ZBrush benchmarks

PolyHertz

I was wondering what kind of scores you all get in the ZBrush benchmark (preferences>performance>Test multithreading, lower is better)? I get about 2.5 but have heard of people getting as low as 0.68 with newer cpus. Just curious to know because am thinking of building a new PC before the end of the year because mine's starting to show its age (especially when sculpting) and am tired of waiting for sandy-bridge.

Note: I think this feature may be broken in 4.0, at least it doesn't work for me (but still have 3.5 installed).

cryrid

My laptop is 3 years old now, so it's only getting around 3.54 : /

robioto

I get 1.14 with a 3ghz quad core i7 but this was built last year around this time so there are faster ones out there now I'm sure.

PolyHertz

Hmm, just two replies?

Robioto: What model processor is that? an 950 Bloomfield?

James Edwards

1.26 on my 2.8 GHz i7 iMac

ENODMI

ha, 4.45 on some old Xenon:(

robioto

Polyhertz, not at my computer at the moment but I think that's correct, a 950 bloomfield. My benchmark might go higher after I flash the SSD with new firmware to support the trim command on win 7. I'll post an update after I get that done. Currently the SSD is the performance bottleneck because of the absence of trim support. If you buy an SSD it's something to consider before purchse.

m4dcow

I get 1.06 on a Quad Core i7 920, 12gb of ram & normal hard drive (WD6400aaks).

maze

I was also wondering about this, first time I just test it out I get 0.017 (single thread timer), i7930, 12gb dominator gt, quadro fx1800 (dont know if graphic card counts though)

PolyHertz

maze: yea that's an impossibly good score, you're using zb4 I take it? If its working right it should draw and spin a star tool on the canvas before giving a result.

maze

Hi Polyhertz, yes I just test it again, in multithread timer I get 0.0165, Z4 I recently switch yes, I think it does it too fast that I see straightly the result almost, test2 it says. Just finished a project at around 40mil polys no lag at all. Can't complain, although I was curious about what this number represented I mean 0.017 doesn't really tells me anything unless I compared it with something else I guess, hope this helped.

cryrid

Hi Polyhertz, yes I just test it again, in multithread timer I get 0.0165, Z4 I recently switch yes, I think it does it too fast that I see straightly the result almost, test2 it says. Just finished a project at around 40mil polys no lag at all.

Well color me green...

maze

ah?

wannabeartist

Hey,

Just tried mine, AMD Phenom II x4 955. Zbrush 4 says 1.71

cryrid

maze wrote: »

ah?

I'm envious of your workstation.

maze

ohh...didn meant to show off, I build it some months ago, I work mainly texturing & modeling / rendering for vfx so it does really help.

Super

Do we know whether Zbrush prefers high clock count per core or benefit more from multiple cores for CPU drawing? Not interested in total polycount but more the interactivity. 

For example something like a 9900k (8 core 3.6Ghz with 2 cores Turbo at 5Ghz) vs 9980xe (16 core 3.0Ghz, 32 threads).

The issue with Zbrush is performance is so dependent on the canvas size. I just upgraded my monitor and now increasing the canvas size, performance has dropped maybe 50%. It struggles to rotate 500k poly without dropping frames massively. 

brainchildpl

I am also curious about it.