How Strong Is Your Connection? – XDA Xposed Tuesday

Everyone is always talking about their bars. How many bars of WiFi do they … more

OnePlus 2 Announced: Specs, Price and Details

The OnePlus 2 has just had its Virtual Reality Launch event, and at the XDA Office we all … more

A Helpful Guide to Music Streaming Services

With the launch of Apple Music, music streaming services have recently gained a lot of … more

An Inside Look at the Redesign of Business Calendar

The much-acclaimed calendar app, Business Calendar, underwent a major design … more

[App] Cpu Performance Tester

173 posts
Thanks Meter: 123
By rootfan, Senior Member on 30th March 2014, 01:26 AM
Post Reply Subscribe to Thread Email Thread
This application simply does large amounts of mathematical operations on one, two, three, four, or eight threads (which corresponds to the number of cores used) and measures the amount of time it takes to complete. It makes it easy to see the cpu power of one computer compared to another. Enjoy

Some devices for comparison
Intel i7-3770 @ 3.4 ghz (quad core ht) -
1 Thread - 23 seconds
2 Threads - 23 seconds
4 Threads - 24 seconds
8 Threads - 27 seconds

Intel i5-3317U @ 1.7 ghz (dual core ht) -
1 Thread - 35 seconds
2 Threads - 36 seconds
4 threads - 40 seconds
8 threads - 1 minute 16 seconds

Intel Atom-Z3740D @ 1.33 ghz (bay-trail, quad core no ht)
1 Thread - 1 minute 24 seconds
2 Threads - 1 minute 24 seconds
4 Threads - 1 minute 25 seconds
8 Threads - 2 minutes 35 seconds

Source code can be found in the text file bellow.

Performance Tester: - For X86 - Windows RT edition
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	perfpic.jpg
Views:	2412
Size:	28.8 KB
ID:	2658030  
Attached Files
File Type: txt performance.txt - [Click for QR Code] (13.3 KB, 152 views)
Last edited by rootfan; 1st April 2014 at 01:55 AM.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to rootfan For This Useful Post: [ View ]
31st March 2014, 07:25 AM |#2  
Recognized Developer
Flag Seattle
Thanks Meter: 2,864
Cool. Looks easy to port to jailbroken RT; and chance of an ARM build? (I'd do it myself but I'm away from my dev machine at present).
1st April 2014, 01:49 AM |#3  
rootfan's Avatar
OP Senior Member
Flag Idaho Falls
Thanks Meter: 123
Of course. I will just post it above for now.
1st April 2014, 01:53 AM |#4  
Recognized Developer
Flag Seattle
Thanks Meter: 2,864
That would be great, thanks.

I'm somewhat amused by somebody with a C# logo in their profile image posting a C++ app but that does make sense for performance testing programs.
9th April 2014, 02:24 PM |#5  
Senior Member
Flag Thurrock
Thanks Meter: 17
Scores for my AMD FX-8350 (stock @ 4.0GHz):
1 Thread: 26 seconds
2 Thread: 27 Seconds
3 Thread: 27 seconds
4 Thread: 27 Seconds
8 thread: 29 seconds.

Will give it a whirl on my Q6600 machine in a sec!

Q6600 (stock 2.4GHz):
1 thread: 47 seconds
2 threads: 47 seconds
3 threads: 47 seconds
4 threads: 48 seconds
8 threads: 1 minute 26
Last edited by chazam; 9th April 2014 at 02:49 PM.
9th April 2014, 03:38 PM |#6  
T.E.C.H.N.O's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Hamburg
Thanks Meter: 76
On Windows 8 (64 bit) it gives me the following error:

The program cannot be started, because MSVCP110.dll it missing.

9th April 2014, 05:54 PM |#7  
vbetts's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Toledo Ohio
Thanks Meter: 56
You need .net framework or Visual c++.

Works on 7, my work machine which has a core 2 duo 4600(yup running one of these old guys!) scored 56 seconds on 2 threads.
9th April 2014, 06:44 PM |#8  
Recognized Developer
Flag Seattle
Thanks Meter: 2,864
@chazram: Cool (though not surprising) to see that the clock cycles per (arithmetic) instruction are basically the same between Intel and AMD (which allows the AMD's greater clock rate to smoke the Intel). Also interesting to see the difference between actually having eight integer cores (AMD) and having eight hardware pipelines but only four ALUs (Intel). It *is* actually a bit surprising to see how close the AMD is on 4 threads and 8, given the 8350 only has 4 floating-point ALUs and a good bit of the computation is FP. On the other hand, repeating the same operation over and over again can easily be optimized, possibly even my microcode.

Of course, real-world usage is a lot more than just crunching numbers over and over, but it's a pretty good set of ALU benchmarks.
9th April 2014, 10:03 PM |#9  
Flag Bordeaux
Thanks Meter: 14
Is the test loop doing floating point or integer calculation ?
shouldn't thread priority be high ?
Like memory consumption exceed the simple CPU Cache, how to be sure that results aren't influenced by ram quality ?
9th April 2014, 10:08 PM |#10  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 325
Originally Posted by GoodDayToDie

given the 8350 only has 4 floating-point ALUs and a good bit of the computation is FP. On the other hand, repeating the same operation over and over again can easily be optimized, possibly even my microcode.

Should also be mentioned that the AMD floating point units consist of 2 128 bit FPU's which can be addressed by each half of a module independently or the 2 128 bit units can be ganged together to form a single 256 bit FPU. I think intel utilise a near identical unit. But I should think the effective 8 128 bit FPU's of the 8350 should suffice?
9th April 2014, 11:58 PM |#11  
Connor Baker's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Sterling
Thanks Meter: 777
Scores from my Win8.1 device:

One Thread - 27
Two Threads - 27
Three Threads - 27
Four Threads - 28
Eight Threads - 30

Lenovo Y410P, with an Intel i7-4000MQ @ 2.40GHz

Connor Baker

Read More
Post Reply Subscribe to Thread
Previous Thread Next Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes