Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can't match Passmarks calculations in spreadsheet for all sub trests

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

  • Can't match Passmarks calculations in spreadsheet for all sub trests

    For reasons not worth going into, I have produced a spreadsheet using the numbers shown on this page (https://www.passmark.com/forum/perfo...and-disk-mark=) to recreate Performance Test Results, but I can't get the numbers from running the test to match up.
    I can get very close to the overall rating using the individual ratings for the 5 categories, and my calcs for 2D graphics and DiskMark are also very close, but the memory, CPU, and 3D Graphics are way off.
    For example, see the calcs for CPU Mark below. Running Performance Test gave 17111 for this compared to 18290 by my calcs.
    Any ideas?

  • #2
    What version of PerformanceTest are you running?
    Also what CPU model? Some CPUs don't support the full suite of Extended Instructions tests.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks David, it's build 1025. CPU is i7 8700 @4.8GHz, but I don't think that's the issue. Did you look at my attachment? By those calcs, the CPU Mark is 18290, but the score given in PT was 17111.
      The CPU Mark was just an example. As you can see from my original post, I can't match the memory or 3D Graphics result either. Do my calcs in the attachment look correct?

      Comment


      • #4
        Are you using the V8 or the V9 values from the forum thread? In the V9 post, it notes that:

        Overall CPU mark is scaled down 6.5% to bring it closer in line to V8 results
        18290 * 0.935 = 17101 (probably some rounding errors).

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Richard (PassMark) View Post
          Are you using the V8 or the V9 values from the forum thread? In the V9 post, it notes that:



          18290 * 0.935 = 17101 (probably some rounding errors).
          Thanks Richard, that explains that one. Now, what about memory and 3D graphics. Here are my calcs in the attachment. PT gave Memory Mark as 3442 and 3D Graphics as 15400. Mine as you can see are 4311 and 13798 respectively. Click image for larger version

Name:	PT2.JPG
Views:	195
Size:	63.3 KB
ID:	42418

          Comment


          • #6
            Be aware that for RAM Latency, lower is better. The inverse of all the others, where higher is better.

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks David, but Iím not sure that helps. My calcs shown in the attachment do not match those given in Performance Test results and I canít see where I might have gone wrong.

              Comment


              • #8
                No help here, guys?

                Comment


                • #9
                  I am very disappointed and surprised that you are not interested in understanding why your formula does not give the same results as the Memory and 3D Graphics Passmark. I know you have limited resources, but, really, we are probably only talking about spending a few minutes looking at the calc.
                  Oh well....

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X