storm-chaser

JSHamlet234 said:


> Maybe we can run 1.55 next competition and compare. I have a feeling my 5960X and 5800H will trade places in the ranking.


I'm thinking the same thing. This comp has pretty much already run it's course, but I will leave it open for further competition, in case anyone wants to submit another rig or whatever, and I will continue to update the leaderboard. But by now we should all know to take the results with a grain of salt.

Thank you to
@Dziarson 
for giving us the heads up earlier in the thread that wPrime v2.10 may indeed have problems, and his recommendation for using benchmate.

I'd suggest everyone go to benchmate's website and download version 0.10.8. It's 488MB but contains a ton of benchmarks that can keep us busy in competition for a while. This also contains wPrime v 1.55, and we will get that comp started in the next couple days. We can then compare leaderboards to see how the results stack up against v2.10...






BenchMate







benchmate.org


----------



## Tehone

0451 said:


> Lol the weather widget on the taskbar is not something I leave enabled in competitive CPU benchmarks.


dosnt really matter to me its just something to kill time,  also as a side note i doubt with my 32gb of ram and everything else closed the widget effects it much even if at all


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Tehone said:


> dosnt really matter to me its just something to kill time,  also as a side note i doubt with my 32gb of ram and everything else closed the widget effects it much even if at all


Do you even want to go fast? Remember the wise words of Reese Bobby. _If you’re not first, you’re last._


----------



## Dziarson

@0451
"He is such a big idiot that even if there was an idiot competition, he would still take 2nd place because he is such an idiot."


----------



## Tehone

Tehone said:


> dosnt really matter to me its just something to kill time,  also as a side note i doubt with my 32gb of ram and everything else closed the widget effects it much even if at all


Well i disabled it and reran the test the gain was in the margin of error, so no didnt do anything


----------



## Mord




----------



## storm-chaser

Thanks guys my rig is down for a couple days due to water cooling upgrades. So there may be a slight delay in updating the chart.


----------



## domdtxdissar

1024m = 42.748sec
~4900/4800mhz


----------

