Real-World Multitasking Benchmark

A client had me check out his home office computers because “they are being slow” and the verdict was a slew of problems due to running ancient hardware. What I did notice was that he was trying to heavily multitask on a dual core cpu so now he is having me build 2 brand-new systems to bring him into 2020.

This actually got me thinking if there are any real-world multitasking benchmarks out there and how I should go about making my own if there isn’t one? How would I go about testing real-world multitasking performance with predictable, repeatable results? I would like to be able to test how well (or poorly) an existing system does in a test like this so I can show a client real-world data that they probably need something more capable of multitasking.

Also, if this is in the wrong area of the forum I apologize. It seemed like the best place for it and the “About the Benchmarking Category” didn’t help too much. :laughing:

On an old dual core ? Just fire up all the basic maintenance programs and antivirus at the same time . Scan for malware/spyware ect.

Bench marking is a bit OS dependent. Your clients needs in regards to updating depends on what they are doing and what they are using.

1 Like

The better of the two computers was running a Core 2 Duo E8500. It managed to touch base clock (3.16) occasionally but was having a lot of trouble staying there. I’m thinking if I build the benchmark myself then I’ll really just look at Windows 10 for consistency.

Antivirus is a good idea though. Rather than using basic maintenance stuff I would like to show them open tabs in an internet browser with a few open Word and Excel documents as well. I’m mainly looking for something to use as a benchmark going forward, not particularly for this client.

This is going to be next to impossible to benchmark overall simply because of different types of workloads. If you start using handbrake to convert a bunch of videos and then try to go play a game while you wait then you’ll have a bad time on any machine. The type of task matters here. Also what is slow for some in one case is something another user doesnt even do… such as closing and opening the same program. Windows 10 utilizes empty RAM to cache frequently loaded stuff so initial program launches will feel slow but only on first open.

Its a can of worms really. Just build something with modern IO and call it a day.

Almost anything you build today will just smoke. All the improvements across board.

Some time on a modern system built well, should speak for itself.

oof

You could give them an athlon 3000g or celeron and it would be miles ahead.

1 Like

The other computer was in worse shape. Also a dual-core and was clocked at 1.-something. Also a Core 2 Duo I just don’t remember which model. I gave them options and they ended up opting for the Ryzen 5 3400G for both systems instead of the Athlon. Once all the parts show up I’ll give my makeshift benchmark a shot on both identical systems and see how accurate of results I can get. :man_shrugging:

ASUS has a “Real World” Benchmark I can’t remember how much multi tasking there is in it.


Just ran the test on my PC and got a score of 146005. I have no idea if that is any good but the last test is called “Heavy Multitasking” so that answers that question.

2 Likes

Just tried it myself but it errored out on me. Possibly because I am not running Asus hardware?
Either that or my 2700X actually can’t multitask and this has all been an illusion lol

In my experience the biggest slow down with old hardware and multi-tasking is due to inadequate RAM capacity, exacerbated by slow storage performance.

However, the Windows ADK has the “performance toolkit” in it that has some tools for recording metrics whilst performing your actual workload that can help highlight bottlenecks. I haven’t used it myself yet, but discovered them yesterday when i was trying to get a disk IO load generator (WPT used to have “diskio” but looks like they removed it).

So, not quite a “benchmark”, but it can help identify where your issues are to help resolve them.

Generally speaking, I would say that “good multitasking” to most office users means 2 things. Lots of ram, and an SSD. With those in place, it can even take old hardware , and make it feel like new. Web browsers have also gotten heavy, so any modern CPU will destroy those old ones as others have stated, but mostly due to architecture improvements. Generally speaking, a modern “bottom of the barrel” $50 CPU with 16GB ram and an SSD will feel a million times better than a 2008 6 core workstation monster with a hard drive and 8GB of ram.

As for as office use, Octane benchmark, which is really just a web browser benchmark, gives you really great comparisons for modern office use case. Browsers are seriously some heavy programs as much as people like to think that they are simple.

2 Likes

True, and I even recommended them a “bottom of the barrel” Athlon 3000G but also gave an upgraded option in the Ryzen 5 3400G because they could realistically pull more life out of the quad-core rather than the dual-core as programs become more complex in the future.

Web browsers are definitely something I will be including in my tests if I can get a reliable testing method put together. Looking at the innards of Asus’s RealBench gave me an idea for how to put it together. I’ll update later this week when I have some meaningful results.

Thanks everyone who has given feedback today :+1:

Definitely recommend going with more. I was just proving the point that a dual core was better than an old 6 core for most things. More cores is still better up to about 6 modern cores for most users.

EDIT: Source https://chromeunboxed.com/chromebooks-find-new-benchmark-to-replace-octane/

Google has retired octane as people were cheating in them (browsers themselves honestly) so they are now using this to test browsers, and chromebooks https://browserbench.org/Speedometer/

1 Like

RealBench is a pretty good bench

208,000 on a 3800X stock for comparison

Could do something like install chocolatey, install immunet, and have it continuously install a bunch of software/programs (immunet will scan them as this happens), load up Chrome/Excel with crap, play a video, run windows update, etc.

If its just going to be a Chrome and Office machine, an R3400G, 8gb+ RAM, and an SSD is enough. Windows 10 runs like shit with less than 8gb of RAM, and SSDs are so cheap these days you could ROI any additional cost of a 256/512gb Sata SSD over spinning rust in the manhours saved from loadtimes

My personal opinion is the 3600. Should hold its own for office tasks for a while to come. Even after it falls behind in gaming.

My 1700X is showing it’s age. The graphics card is also part of the test I have a vega 64

I thought about that too, or rather going with a 2600 to keep cost further down, but then the added cost of a discrete gpu was going over-budget. Watching videos is the most graphically intensive thing this client does on his computers so integrated was the way to go.

As far as Windows Update in the eventual benchmark, @2bitmarksman, it would be great if I could use it reliably but I’m aiming for something more repeatable. And yes, those specs are exactly what I’m building for them. Parts should all be arriving by tomorrow and then I’ll run my test on both of those computers, my laptop, and the two desktops here. Sample size of 5 but it should give me a decent spread of results.

I kind of assumed that but I find the mid tier with an upgrade path to work pretty well.