![cpu stress test 2018 cpu stress test 2018](https://image.crictracker.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/CricTracker-Facebook-Preview.png)
Our results after the reset actually made more sense, as the score went from 418 to 444. We went ahead and reset our system’s UEFI and let the thermal paste set longer (we had removed the cold plate for photography at the end of our review of the chip). Update: After running our original story, Intel officials contacted us about our oddly low single-threaded scores from the Xeon W-3175X as the company’s own scores for the CPU were higher. It’s possible the Xeon’s performance actually loses some ground in single-threaded tests when AVX, AVX2 or AVX512 is used, as Intel allows the CPU to shift down for the more difficult AVX workloads. We’re actually surprised by the score here, as we thought the higher clock speeds of the Xeon W-3175X would easily put it ahead. Single-threaded performance of the Xeon W-3175X drops back a bit with Cinebench R20, which doesn’t make sense, so we re-ran it. Still, that’s a decent swing from Cinebench R15, which put the Xeon W-3175X ahead by just under 10 percent. Cinebench R20 surprisingly puts the Threadripper 2990WX slightly ahead by about 2 percent-which again-is well within the margin of error, and what we’d consider a tie. We also ran the test’s optional single-threaded test. That’s just the default test, using all of the CPU cores available. Move to Cinebench R20, and the gap opens considerably. The 32 cores of the Threadripper 2990WX make it damn near even with the higher-clocked 28-core Xeon W-3175X in the much older Cinebench R15. the Threadripper’s 32, it’s not a great look for Threadripper. When you remember that the Xeon has 28 cores vs. That’s a decent uptick in performance for the Xeon over Threadripper. With Cinebench R20, the margin increases to just under 10 percent in favor of the 28-core Xeon W-3175X. With Cinebench R15, the Xeon W-3175X clocks in just under 3.6 percent faster. The company went so far as to force third-party sites from hosting stand alone versions they had extracted.
#CPU STRESS TEST 2018 PC#
Maxon originally offered PC users Cinebench R20 on the Windows store only which raised hackles across the Internet. IDGĬinebench R20 was originally intended to be on official Microsoft and Apple stores only but after an outcry, Maxon will release it as a standalone. This allows Maxon and Cinema 4D to stay on the cutting edge and deliver the performance required to satisfy the top production companies,” Maxon officials told us. “Maxon also works very closely with Intel and AMD to test Cinebench on not only the most recent CPUs but the next generation as well.
![cpu stress test 2018 cpu stress test 2018](https://tpucdn.com/review/xpg-valor-air/images/thermal-performance-cpu-idle.png)
It’s all water under the bridge now, as AMD itself used Cinebench R15 to demonstrate just how fast its Ryzen CPUs were. Maxon, however, denied this and told PCWorld in 2017 that despite what the FTC maintained, it didn’t use the infamous “CPU ID” options that favored Intel chips. At one point, previous versions of Cinebench had been tainted by accusations that it hobbled AMD performance by using the Intel compiler, which favored Intel’s CPUs over AMD’s.
![cpu stress test 2018 cpu stress test 2018](https://static.listoffreeware.com/wp-content/uploads/hiren-bootcd_fs_27-06-2016.png)
Maxon’s Cinebench refresh arrives with some historical baggage. Because we can never have enough, the benchmark now supports up to 256 render threads. Under the hood, the R20 engine supports AVX, AVX2, and AVX512 instruction sets. The engine itself features support for Intel’s Embree raytracing technology, which has also been adopted by Valve, AutoDesk, UbiSoft, V-ray, Blender, and Corona, among others. To keep Cinebench R20 more relevant, the company has increased the workload complexity, increased memory use, and adopted the latest rendering engine from the product it’s based on: Cinema 4D R20. Maxon’s new Cinebench R20 running through its paces on a 28-core Xeon W-3175X.