I love this benchmark. You guys have to check this out.

[Kunaak]

http://www.31337.s5.com/31337ware.htm

or CPU Mathmark.

it's like super PI, but it doesn't crash so constantly when overclocking, infact, it hasn't crashed for me yet after a hour of fiddling with.
SuperPI for me, gives me constant errors when overclocking extremly high.

this one takes everything I threw at it, and still comes out smiling.
I even passed it with a 234 FSB, which was completly impossible for me with PI cause it wouldn't even open.
(the score sucked cause I had a lower overall speed)

heres my best screen shot of this program and my best time.

221x12.5=2.775 ghz.

8.562 seconds.
I love that it has the decimal places for the seconds, it just makes it that much more "critical" when even going for a few extra decimals faster.
this is a Nice Program.
it even has a burn in feature.

;)

If anyone heres interested, it would be fun to see some other Time scores and such posted.

[sjohnson]

"Forbidden
Remote Host: [XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX]

You do not have permission to access http://www.31337.s5.com/CPUMathMark3.exe
Data files must be stored on the same site they are linked from.

Thank you for using FreeServers"

Can't get there from here ;)

[Kunaak]

ok, well, I got mine at


http://www.majorgeeks.com/article.php?sid=123&cat=4

but you will need to download this part.

"***Here are the MSwinsck. files needed for the benchmark. Most systems have them anyway, but if your not sure, get them!
WindowsNT here
Windows9x here"

depending on what OS you have.
from the original website.

http://www.31337.s5.com/31337ware.htm

otherwise the Benchmark can't finish.

[charlie]

Kunaak,
You must have started something! It's downloading at an absolute SNAIL's PACE!!!
C

[SupaMan]

nice & slow. how does it scale with OCing?

[DaGooch]

Here is mine for reference:

[DaGooch]

Here is one at a little higher MHz:

[charlie]

Hmmmmm..........

Meeza thinks this benchie likes AMD...
BUT, this is with "bath water in my res'...catch me again after I make a trip to the 7-11 for a bag of ice!
C

[BrainStorm]

Originally posted by charlie
Hmmmmm..........

Meeza thinks this benchie likes AMD...
BUT, this is with "bath water in my res'...catch me again after I make a trip to the 7-11 for a bag of ice!
C

Must not be optimized for SSE2...;)

[charlie]

Hmmmmm....
remember that discussion we had about AMD vs. Intel re: efficiency and usage of clock cycles??
Hmmmmm....
Did someone say Barton 3000's were $340?
I sure hope P4/800 kicks a**.
C

[PiLsY]

Charlie - dont forget than on the NF2 boards an AMD @ 12 x 200 is pretty much equal to a P4 @ 21 x 171 (tested it personally here - get exactly the same benches in 3dmark, faster in super pi and slower in pifast, but not by much. If this program scales inline with those 3 benches you will need roughly a P4 @ 4.2 - 4.4gig depending on how far above 200FSB the amd is running to equal the times. Your 3.5gig time isnt that bad all things considered.

PiLsY.

[charlie]

Thanks Pilsy,
That answers that. I don't know what was up with my rig tonight!
Wouldn't even post past 3600. 3800 a few nights ago. So would it be fair to say that 3.0gHz of AMD is equivalent to about 4.5gHz of P4?? Could this test alos be using greater amounts of RAm? The other guys have 512...
And what are your prelim opinions of canterwood/3.0/800??
C

[IFMU]

Anyone mind telling me what this error is?

[PiLsY]

Charlie -

Canterwood - damn fine board. Should help people with 533 chips at the 190 - 200FSB area get a fair few mhz more. Memory performance looks very good too.

As for the actual move to 800FSB, I dont think we will see as huge an improvement as we did from going 400 - 533. Especially so on dual ddr boards. Im thinking bandwidth saturation and diminishing returns. The difference will be there though.

Overclocking wise 250/250 would be well sweet running 1:1 though ;). At those kind of speeds im thinking maybe 500points difference between single and dual DDR. I doubt theres many single channel boards that could go that far though.

PiLsY.

[cpulloverclock]

this benchmark is known
I use it since its creation

Barton 2500+@2756MHz (229.7*12) watercooled
http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_oc/00/03/IMG0003305.jpg

[Kunaak]

wow, there are some good times here, this was fun to come back and see so many actually gave it a try.
I also got a few scores to aim for...

;)

[beatnic]

Originally posted by IFMU
Anyone mind telling me what this error is?

software bug.. probably the author didn't include a check routine :p

[cpulloverclock]

Kunaak, your score will be better if u choose Burn-In instead of Benchmark.

- 0.5-0.7s

I'm too nice

[JCviggen]

Originally posted by cpulloverclock
this benchmark is known
I use it since its creation
[/IMG]

I hear ya

look who's in the hall of fame :D

http://www.31337.s5.com/halloffame.htm


check the specs... thats some old §§§§ (not to mention it was a slower version of the program than it is now)

I also get the "divide by zero" error now btw.. doesnt want to run on my rig

[cpulloverclock]

Originally posted by JCviggen
I hear ya

look who's in the hall of fame :D

http://www.31337.s5.com/halloffame.htm


check the specs... thats some old §§§§ (not to mention it was a slower version of the program than it is now)

I also get the "divide by zero" error now btw.. doesnt want to run on my rig yes now it's the v3.0
33s = v2.0 or with a bad system

[JCviggen]

this is what I got so far

http://users.pandora.be/JCviggen/CPUMM.JPG

Also, the "compare system" Athlon 1.4@1.75 GHz was mine btw... I did some beta testing for that thing once :p

[cpulloverclock]

Originally posted by JCviggen
this is what I got so far

http://users.pandora.be/JCviggen/CPUMM.JPG

Also, the "compare system" Athlon 1.4@1.75 GHz was mine btw... I did some beta testing for that thing once :p
7.81s for 3GHz
There is a problem :confused:

[Swiftdeathz]

This is what I get on mine

[sjohnson]

Here's a run on one of my rigs. Running again always generates higher times on the second and subsequent runs. Wonder why?

[Dissolved]

i get 10.531 but i had other stuff running
2.258ghz

Nice program tho. its fast :)

[XtremepH]

My two cents:

http://www.whyhacking.com/benchmarks/mmark.jpg

[Qkjhfhaiguihfma]

Is it just me, or is it calculating the wrong value of pi?

/me thought 3.141592653. . . . .

No?

[Kunaak]

has anyone noticed if this program responds more to speed or more to FSB?

or if it does better on XP then 2000?

[charlie]

A little ice in the resevoir...
Still doesn't help the AMD biased benchie :rolleyes:
C

[Kunaak]

new high for me.

7.718

a few tips.
200 pro is faster. FSB counts for alot.
open the program, CRTL+ALT+DEL, processes, change to real time.
then select burn in, once.
this is the way to get the fastest score around.
it only helps by about a half second, but it works.

[sysfailur]

MMM well... personally I don't like this bench at all. Most benches are taking like 7-10 seconds. That's silly. I prefer a bench like hexus pifast, which will have you biting your thumbs for about a minute hoping that you'll make it through.

[LikwidKool]

i just get a damn wnsock error,a dn I can't download it from the guy's site. It just keep sgiving me the error at power test. I am running XP so I figured all would be good right?

[Kunaak]

you need to download the second part.
so the program knows whether your using a NT based OS or a 9X based OS.

[JCviggen]

best I can do...

[Kunaak]

Holy Crap JC, you definatly win again.
I know for a fact I can't touch that 7.3 score.
it was hard as hell for me to go from 7.9 to 7.9.

nice score.

[JCviggen]

nicest part is that its a 60$ CPU I guess...

I think I can shave off a bit more, but I could use a better mobo. This NF7 1.2 hates cas2 ... 222-223 MHz and I have to go to cas2.5 :(

[Kunaak]

how sad for that ABit.
they are usually pretty good.

my Epox is great at cas 2-2-2 all the way to 230.
just can't benchmark at all at that speed, except a few Sisoft sandra ones, which is nice and all, but hardly fun.

man, I gotta get one of them 1700 XPMW's.

if you can get more then 7.3, give it a try, thats pretty hardcore.

;)

[gtcrispy]

This is as fast as I could get on my setup. Oh wait. Realized I didn't try your tips. I'll give those a try.

http://207.44.156.21/~admin309/benchmarks/2775_cpumark.jpg

[Major]

Here is a link with a zip containing all of the files needed.

http://optimisersonpc.free.fr/Progs/CPU%20math.zip

[CodeRed]

Couldnt help myself .. had to try this thing out.

Here goes

http://www.users.tpg.com.au/spark69/cpumath2902.jpg

Done on a totally stock NF7-S v2, XP2100+ AUIHB 0302, 2x XMS3500C2 3-2-2-2 and prom cooled of course using 2.25V.

Shame this board wont do high FSB with high Vcore (same prob as my old 8RDA+) otherwise I'd try 12.5 x 232 :(

[full loaded]

ok, this is a great program, if my setup is online agaid (hurry jc ;))
I will see wat I get, I hope to reach the 7,5.

[charlie]

SURE,
it's good! It's equal to a 4.3gHz P4!!!
These AMD's are really strong on these math benchmarks:thumbsup:

[Major]

Not the fastest in the world, but its mine !:)

[JCviggen]

I'm only beating my own scores (boredom) but I've set my goal to go below 7 seconds now ;)

http://users.pandora.be/JCviggen/CPUMMmax2.JPG

[theonetheycall]

11.32!! :(
2400+ @ 2178 :(
Doing VDD mod NOW :)

[Kunaak]

What can we say JC, you have the fastest AMD CPU around...

;)

[WxChaser]

Got it to run after finding the mswinsck.ocx file somewhere.
Still think I'm missing the mswinsck.oca and mswinsck.dep files though...output doesn't look right.

[Major]

Originally posted by WxChaser
Got it to run after finding the mswinsck.ocx file somewhere.
Still think I'm missing the mswinsck.oca and mswinsck.dep files though...output doesn't look right.

WxChaser look back about 8-10 posts, I posted a link to a zip that contains all of the files.

I've been using this bench instead of Super Pi to test cpu oc, it seems a little quicker.

[Nohto]

Originally posted by IFMU
Anyone mind telling me what this error is?
I get the same thing on my dually. Whats up with that? Any fixes?