2 ms·

That was about Geekbench 3, the previous version. The new version doesn't have those problems, and also it uses the exact same workload between desktops and mob

That was about Geekbench 3, the previous version. The new version doesn't have those problems, and also it uses the exact same workload between desktops and mobile devices. In those same forums there are comments by Linus about the new Geekbench 4 and they are much more positive. http://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=159853&curpostid=159853 http://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=159853&curposti...

dahauns 9y ago
>The new version doesn't have those problems. See, that's the thing. It may be much better than before, but starting from such a low level this doesn't mean much. Considering the whole Geekbench history I have a hard time accepting that statement in its absolute form. That they suddenly are _the_ indesputable luminaries about all the intricacies, pitfalls and subtleties of multi-arch benchmarking and have done everything right to make a single artificial score a meaningful comparator (which is questionable in itself in the best of cases IMO).
mbell 9y ago
Something is still wonky with their approach. Consider a 3770 vs 6700: https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/compare/3041851?baseline=3041905 https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/compare/3041851?basel... Almost all other benchmarks I've seen put the 6700 at ~15% faster for both single and multi core tests, including most importantly, real world benchmarks. Geekbench has the 6700 at 47% faster single core and 64% faster multi-core. The few individual benchmarks I've see with numbers close to Geekbench's overall spread are using new instructions or are actually testing the onboard GPU.
- jfpoole 9y ago
  The 6700 result you selected is significantly faster than the average for the 6700: http://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks http://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks Maybe it's overclocked? If you look at the averages for the 3770 and the 6700 Geekbench reports a difference of 20% for single core.

dahauns 9y ago

>The new version doesn't have those problems. See, that's the thing. It may be much better than before, but starting from such a low level this doesn't mean much. Considering the whole Geekbench history I have a hard time accepting that statement in its absolute form. That they suddenly are _the_ indesputable luminaries about all the intricacies, pitfalls and subtleties of multi-arch benchmarking and have done everything right to make a single artificial score a meaningful comparator (which is questionable in itself in the best of cases IMO).

mbell 9y ago

Something is still wonky with their approach. Consider a 3770 vs 6700: https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/compare/3041851?baseline=3041905 https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/compare/3041851?basel... Almost all other benchmarks I've seen put the 6700 at ~15% faster for both single and multi core tests, including most importantly, real world benchmarks. Geekbench has the 6700 at 47% faster single core and 64% faster multi-core. The few individual benchmarks I've see with numbers close to Geekbench's overall spread are using new instructions or are actually testing the onboard GPU.

jfpoole 9y ago
The 6700 result you selected is significantly faster than the average for the 6700: http://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks http://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks Maybe it's overclocked? If you look at the averages for the 3770 and the 6700 Geekbench reports a difference of 20% for single core.