• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
0

Current Build - PPBM

Community Expert ,
Mar 22, 2017 Mar 22, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I ran the PPBM a few times on my current machine. I can't tell from the results, but I would have thought my disk time would have been higher? Also, my time seems to be slghtly better than the 2600K listed on the website. Here's the results:

PPBM-2017-03-19_0-10-16-ProjectInF-ExToC.jpg

P8Z68 - 2017-03-22_12-00-55.png

Views

695

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

LEGEND , Mar 23, 2017 Mar 23, 2017

For the most part, those results are typical for a system with a non-overclocked (or default Turbo'd) i7-2600K with a mid-range Fermi-generation GPU. However, the 306 MB/second result in the Disk I/O test is below average for a SATA SSD. This is because you have a budget SSD (an OCZ Trion 100) as your secondary (media/projects) SSD - the Samsung 850 EVO, even at the 250GB capacity point, is capable of well over 400 MB/second in the PPBM Disk I/O test (based on my own testing). What's more, the i

...

Votes

Translate

Translate
LEGEND ,
Mar 23, 2017 Mar 23, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

For the most part, those results are typical for a system with a non-overclocked (or default Turbo'd) i7-2600K with a mid-range Fermi-generation GPU. However, the 306 MB/second result in the Disk I/O test is below average for a SATA SSD. This is because you have a budget SSD (an OCZ Trion 100) as your secondary (media/projects) SSD - the Samsung 850 EVO, even at the 250GB capacity point, is capable of well over 400 MB/second in the PPBM Disk I/O test (based on my own testing). What's more, the i7-2600K in the CPU-intensive MPEG-2 "MPE Off" test is only slightly faster than my i5-6500 result in that same test.

And the over-300-second result in the H.264 Blu-ray export test is proof that mid-range Fermi GPUs simply cannot keep up with even a mediocre budget Maxwell GPU, let alone the higher-end Pascal GPUs, in Blu-ray exports.

Also, I noticed that you're still running Windows 7. Windows 7 simply does not have the disk I/O performance as newer Windows OSes such as Windows 10. And that's not to mention that USB 3.0 support is not as complete in Windows 7 as it is in Windows 8 or later.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Mar 23, 2017 Mar 23, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Excellent, thanks for that rundown!

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Apr 01, 2017 Apr 01, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Here's the best I could get from my i7-2600k - I've been using it without the TURBO on in the bios, but I had run it that way for a long time. So, this is turbo boosted to 4.4ghz. I ran this with the PPBM project folder,  on the P: drive (850 evo 256mb) with the default media cache locations (c:) This looks to be a bit faster than the 2600k on the PPBM website and also my original results in the OP, which were without the turbo mode on. I don't know why I can not get any better on the Disk I/O test, but this was about it. Is Win7 slower than Win10?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Apr 01, 2017 Apr 01, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

That is about what I expected for a second-gen i7 that's overclocked to 4.4 GHz. A bit slower than even my default-Turbo'd i7-4790K @ 4.2 GHz.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines