Step6 faster then Step5

Some time ago, after looking at Eva2000's 32M result, I began suspecting Step5 performed a bit worse than step6, so I decided to get it tested.

What I did was asking two members to run 32M, sadly first was a 965P user which I werent aware of, so last night I got the second result, same mobo as I, same mem settings.

The thing is, its primarily when overclocking the step6 benefits..

Here goes the test:
http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/1...4m37secno9.jpg
Many thanks too GOESA

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/998/rerun32mkv1.jpg

In order too test results on your own setup run realtime, no other tweaks were made.

The results speaks for themselves, almots 2mins difference on 32M.

EDIT:
Post has been editied due not looking into the issue with forgetting too ask for 2*512 or 2*1GB, which obviously has an impact.. (please dont mind me being a bit angry with nobody willing to test this but just being b..chy..)
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/2...inal32mte2.jpg
Many thanks too PcCI2iminal

- Futher I've made a rerun of my 32M in order for each round too be viewed, the rerun was less than 1 second different from the other one, which isnt a coincidence, please have a bit more trust in me, the settings are well thought off..
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/2...inal32mte2.jpg (first run)

wow

were the ram modules the same? I see your clocks are the same, but no reference to the actual ram used

i doubt it, some settings most be different, you are looking at a difference of 2 minutes....

I suspected that for a while now - this surely proves it ...
I get around the same time at pi32 with my step5 with 3.6ghz ....
So I think this is very intretsting ... !

What could possibly cause a discrepency of 2 entire minutes?

Both were run with the same Afinity + Priority settings? That's all I can think of that would cause a possible 2 mins difference...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...trican/pi2.jpg
same mobo crapier timings, as i could not remeber them all....
step 5
24-7 rig. no tweaks and a bunch of programs and crap in the background



edited for better pic

Now to compare an A0 vs B2 would be real funny!

To have a good comparison, you have to test 32M on the same system and just switch the cpu.

Very interesting considerations....

Can you tell me what's the name of the program that shows core voltages on 2nd pic please??

#10, nope, just understandin' of hardware, made one mistake though, underestimated some ram-related issue...
I've received a few very different results since postin' which is hmm, an hour ago.. :)

GOESA: A friend of mine, mem used: G.Skill 2GBHZ PC6400, the OS isnt in performance-mode, just classic skin choosen, no inet connection = less MS online applications... = a bit faster, however, very little difference.

However, still a half min difference
http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/1...4m37secno9.jpg


Now what I'd really like is someone with 2*512MB to go ahead and run as well.. BIOS settings for mine and GOESA: "Standart" in the section where you adjust voltage as well :)

EDIT:
THe program is Asus Probe2, I got alot of background applications running, doesnt hurt much when using DC and singlethreaded benchmark.

the best way to see the differences would be to underclock - or at least stock clock the CPU and not run a memory intensive test. The higher the CPU is clocked at the smaller the actual time difference will be

Pt1t i think these results are pretty decent. Even more so after thelostrican filled us in with his time, which is in the Beier ballpark, even though it is unoptimized. Goes to show that optimisations are not the cause of the faster time.
Also, i know that Beier has been thinking about the problem - i actually know he chose not to ask someone because "he would not understand the "unoptimized" part" ;)
I think the results are legit, though surprising.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlackeR

Pt1t i think these results are pretty decent. Even more so after thelostrican filled us in with his time, which is in the Beier ballpark, even though it is unoptimized. Goes to show that optimisations are not the cause of the faster time.
Also, i know that Beier has been thinking about the problem - i actually know he chose not to ask someone because "he would not understand the "unoptimized" part" ;)
I think the results are legit, though surprising.

---

No, i think there is maybe 10sec between B1-B2 for the 32M but not 2minutes. :slapass:

Are you sure it isn't throttling? Try compare at lower speeds.

Nothing to do with stepping, it's all in the setup.

- Dont post if you do not have something decent to add to the conversation FUGGER

Quote:

---

Step6 faster then Step5

---

Just some clarifications, to make such "statement", what is the confidence level that your findings is true "across the board", how do you define the "confidence" level and why can you say that a certain sample is good, or bad? Can you say that x% of all the CPU in XS is a good enough sample? Or can you say that x% of an estimated overall ES data collected across different sites then comparing them against x% of retail CPU is good enough basis to make such "conclusion" (if it is the conclusion)?

Hi.. Is anyone listening to my quest? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GordonFreemanLP

Hi.. Is anyone listening to my quest? :)

---

PCProbe

Asus program

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by death metal

Just some clarifications, to make such "statement", what is the confidence level that your findings is true "across the board", how do you define the "confidence" level and why can you say that a certain sample is good, or bad? Can you say that x% of all the CPU in XS is a good enough sample? Or can you say that x% of an estimated overall ES data collected across different sites then comparing them against x% of retail CPU is good enough basis to make such "conclusion" (if it is the conclusion)?

---

clock for clock, and no I cant guarantee that all cpus will do 3600mhz ;)

GordonFreemanLP:
Asus PC Probe2

Dinos22:
How dare you.

G H Z:
It isnt

Mike:
Any chance you could back this up, you got all the gear needed, right?

Hmm, Im not sure about the timerange, but think PcCI2iminal is getting a step6 as well very soon, and he can make same run with all the same settings, if that suits some of ya =)

Tnks a lot... :'( there are similar programs fon not-asus mobos??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

clock for clock, and no I cant guarantee that all cpus will do 3600mhz ;)

GordonFreemanLP:
Asus PC Probe2

Dinos22:
How dare you.

G H Z:
It isnt

Mike:
Any chance you could back this up, you got all the gear needed, right?

Hmm, Im not sure about the timerange, but think PcCI2iminal is getting a step6 as well very soon, and he can make same run with all the same settings, if that suits some of ya =)

---

Sorry for not being clear, I am not talking about the clock speed, but about your statement that All Step5 vs All Step6 = Your Header/Title.

If you are to ask me:
a) define a sample size, justify why such sample size is good for your "statement"
b) run the system in a completely controlled environment, that is, within your control and not some other system across the world where you may not know the exact settings (I am not saying people aren't telling the truth but people commit mistakes or understands things differently).
c) run the system where all other factor will not interfere, i.e. run them in stock settings at both speed/similar hard driver/etc. you get the picture.
d) record them in a systematic manner and not just a couple or more screenshots.
e) etc.

If anything, thelostrican just disproves the 2min difference you post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Dinos22:
How dare you.

---

lol

Same OS, clean install, same drivers (Intel released new inf file a few days ago), same memory subtimings, same tweaks, largesystemcache? And voltages, cooling too pretty much similar

Looking at icons one can conclude it is not fresh install :D

deathmetal(great username) heh is making it too difficult

it's freaking simple

one system
two CPUs (1xB2 + 1xB1)

tests at any setting, record results

post findings

SIMPLE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

deathmetal(great username) heh is making it too difficult

it's freaking simple

one system
two CPUs (1xB2 + 1xB1)

tests at any setting, record results

post findings

SIMPLE

---

you can add do a couple of runs of each and take an average

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcTan

you can add do a couple of runs of each and take an average

---

with a stable system there should not be much variation at all

if there were and you needed to take an average i would find a more stable testing setup/settings

In the past there have been speed variations clock for clock between various steppings. It has been true for Preslers, Yonahs, Merom and Conroes.....

Some steppings ( and obviously there are many steps from A0s to B/Cx ) have no appearant speed variations others show significant improvements.

I have ran test between most of the Conroe steppings and seen great differences - and am currently looking into step 5/6 myself :D

For example here is a posted comparo from Sierra_Bound/Fredyama which has a variation that on first glance appears to be rather CPU specific and not stepping specific - yet too early to tell what the real cause is :p: :

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...4&postcount=59

Vcore etc. is one of many influences that can cause variations - not to mention temps etc. - now if the differences between steppings are tiny - it's very hard to tell what you're looking at. 1M downclocked is a good starting point imho to see if something is worth investigating in...

true about vcore it impacted runs on AMD for me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

deathmetal(great username) heh is making it too difficult

it's freaking simple

one system
two CPUs (1xB2 + 1xB1)

tests at any setting, record results

post findings

SIMPLE

---

Yep, I never said different systems right? I just made it too wordy though =)...

with E6400 its same thing >> step6 faster than step5 ???


btw: great JOb ;)


regards

Take a look here: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...4&postcount=59

LOL B1 are NOT slower than B2.. that B1 time is slow as snail though and unsual as 9x400mhz 4-4-4-8/12 on 975x platform unsually completes 32M in around 14min to 14min 30ish seconds

Look again at this chart by fredyama (yes I know its been linked to twice already)

http://green.ap.teacup.com/fredyama/img/1154773142.gif

If he doesn't know how to optimize Pi, I don't know who does. Like Mike said, tiny difference, but its there.

Also Mike's word is trustworthy-I don't think there's a single Conroe stepping that hasn't passed through his hands. He's mentioned that this same phenoma occured with Yonahs. No surprise its happening again.

using 1M to test isn't accurate enough, the swing in 1M completion times are very minor but they exist even on subsequent runs of 1M with the same cpu.

Aren't newer steppings supposed to be "better" ? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

using 1M to test isn't accurate enough, the swing in 1M completion times are very minor but they exist even on subsequent runs of 1M with the same cpu.

---

I find it very hard to believe that fredyama wouldn't be aware of this. ;) I'm sure he must have run multiple times. That .047 occuring nearly every time doesn't look coincidental. If it were just random variation, they Step 5 would pull ahead at least once or twice.

did u say one was 965? other 975?

the latency of 965 is slower in super pi.

for this test to be accurate u wud need 1 system 2 CPU's one step 6 and other 5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

using 1M to test isn't accurate enough, the swing in 1M completion times are very minor but they exist even on subsequent runs of 1M with the same cpu.

---

Seriously Eva2000...
Fredyama is one of the very best pi-calc tweakers, do you really think he havnt considered that?
Show a bit respect man. :mad:

death_metal, no, but, if you want multiple systems too compare, well, write a letter and send it to Tomshardware.com or Anandtech.com..

But I belive the difference is much clearer in the 32M run, but seems like the 2*512MB vs. 2*1GB had a large impact I didnt consider... Thats why I got another result from GOESA.

$20 says one has LargeSystemCache = 1 and the other doesn't. B1 = B2 (except for a small twist that can't be discussed yet).

While I never tested whether there is such a performance difference between step 5 and step 6, it certainly appears to me that there are differences in their thermal characteristics. 6 seems to run cooler at the same voltages and speeds. Furthermore, it seems quite a bit more responsive to voltage. IMHO this is why many of the retail OC's don't look so impressive. The retails tend to need more voltage do well, but once its ramped up they can more than compete. B1's being somewhat the opposite. :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pt1t

To have a good comparison, you have to test 32M on the same system and just switch the cpu.

---

exactly..I think the ES will shine when you have a more control setup.

M.Beier, can you do a rerun of 32M at those speeds but this time screen capture the full super pi window rather than cover the top portion of the the window with cpuz screenies...

Also do a tweaked pi run to see how much faster than 14min 06.672s you can complete 32M in.

Sure tomorrow, hmm, screencapture, like some software or just takin' some pictures during the run?

Its 1am, so Im on my way too bed, didnt get any sleep last night.

EDIT:
Im not gonna change OS :)
But sure I'll give it a shot, MAXMEM 3-2-2-4 and some winmemtweaks (they worked on A64, dont know if they work for C2D, I'll figure out) and ofcause, memset :)

there's nothing wrong what eva2000 is saying................i say 32M times as well......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Sure tomorrow, hmm, screencapture, like some software or just takin' some pictures during the run?

Its 1am, so Im on my way too bed, didnt get any sleep last night.

---

just screen captures using print screen at end of 32m time NOT during the run though.. just would be nice to see the times are each of the 24 iterations..

so do rerun of

untweaked 32M

then do a run of 32M tweaked

Well who's got both B1 and B2 here? This should be settled on 1 system.

If there is a difference, it's going to be very small, like Fredyama's results. 2 minutes difference is due to the system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

G H Z: It isnt

---

The title of your thread is step 6 is faster than step 5, yet later you fall back on Fredeyama's numbers which suggest the exact opposite. Which is it? ;)

Fredyama's results show step6 faster, albeit by a hair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gautam

Look again at this chart by fredyama (yes I know its been linked to twice already)

http://green.ap.teacup.com/fredyama/img/1154773142.gif

If he doesn't know how to optimize Pi, I don't know who does. Like Mike said, tiny difference, but its there.

Also Mike's word is trustworthy-I don't think there's a single Conroe stepping that hasn't passed through his hands. He's mentioned that this same phenoma occured with Yonahs. No surprise its happening again.

---

well i don't know if you guys bothered to do some math here but i can tell you that if we take these times and blow them out to say 32M finish times of around 14minutes the difference is scores should be around 3 seconds and NOT 2 minutes M.Beier was alluding to :nono:

so comparing two processors (I assume Fredyama-san only used 1xB1 and 1xB2 for this test) is just not enough to make a conclusion on which one is faster but from results on those two we are seeing a very small difference

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absolute_0

Fredyama's results show step6 faster, albeit by a hair.

---

Haha good point LMAO, I need my eyes checked.

Yeah, M.Beier's results are obviously way off. (Sorry)

2 mins is impossible, a couple of secs though, yes that is possible and probable. I'm only going off fredyama's results and Mike's word.

Those comparisons done on two completely different systems are completely invalid, I won't deny that for a second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freecableguy

... B1 = B2 (except for a small twist that can't be discussed yet).

---

sorry for the OT, it's just that B1 and B2 reminds me of that kiddie show ;)....

anyway, threadstarter, I don't think I need to request THG or AMDtech. You posted your findings here, and as can be seen from different reply, there is huge discrepancy of result between the two. Again, if anything, thelostrican and that comparison from fred sure doesn't show such.

again, like what I replied to dinos, I may have made my reply too wordy because you missed the point (kidding or not kidding) on my earlier post because you said you can not guarantee about the 3.6GHz when I was meaning (and since it's the topic title) that it's about the results. in any case, it's easier to just use similar parts, except for CPU and compare the resuts i.e. just replace the cpu on the motherboard with another one and do the comparison.

Updated with the run you asked for Eva2000 :)

Im gonna do some changes now, going for 13min, but please, do not use that for compare =)

EDIT:
G H Z
You need too sleep more often ;) (location, I bet its not near river Tyne neither :p: )

thanks but can you do the 32m runs with all systray apps closed as well and minimal apps running as i see your available memory in pi app at 1.6GB ish.

I just did a quick run myself and it is 0.563 seconds faster than your 1st run of 14min 06.672s

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/P5W...in06s109ms.png

Sure, but atm Im tryin' too hit those 13 mins, punishin' the mem :D

4-3-2-4 32M 500mhz running atm.. - 2.4v, gonna go for 3-3-2-4 and then get on with the other things before makin' a rerun, however, the things in systray is not of great importance as its dualcore :)

Have you used default windows settings Eva? Or performance, cause that still affects result. :)

what do you mean default windows settings ? i have system properties advance set to best appearance mode with my default windows theme since it's the only way to get pcmark05 to run

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

what do you mean default windows settings ? i have system properties advance set to best appearance mode with my default windows theme since it's the only way to get pcmark05 to run

---

Whats PCMark05 got to do with this discussion on SuperPi runs?

nothing just that i'm doing pcmark05 runs right now, and in the middle of them decided to do a quick pi run at these compared settings of 9x400fsb 4-4-4-8 :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

what do you mean default windows settings ? i have system properties advance set to best appearance mode with my default windows theme since it's the only way to get pcmark05 to run

---

same :)
Just currious if you did in the run as well, since it makes a difference :)

BTW: Mem freq and timmigns changed, 13:2x, but I'll go for those darn 12:59 :D SHouldnt be much of a problem :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

same :)
Just currious if you did in the run as well, since it makes a difference :)

BTW: Mem freq and timmigns changed, 13:2x, but I'll go for those darn 12:59 :D SHouldnt be much of a problem :D

---

so you shaved 40 seconds on tighter timings and increased RAM frequency ALONE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

so you shaved 40 seconds on tighter timings and increased RAM frequency ALONE

---

Yes :toast:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Yes :toast:

---

what RAM frequency and timings exactly

find that a bit hard to believe

screens please

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

what RAM frequency and timings exactly

find that a bit hard to believe

screens please

---

Screen up after next run :)

500mhz 4-3-2-4.
Havnt used memset yet.. But yeah its 38-39 secs I belive, dont remember exact numbers :)

EDIT:
Here goes
http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/3541/2cx5.jpg
Didnt use cpu-z after run, since it was during the phase of looking "whats best, 400mhz 3-2-2-4, 500mhz 4-3-2-4 or 600mhz 4-4-4-4, last one failed wouldnt even boot - and dont wanna add more vdimm, 2.4v is fine, 3.0v for some benchies yes, but not 32M :D )

Still testing, looking into copy-waza and some other stuff soon :)

- another EDIT :(
Memset gave less then 10 seconds, now that sucks :( - A pretty nice burst in PiFast though (thelab.gr pifast) 19.70 secs.

kick arse RAM there man

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

so you shaved 40 seconds on tighter timings and increased RAM frequency ALONE

---

yup very easy dinos with upclock divider and tighter timings :)

This is all about the users :lsfight:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

kick arse RAM there man

---

Its a quite alright 320$ pair :D (2*1GB Crucial Ballistix PC6400)

But I belive I was lucky with them, newer uses other chips as far as I've heard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

yup very easy dinos with upclock divider and tighter timings :)

---

yeah i didn't imagine he was going to use 4-3-2 timings :D

i'll squeeze the life out of my fattys on monday and see if they can do the same clocks..........would be interesting to see how far behind the allendale would be..........hmmm fingers crossed the mobo can keep up with the CPU hehehehe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Its a quite alright 320$ pair :D (2*1GB Crucial Ballistix PC6400)

But I belive I was lucky with them, newer uses other chips as far as I've heard.

---

that's another factor in pi times.. memory modules used can have a minor or slight effect on pi times even if the same timings are used :)

Hmm, I slightly disagree, its just a matter of getting all timmings identical, sadly you cant set all timmings :\
A64 // BH5 proved that pretty much I guess :D

Could you do a run with 400 1:1 with memset window open as well? Just so I can try the exact same settings afterwards :)
But seems the difference is 30sec to me, using same mobo and so on, you have a P5W right next too ya, dont ya? - Read that in another thread, something about a cheaty 1.85v @ vmch.. (man thats like getting a free vmod with it, hehe)

post for OPB:toast:

The cpu: b2 s6, L627a664
board: asus p5b dx bios dated 057
all air cooled

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/9...803packjw3.jpg

no tweak:eek:

http://img423.imageshack.us/img423/1525/36gb2uu8.jpg

Hello TeamUSOffice & Kev'

Another mobo as well, P5W DH

BTW: That tRAS & precharge is a bit lower.. - Also, those settings, they're quite aggressive, isnt standart mode in bios, is it?

HMm, is that memset 2.1? - I still use 2.0, time too update :D

Sweet result on 965P, seems like its Gigabyte only that scores poor in 32M ?

looks like kev used maxmem = 600M there though heh

i'll get back to running some benchies later testing my 2nd set of memory i have here in memtest right now.. does 8-10mhz better than my 1st pair 541mhz 4-4-4-12 at 2.4v vs 533mhz 4-4-4-12 at 2.4v heh

Im currently testing MAXMEM, now is it suppose to do "program failiur" :(
wow, is 600MB the best setting ? :D

nothing but just let you know S5 & S6 and almost the same...
i had tested many times b4

OPBs screenshot isn't loading for me :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

looks like kev used maxmem = 600M there though heh

i'll get back to running some benchies later testing my 2nd set of memory i have here in memtest right now.. does 8-10mhz better than my 1st pair 541mhz 4-4-4-12 at 2.4v vs 533mhz 4-4-4-12 at 2.4v heh

---

how do you know

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Hello TeamUSOffice & Kev'

Another mobo as well, P5W DH

BTW: That tRAS & precharge is a bit lower.. - Also, those settings, they're quite aggressive, isnt standart mode in bios, is it?

HMm, is that memset 2.1? - I still use 2.0, time too update :D

Sweet result on 965P, seems like its Gigabyte only that scores poor in 32M ?

---

judging by your response he would have had a faster time.......................and with a 965P motherboard and THAT would be hillarious



Kev have you tried the new beta bios for P5B Deluxe
http://www.computerbase.de/forum/sho...95#post2165295

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

how do you know

---

see top of super pi app's report of real memory = 628670464 = ~600MB heh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

judging by your response he would have had a faster time.......................and with a 965P motherboard and THAT would be hillarious



Kev have you tried the new beta bios for P5B Deluxe
http://www.computerbase.de/forum/sho...95#post2165295

---

Yes he has :)
But not less then the other result I pulled off ;)

- Eva, gah, Im gonna go to bed, with my mem at 4-3-2-4 500mhz, no matter what tweak I pull of, copy-waza // maxmem, it'll just cause setup too be too unstable for 32M :(
Did a little something with 1M though, but wont submit a thing before gettin' some phasechange on the sucker :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Yes he has :)
But not less then the other result I pulled off ;)

- Eva, gah, Im gonna go to bed, with my mem at 4-3-2-4 500mhz, no matter what tweak I pull of, copy-waza // maxmem, it'll just cause setup too be too unstable for 32M :(
Did a little something with 1M though, but wont submit a thing before gettin' some phasechange on the sucker :)

---

can you try memtest86+ v1.65 and 500mhz 4-3-2-4 and tell me if you get errors in test #1 to 4 .. i'm having same probs but with my pair #3 of memory can do 533mhz 4-4-4-12 at 2.4v but can't even do 472mhz 4-4-3 where tRP = 3 regardless of vdimm.. same memory on Intel D975XBX did 488mhz 4-4-3-5 at 2.2v!

Swapped in my pair #2 of same model memory this one does 540-542mhz 4-4-4-12 at 2.4v better than my pair #3 .. haven't tried 4-4-3 yet but hope it's the ram not the board having issues with 4-4-3 heh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

can you try memtest86+ v1.65 and 500mhz 4-3-2-4 and tell me if you get errors in test #1 to 4 .. i'm having same probs but with my pair #3 of memory can do 533mhz 4-4-4-12 at 2.4v but can't even do 472mhz 4-4-3 where tRP = 3 regardless of vdimm.. same memory on Intel D975XBX did 488mhz 4-4-3-5 at 2.2v!

Swapped in my pair #2 of same model memory this one does 540-542mhz 4-4-4-12 at 2.4v better than my pair #3 .. haven't tried 4-4-3 yet but hope it's the ram not the board having issues with 4-4-3 heh

---

Hmm, I dont have floppy connected, hmm, NF4 had it in bios... Wont a windows based version do?

But... Has errors at low clocks,.. Hmm, usual with ballistix..
Did max 'em out.. 530 4-3-2-4 is about max benchable.. - dual P95 stable.. Hmm, desperatly trying too get 500mhz 4-4-4-4 :( 400mhz 3-3-2-4 is dualP95 stable though..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

see top of super pi app's report of real memory = 628670464 = ~600MB heh

---

i understand

i cannot see the screenshot.........it doesn't load for me


lol so "no tweaks" for OPB excludes Maxmem :D

i've never seen any gains in 32M with maxmem on AMD.......will be testing on intel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

i understand

i cannot see the screenshot.........it doesn't load for me


lol so "no tweaks" for OPB excludes Maxmem :D

i've never seen any gains in 32M with maxmem on AMD.......will be testing on intel

---

Hehe, I find that very hard too belive :D

AMD gains about a full to a half min on 32M ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Hehe, I find that very hard too belive :D

AMD gains about a full to a half min on 32M ;)

---

well considering how good my 32M times were on AMD IMAGINE me getting those results with Maxmem >>>>> ROFL people running 300MHz 2-2-2-5 would have trouble beating the clocks LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

well considering how good my 32M times were on AMD IMAGINE me getting those results with Maxmem >>>>> ROFL people running 300MHz 2-2-2-5 would have trouble beating the clocks LOL

---

Try too search for PRTeamJapan's results, I dont know if he has any in the 20's.. His results are quite impressive, though I belive he started clock&tweaking in the A64 age.. - Thereby some of his first results might not be quite as shiny as the later ones..

