Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Look At The Per-Clock Performance / Peak Frequencies With The Intel Core i7-1065G7 Ice Lake

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Look At The Per-Clock Performance / Peak Frequencies With The Intel Core i7-1065G7 Ice Lake

    Phoronix: A Look At The Per-Clock Performance / Peak Frequencies With The Intel Core i7-1065G7 Ice Lake

    Following this week's Intel Core i7-1065G7 Ice Lake Linux benchmarks there was some questions and speculations about the per-clock performance of this long-awaited Intel microarchitecture update. Here is some additional data shedding light on the clock frequencies under load and ultimately how the per-clock performance compares to the common Intel previous-generation mobile CPUs.

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Looks like Intel was "slightly" exaggerating the IPC gains of Icelake, to say the least.

    Comment


    • #3
      Typo:

      Originally posted by phoronix View Post
      First up was the single-threaded PHPBench test case where the Core i7-1065G7 came out to be 1.17x the spedd of the Core i7-8550U.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by brent View Post
        Looks like Intel was "slightly" exaggerating the IPC gains of Icelake, to say the least.
        Aren't you reading the graphs the wrong way around?
        I mean if you are reading them as Ice Lake hitting higher avg then IPC could be the same and the unit have higher performance.

        Ice Lake settles at a lower avg. lower min and lower max. Yet it still manages to beat it's older sibling handily.
        I can't interpret it any other way than higher IPC. Significantly so.

        Comment


        • #5
          Michael
          But in this set of tests if looking at the geometric mean of the raw performance, the Ice Lake CPU was running at 1.1x the speed of the Kabylake-R model. So ultimately the i7-1065G7 had about 1.08x the performance-per-MHz of the Kabylake-R model.
          that cant possibly be right
          1,1X perf
          running at lower clocks
          1,08X perf per MHz

          did you mean 1,18?

          EDIT: i did the math and its indeed 18% higher, matching intels claim
          Last edited by davidbepo; 26 October 2019, 12:25 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by brent View Post
            Looks like Intel was "slightly" exaggerating the IPC gains of Icelake, to say the least.
            no, see my comment

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by davidbepo View Post
              Michael


              that cant possibly be right
              1,1X perf
              running at lower clocks
              1,08X perf per MHz

              did you mean 1,18?

              EDIT: i did the math and its indeed 18% higher, matching intels claim
              Yeah fixed, thanks, meant 18 not 08 typo.
              Michael Larabel
              https://www.michaellarabel.com/

              Comment


              • #8
                Thank you, Michael

                It would be great if you also run something more computationally intensive on these two laptops, e.g. x264/x265 veryslow preset encoding or rendering in Blender - all of which should take at least a few minutes to complete. This way we'd get a little bit more consistent frequencies, temperatures, throttling and performance - not some spikes which don't convey a lot of information.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by birdie View Post
                  Thank you, Michael

                  It would be great if you also run something more computationally intensive on these two laptops, e.g. x264/x265 veryslow preset encoding or rendering in Blender - all of which should take at least a few minutes to complete. This way we'd get a little bit more consistent frequencies, temperatures, throttling and performance - not some spikes which don't convey a lot of information.
                  There are some long running tests if you click the OpenBenchmarking.org link in the article. Also, each test ran a minimum of 3 minutes total, granted many tests longer than that, so at a minimum are 180 samples per test.
                  Michael Larabel
                  https://www.michaellarabel.com/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hi Michael,

                    Great article, as usual, but I can't find memory speeds anywhere. What memory speeds are the two systems running at?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X