As the title says.
Homepage
Results.
32 Bit Version
Rendering (Single CPU): 368 CB-CPU (Higher is better)
Render time - 71.6 seconds
64 Bit Version
Rendering (Single CPU): 480 CB-CPU (Higher is better)
Render time - 54.8 seconds.
Printable View
As the title says.
Homepage
Results.
32 Bit Version
Rendering (Single CPU): 368 CB-CPU (Higher is better)
Render time - 71.6 seconds
64 Bit Version
Rendering (Single CPU): 480 CB-CPU (Higher is better)
Render time - 54.8 seconds.
thats a 30% boost right? not bad at all!
was the 32bit version run under the old winxp or winxp-x64 ?
If it really makes that much of a performance difference, then I might have a reason to install winxp x86-64. :stick:
nice im getting 64bit windows when i get my venice
I have just run both, 32-bit and 64-bit on Server2003 64-bit Edition
289x10=2890MHZ DDR554 5-2-2-2.0-1T (just for kicks as memory speed and L2 cache size don't really matter much here)
64.2s (32-bit) vs 48.6s (64-bit)
Nice, 24% boost !!! It's time for software developers to switch to 64-bit, don't ya think :D ?
Hmmm...would love to see and AMD vs Intel on this software considering A64 SHOULD give it some leeway against Intel's Encoding and Multi-tasking prowess.
Perkam
P4 HT eats alive single core A64 in that benchmark!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Then perhaps the challenge lies in AMD X2 vs Pentium D ??Quote:
Originally Posted by bachus_anonym
Perkam
As far as we have seen, AMD X2 4800+ manages a bit better result than Pentium XE 840... At least in 32-bit version :)
the x2 wins, not a real challange from a performence pov, but when you look at availability and price/performence it looks good for intel, sinificantly cheaper and not much slower...
id like to see a 840 vs 4800+ compare with the 64bit version :D
My AMD64 (x2 Opteron 252) outperformed my Intel (x2 Xeon 3.6GHZ) with EMT64 on Linux 64-bit. I guess it should be the same with WINDOWS XP 64.
________
Rhode Island Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
in what tests? compiling? how much faster was the opteron? did it have numa enabled?
nice rigs you have there :D
hmmm you need some decent memory though it seems... there is registered memory based on winbond ics that do 2-2-2 and there is other stuff based on micron ics that do 2.5-2-2 :)
with that much memory and interleaving enabled you should see a nice difference with faster memory timings i think.
32 Bit version in WinXP32Quote:
Originally Posted by Der_KHAN
64 Bit version in WinXP64
Since it's Sunday and I got some spare time :D , I re-run Cinebench benchmark. This time on 32-bit OS as well as 64-bit OS... For comparison ;)
This is @ 306x10=3065MHz DDR576 5-2-2-2.0-1T. Both OSes are on optimized in EXACTLY same way... Same services disabled, same tweaks...
Cinebench 32-bit on Server2003 32-bit - 60.5s
Cinebench 32-bit on Server2003 64-bit - 60.3s
Cinebench 64-bit on Server2003 64-bit - 45.8s
I thought, someone might find it interesting ;)
Lets see Intel guys post result. Is this not their benchmark? Let us see how they can beat the 64-bit record. Are they shy or what?
Honestly, It doesn't take much for P4 HT to wipe the floor with that 60s I just did... 4GHz is more than enough to make it happen :lol:
My friends Dual 275 Opteron did this bench in 26.3 seconds (the 32 Bit version) Man can you imagine with the 64 Bit version !!! I phone him. :banana:
yeah give him a call! :D
thx a lot michal! very interesting :toast:
I can't get XP x64 installed (the betas worked fine!). Maybe I'll try 2003 server.
Eric
On air
266x14 3.73Ghz
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...chmentid=31043
Vapochill @ 1.45v
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...chmentid=31044
sweet!!! thx for posting more results charles :toast:
im curious how an amd dual core compares to this
14-SIXTY on that multiplier???
Can we have a comparison between AMD 64bit and Intel 64bit? I'd like to see the speed up each one has...