RapydMark CPU benchmark

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jul 27, 2020
15,759
9,823
106
RapydMark for Windows (frikiscape.com)

Synthetic highly parallel benchmark.

1637755795894.png
1637755840866.png

My company's dual socket Ivy Bridge-E beat Comet Lake in total time, only due to more cores. Should be fun to see how 5950X and i9-12900K fare in this benchmark. My guess is that 5950X will win.

Update: 5950X did win! But i9-12900K put up a good fight despite fewer cores.

Performance comparison chart so far thanks to Makaveli:

1652705066734.png

Public view-only link for the sheet: RapydMark64 - Google Drive

CCD comparison by Det0x:

1 CCD -> 8 cores / 8 threads = 368.309 seconds
1 CCD -> 8 cores / 16 threads = 230.797 seconds
2 CCD's -> 16 cores / 32 threads = 135.978 seconds

Interesting HT/no-HT comparison:
User
CPU
Cores
Threads
Time
JoeRambo​
i9-12900K​
8​
16​
212.656​
JoeRambo​
5800X​
8​
16​
263.424​
Det0x​
5950X​
8​
16​
230.797​
Det0x​
5950X​
8​
8​
368.309​
JoeRambo​
i9-12900K​
8​
8​
328.88​
 
Last edited:

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
@Det0x @Carfax83

Guys, a request, if you don't mind please.

Could you run Rapydmark at different times of the day and note the variance in scores?

Whenever I've run Rapydmark in the past, I never saw a variance greater than maybe 5 seconds or so. So that large of a variance with what you're getting is definitely abnormal.

Any suggestions for a good easy to install and easy to run free memory intensive multicore benchmark other than CBR23 that performs consistently and finishes in less than 5 minutes?

Honestly, for memory performance games are the best option due to how much data is being constantly read and copied to and from RAM. Way more data than what is used in benchmarks or stress tests.
 
Jul 27, 2020
15,759
9,823
106
Whenever I've run Rapydmark in the past, I never saw a variance greater than maybe 5 seconds or so. So that large of a variance with what you're getting is definitely abnormal.

Honestly, for memory performance games are the best option due to how much data is being constantly read and copied to and from RAM. Way more data than what is used in benchmarks or stress tests.
The latest I got is about 213 seconds down from a crazy high of 400+ seconds when the RAM was initially trained by ASROCK's BIOS to work at just DDR5-4400 CL36 speed. I got it tuned to DDR5-4600 28-30-30-60 (it's an EXPO kit I got cheap).

Do you have a recommendation for any good 3D FPS or car racing game that is easily downloadable and will work without internet connection? I don't feel like connecting my PC to the internet. I'm enjoying the Windows Update-free experience a bit too much.
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
The latest I got is about 213 seconds down from a crazy high of 400+ seconds when the RAM was initially trained by ASROCK's BIOS to work at just DDR5-4400 CL36 speed. I got it tuned to DDR5-4600 28-30-30-60 (it's an EXPO kit I got cheap).

Do you have a recommendation for any good 3D FPS or car racing game that is easily downloadable and will work without internet connection? I don't feel like connecting my PC to the internet. I'm enjoying the Windows Update-free experience a bit too much.

Without an internet connection? GoG Galaxy has CBP 2077 and since it has no DRM it likely requires no internet connection. But don't quote me on that though, because I'm not 100% sure. I just know that GoG Galaxy is supposed to be a drm free digital distribution platform. From my experience, games that use Frostbite engine like the Battlefield series or the newly released Dead Space remake tend to be very sensitive to memory overclocks and timings when it comes to stability so that's what I prefer to test with.

But all of those games require an internet connection to work.
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
Newest score, 126 at 5.5ghz with DDR5 7600 CL34:

2M82Sr.jpg
 
Jul 27, 2020
15,759
9,823
106
Newest score, 126 at 5.5ghz with DDR5 7600 CL34:
Do you feel like matching my timings of 28-30-30-60 at any speed (it will surely be more than my 4600 MT/s) and see what effect it has on the score?

My CPU voltage is 1.17V
IMC is at 1.225V

PMIC VDD/VDDQ are both 1.25V
VPP is 1.8V

Only the mentioned timings were set manually. Rest were all AUTO.
Round trip time is minimum. Memory training set to slowest.
Timing optimization set to TIGHT (Tighter and Tightest were not stable).
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
Do you feel like matching my timings of 28-30-30-60 at any speed (it will surely be more than my 4600 MT/s) and see what effect it has on the score?

Here it is at DDR5 4600 with those timings. Honestly, Rapydmark doesn't seem to be memory limited at all by the looks of it. Unless it's latency and not bandwidth.

EjKRBz.jpg


If I put all core multiplier of 50 in the BIOS (which should be fine for a 12700K I think), the idle temp of all the cores shoots past 90C and the score is lower due to throttling. By leaving the cores at stock setting, idle temps stay below 50 and I get better scores. The PC is disconnected from internet and I don't really want any Windows updates until I'm done testing the system properly. Nothing else runs while Rapydmark is running.

This looks like thermal throttling to me. Your idle temps should be in the low to upper 30s depending on the quality of your cooling. If it's in the 50s, then something is definitely wrong.
 
  • Love
Reactions: igor_kavinski