Go Back   hwbot.org > News > HWBOT Frontpage News

HWBOT Frontpage News Official HWBOT articles and frontpage news

Reply
 
Thread Tools

OCLab.ru Grabs Scoop on Haswell(?): First Benchmark Performance Results

It's not a full review yet, but the guys from the Russian OCLab.ru website managed to get the first testing results from the upcoming Intel Haswell architecture. They put the CPU through four popular benchmarks for overclockers: SuperPI 1M, SuperPI 32M, PiFast, Wprime 32M and Wprime 1024M. The CPU used was a Intel Haswell B0 stepping clocked at 2.8GHz and they compared it to an Ivy Bridge clocked at 2.8GHz. The OCLab.ru benchmark results:

  • Super PI 32M
    • Haswell: 11 minutes 27.505 seconds
    • Ivy Bridge: 11 minutes 49.094 seconds
  • Super PI 1M
    • Haswell: 14,1 seconds
    • Ivy Bridge: 13,1 seconds
  • PiFast
    • Haswell: 24,01 seconds
    • Ivy Bridge: 25,5 seconds
  • Wprime 32M
    • Haswell: 12.8x seconds
    • Ivy Bridge: 13.97 seconds
  • Wprime 1024M
    • Haswell: 7 minutes 11.181 seconds
    • Ivy Bridge: 7 minutes 11.8xx seconds

Of course we were unable to verify if the presented performance results are indeed correct and to what extend the BIOS was optimised for performance. Given the odd results for the SuperPI 1M benchmark, it might be possible that the BIOS is not ready yet (or that the results were mixed up). As always, we have to be careful with leaked information you can find on the internet - pagehits and views are ruling this world - but given that the number One of the HWBOT Pro OC League definitely has a solid amount of contacts in the industry (just google a bit and you'll find out) we consider this leak to be plausible at least. In any case, if true, these results are nothing more than a first indication of the Haswell performance level - we are eagerly waiting for the first information about the overclocking capabilities to leak out.

For more information, check out their news article: link.


Jan 30, 2013 - review - oclab.ru
  #1  
Old 01-30-2013, 02:24
Massman's Avatar
Massman Massman is offline
Abhorrently evil braindead kind-hearted money-driven child-hating short-sighted hardware-sharing cheating
macho nacho supreme discriminating clueless idiot boy genius with sense of humor
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Waregem, Belgium
Posts: 18,955
Send a message via MSN to Massman
Default OCLab.ru Grabs Scoop on Haswell: First Benchmark Performance Results

I guess they pissed off Francois!
__________________
Where courage, motivation and ignorance meet, a persistent idiot awakens.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-30-2013, 02:49
dhenzjhen's Avatar
dhenzjhen dhenzjhen is offline
transformer
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Philippines
Posts: 626
Send a message via Skype™ to dhenzjhen
Default

we got ivy-e samples also here in the lab
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-30-2013, 03:24
Tim Handley Tim Handley is offline
kitchen robot
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: TAIWAN
Posts: 2
Default

I don't see the point in publishing results from such early samples because the final CPUs will behave differently. Anyone know what board they're using?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-30-2013, 03:26
l0ud_sil3nc3's Avatar
l0ud_sil3nc3 l0ud_sil3nc3 is offline
transformer
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UNITED STATES
Posts: 856
Default

good to finally see some Haswell #'s
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by sin0822 View Post
whats LOD?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
If you can't beat 'em, report them! lol
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-30-2013, 04:16
xxbassplayerxx xxbassplayerxx is offline
Boss Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UNITED STATES
Posts: 807
Default

Interesting 1M numbers...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-30-2013, 04:26
I.M.O.G.'s Avatar
I.M.O.G. I.M.O.G. is offline
transformer
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rootstown, OH
Posts: 783
Send a message via AIM to I.M.O.G.
Default

Ya, only way 1M numbers make sense is if the single threaded integer performance is worse, but has wells memory performance is far better, making 1M slower, but memory intensive 32M faster. That's the first explanation that comes to mind, but it is possible the 1M results were just swapped, or otherwise erroneous.

@Handley: Agree its nearly pointless. But after doing a CES full of nothing for our crowd, any news about haswell is interesting to me.

We need cold results, if it can't do full pot, can't compete with ivy.
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by Devroush on HWBOT View Post
Of course it will be bug free, I only write flawless code.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-30-2013, 04:56
chispy chispy is offline
transformer
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Puerto Rico, small island in the Caribbean ;)
Posts: 718
Default

Thanks for the info and the leaks
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-30-2013, 05:25
GIPrice GIPrice is offline
kitchen robot
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 10
Default

I want to see iGPU numbers
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-30-2013, 07:06
Massman's Avatar
Massman Massman is offline
Abhorrently evil braindead kind-hearted money-driven child-hating short-sighted hardware-sharing cheating
macho nacho supreme discriminating clueless idiot boy genius with sense of humor
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Waregem, Belgium
Posts: 18,955
Send a message via MSN to Massman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dhenzjhen View Post
we got ivy-e samples also here in the lab
Pics or it didn't happen!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Handley View Post
I don't see the point in publishing results from such early samples because the final CPUs will behave differently. Anyone know what board they're using?
No idea. Assuming the leak is legit (it's still unconfirmed), my best guess would be on either an Asus or an Intel one, based on previous benchmark results/contact info, but it might be anything else. Maybe it's just a mobile mainboard from a notebook vendor

Quote:
Originally Posted by I.M.O.G. View Post
Ya, only way 1M numbers make sense is if the single threaded integer performance is worse, but has wells memory performance is far better, making 1M slower, but memory intensive 32M faster. That's the first explanation that comes to mind, but it is possible the 1M results were just swapped, or otherwise erroneous.

@Handley: Agree its nearly pointless. But after doing a CES full of nothing for our crowd, any news about haswell is interesting to me.

We need cold results, if it can't do full pot, can't compete with ivy.
Probably just swapped. Anything else is just too complicated as an explanation
__________________
Where courage, motivation and ignorance meet, a persistent idiot awakens.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-30-2013, 07:14
borandi's Avatar
borandi borandi is offline
robo cop
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 476
Default

Graphs are a bit unrepresentative, making the difference look bigger than it is and going 'look, A < B!'. Put them all down to zero for scale. Also would much rather see production CPU results, even at stock, but given the release date aren't we still a month or so before anyone gets them? Pre-production samples are usually just for validation and not in any way 'optimised' for those last-minute design tweaks.

Denis, stop teasing us with IB-E
__________________
Bro, do you even bench?



Quote:
"who cares about Christian Ney, this is overclocking" - John Lam
ReviewBros
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:10.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright COLARDYN IT GCV 2004 - 2013