Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best online benchmark software Benchtown.com vs ?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
August 31, 2011 7:34:52 PM

Aloha
I tried this site called benchtown and it does a benchmark of your system and then you can upload to the web and share it with everyone.

are there any other sites like this, where you can share your benchmarking results online?

a b K Overclocking
September 2, 2011 2:26:40 AM

yes... prime 95 will allow you to do that as well
September 3, 2011 8:06:50 AM

Is that a popular site?
Related resources
September 10, 2011 11:27:09 PM

Aloha
does prime give scores for each subsystem of the pc or just the one number as a total score?

I am hoping for more subsystem scores like hard drive memory graphics and even smaller then that if possible.
October 15, 2011 3:52:00 PM

I downloaded prime but have only been using it for stability testing so far
I will check out the benchmarks.
November 9, 2012 11:41:39 PM

These days I am using passmark.

I like the fact that the scores like hard disk and cpu are directly comparable to the benchmarks they post online at.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/high_end_drives.html

So when you complete the test you can see exactly where your cpu and hard drive score compared to almost every other cpu on the market today.

You can even see if your cpu or hard drive is performing as it should, by comparing the scores you got with the score for the same item online.

Also when you run a test it allows you to upload your results and those are the results that are used to calculate the scores that are posted online.

That is a major advantage of using passmark for both benchmarking your own system and deciding which hardware you might want to buy!

Some of the other benchmarks you might see online come from brand new systems built in a lab by certified computer techs and they might be higher than the average person would get.

Also the SSD scores are much more useful then the specs published by manufactures and posted online in reviews because ssd's slow down after use (some slow down quite a bit, and some not as much) , and the passmark scores include those used ssd's in the score calculations.
scott
a c 110 K Overclocking
November 10, 2012 2:01:22 AM

Passmark is ridiculously inaccurate, though (or at least using the scores posted on their site as a way to compare CPU's is). The scores are user submitted and never checked for accuracy.

An 8350 beating nearly every single consumer level Intel CPU? Mobile CPU's beating high end desktop parts? Yeah...

Passmark is only good for use as a way to make sure your system is performing reasonably well, but should never be used as a source for comparison to other systems (unless you're testing side by side with another system in the same room).
a c 149 K Overclocking
November 10, 2012 2:05:00 AM

HWBot.......
November 17, 2012 1:41:17 PM

Well nothing is perfect.
You can pretty much find a flaw in every test.
If you have a better suggestion please make it.

The fact that the scores come from user uploads is one of the KEY reasons I like the tests.

This means the test is run on USED components that have not been perfectly set up by computer techs in a lab.


This is a nice benefit, especially when comparing hard disk scores.

Many SSD's see a sharp drop off in performance after just a few days usage, and regular hard disks can drop in performance too after they have been used for a while.

The passmark test uses 8 separate tests on the CPU to come up with its numbers.
The test was around a long time before the 8350 came out.
If you look you can see that CPU is very new and only 20 samples make up the numbers.

Yes you are correct it is an awesome tool to compare your cpu and hard drive scores to the online ones to make sure your system is running smoothly.

But you cannot just dismiss its results because you do not like them.

Since most users will compare the desktop cpu's to other desktop cpu's and mobile cpu's to other mobile cpu's that is really not a huge issue either.

It can be a very useful tool for people considering on of the garbage cpu's that are currently being sold today like intel atoms and AMD e series (like e-50 E2-1800)
a b K Overclocking
November 18, 2012 3:29:35 AM

I am going to go out on a limb here and risk getting flamed, but I actually feel the need to defend the Passmark software. It's actually amazingly useful and the truth is that it provides more in-depth information about YOUR system than most people could possibly ask for. The fact that it individually runs tests focused on different functions of the CPU, 2D graphcis, 3D graphics, memory, and disk and then provides those results for you to compare to your own previous tests is invaluable. It is a very, very good way to keep track of the performance of different elements of your system over time, as you upgrade one part or another.

There are two aspects of Passmark that do deserve criticism, but mostly because people tend to focus on them far too much.

First, yes, the "overall score" isn't something I think is truly very accurate in comparing different systems. For example, the difference between the fastest FX8350-based system and the slower of my two X4 965 rigs is only 800 points. Meanwhile, the difference between just various i7 machines is literally thousands of points. Instead of the gap getting smaller between systems as they become faster, as would be the actual experience perceived by a human user, the formula makes the gap much larger numerically. Thus, it's hard to compare anything that isn't in the same ballpark as your own system.

Second, as someone has pointed out already, the index of component scores needs to be taken with not a grain, but a teaspoon of salt. The CPU numbers aren't accurate representations of the real performance level of the processor potential, because there is no way to weigh just who is submitting the scores. What I mean by that is right now, anyone submitting a FX-8350 score is going to be an overclocker 90% of the time, and thus the scores are through the roof. Meanwhile, 90% of the people submitting scores for i5 processors that are available in retail machines are going to be running stock speeds. Thus, the scores get skewed far in favor of the FX chip in that case. The best example of this is the A10-5800k. When it was released, the first 72 hours had it's overall average AHEAD of the FX-8150. Why? Because the people who rushed out and bought it the day of release were clearly enthusiasts who took it home and maxed out the limits before benchmarking. Since then, it's dropped to about half that initial average. There are other things I could point out as well- for example, if you look at the Hard Drive charts, usually there is a "Kyle's SSD RAID" or something like that in the top 10 models. Obviously, that should have been caught before filtering through to the hardware index. The entire hardware score section of the site really took a hit when they upgraded from version 7 to version 8. For whatever reason, they decided to wipe ALL of the past scores from the database, which had actually been fairly accurate when the sample sizes were collected over a period of months and years.

So, that long-winded thought summarized: Passmark is a great tool to assess progress you make with your own system, if viewed on the sub-score level. It's not especially great to use as a way to judge your system against the database of scores.
a c 110 K Overclocking
November 18, 2012 4:33:29 AM

ocmusicjunkie said:
So, that long-winded thought summarized: Passmark is a great tool to assess progress you make with your own system, if viewed on the sub-score level. It's not especially great to use as a way to judge your system against the database of scores.


Agreed entirely.

My point above is basically just saying don't use it a gauge for which CPU is better than another (because of exactly what you said).

It great as a tool to track your own system's performance across overclocks and so on.
!