x264 Benchmark

[kpfong]

Athlon 64 3200+ ClawHammer, 10x199.5MHz, Nvidia NForce3 150, 4-4-8-12@199.5MHz, XP Pro SP2


---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 27.50 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 27.42 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 27.46 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 27.50 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 27.48 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 6.64 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 6.63 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 6.63 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 6.64 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

[alom]

the link isn't work now. where can i get the fiel of x264 Benchmark?

[Adrian Wong]

Originally Posted by alom

the link isn't work now. where can i get the fiel of x264 Benchmark?

What do you mean the link isn't working?

You can download it here - Tech ARP - x264 Benchmark

[Heaven]

Hi to all!
Here are my results:

Amd Athlon 64 X2 5600+ Windsor, 14x200MHz, nVidia MCP61, 5-5-5-18-24@400MHz, XP Pro Sp2

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/2594/71250021cw5.png
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/1518/25400943yh9.png
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/9292/94651062cx5.png



---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 76.46 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 76.41 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 76.46 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 76.62 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 76.62 fps, 1850.89 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.54 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.52 fps, 1826.32 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.52 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.53 fps, 1826.37 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 18.53 fps, 1826.38 kb/s

[kpfong]

Intel Pentium M 730 Dothan, 12 x 133MHz, i915GM, 3-3-3-9@200MHz, XP Tablet PC SP2


---------- RUN1PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 20.41 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 20.37 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 20.40 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 20.28 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS1.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 20.38 fps, 1854.10 kb/s

---------- RUN1PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 5.05 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

---------- RUN2PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 5.02 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

---------- RUN3PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 5.02 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

---------- RUN4PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 4.98 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

---------- RUN5PASS2.LOG
encoded 1749 frames, 5.02 fps, 1825.89 kb/s

[graysky]

Thanks for all the data, guys. I need to spend a few hours updating the table (it is REALLY labor intensive at this point given the size of it and the fact that I'm using screenshots to capture it).

Once TA upgrades the backend, it'll be much easier

[graysky]

Oh, btw, Kris over at anandtech.com used my benchmark in his overclocking qx9650 guide which is pretty flattering.

Have a look.

[Chai]

Originally Posted by graysky

Oh, btw, Kris over at anandtech.com used my benchmark in his overclocking qx9650 guide which is pretty flattering.

Have a look.

Yup I saw that too.

[Adrian Wong]

Originally Posted by graysky

Oh, btw, Kris over at anandtech.com used my benchmark in his overclocking qx9650 guide which is pretty flattering.

Have a look.

We are using it in our current and future CPU tests too. More coming up!

Oh yeah, I have some benchmark results (averaged) for you :

Core 2 Extreme QX6700 (Pass 1) 134.1
Core 2 Extreme QX6700 (Pass 2) 37.2
Core 2 Quad Q6600 (Pass 1) 128.3
Core 2 Quad Q6600 (Pass 2) 35.5
Core 2 Duo E6600 (Pass 1) 68.7
Core 2 Duo E6600 (Pass 2) 16.9
Core 2 Duo E6320 (Pass 1) 54.8
Core 2 Duo E6320 (Pass 2) 13.3

[hkazemi]

I found an inconsistency in the data table for an entry labeled Core 2 Quad Q9550 ES. The problem has to do with the listed multiplier. It is listed as 8x333 for 2.66 ghz.

The problem is that isn't the right multiplier for a Q9550; it is correct for a Q9450 at stock speeds.

Q9450 is 8.0 x 333 for 2.66 ghz
Q9550 is 8.5 x 333 for 2.83 ghz

This can be seen various places on the web, including the tables here:
List of future Intel Core 2 microprocessors - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Both the stock speed table and the Intel OC table show this entry.

I think most likely the chip is a Q9450 not a Q9550.