FX-8320 Cinebench Score EXTREMELY Low

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

Syndfull

Reputable
Apr 29, 2015
5
0
4,510
I've OC'd my CPU to 4.0GHz running 60C under prime95 stress testing. It's been stress tested with Unigine and 3dMark as well. Cinebench is giving me a score of 330 though with no background processes. My friend, on the other hand, has a 4.18GHz Fx-8350 and is getting scores of 926.

What the actual <mod edit> is going on? I have a stable voltage and temp on my OC. Cinebench isn't even pushing it up to the max voltage or temp according to HWMonitor running when Cinebench is running. HWMonitor clearly shows prime95 pushing the temps and voltage up.

I'm running Fx-8320 4.0GHz, GTX 970, 8gb 1334MHz G Skill Ripjaws CAS 9 RAM, Samsung 128Gb Pro(where Cinebench is), 990FXA-UD3 mobo. I should note I have everything power-restricting in the BIOS turned off to keep my OC stable. I also have Windows power settings set to highest performance custom settings. I have an 800W 80+ Bronze PSU.

I understand that this is hardware dependent but there is something seriously wrong if the score difference is this big.

Welcome to the forum, now watch your language. We have rules. Thanks.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
S

Syndfull

Reputable
Apr 29, 2015
5
0
4,510
The clock speeds are extremely similar and the difference in the architecture should not account for the 3x lower score. Note that the rest of my specs were better than the ones on the Fx 8350 build.

I don't understand why my score is 1/3 that of the 8350. In fact, I'm scoring FAR lower than a reference stock 8320 on top of it. This is very unusual.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Syndfull

Reputable
Apr 29, 2015
5
0
4,510


He liquid cools while I have a stock cooler. As before though, under prime95 stress testing, I only go up to 60 C stable with full load which is a great temp for an OC. I've made sure this was the case with multiple stress tests and Cinebench was the only one where my CPU underperformed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Syndfull

Reputable
Apr 29, 2015
5
0
4,510


I wouldn't worry so much about the 8350. It was just a score provided for reference by my friend. It's my score being so low that's the issue. Like I said, any other PC in a caliber anywhere near mine scores at least twice as high as 330.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Syndfull

Reputable
Apr 29, 2015
5
0
4,510


Exactly, there is something majorly wrong with my score and how it's turning out.

After some tinkering, I'm reporting in now to gladly say I found the fix! Hopefully this will show up in some google searches because I saw multiple people with the same problems who never found a fix.

Ok, so I went and did some benchmarks. I was getting 30 FPS AND crashing in games like GTA V even with low settings and 720p. The works, basically. My entire rig was messing up.

What's the one thing all these programs have in common then? That is the ONLY logical component that can be at fault. RAM and how my OS is optimized to use it.

I had 0 free RAM when I looked at it under task manager. This was my issue all along: low free memory. My RAM was being, quite literally, eaten by Superfetching. I went here and disabled Superfetch. I have had the feature turned off in the past and don't know how it has been re-enabled. I increased Windows' available buffer memory here. I have changed my vram in Windows from 1gb to 6gb. I then optimized my startup programs and services via msconfig so I would only load essential Windows programs on startup.

I'm now getting scores of 630 in Cinebench, 2x higher already than my previous score. This was a huge bottleneck. I may have some room to optimize further but now my memory is not the problem.

Thanks i7Baby for all your help. =) If you can reply below this post, I would like to pick your post as the solution there so that users, when looking for the solution, will see this post and how to solve the problem.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom