Chromium Compile: Windows VC++ Compile of Chrome

A large number of AnandTech readers are software engineers, looking at how the hardware they use performs. While compiling a Linux kernel is ‘standard’ for the reviewers who often compile, our test is a little more varied – we are using the windows instructions to compile Chrome, specifically a Chrome 56 build from March 2017, as that was when we built the test. Google quite handily gives instructions on how to compile with Windows, along with a 400k file download for the repo. This is by far one of our most popular benchmarks, and is a good measure of core performance, multithreading performance, and also memory accesses.

In our test, using Google’s instructions, we use the MSVC compiler and ninja developer tools to manage the compile. As you may expect, the benchmark is variably threaded, with a mix of DRAM requirements that benefit from faster caches. Data procured in our test is the time taken for the compile, which we convert into compiles per day. The benchmark takes anywhere from an hour on a fast single high-end desktop processor to several hours on the slowest offerings.

Compile Chromium (Rate)

Prior to this test, the two CPUs battling it out for supremacy were the 16-core Ryzen Threadripper 2950X, and the 8-core i9-9900K. By adding six more cores, a lot more frequency, and two more memory channels, the Core i9-9990XE plows through this test very easily, perfoming the compile in 42 minutes and 10 seconds, and is the only processor to broach the 50 minute mark, let alone the 45 minute mark. 

The Intel Core i9-9990XE Review CPU Performance: Rendering Tests
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • kgardas - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    Nice comparison, but why is ryzen 3xxx missing from your compilation test? Would be most interesting!
  • Slash3 - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link isn't?
  • Slash3 - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    Nm, I see what you meant.
  • Flunk - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    Probably part of Intel's deal to loan them the chip.
  • Retycint - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    Intel wasn't the one who loaned them the chip. Nice try, though
  • jabber - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    Three or fours years ago this might have been exciting...
  • EdgeOfDetroit - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    I love all the hate from AMD fanbois here who don't understand that for some things, single thread speed is king. And that apparently didn't read the article long enough to see the completely valid application for these yet felt justified in slamming Intel for selling it. Not surprisingly, those were the first comments, as they didn't have to read the article before commenting.
  • ET - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    I love the Intel fanboys, who must post such a comment even before any AMD fan had said anything, just because they know that the value of money on that thing is atrocious and that it loses to a 12 core AMD consumer CPU is several tests.
  • Retycint - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    I mean, nobody is buying Lamborghinis based on their cost-to-perf ratio....

    AMD is irrelevant in this scenario because it doesn't satisfy the same needs. Not every CPU had to be mass-market oriented
  • nandnandnand - Monday, October 28, 2019 - link

    There's nothing to hate. Intel Core i9-9990XE isn't a real product.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now