10. NEW: Added 'Benchmark' tool to measure system performance and help diagnose performance problems. (Help > Benchmark...)
:o
JRMark (version 14.0.83): 1684
2. Fixed: Theater View themes wouldn't show root items (only applies to build 82).works nicely again, just deleted my aa folder.
I think yours is better than mine.i dont think so.. though i have no idea what i talk about..
.. the question is who will be the twain at the and of this thread.Hmmm?
There's some interesting stuff comparing a Core Duo and i5 / i7.
For example, single-threaded integer math runs about the same speed, but the i7 walks away in the multi-threaded math tests. This isn't too surprising since it has twice the cores.
Single-threaded large scale memory manipulation is about 4x faster on the i7 (for example, Image > Flood filling). I didn't expect that, as I'd always read the jump to DDR3 wasn't exciting.
This also shows that some core database routines still have room to grow to better utilize 4+ CPU cores.
I think we should sell motherboards and CPU's at the bottom of the benchmark.
Here's my HTPC (Core 2 Duo E6750 @ 3.2GHz, 8GB DDR2-RAM, NVIDIA GT 8600 GPU) Testing on Windows Vista SP2 X64
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3,579 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2,226 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 3,683 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 2,299 seconds
Score: 1612
Running 'Bilder' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1,388 seconds
Flood filling... 1,907 seconds
Direct copying... 2,027 seconds
Small renders... 3,001 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 2,869 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 2,875 seconds
Score: 1564
Running 'Datenbank' benchmark...
Create database... 1,503 seconds
Populate database... 4,091 seconds
Save database... 0,324 seconds
Reload database... 0,087 seconds
Search database... 3,035 seconds
Sort database... 3,055 seconds
Group database... 2,692 seconds
Score: 1454
JRMark (version 14.0.83): 1543
I wouldn't dare post post this unless I had a Core i7-860 on order. ;D
Sorry gappie, I get the "crappiest machine" award!
I think we should sell motherboards and CPU's at the bottom of the benchmark.:) guess so.. the question is what those twainmarks mean. the first machine i posted here can record 24 tracks at 24 bits easely. and has no problem with my 'modest' media database. does it also have influence when its done on a 64 bit system? xp vs w7 etc...
The margins on hardware are RAZOR THIN. Just have a direct clickthrough to the Newegg ad on Interact instead. ;)That's a better idea.
lol... that is a relief.. but you have a new machine on the way... :)
Sorry gappie, I get the "crappiest machine" award!
:) guess so.. the question is what those twainmarks mean. the first machine i posted here can record 24 tracks at 24 bits easely. and has no problem with my 'modest' media database. does it also have influence when its done on a 64 bit system? xp vs w7 etc...
nice and intriguing new little tool..
:)
gab
:) guess so.. the question is what those twainmarks mean.
It's a measure of your self-worth, of course, just like ANY benchmark. Silly Gappie...It's an inverse measure of your net worth.
It's a measure of your self-worth, of course, just like ANY benchmark. Silly Gappie...lol.. :( this together with my old volvo... maybe i should read more spam..
It's an inverse measure of your net worth.
Ha ha!! That too, of course.This is slowly spinning out of control .... I love it. Thanks for a good laugh. Several, in fact.
Maybe you guys should do a contest where the person with the highest submitted score gets a set of virtual "truck nuts" that hangs off the bottom of their avatar picture on Interact. That'd be sweet.
This is slowly spinning out of control .... I love it. Thanks for a good laugh. Several, in fact.
I think a prize for the best, maybe a pair of furry dice for the car. And another for the worst, maybe a new motherboard.
Here's an i7 @ 3.2
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Multi-threaded integer math..1.210 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.825 seconds
Score: 2225
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Flood filling... 0.450 seconds
Direct copying... 0.543 seconds
And here's my server machine in the basement (Core i5 750 @ 4.0GHz, 4GB RAM, AMD HD 3850):
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.723 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1.008 seconds
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Flood filling... 0.470 seconds
Direct copying... 0.676 seconds
I had to look up truck nuts. I added a link to glynor's post. Just shows what he's learned on twitter.
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 13.814 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 8.929 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 4.817 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 2.543 seconds
Score: 631
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 3.987 seconds
Flood filling... 4.274 seconds
Direct copying... 2.670 seconds
Small renders... 6.515 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 3.249 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 2.939 seconds
Score: 931
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.926 seconds
Populate database... 9.958 seconds
Save database... 0.572 seconds
Reload database... 0.251 seconds
Search database... 7.151 seconds
Sort database... 8.725 seconds
Group database... 6.983 seconds
Score: 622
JRMark (version 14.0.83): 728
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 4.257 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.522 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 4.299 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 2.535 seconds
Score: 1396
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1.578 seconds
Flood filling... 2.557 seconds
Direct copying... 2.519 seconds
Small renders... 3.069 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 2.916 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 2.905 seconds
Score: 1415
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.829 seconds
Populate database... 3.339 seconds
Save database... 0.166 seconds
Reload database... 0.078 seconds
Search database... 3.341 seconds
Sort database... 3.181 seconds
Group database... 2.844 seconds
Score: 1560
JRMark (version 14.0.83): 1457
Ha ha! You'll love it. You can OC them to the moon.
What was that score from?
Is it strange that the single vs multi-thread performance is so similar?
No point keeping it a secret now... it's from a P4 1.8 MHz with 512 Mb RAM. Needless to say, I'll love the new one without OC'ing. At least I hope so. Not being the truck nuts sort, I decided to go with the lower power supply and smaller case the lower power requirement of the Lynnfield processor seems to allow. I know next to nothing about OC'ing, but I assume that decision might put some constraints on what I can do. I read a comforting opinion that the Turbo Boost feature lessens the need for/benefit from OC'ing.
Nice marks, rick.ca. Let's see if anyone can beat it. I have some PC's around here somewhere....
Definitely not beating rick.ca's, but this qualify for second place. I have not tried my old laptops though, one of which probably would not even run MC14 as it has Windows 98SE on it (I am using it as a printer server, and it works horribly at that too).
JRMark (version 14.0.83): 264
Bloody hell what is Glynor Running (or OCing)!
If you are using MC on an Atom based PC, post your benchmark results and comment on how MC works on that PC.
ASUS EeePC 1000H (Intel Atom N270 @ 1.6GHz, 2GB RAM):
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 22.997 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 13.751 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 25.094 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 14.782 seconds
Score: 248
STANDINGS:
Best: glynor JRMark (version 14.0.83): 2867
Worst: rick.ca JRMark (version 14.0.83): 264
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 22,342 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 13,542 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 12,853 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 7,630 seconds
Score: 337
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 8,444 seconds
Flood filling... 5,531 seconds
Direct copying... 4,518 seconds
Small renders... 15,589 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 9,042 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 8,960 seconds
Score: 422
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 4,112 seconds
Populate database... 12,851 seconds
Save database... 0,802 seconds
Reload database... 0,356 seconds
Search database... 16,486 seconds
Sort database... 15,364 seconds
Group database... 12,813 seconds
Score: 342
JRMark (version 14.0.84): 367
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 29,071 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 11,124 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 57,696 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 21,895 seconds
Score: 159
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 8,319 seconds
Flood filling... 7,104 seconds
Direct copying... 9,155 seconds
Small renders... 18,647 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 32,007 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 31,776 seconds
Score: 206
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 3,377 seconds
Populate database... 10,517 seconds
Save database... 0,844 seconds
Reload database... 0,340 seconds
Search database... 15,504 seconds
Sort database... 14,146 seconds
Group database... 12,661 seconds
Score: 375
JRMark (version 14.0.84): 246
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 13,551 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 8,793 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 27,315 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 17,666 seconds
Score: 282
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 6,992 seconds
Flood filling... 4,822 seconds
Direct copying... 33,945 seconds
Small renders... 14,925 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 27,058 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 28,118 seconds
Score: 190
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 3,709 seconds
Populate database... 10,662 seconds
Save database... 1,340 seconds
Reload database... 0,568 seconds
Search database... 13,863 seconds
Sort database... 14,171 seconds
Group database... 12,441 seconds
Score: 379
JRMark (version 14.0.84): 284
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 6,587 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 4,400 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 7,136 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 4,428 seconds
Score: 843
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 2,863 seconds
Flood filling... 3,605 seconds
Direct copying... 3,197 seconds
Small renders... 5,790 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 6,123 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 7,157 seconds
Score: 766
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 1,811 seconds
Populate database... 7,561 seconds
Save database... 1,213 seconds
Reload database... 0,756 seconds
Search database... 9,221 seconds
Sort database... 8,133 seconds
Group database... 6,980 seconds
Score: 603
JRMark (version 14.0.84): 737
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 5,329 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 3,314 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 5,331 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 3,345 seconds
Score: 1097
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 2,291 seconds
Flood filling... 2,229 seconds
Direct copying... 2,532 seconds
Small renders... 4,288 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 4,080 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 4,011 seconds
Score: 1132
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0,860 seconds
Populate database... 3,453 seconds
Save database... 0,249 seconds
Reload database... 0,102 seconds
Search database... 4,203 seconds
Sort database... 4,147 seconds
Group database... 4,510 seconds
Score: 1227
JRMark (version 14.0.84): 1152
JRMark (version 14.0.90): 666
I have the devil's computer.
And that no man might buy or sell,
save he that had the benchmark,
or the name of the beast,
or the number of his name.
JRMark (version 14.0.106): 2425
Nice one. That must be a Nehalem machine. What are you running there? Core i7 8x0 chip, I assume, but it could be a 9-series one or even an overclocked i5 (but not as overclocked as mine).
[img]I intend to try for 3,6-4,0 GHz at some point. Don't foresee any problems, just can't be bothered with it right now. It's sufficiently speedy at its current frequency...
I guess this is in the thread already, but what are you running at?
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3,329 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 1,887 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1,729 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1,065 seconds
Score: 2372
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0,731 seconds
Flood filling... 0,458 seconds
Direct copying... 0,691 seconds
Small renders... 2,092 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0,991 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0,967 seconds
Score: 3711
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0,412 seconds
Populate database... 1,499 seconds
Save database... 0,124 seconds
Reload database... 0,068 seconds
Search database... 1,987 seconds
Sort database... 2,601 seconds
Group database... 2,075 seconds
Score: 2452
JRMark (version 15.0.16): 2845
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 22,282 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 13,454 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 12,605 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 7,564 seconds
Score: 340
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 9,269 seconds
Flood filling... 5,641 seconds
Direct copying... 4,776 seconds
Small renders... 15,835 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 9,474 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 9,522 seconds
Score: 404
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 4,198 seconds
Populate database... 13,029 seconds
Save database... 0,813 seconds
Reload database... 0,332 seconds
Search database... 16,654 seconds
Sort database... 15,308 seconds
Group database... 14,151 seconds
Score: 333
JRMark (version 15.0.16): 359
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 22,222 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 13,456 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 12,610 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 7,553 seconds
Score: 340
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 7,778 seconds
Flood filling... 5,518 seconds
Direct copying... 4,533 seconds
Small renders... 15,567 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 9,052 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 8,908 seconds
Score: 428
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 4,124 seconds
Populate database... 12,729 seconds
Save database... 0,777 seconds
Reload database... 0,292 seconds
Search database... 16,193 seconds
Sort database... 15,367 seconds
Group database... 12,913 seconds
Score: 345
JRMark (version 14.0.159): 371
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3,335 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 1,881 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1,701 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1,044 seconds
Score: 2387
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0,732 seconds
Flood filling... 0,466 seconds
Direct copying... 0,695 seconds
Small renders... 2,094 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0,992 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0,975 seconds
Score: 3695
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0,432 seconds
Populate database... 1,659 seconds
Save database... 0,118 seconds
Reload database... 0,049 seconds
Search database... 2,040 seconds
Sort database... 2,605 seconds
Group database... 2,024 seconds
Score: 2408
JRMark (version 14.0.159): 2830
I have what I consider a pretty strong system (Quad core, 8GB ram, 7200rpm drives, ATI 4xxx video card, etc) and I got benchmark scores in the 1700s and 1800s. However, for the last score, the database score, it was like 1200something. Could this be due to a large database?No. It's a test. It isn't reading or writing MC's database.
No. It's a test. It isn't reading or writing MC's database.
It has pushed benchmark scores up.
Intel i7 @ 3.6GHz, 6Gb RAM, Windows 7 x64:
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.690 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.081 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.116 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.709 seconds
Score: 2501
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.901 seconds
Flood filling... 0.456 seconds
Direct copying... 0.644 seconds
Small renders... 2.296 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 1.132 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 1.067 seconds
Score: 3387
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.492 seconds
Populate database... 1.722 seconds
Save database... 0.133 seconds
Reload database... 0.039 seconds
Search database... 2.019 seconds
Sort database... 2.549 seconds
Group database... 2.073 seconds
Score: 2382
JRMark (version 15.0.51): 2757
Would you expect any of those three events to affect the benchmark tool quite so dramatically?
JRMark (version 15.0.113): 3242
Its i7 980@4Ghz DDR3 1600.. Will be interesting to test .115 build)
it always shows multi-threaded math as taking longer than single-threaded math. Why is this?
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===I'm happy again, but for how long, I wonder...
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.510 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 1.975 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.057 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.781 seconds
Score: 2595
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.785 seconds
Flood filling... 0.505 seconds
Direct copying... 0.550 seconds
Small renders... 2.131 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 1.148 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 1.069 seconds
Score: 3555
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.370 seconds
Populate database... 1.286 seconds
Save database... 0.116 seconds
Reload database... 0.033 seconds
Search database... 1.194 seconds
Sort database... 0.910 seconds
Group database... 0.821 seconds
Score: 4546
JRMark (version 15.0.135): 3565
JRMark (version 17.0.125): 4967That may be a new record.
That may be a new record.
We'll send you a t-shirt signed by the team if you get it over 5000.
Smokin' !
Is this like walking across coals for 2 seconds?
Here are the shirts.
So, what do we get for a 6000 score...
Here are the shirts. Do you want white (first) or beige?
http://pix01.com/Vx%40bfuv
Do you want the signatures or just plain? We could sign around the bottom so it would only be visible to your closest friends.
In the order of appearance, Bob, Matt, John, and myself.
Here's the shirt, ready to ship.Continued here (http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=71937.msg486463#msg486463). The t shirt arrived.(http://www.pix01.com/gallery/8D12431D-7EA0-495D-9EA2-775091458CB9/T_Shirt_Signing/1988306394.jpg)
JohnT signing
More pictures (http://pix01.com/Xx%40Oaz9)
We signed in the order we came to JRiver. Matt was the new guy in 2000.
In the order of appearance, Bob, Matt, John, and myself. I forged Yaobing's signature since he works in Chicago.
Congratulations again to InflatableMouse for breaking the 5000 mark.
I won! At least until someone who knows what they're doing takes a fling at it.
Interesting results from InflatableMouse and rjm, similar equipment, I wonder what is causing InflatableMouse to have higher bench
SanDisk Extreme SDSSDX-240G-G25 240GB
vs.
Samsung 830 128GB SSD
No, I'm not confident that's the reason. I'm confident that the HD test was where the big differences were.
This is an approximate comparison (but uses the SanDisk 128G model):
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/ssd-charts-2011/compare,2787.html?prod%5B5491%5D=on&prod%5B5413%5D=on (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/ssd-charts-2011/compare,2787.html?prod%5B5491%5D=on&prod%5B5413%5D=on)
My memory has a CAS latency of 9. The Kingston is 10 or 11.Would love to get to the bottom of why my system is slower. Could a CAS 9 vs. 11 make a significant difference? I thought all memory was pretty much the same unless you're into overclocking which I am not.
I've got an Abacus with a better JRMark than that :oYeah... well it used to be around 300. On the other hand, I can use it all day without a charge, and it's around 3 years old now.
Is there a 6000 club? :)
JRMark (version 18.0.120): 6128 @ 5Ghz
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.402 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.080 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.987 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.552 seconds
Score: 2706
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.218 seconds
Flood filling... 0.277 seconds
Direct copying... 0.354 seconds
Small renders... 0.900 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.621 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.392 seconds
Score: 7967
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.258 seconds
Populate database... 0.933 seconds
Save database... 0.248 seconds
Reload database... 0.038 seconds
Search database... 0.712 seconds
Sort database... 0.615 seconds
Group database... 0.472 seconds
Score: 6563
JRMark (version 18.0.204): 5745
Did anyone ever determine what a reasonable/minimum score is for each version of MC?
My HTPC is one of those tiny Dell boxes (Inspiron Zino HD) and it seems to do fine with 2 HD streams and WMC.
JRMark (version 18.0.206): 770
I'm guessing that most audio related features will work, though you might have some difficulty with DSD.Thanks. I need to find a really good small ITX combo then. :-\
I think it's recommended to have a JRmark score of 2000+ for stereo DSD playback. (higher for multichannel)
It may be possible to bitstream DSD on slower hardware though. I'm not really sure.
I'm guessing that most audio related features will work, though you might have some difficulty with DSD.
I think it's recommended to have a JRmark score of 2000+ for stereo DSD playback. (higher for multichannel)
It may be possible to bitstream DSD on slower hardware though. I'm not really sure.
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.076 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.047 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.885 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.558 seconds
Score: 2894
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.274 seconds
Flood filling... 0.349 seconds
Direct copying... 0.546 seconds
Small renders... 0.976 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.704 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.454 seconds
Score: 6663
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.328 seconds
Populate database... 0.998 seconds
Save database... 0.197 seconds
Reload database... 0.081 seconds
Search database... 0.820 seconds
Sort database... 0.773 seconds
Group database... 0.506 seconds
Score: 5806
JRMark (version 19.0.56): 5121
I'm running a Quad Core i5-760(2010)2.8, a nvidia 610GT Video card,4GB ram ddr-3 1333 (Kingston), Soundblaster audio card (7.1)..... so what parts & in what order should I upgrade to take max advantage of what JRiver offers for both audio &video??? Also currently running a Redemere 40ft HDMI cable from my PC to my Yamaha RX-A1000 to be able to use it(PC) as a HTPC.Thanks for any help in advance
500GB SATA
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.943 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.618 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.070 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.772 seconds
Score: 2261
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1.117 seconds
Flood filling... 0.481 seconds
Direct copying... 0.921 seconds
Small renders... 1.379 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 1.195 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.575 seconds
Score: 3881
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.517 seconds
Populate database... 1.990 seconds
Save database... 0.177 seconds
Reload database... 0.063 seconds
Search database... 1.166 seconds
Sort database... 1.172 seconds
Group database... 0.931 seconds
Score: 3573
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.992 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.684 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 3.917 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 2.683 seconds
Score: 1431
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.455 seconds
Flood filling... 0.427 seconds
Direct copying... 0.514 seconds
Small renders... 1.378 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 1.752 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 1.026 seconds
Score: 3963
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.259 seconds
Populate database... 1.261 seconds
Save database... 0.311 seconds
Reload database... 0.049 seconds
Search database... 1.032 seconds
Sort database... 1.241 seconds
Group database... 0.847 seconds
Score: 4301
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 4.102 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.735 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.578 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.400 seconds
Score: 2431
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1.441 seconds
Flood filling... 0.723 seconds
Direct copying... 1.289 seconds
Small renders... 1.446 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 1.186 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.547 seconds
Score: 3317
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.484 seconds
Populate database... 1.959 seconds
Save database... 0.339 seconds
Reload database... 0.130 seconds
Search database... 1.092 seconds
Sort database... 0.942 seconds
Group database... 0.817 seconds
Score: 3731
PC engines WRAP-2E running debian i386 Geode 266 Processor
JRMark (version 19.0.94): 49
Is it usable?The WRAP works fine as a DLNA server. No sound card so I can only test the rendering with a null output device which shows it to be marginal. It has 192 megs of Ram.
So I guess the main factor in this is cpu(most importantly higher frequency)? All the ones I see busting 5000 are running cpu frequencies around the 4ghz or higher mark. I'm sure my score of 4600 is fine for everything but a little disappointed that my combination of i7-4770s(3.1, turbo 3.9), 8gb of 1600 ram, pretty fast intel 530 series SSD, and a GTX 670 didn't score a little better. So dedicated gpu is no factor? I mean I could go pull the $700 GTX 780 ti out of my other computer and throw it in and it wouldn't raise my score one bit would it? While technically it would be much more powerful rendering wise.
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 4.193 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.662 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.402 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.848 seconds
Score: 2087
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.400 seconds
Flood filling... 0.348 seconds
Direct copying... 0.507 seconds
Small renders... 1.167 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.878 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.533 seconds
Score: 5739
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.189 seconds
Populate database... 0.984 seconds
Save database... 0.166 seconds
Reload database... 0.051 seconds
Search database... 0.869 seconds
Sort database... 0.762 seconds
Group database... 0.583 seconds
Score: 5968
JRMark (version 19.0.156): 4598
I think that makes you #1 now. Congratulations!
50 euros says you can't beat that mark.I would hope an X99 system would beat it.
First results from my Haswell-e i7-5720K build (http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=91635.0).I don't suppose it would be possible to run this without the GPU to see the image score with just the Haswell? Must be getting pretty good fro Madvr just by itself
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.122 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 1.918 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.595 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.398 seconds
Score: 3150
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.226 seconds
Flood filling... 0.258 seconds
Direct copying... 0.237 seconds
Small renders... 0.877 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.645 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.349 seconds
Score: 8489
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.141 seconds
Populate database... 0.801 seconds
Save database... 0.210 seconds
Reload database... 0.039 seconds
Search database... 0.640 seconds
Sort database... 0.565 seconds
Group database... 0.559 seconds
Score: 7275
JRMark (version 20.0.14): 6305
The image score is plain CPU image processing, not related to video at all, and it does not use the GPU in the process.thanks Hendrik didn't know that. Is their a benchmark for the built-in graphics for the new intel procs ... in relation to MADVr for example?
Desktop machine: i5 2500k clocked at 4635Mhz. 16gb ramAre you using particularly fast RAM?
JRMark (version 20.0.14): 5390
Are you using particularly fast RAM?
I'm unable to break 5K at 4.7GHz on my system - that scored 4948.
Are you using a SSD and GPU?It's a CPU test so those should not be relevant. I am running one of the newer SATA3 Sandisk Enterprise SSDs though, and have a GTX570.
My score is over 5K at 3.5GHZ on my computer.Well I'd expect that from a 4770K. (which may be turboing to 3.9GHz)
I have 2X4GB DDR3-2133.
Are you using particularly fast RAM?
I'm unable to break 5K at 4.7GHz on my system (also a 2500K) - that scored 4948.
Running 1600 ram (9-9-9-24), but have the BClk running at 103 with 45 mulitpler. It doesnt like mult > 45 - will bluescreen or hang, even though it might get through Prime95 tests.Very strange. I didn't think BCLK did much for the system, and I'd expect that would only get you an extra 3% not nearly as much as that.
It's a CPU test so those should not be relevant. I am running one of the newer SATA3 Sandisk Enterprise SSDs though, and have a GTX570.
Very strange. I didn't think BCLK did much for the system, and I'd expect that would only get you an extra 3% not nearly as much as that.
What OS are you running? I'm on 8.1
where in JRiver do i find JRMark??? TIA
RPi model B 900 mhz
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
JRMark (version 20.0.26): 96
You should really give Bob a decent tiny ARM device, the Pi's are just hilariously slow (even for their price).Something like NVIDIA's Jetson TK1 (https://developer.nvidia.com/jetson-tk1) looks pretty nice, and seems like it would be able to handle anything you throw at it if you wanted to port over something like Theater View too.
;) No way! The pi runs MC?Sigh,
Sigh,Sure.
I was kinda hoping no one would notice...
You should really give Bob a decent tiny ARM device, the Pi's are just hilariously slow (even for their price).Bob does his best work on hardware that is hopelessly out of date. It's his way and we all admire him for it.
JRMark (version 20.0.26): 96Looks like a baseball stat: Royals post season innings (80) plus total home runs in those post season games (16) ;D
Looks like a baseball stat: Royals post season innings (80) plus total home runs in those post season games (16) ;DOught to be a good WS!
Something like NVIDIA's Jetson TK1 (https://developer.nvidia.com/jetson-tk1) looks pretty nice, and seems like it would be able to handle anything you throw at it if you wanted to port over something like Theater View too.
Quite an improvement over the model B's score of 96 (http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=54396.msg638471#msg638471)!
Seems like that would handle just about anything you ask of it as far as audio is concerned, other than DSD→PCM or DST-compressed DSD.
You could over clock a little. Ask on our hardware board.good idea but ummm i already did right now im setting at 4.6 ghz on the cpu and 1.5 on the gpu. my sound card does not have a official windows 10 driver (YET) so that might help increase the score when i can get it
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.316 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.285 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.680 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1.164 seconds
Score: 2250
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 3.295 seconds
Flood filling... 0.217 seconds
Direct copying... 0.355 seconds
Small renders... 0.732 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.583 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.303 seconds
Score: 4011
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.228 seconds
Populate database... 0.901 seconds
Save database... 0.199 seconds
Reload database... 0.102 seconds
Search database... 0.594 seconds
Sort database... 0.671 seconds
Group database... 0.432 seconds
Score: 6876
JRMark (version 21.0.28): 4379
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3,321 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2,284 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1,933 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1,165 seconds
Score: 2183
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0,260 seconds
Flood filling... 0,219 seconds
Direct copying... 0,339 seconds
Small renders... 0,809 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0,605 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0,333 seconds
Score: 8573
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0,139 seconds
Populate database... 0,863 seconds
Save database... 0,258 seconds
Reload database... 0,073 seconds
Search database... 0,650 seconds
Sort database... 0,728 seconds
Group database... 0,491 seconds
Score: 6714
JRMark (version 21.0.30): 5823
On Linux, latest version 21.0.28:Code: [Select]=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.316 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.285 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.680 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1.164 seconds
Score: 2250
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 3.295 seconds
Flood filling... 0.217 seconds
Direct copying... 0.355 seconds
Small renders... 0.732 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.583 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.303 seconds
Score: 4011
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.228 seconds
Populate database... 0.901 seconds
Save database... 0.199 seconds
Reload database... 0.102 seconds
Search database... 0.594 seconds
Sort database... 0.671 seconds
Group database... 0.432 seconds
Score: 6876
JRMark (version 21.0.28): 4379
I'll switch to windows on this same machine and run it again.
Holy crap that's a big difference:Code: [Select]=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3,321 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2,284 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1,933 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1,165 seconds
Score: 2183
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0,260 seconds
Flood filling... 0,219 seconds
Direct copying... 0,339 seconds
Small renders... 0,809 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0,605 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0,333 seconds
Score: 8573
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0,139 seconds
Populate database... 0,863 seconds
Save database... 0,258 seconds
Reload database... 0,073 seconds
Search database... 0,650 seconds
Sort database... 0,728 seconds
Group database... 0,491 seconds
Score: 6714
JRMark (version 21.0.30): 5823
My interest is in thumbnail generation, as when I look at server logs I see that thumbs are generated on the fly when using remote clients. I take it this area would be impacted should I make a move to Linux?
32 or 64 bit MC?
You can pre-build the thumbs on a client so that they're generated in advance. That dramatically improves performance on any client (Windows or Linux),a nd I would recommend it.Sorry, I should've been more specific. I'm referencing the Gizmo client, (and JRemote too) for which I don't believe this is an option.
For some reason the 64 bit build is about half the speed of the 32 bit build in the image benchmarks.
Not sure if this translates into a real world difference. We are looking into it.
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 9.217 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 12.566 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 6.066 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 6.730 seconds
Score: 549
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1.965 seconds
Flood filling... 4.748 seconds
Direct copying... 4.398 seconds
Small renders... 2.060 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 3.675 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.832 seconds
Score: 1245
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 4.750 seconds
Populate database... 9.453 seconds
Save database... 1.073 seconds
Reload database... 0.339 seconds
Search database... 17.877 seconds
Sort database... 7.876 seconds
Group database... 4.534 seconds
Score: 468
JRMark (version 21.0.63): 754
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.292 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.273 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.981 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.619 seconds
Score: 2652
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.357 seconds
Flood filling... 0.224 seconds
Direct copying... 0.350 seconds
Small renders... 0.837 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.664 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.373 seconds
Score: 7843
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.132 seconds
Populate database... 0.800 seconds
Save database... 0.246 seconds
Reload database... 0.055 seconds
Search database... 1.269 seconds
Sort database... 0.842 seconds
Group database... 0.514 seconds
Score: 5575
JRMark (version 21.0.72): 5356
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.122 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 1.918 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.595 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.398 seconds
Score: 3150
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.226 seconds
Flood filling... 0.258 seconds
Direct copying... 0.237 seconds
Small renders... 0.877 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.645 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.349 seconds
Score: 8489
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.141 seconds
Populate database... 0.801 seconds
Save database... 0.210 seconds
Reload database... 0.039 seconds
Search database... 0.640 seconds
Sort database... 0.565 seconds
Group database... 0.559 seconds
Score: 7275
JRMark (version 20.0.14): 6305
I did my build in September of 2014 and scored 6305. I'm curious why it is beat by the newer systems? I was only clocked at around 4 Ghz and it wasn't even the fastest CPU available. Maybe it was the M2 SSD drive. Would that make the difference. Maybe JRMark was faster back then. ;D
I did my build in September of 2014 and scored 6305. I'm curious why it is beat by the newer systems? I was only clocked at around 4 Ghz and it wasn't even the fastest CPU available. Maybe it was the M2 SSD drive. Would that make the difference. Maybe JRMark was faster back then. ;DCode: [Select]=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.122 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 1.918 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.595 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.398 seconds
Score: 3150
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.226 seconds
Flood filling... 0.258 seconds
Direct copying... 0.237 seconds
Small renders... 0.877 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.645 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.349 seconds
Score: 8489
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.141 seconds
Populate database... 0.801 seconds
Save database... 0.210 seconds
Reload database... 0.039 seconds
Search database... 0.640 seconds
Sort database... 0.565 seconds
Group database... 0.559 seconds
Score: 7275
JRMark (version 20.0.14): 6305
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.293 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.273 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.094 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.749 seconds
Score: 2564
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.310 seconds
Flood filling... 0.228 seconds
Direct copying... 0.371 seconds
Small renders... 0.835 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.727 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.423 seconds
Score: 7597
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.134 seconds
Populate database... 0.820 seconds
Save database... 0.219 seconds
Reload database... 0.045 seconds
Search database... 0.675 seconds
Sort database... 0.857 seconds
Group database... 0.541 seconds
Score: 6532
JRMark (version 21.0.73): 5565
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 4.704 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 3.118 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 2.686 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1.829 seconds
Score: 1540
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.362 seconds
Flood filling... 0.187 seconds
Direct copying... 0.426 seconds
Small renders... 1.143 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 1.496 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.923 seconds
Score: 4848
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.192 seconds
Populate database... 1.171 seconds
Save database... 0.370 seconds
Reload database... 0.088 seconds
Search database... 0.947 seconds
Sort database... 1.083 seconds
Group database... 0.766 seconds
Score: 4657
JRMark (version 21.0.90): 3681
It was over 4 years ago the 5,000+ JR Mark was broken, yet it seems that there is relatively little improvement. Some 6K+ benchmarks, but ... I'd have thought the improvement over this time would have been multiples.
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1.345 seconds
That looks suspiciously bad. If all other things remain the same, adding a discrete GPU made those numbers 8 times worse? Hmmm...
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 2.968 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 1.961 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.001 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.642 seconds
Score: 2891
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.312 seconds
Flood filling... 0.296 seconds
Direct copying... 0.327 seconds
Small renders... 0.995 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.744 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.430 seconds
Score: 7086
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.197 seconds
Populate database... 0.770 seconds
Save database... 0.108 seconds
Reload database... 0.066 seconds
Search database... 0.758 seconds
Sort database... 1.034 seconds
Group database... 0.611 seconds
Score: 6068
JRMark (version 22.0.29): 5348
No probs breaking 5,000 with V98 and Asus AutoTune (no manual tweaks by me).
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.032 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.003 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.922 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.599 seconds
Score: 2898
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.203 seconds
Flood filling... 0.342 seconds
Direct copying... 0.514 seconds
Small renders... 0.849 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.662 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.582 seconds
Score: 6979
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.315 seconds
Populate database... 1.103 seconds
Save database... 0.237 seconds
Reload database... 0.092 seconds
Search database... 0.755 seconds
Sort database... 0.776 seconds
Group database... 0.451 seconds
Score: 5768
JRMark (version 18.0.98): 5215
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.460 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.390 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.194 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.818 seconds
Score: 2417
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.343 seconds
Flood filling... 0.220 seconds
Direct copying... 0.350 seconds
Small renders... 0.869 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.703 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.435 seconds
Score: 7533
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.141 seconds
Populate database... 0.812 seconds
Save database... 0.198 seconds
Reload database... 0.064 seconds
Search database... 0.671 seconds
Sort database... 0.738 seconds
Group database... 0.596 seconds
Score: 6676
JRMark (version 22.0.28): 5542
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.473 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.388 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.159 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.770 seconds
Score: 2439
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.277 seconds
Flood filling... 0.230 seconds
Direct copying... 0.349 seconds
Small renders... 0.865 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.721 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.402 seconds
Score: 7736
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.151 seconds
Populate database... 0.857 seconds
Save database... 0.211 seconds
Reload database... 0.031 seconds
Search database... 0.645 seconds
Sort database... 0.572 seconds
Group database... 0.469 seconds
Score: 7324
JRMark (version 19.0.163): 5833
intel NUC i7RYH ubuntu 14.04 64bit & JRiver 21
math: 1869
image: 1744
db: 5862
JRMark (version 21.0.4): 3158
UPDATE ubuntu 16.04 64bit JRiver 21
Running 'Math' benchmark... Score: 1759
Running 'Image' benchmark... Score: 3813
Running 'Database' benchmark.. Score: 4646
JRMark (version 21.0.88): 3406
Like I said, me, I'm seeing a revers of fortunes. Same hardware (i7 6700K OCed to 4400Mhz, 16GB DDR4 3400, GTX 970, SSDs, the works).Code: [Select]=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.460 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.390 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.194 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.818 seconds
Score: 2417
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.343 seconds
Flood filling... 0.220 seconds
Direct copying... 0.350 seconds
Small renders... 0.869 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.703 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.435 seconds
Score: 7533
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.141 seconds
Populate database... 0.812 seconds
Save database... 0.198 seconds
Reload database... 0.064 seconds
Search database... 0.671 seconds
Sort database... 0.738 seconds
Group database... 0.596 seconds
Score: 6676
JRMark (version 22.0.28): 5542Code: [Select]=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.473 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.388 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.159 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.770 seconds
Score: 2439
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.277 seconds
Flood filling... 0.230 seconds
Direct copying... 0.349 seconds
Small renders... 0.865 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.721 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.402 seconds
Score: 7736
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.151 seconds
Populate database... 0.857 seconds
Save database... 0.211 seconds
Reload database... 0.031 seconds
Search database... 0.645 seconds
Sort database... 0.572 seconds
Group database... 0.469 seconds
Score: 7324
JRMark (version 19.0.163): 5833
So with the huge emphasis ON MY SYSTEM (so take it as such), that's about %5 worse overall for version 22. While the Math benchmark holds steady more or less, the Image benchmark is starting to drift away (Image creation/destruction takes 123% time compared to older version), and database benchmark is, ahem, way off (reload database 206% more time, sort and group database 129% and 127% respectively).
This may mean something or nothing depending on a kazilion of factors, that benchmarks on one system can't account for. And all these is for pure statistical fun, I can't say I notice a difference in real time usage.
Second thing, I'd like to know how on God's green Earth did mojave scored 6305 with a Haswell-e i7-5820K (on MC 20)? If that results holds solid, we can draw the conclusion that MC is very well threaded, so the more cores the merrier, speed be damned (the hexacore Haswell-e i7-5820K is 3.3-3.6Ghz, Skylake i7-6700K is 4-4.2Ghz).
Windows I assume. I wonder if the dev studio 2015 compile is responsible?
There is only a few outliers in there, that is mostly: Image Creation, and Library Sort/Group.The image creation made me suspicious since there seems like there might have been a change in there somewhere that's affecting the spectrum analyzer in linux. Users reported it worked faster a couple of months ago, still trying to track that one down...
Library sorting and grouping were changed a while ago for a few more features, which takes extra time - especially if you compare 19 to 22, like here.
Wondering why a core 2 quad 2.66GHz has a slightly better MATH score than an i5-7500 3.4GHz ?Sometimes the new CPU's run longer at a lower speed before going to max speed. I would monitor the CPU speed during the test to see if that is the issue. If so, just for the benchmark, try disabling all the C states in the bios. You can also disable CPU EIST Function.
I7 7700k @ 5GHZ AVX = 4.8GHZHot rod!
Corsair DDR4 2x8GB 3000 1T
Win 10 x64
JRMark (version 23.0.22): 6691
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3,309 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2,285 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0,423 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0,290 seconds
Score: 3012
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0,173 seconds
Flood filling... 0,249 seconds
Direct copying... 0,184 seconds
Small renders... 0,843 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0,660 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0,349 seconds
Score: 8950
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0,133 seconds
Populate database... 0,779 seconds
Save database... 0,110 seconds
Reload database... 0,049 seconds
Search database... 0,711 seconds
Sort database... 0,711 seconds
Group database... 0,455 seconds
Score: 7294
JRMark (version 23.0.36): 6419
My new workstation, i9-7900X @ 4.6GHz. Unfortunately the MC benchmark is largely single-threaded so no stomping a 5GHz CPU. ;)That explains a lot. I'm a bit surprised that it's only 5% faster than my Ryzen build, but I guess it's the workload rather than being representative of their relative performance levels. I expect that building MC will be much faster on the i9.
But it does build MC in about half the time as the old system.
Instead of disabling things in the BIOS, just set windows to High Performance Power Plan for consistent results.
Does any part of Jmark take into account the video card??
My new build
I-7 3700
Asus p8z77-I
Adata s510 120g ssd
560TI
Stock speeds
JRiver fresh install with library backup..
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.212 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.132 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 1.004 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.702 seconds
Score: 2695
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.704 seconds
Flood filling... 0.357 seconds
Direct copying... 0.671 seconds
Small renders... 1.017 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.703 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.598 seconds
Score: 5432
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.311 seconds
Populate database... 1.070 seconds
Save database... 0.118 seconds
Reload database... 0.033 seconds
Search database... 0.858 seconds
Sort database... 0.845 seconds
Group database... 0.622 seconds
Score: 5575
JRMark (version 17.0.182): 4568
64bit Version:Something isn't right. Try rebooting.
i7-4770T; MSI Z87M Gaming; 8 GB CL9 1600 MHz RAM; Samsung Evo SSD; MSI 1070 Gaming X:
Score: 3979
JRMark (version 23.0.62): 3422
-> Slower than old version 4207!
Raspberry Pi 3, stock clock speeds, running on an SD cardCode: [Select]=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 9.217 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 12.566 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 6.066 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 6.730 seconds
Score: 549
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1.965 seconds
Flood filling... 4.748 seconds
Direct copying... 4.398 seconds
Small renders... 2.060 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 3.675 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.832 seconds
Score: 1245
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 4.750 seconds
Populate database... 9.453 seconds
Save database... 1.073 seconds
Reload database... 0.339 seconds
Search database... 17.877 seconds
Sort database... 7.876 seconds
Group database... 4.534 seconds
Score: 468
JRMark (version 21.0.63): 754
The pi's are getting pretty close to some of the lower end intel hardware. I expect the model 4 (unannounced and hypothetical) will be within striking distance of the Atom/Celerons.
mwillems was right again. It just took a few years.
Why do JRMark scores drop every major version upgrade? On my laptop:
last version of MC24 JRMark ~ 2800.
last version of MC25 JRMark ~ 2400.
first version of MC26 JRMark ~ 2000.
Even more pronounced on my Desktop, lost over 900 points going from last version of MC 25 to first version of MC26!
I had an issue cracking 8k in the last update, but this one seemed to really speed it up. Same specs as mentioned before:Battle of the titans -- Ryzen 9 3950X, 32 GB DDR4 @ 3600, GTX 1650:
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 2.933 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.021 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.376 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.257 seconds
Score: 3402
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.221 seconds
Flood filling... 0.140 seconds
Direct copying... 0.341 seconds
Small renders... 0.679 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.257 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.163 seconds
Score: 12215
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.064 seconds
Populate database... 0.618 seconds
Save database... 0.150 seconds
Reload database... 0.039 seconds
Search database... 0.834 seconds
Sort database... 0.433 seconds
Group database... 0.375 seconds
Score: 8553
JRMark (version 26.0.22 64 bit): 8056
Sort of in the range of an i5.Yeah, looks like it mostly gets downgraded on the math score.
1794. Not terrible.
Nice! It will not be long till the first 10K score is posted.
Suggestion:Love that idea
1) add a "Submit" button to send these results to a JRiver database - also send OS, CPU, GPU, RAM info, MC version, plus a user-provided text label and optional username
2) add a wiki page to search the DB and view the highscores
It is not good!
Mac mini 2018 3.2GHz 6-core i7, 32 GB memory, AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB
I just got 3140
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 4.874 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 3.374 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.868 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.702 seconds
Score: 1935
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1.879 seconds
Flood filling... 0.290 seconds
Direct copying... 0.461 seconds
Small renders... 1.019 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.606 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 1.665 seconds
Score: 3717
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.151 seconds
Populate database... 1.363 seconds
Save database... 0.416 seconds
Reload database... 0.462 seconds
Search database... 1.480 seconds
Sort database... 0.981 seconds
Group database... 0.853 seconds
Score: 3769
JRMark (version 32.0.52 64 bit): 3140
Excellent results for a Mini PC!Yes. And it is basically silent and stays cool.
Apple Mac mini with M4 Pro chip with 12 core CPU, 16 core GPU, 24GB Unified Memory and 512 GB SSDWow, that's twice as fast as the M1. Crazy.
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 1.367 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 1.804 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 0.302 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 0.467 seconds
Score: 4822
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 0.266 seconds
Flood filling... 0.078 seconds
Direct copying... 0.185 seconds
Small renders... 0.252 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 0.154 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 0.138 seconds
Score: 20514
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.028 seconds
Populate database... 0.330 seconds
Save database... 0.104 seconds
Reload database... 0.137 seconds
Search database... 0.383 seconds
Sort database... 0.271 seconds
Group database... 0.312 seconds
Score: 13737
JRMark (version 33.0.30 64 bit): 13024