shadowsfall 發表於 2009-2-12 01:12:31

Phenom II 940 測試PART II

前一次弄了常用的BENCHMARK軟體做測試以後,接下來就是要實戰了,這次還是找了一些常用的用途,如轉檔跟壓縮來測試一下PHENOM II的長進到底在哪裡XD
測試平台:
CPU:PHENOM II 940 預設值3G
RAM:創見AXERAM DDR800 1G*2@1066 CL5
MB:MSI KA780GM-M
散熱器:ZEROtherm BTF-80
VGA:MSI 4670 SP
POWER: DELL875W
HD:HITACHI 160G
OS:VISTA ULTIMATE 32BIT
先來看一下模擬繪圖的CINEBENCH R10 可以透過算圖來得出使用單一核心以及多核心的結果及增長
單一核心為2723,多核心9765,倍數為3.59倍

接著是7Z這套免費的壓縮軟體,跟RAR一樣支援多核心,還有內建效能測試
測試的結果是10621MIPS

再來是WINRAR 3.71,這個就不用再多描述了吧XD,用壓縮最佳設定來壓一個2.43G的ISO檔
最後耗時12分29秒,不過CPU使用率最多用到80%,不曉得有沒有持續使用到100%的方法?
接下來是影片轉檔的部分,則是使用了X.264 BENCHMARK 2.0以及TMPGENC EXPRESS 4來進行X.264編碼,以及將影片檔轉換成DVD格式的測試
先看X.264 BENCHMARK,基本上就是將一個內附的720P MPEG2檔轉換成X.264格式的檔案來評斷每秒能轉換的影片格數,原有內建的設定是採用了採用了X.264 V747以及V819的主程式來進行壓縮,不過這兩個版本都有點時間了,所以自己再另外修改加上最新的V1096板,這板相較於舊版效率更高,更能夠好好發揮CPU的實力

直接來看看結果,稍微重新編排過,把同一個RUN的2次PASS都擺在一起
Results for x264.exe v747
encoded 1442 frames, 66.16 fps, 3905.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 16.60 fps, 3952.85 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 67.37 fps, 3905.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 16.62 fps, 3952.85 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 67.72 fps, 3905.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 16.62 fps, 3952.85 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 67.23 fps, 3905.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 16.56 fps, 3952.85 kb/s

Results for x264.exe v819M
encoded 1442 frames, 69.29 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 17.76 fps, 3963.43 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 69.34 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 17.72 fps, 3963.44 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 69.14 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 17.81 fps, 3962.74 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 69.35 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 17.81 fps, 3963.43 kb/s

Results for x264.exe v1096
encoded 1442 frames, 79.89 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.06 fps, 3926.47 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 81.51 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.07 fps, 3927.16 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 81.44 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.07 fps, 3926.30 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 81.37 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.05 fps, 3927.91 kb/s
接著是TMPGENC EXPRESS 4,把兩個X.264的720P影片檔轉成DVD的MPEG2格式,看耗費的時間
出來的結果都在21分鐘上下
最後一個是網路上的朋友要求的,跟9550同時脈比較一下X.264的表現差距,不過他沒說清楚是Q9550還是PHENOM 9550 XD,所以就當成是我手邊有的PHENOM 9550摟,把PHENOM II 940降到跟9550一樣的11*200來跑看看
來看一下文字結果,一樣把結果重編排過,先看PHENOM 9550
Results for x264.exe v747
encoded 1442 frames, 48.68 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 11.82 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 49.09 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 11.77 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 49.38 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 11.84 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 49.01 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 11.82 fps, 3952.97 kb/s

Results for x264.exe v819M
encoded 1442 frames, 50.24 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 12.66 fps, 3963.44 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 50.46 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 12.67 fps, 3963.43 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 50.37 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 12.63 fps, 3963.44 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 50.24 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 12.64 fps, 3963.43 kb/s

Results for x264.exe v1096
encoded 1442 frames, 58.84 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 15.51 fps, 3926.76 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 59.99 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 15.49 fps, 3927.30 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 59.56 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 15.49 fps, 3927.92 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 59.56 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 15.48 fps, 3927.90 kb/s
接著是940跑2.2G
Results for x264.exe v747
encoded 1442 frames, 50.84 fps, 3905.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 12.26 fps, 3952.85 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 51.38 fps, 3905.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 12.27 fps, 3952.85 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 51.67 fps, 3905.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 12.26 fps, 3952.85 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 51.56 fps, 3905.42 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 12.19 fps, 3952.85 kb/s

Results for x264.exe v819
encoded 1442 frames, 53.03 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 13.14 fps, 3963.43 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 53.06 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 13.15 fps, 3963.43 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 53.00 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 13.15 fps, 3963.43 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 52.85 fps, 3891.55 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 13.13 fps, 3963.43 kb/s

Results for x264.exe v1096M
encoded 1442 frames, 63.79 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 16.30 fps, 3927.30 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 63.66 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 16.33 fps, 3927.75 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 63.49 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 16.31 fps, 3927.85 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 63.66 fps, 3973.41 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 16.39 fps, 3926.41 kb/s
可以看得出來PHENOM II還是比PHENOM多了一點速度上的優勢,尤其換上了新版的X.264在1ST.PASS的部分差距更明顯
PART2就這樣摟,下一次就是比較超頻過後的表現,把所有的測試全部放在一起不分PART了
[ 本帖最後由 shadowsfall 於 2009-2-12 01:17 編輯 ]

頁: [1]
查看完整版本: Phenom II 940 測試PART II