EDIT:
Impressive results, I have a bit hard keepin' up, my fastest A64 ran 3200mhz, I hated that freakin' coldbug... - FX55 clawhammer on LN2 was quite fun though :)

yeah AMD 32M was a lot of fun [EDIT]>>> this was all with an IDE drive LOL some crappy 40GB maxtor if i remember from memory

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/6...485s2ev.th.jpg

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/3...stref23.th.jpg

http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/8...timings.th.jpg




BUT you are right no one beats Japanese :) :worship: :guitar:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

yeah AMD 32M was a lot of fun

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/6...485s2ev.th.jpg

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/3...stref23.th.jpg

http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/8...timings.th.jpg




BUT you are right no one beats Japanese :)

---

Just a matter of using same settings :p:
I belive Coolaler's runs are awesome as well the 3x 9.000, those arnt easy too get..
But in A64 days, everybody struggled with that stupid coldbug, I had 6 CPU's with 1MB L2, all coldbugged, and all except one couldnt even handle -20 idle temp :( (basicly, I gave the last motherf**ker 2.05v just in order too keep it WARM, futhermore, a massive layer of AS5 too prevent the -30 deg liquid cooling causing system faliur)

EDIT:
Hmm, more importantly for the thread, I heard a bird singing about new results being up within 48 hours :)
- Grr, reminds me, the realbirds are beginning too make awefull noise, might be a good idé to get some sleep while still possible, gah 40GB network transfering before bed time.. :(

cool what CPU are you getting :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

cool what CPU are you getting :D

---

hehe, not a A64 anymore thats for sure, no I ment the step5 vs. step6 results ;)

But hmm, I'll also look into picking up a E6600 step5 myself, gah, just 50 miles away and me mom took the car for the weekend :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

hehe, not a A64 anymore thats for sure, no I ment the step5 vs. step6 results ;)

But hmm, I'll also look into picking up a E6600 step5 myself, gah, just 50 miles away and me mom took the car for the weekend :(

---

50 miles that's not that far to run for a nice E6600 S5 B1..... :D

haha :)

Well, sooner or later Im goin' down there..
Gonna write an article about AM2 vs. conroe - highest CPU classes highest possible "dayli" setup, basicly that means... Cascade on AM2 and on conroe X6800.. - Now I hope there'll be some Corsair C3 for me to play with ;) (after Tyrou showed his results, I almost have wet dreams about corsair C3, hehe)
- But this probaly wont even be within august.. Late september I guess, as my university education starts on the 4th of september.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guess2098

nothing but just let you know S5 & S6 and almost the same...
i had tested many times b4

---

i think the topic changed already ;)

I thought it would be instructive to try and catch the master...couldn't pull off the last 7 seconds though. :-/

maxmem 600, copy waza, etc...either the 965 is faster than the 975 :confused: or there is some very aggressive tweaking going on there.

Btw don't worry about the Bad Axe 6400C3 results. In reality your memory is probably superior. Raw speeds it might not be able to catch, but there's no 6400C3 that can pull off 500 4-3-2-1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

But hmm, I'll also look into picking up a E6600 step5 myself, gah, just 50 miles away and me mom took the car for the weekend :(

---

run 100 miles if you have to E6600 B1 Step 5 are nice

vcore = 1.6625v bios = 1.64v idle windows /1.61-1.62v under load
vdimm = 2.35v
vFSB = 1.3v
vMCH = 1.75
vICH = AUTO
Performance Mode = Standard

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=115697
http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/P5W..._validated.png

Max 32M so far

@4011Mhz - 9x445fsb 1:1 4-4-3-8 :cool:
http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/P5W...6s859ms_tn.png

eva, from what I hear, if you check actual vcore with a DMM, you will find it stays put at BIOS settings on the P5W DH.

it does ? thanks for the info.. seems to run cooler than on badaxe still 40-41C idle coretemp reported @4011mhz at 1.6625v in bios :)

So what are the highest clocks on either

My stepping 5 does 4.2 so far and I am interested to find out what the rest of you guys are getting:eek: