• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Question Handbrake 1.3.3 - Benchmark your System - New benchmark criteria

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Det0x

Senior member
Sep 11, 2014
449
442
136
encoded 1806 frames in 170.24s (10.61 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09

Average Effective Clock screenshot at 93% done.

Which " average " column number you want ... is questionable....
Averages ... of averages ... are not accurate.

This test is not pushing the limits of this chip.

I'm expecting an ALL core OC of 4.65 GHz
( not testing yet )
Will submit when All Core found.

( this is a BOOST score )
Look what i have highlighted in this picture:

We need average effective clocks. Restart timers/sensors in hwinfo when you have started the benchmark and take screenshot 1-3 seconds before it finishes.
 

Noid

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,217
66
91
OPEN YOUR EYES ... ITS IN MY SCREENSHOT
( my previous screenshot also has it - but after 100 completion)
I did not see any requirement for 100 percent screenshot.

I'm currently seeking my All Core OC.

If this is not good enough ... then I am done lol.

Oh, you are rejecting my numbers because they are not highlighted ? Ok ... fine lol
 
Last edited:

Hulk

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,782
182
106
encoded 1806 frames in 170.24s (10.61 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09

Average Effective Clock screenshot at 93% done.

Which " average " column number you want ... is questionable....
Averages ... of averages ... are not accurate.

This test is not pushing the limits of this chip.

I'm expecting an ALL core OC of 4.65 GHz
( not testing yet )
Will submit when All Core found.

( this is a BOOST score )
Thanks! That's perfect. I added your score to the table. Those Zen 3's really crush Handbrake.

From what I understand from my reading of "Average Effective Clock" it's not an average of an average. From the following link:


"It has become a common practice for several years to report instant (discrete) clock values for CPUs. This method is based on knowledge of the actual bus clock (BCLK) and sampling of core ratios at specific time points. The resulting clock is then a simple result of ratio * BCLK. Such approach worked quite well in the past, but is not longer sufficient. Over the years CPUs have become very dynamic components that can change their operating parameters hundreds of times per second depending on several factors including workload amount, temperature limits, thermal/VR current and power limits, turbo ratios, dynamic TDPs, etc. While this method still represents actual clock values and ratios reported match defined P-States, it has become insufficient to provide a good overview of CPU dynamics especially when parameters are fluctuating with a much higher frequency than any software is able to capture. Another disadvantage is that cores in modern CPUs that have no workload are being suspended (lower C-States). In such case when software attempts to poll their status, it will wake them up briefly and thus the clock obtained doesn't respect the sleeping state.

Hence a new approach needs to be used called the Effective clock. This method relies on hardware's capability to sample the actual clock state (all its levels) across a certain interval, including sleeping (halted) states. The software then queries the counter over a specific polling period, which provides the average value of all clock states that occurred in the given interval. HWiNFO v6.13-3955 Beta introduces reporting of this clock.
Many users might be surprised how different this clock is in comparison to the traditional clock values reported. But please note that this effective value is the average clock across the polling interval used in HWiNFO. "
 

Noid

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,217
66
91
All core results in 5 more hours hopefully.
4.6 Ghz at 1.35v - - 2.5 hrs. of P95 passed so far ...

Wish I could remove core 17 and 18
( I think 4.7 then .... )
 

Noid

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,217
66
91
encoded 1806 frames in 157.92s (11.44 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09

All core 4.6GHz @ 1.35v
2 x 16 = 32 GB Cas18

clock numbers in screenshot
( not sure what column you want )

P95 utilization at 99.8 percent
So, this is a walk in the park.

This does produce alot of heat.
( good to test with )
Although I have 20C --- 3 second spikes in temperature
My P95 sits at 78C in " current " status most of the time.
Average temp over 8 hours of p95 was 79C.

I could probably get a temporary all core OC of 4.8Ghz if you are curious ...
( not p95 stable of course )
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Hulk

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,782
182
106
encoded 1806 frames in 157.92s (11.44 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09

All core 4.6GHz @ 1.35v
2 x 16 = 32 GB Cas18

clock numbers in screenshot
( not sure what column you want )

P95 utilization at 99.8 percent
So, this is a walk in the park.

This does produce alot of heat.
( good to test with )
Although I have 20C --- 3 second spikes in temperature
My P95 sits at 78C in " current " status most of the time.
Average temp over 8 hours of p95 was 79C.

I could probably get a temporary all core OC of 4.8Ghz if you are curious ...
( not p95 stable of course )
Your system is scaling quite linearly. I find it interesting that the best AMD systems are just below 4GHz Effective Average Clock while the fastest Intel are just below 5GHz. The clock difference reported by other means such as average clock in HWinfo, CPUz, or Task Manager show the AMD and Intel clocks to be much closer. Something is going on there.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY