How exactly CPU meter in a lobby figure out the numbers?

[DangerPizzaSlice]

Current top of the line CPU is 9900K which is having 580 points at a raw single core performance.

I running a 3700X which is 535 points, only 8% slower.

CPU's in lobby rated from 0 to 450, lower the better, and this meter is showing up 3700X as a 133-140

What in the world you need to have, to be at a top 100 in this benchmark of sort?

Thanks.

[armacham01]

Did you re-run the benchmark after you got your new CPU?

[DangerPizzaSlice]

of course. old one is 6600 non-k, i was at 175ish

new cpu is 136-140 out of the box and 133-135 with a slight overclock.

[PhilipJFry]

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

[DangerPizzaSlice]

Yeah, thanks PjF, i'am aware of userbenchmark, cpu-z amd passmark. Quite a long time PC enthusiast. That is not a point, though.

I just wanted to know, by what woodoo rituals FAF benchmark comes up with a result. Thats what bugs me

[Katharsas]

It probably just measures how long something takes and converts that into a number. You will never arrive at 0 unless your CPU is infinitely fast.

[speed2]

Yeah, thanks PjF, i'am aware of userbenchmark, cpu-z amd passmark. Quite a long time PC enthusiast. That is not a point, though.

I just wanted to know, by what woodoo rituals FAF benchmark comes up with a result. Thats what bugs me

https://github.com/FAForever/fa/blob/de ... 5173-L5360

[tatsu]

Current top of the line CPU is 9900K which is having 580 points at a raw single core performance.
running a 3700X gets me 535 points, only 8% slower.

*faster

@DangerPizzaSlice let's start with the beginning : in faf... lower "cpu score" in the ingame lobby is better. (580 = "why would we ever play with you you''ll lag", 0 = "omg i wish every player was rich like you")

so yeah your 9900K scored worse than your 3700X according to FAF... which you should disregard entirely because FAF's cpu score is rustic and in no way an authority on what CPU is better... especially when it comes to newer CPUs.

this test at the time it was made didn't account for the world of CPU developing "under-clocking", a technology which allows for saving power and useless cycles dynamically when the CPU isn't doing much. and by today's standards, running FAF's cpu bench is basically not even lifting a pinkie.

[ZLO_RD]

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

just need to remember that all those websites are not very accurate

Screenshot_435.png (47.82 KiB) Viewed 1737 times

@DangerPizzaSlice let's start with the beginning : in faf... lower "cpu score" in the ingame lobby is better. (580 = "why would we ever play with you you''ll lag", 0 = "omg i wish every player was rich like you")

i think he mesured those numbers in CPU-Z or cinebench, not faf.

https://github.com/FAForever/fa/blob/develop/lua/ui/lobby/lobby.lua#L5173-L5360

This looks like the real answer, but hard to understand what exactly happens there without having a reading-code-skills =\

[Katharsas]

It averages time for some iterations of random math operations. So the test measures how fast the LUA interpreter can interpret a set of simple Math operations (and a table insert/remove). I suspect that either the intepreter overhead or some of those operations (power, devision, insert, remove) completely dominate the benchmark. The fast, common operations probably dont have much influence at all.