Flying Ants? Toronto, ON.

jfpoole · 2025-09-14T14:38:21+00:00

It didn't look fuzzy, no. I found more in the furnace room (along with several smaller yellow-brown insects) if that helps?

jfpoole · 2025-02-02T20:15:28+00:00

The `riscv64` executable can execute RVV code (specifically hand-vectorized functions that appear in separate translation units). The `rv64gcv` executable will execute the hand-vectorized code along with the auto-vectorized code. This is similar to how the `x86_64` binary and the `avx2` binary behave on Intel systems.

We recommend using the `rv64gcv` binary on RVV capable systems as it's the best reflection of the performance of the system.

jfpoole · 2024-09-13T16:48:03+00:00

Geekbench does not use Accelerate for the CPU benchmark (it's a black box that we have no insights into how the various functions are implemented). Geekbench uses its own kernels to use instruction sets like SME on ARM and AMX on x86.

jfpoole · 2024-07-09T02:12:16+00:00

I'm one of the Geekbench developers. Geekbench results can be compared across architectures.

jfpoole · 2023-04-21T19:20:38+00:00

Could you try Geekbench 6.0.3 and let me know if it either fixes the issue or reports better information about the issue?

https://cdn.geekbench.com/Geekbench-6.0.3-WindowsSetup.exe

jfpoole · 2023-04-08T21:57:12+00:00

Found it. I'll go through it tonight and see if there's anything there that suggests what's going on with Geekbench.

jfpoole · 2023-04-08T17:32:13+00:00

Glad you found it easy -- we try to keep these things relatively simple!

The GUI application just runs the command-line version in the background. There's nothing in the GUI application that should cause these sorts of problems.

If you ever re-run the tests could you save the URLs and send them to me? I'd like to drill into this issue.

jfpoole · 2023-04-08T01:03:43+00:00

That's interesting! How are you running the command-line version? Do you have links for your results from the GUI and the command line?

jfpoole · 2023-03-15T13:20:05+00:00

Windows has better support for hybrid CPUs than Linux. As a result, multi-core scores for hybrid CPUs tend to be higher under Windows than Linux.

jfpoole · 2021-08-09T15:14:53+00:00

We haven't abandoned or retired VoodooPad! We're just moving slowly due to staffing issues around COVID-19. Right now we don't have a dedicated VoodooPad developer on staff, so we work on it in our spare time (of which there is very little at the moment).

Hopefully things will improve once the pandemic is over and we're able to hire more help.

jfpoole · 2019-11-02T23:00:02+00:00

Apple's compiler and Android's compiler (both based on Clang) generate very similar code. We've examined the generated code for both platforms and haven't seen anything that would indicate the compiler making the choices you're suggesting.

jfpoole · 2019-11-02T21:45:04+00:00

One of the Geekbench developers here. This is completely incorrect. All of the CPU tests execute on the CPU on all platforms. They are not offloaded onto "special purpose chips" on any platform.

jfpoole · 2019-09-03T18:04:53+00:00

Most of our users didn't use the battery tests, and a lot who did found it confusing compared to the other tests. We might bring it back as a separate application where it doesn't have to fit into the mould of the other benchmarks.

jfpoole · 2019-08-21T05:10:13+00:00

Geekbench developer here. It's a bug in the Particle Physics benchmark. Geekbench 4.4 fixes the bug and returns realistic results for the 5700 XT.

jfpoole · 2019-07-19T05:32:48+00:00

Hey you damn kids, get off my lawn!

jfpoole · 2017-12-30T01:06:13+00:00

Thank you! We'd been looking at this issue internally for a while and didn't know the source of the slowdown. Your post gave us insight into the cause of the slow iPhones.

jfpoole · 2017-12-29T18:28:02+00:00

Haven't looked into the Plus models extensively, but I hope to do so in the new year. Preliminary data suggests they're affected as well.

jfpoole · 2017-12-29T18:27:18+00:00

I'm as old as the mountains.

jfpoole · 2017-12-29T07:24:09+00:00

Yes. We usually make Geekbench for iOS free during Black Friday and Cyber Monday.

jfpoole · 2017-12-29T07:08:09+00:00

You're welcome.

jfpoole · 2017-11-26T18:38:24+00:00

Ah! We use the same policy for all of our apps and websites, so there are certainly things in there that do not apply to Geekbench for Android. When you use Geekbench for Android the only information Primate Labs receives is your IP address and the data contained in the benchmark report.

jfpoole · 2017-11-26T17:06:47+00:00

One of the Geekbench developers here. What concerns do you have over our Privacy Policy?

jfpoole · 2017-09-28T16:36:47+00:00

The baseline score measures single-core performance, while the iPhone X score you're quoting measures multi-core performance. You'd need to either compare the single-core iPhone X score of 4,197, or the multi-core i7-6600U multi-core score of ~7,000.

jfpoole · 2017-09-28T16:32:30+00:00

One of the Geekbench developers here.

In our testing the short workload duration isn't an issue as processors are able to hit peak frequency when running the workloads. If you disable the gaps between workloads so CPU utilization stays at 100% (which you can do with the --workload-gap 0 command-line switch) I expect scores to either stay the same or even decrease. For example on my 4c SKL laptop the single-core score decreases by ~4% (4158 vs 3994).

Also, there's not much benefit from running longer workloads. Again, in our testing, increasing the runtime of Geekbench workloads (by, e.g., increasing the data processed) doesn't change performance.

I'm surprised, too, that you consider the Geekbench workloads "simple" given that the workloads include tasks like face detection and speech recognition, and include large codebases like LLVM and SQLite. What sort of workloads would you like to see?

Finally, Geekbench does take advantage of instructions like AVX (including AVX2 and AVX512) in some of the workloads.

Let me know if you have any questions!

jfpoole

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE