View Full Version : E6600 VS 4400+ Output
DAK1640
10-28-2006, 04:12 AM
I am about to pull the trigger on a Conroe rig (E6600) but I need factual data on how much more a Conroe will output compared to the AMD 4400+. Consider both OC'd...
KaptainBlaZzed
10-28-2006, 06:34 AM
I had an X2 3800+ @ 2.8 and the highest RAC i got in QMC was ~2000
I have an E6400 @ 3.3 and its RAC in QMC is currently 3150.
DAK1640
10-28-2006, 06:39 AM
Gr8 info, how do you know what each rigs individual RAC is? I can only see all of them combined.
KaptainBlaZzed
10-28-2006, 07:11 AM
Gr8 info, how do you know what each rigs individual RAC is? I can only see all of them combined.
i am running QMC not WCG. In QMC i can see each individual computer
DAK1640
10-28-2006, 07:14 AM
Kentsfield huh? Wished I had a Quad...
itznfb
10-28-2006, 09:02 AM
my Opty 165 @ 2.9ghz was averaging 5K/day on wcg, my e6600 @ 3.4ghz only averages about 4K/day.
DAK1640
10-28-2006, 09:22 AM
my Opty 165 @ 2.9ghz was averaging 5K/day on wcg, my e6600 @ 3.4ghz only averages about 4K/day.
That can't be right, I have many rigs and all combined can't do 5K / day...
L0$t Pr0PhEt
10-28-2006, 09:26 AM
That can't be right, I have many rigs and all combined can't do 5K / day...
He means in normal WCG points, not boinc WCG :)
DAK1640
10-28-2006, 10:28 AM
Oh, can anyone else shed some light on Intel vs. AMD crunch power.:confused:
RickH
10-28-2006, 12:06 PM
According to BoincView (based on BOINC scoring benchmarks):
4800+ @ 2.64 GHz: 28.58 points/hour, or 686 RAC
E6400 @ 3.52 GHz: 41.72 points/hour, or 1001 RAC
Those are totals for both cores, each. Works out to about 100 & 146 WCG points per hour per core, respectively.
itznfb
10-28-2006, 12:17 PM
were we talking boinc points? i don't even check what i score in boinc
rob725
10-28-2006, 12:34 PM
Here's recent output from 6300 @ 3.45:
DAK1640
10-28-2006, 12:44 PM
According to BoincView (based on BOINC scoring benchmarks):
4800+ @ 2.64 GHz: 28.58 points/hour, or 686 RAC
E6400 @ 3.52 GHz: 41.72 points/hour, or 1001 RAC
Those are totals for both cores, each. Works out to about 100 & 146 WCG points per hour per core, respectively.
Excellent, this is EXACTLY the kind of info I was after...Thank You !!! This translate to a 45.97% increase in output...:woot: :banana: :woot: :banana: :toast:
an0nym0us
10-29-2006, 10:40 AM
Excellent, this is EXACTLY the kind of info I was after...Thank You !!! This translate to a 45.97% increase in output...:woot: :banana: :woot: :banana: :toast:
yeah man the conroes will outdo X2 on almost any folding project.
mike047
10-29-2006, 10:59 AM
According to BoincView (based on BOINC scoring benchmarks):
4800+ @ 2.64 GHz: 28.58 points/hour, or 686 RAC
E6400 @ 3.52 GHz: 41.72 points/hour, or 1001 RAC
Those are totals for both cores, each. Works out to about 100 & 146 WCG points per hour per core, respectively.
Excellent, this is EXACTLY the kind of info I was after...Thank You !!! This translate to a 45.97% increase in output...:woot: :banana: :woot: :banana: :toast:
DAK1640,
I don't see it as cut and dried as that.
GHZ is king, thats what crunches. If you consider the difference in overclock, the points avg is similar.
My farm averages about 2.5 Ghz a box and makes about 95 pph. If I could raise my average OC to 3.6 Ghz[I can't :(] I would make about 150 pph.
One cpu may easier to OC or be more cost effective, but I feel that GHZ is KING for crunching.
If my viewpoint is skewed please let me know :D