Cinebench 10
MAXON CINEBENCH runs several tests on a computer to measure the performance of the processor and graphics card under real-world circumstances and makes use of up to 16 cpus or cpu cores. Cinebench’s test process is in two-phases: The first test procedure is directed against the cpu using a 3D render scene and photo realistic image settings shown above to test how fast the cpu can produce the fully rendered scene. During the 1st pass of the test, the benchmark will only use one cpu, or in a multi-cpu core system it will use only a single cpu core to render the photo realistic scene to get a base value against which it will then perform the 2nd phase of the test using all of the cpu cores available. Higher Frames/Second and lower rendering time in seconds equals better performance.
Results
As you can see from the results, the 415e does fairly well. Again, not the best, but most certainly not the worst. The multiprocessor speed up is adequate.
Cinebench 11.5
CINEBENCH is a real-world cross platform test suite that evaluates your computer’s performance capabilities. CINEBENCH is based on MAXON’s award-winning animation software CINEMA 4D, which is used extensively by studios and production houses worldwide for 3D content creation. MAXON software has been used in blockbuster movies such as Spider-Man, Star Wars, The Chronicles of Narnia and many more.
CINEBENCH is the perfect tool to compare CPU and graphics performance across various systems and platforms (Windows and Mac OS X). And best of all: It’s completely free.
Main Processor Performance (CPU)
The test scenario uses all of your system’s processing power to render a photorealistic 3D scene (from the viral “No Keyframes” animation by AixSponza). This scene makes use of various different algorithms to stress all available processor cores.
In fact, CINEBENCH can measure systems with up to 64 processor threads. The test scene contains approximately 2,000 objects containing more than 300,000 total polygons and uses sharp and blurred reflections, area lights and shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and much more. The result is given in points (pts). The higher the number, the faster your processor.
Results
The results for version 11 are much more ambiguous, but at least they give some procs to compare it too. Definitely not the best for rendering, but productivity is definitely a go.
hi buddy… i just wanted to say that my msie is freezing when I click on the pics… are you using some js or something?
yeah there is some JavaScript. Works fine on my Mac 😛
But seriously try using a different browser. IE6 isn’t actually supported by many sites anymore.
This is just blatant PR for AMD. Complete waste of time as a review.
Max Power (I can only assume that is a reference to the Simpsons from the episode where Homer changes his name and becomes popular),
Unfortunately, we do not have any preference for any company and the simple fact is that AMD made a worthwhile product. We are not a PR Agency and do not act as such, although if you’re looking for a good PR agency to represent you, I would suggest The Max Borges PR Agency. If Intel would like to have a comparison done against this processor, they are more than welcome to send what they feel is their equivalent product. Our job here is simple. We build a rig, using random parts. We do NOT, under any circumstances, use specialized installs, manufacturer suggested parts, or any thing that would manipulate results in any way. If you see different results on other sites, it is likely that they have different computer builds. If a computer build has only one slight difference, it could skew the results drastically in either direction. This is why it is important that you take information from multiple sources, and can only use the average of what you find to make an assumption of product performance, before purchasing a computer.
I say it is worthless as a review because:
1) Some of the benchmarks you run are not compared to any other processors, so what is the point? These results can’t be compared to results from other sites because as you say your builds are from random parts
2) The benchmarks you do provide comparisons chips to, the processors are just so far out of the Athlon II’s league (eg core i7 860) it again is just a waste of time because the performance difference is huge.
I do apologize for the tone of my previous arguments, I just question the point of this article.
“Keep in mind that the results are for your testing benefit. Check your rig against these results to see how much of an upgrade you might get.”
You’re suppose to compare these results to your own rig.
Also, there was no way for me to change the i7 stuff for cinebench 11.5. I thought it fairly obvious considering my comparisons in SiSoft Sandra.
Here in Okinawa, power consumption is a BIG deal. We offer get electric bills of $600 in the summer months. So a CPU that does more with less power works for me. Not to mention my air-conditioner works less.
a 50% power loss drop is impressive