The CDT and copywaza lab

[mrlobber]

WTF

From 10 minutes down to 7? There must be aliens in your system somewhere

Edit: it seems for your 5th CDT test, the image shows your 6th run instead.

Another question: as far as I understand, throughout all the testing (those 6 CDT runs and all of the copywaza), you didn't reboot, did you?

[JMKS]

@KTE: so it seems You absolutely MUST rerun it with C2D.
I will compare it to the Celeron "Conroe-L" - simple CW can produce ~1sec difference in 1M and ~40s in 16M - with C2D the difference is nothing [1M] to ~3sec [16M].
So it depends on many things, but yes, 30% difference is absolutely worth analyzing .

[Eldonko]

10 minutes to 7, WTF.. That's very strange I think, could you try 32M?

[Mord]

KTE, mother of god! What did you do, man?! WTF did you do to that poor little app SPi?! OMG, OMG, OMG!!! This is unbelievable, simply jaw-dropping!

[struggling]
Must resist, must not bench, must get life, must keep sanity... Damn so hard... I can't take it - I'm going benching. The force got me! Damn, where's my cigarettes?
[/struggling]

[hixie]

KTE, mother of god! What did you do, man?! WTF did you do to that poor little app SPi?! OMG, OMG, OMG!!! This is unbelievable, simply jaw-dropping!

[struggling]
Must resist, must not bench, must get life, must keep sanity... Damn so hard... I can't take it - I'm going benching. The force got me! Damn, where's my cigarettes?
[/struggling]

I smoking mine right now, we're all a victim!

[KTE]

Edit: it seems for your 5th CDT test, the image shows your 6th run instead.

I've updated it with the correct link. Thanks!

Another question: as far as I understand, throughout all the testing (those 6 CDT runs and all of the copywaza), you didn't reboot, did you?

Nope. No reboot.

If you discount the second set of results for whatever reason (below 10m) then even with the first set I gained from 10m25s to 10m16s with CW and 10m25s to 10m9s with CDT today. Big worthwhile difference to someone competing.

@KTE: so it seems You absolutely MUST rerun it with C2D.

The Pentium E2160 is on the core muarch, right? I can get that and a P5B-D today but it 'aint till weekend that I drive over to pick it up at earliest. Still I don't really want to waste cash right now. Plenty of others have one to test.

For now, go ahead testing Core 2 and any other CPUs. I won't be testing the Pres/Cely anymore (unless someone asks for it). The CPU still works fine but I don't want it to be about discussing older CPU results. I just did it to test teh tweak across various platforms really.

You guys who've tested CDT and say it failed, what are your best 32M 3600MHz C2D times and at normal voltages/latencies/DDR speeds?
(some config you can repeat today like DDR1000 4-4-4-12)

You have to keep things constant if you want to test "just" a technique.
Same CPU MHz, same DDR speed, same latencies, same ratio, same strap if possible, same OS, same monitor resolution, same all tweaks, same pagefile, same maxmem, same order, as similar as HD cache as possible.

FWIW, while 8M was running at the last loop I moved the mouse 4 cm to the right and added 7 seconds from the normal time it should've been for a loop. That's how freaking sensitive ms benches be.

[dduckquack]

holy milking cow

[hixie]

I've updated it with the correct link. Thanks!
Nope. No reboot.

If you discount the second set of results for whatever reason (below 10m) then even with the first set I gained from 10m25s to 10m16s with CW and 10m25s to 10m9s with CDT today. Big worthwhile difference to someone competing.

The Pentium E2160 is on the core muarch, right? I can get that and a P5B-D today but it 'aint till weekend that I drive over to pick it up at earliest. Still I don't really want to waste cash right now. Plenty of others have one to test.

For now, go ahead testing Core 2 and any other CPUs. I won't be testing the Pres/Cely anymore (unless someone asks for it). The CPU still works fine but I don't want it to be about discussing older CPU results. I just did it to test teh tweak across various platforms really.

You guys who've tested CDT and say it failed, what are your best 32M 3600MHz C2D times and at normal voltages/latencies/DDR speeds?
(some config you can repeat today like DDR1000 4-4-4-12)

You have to keep things constant if you want to test "just" a technique.
Same CPU MHz, same DDR speed, same latencies, same ratio, same strap if possible, same OS, same monitor resolution, same all tweaks, same pagefile, same maxmem, same order, as similar as HD cache as possible.

FWIW, while 8M was running at the last loop I moved the mouse 4 cm to the right and gained 7 seconds from the normal time it should've been for a loop. That's how freaking sensitive ms benches be.

So what did you do different from the original posted CDT. Or did you just do it more carefully? and tried to max system cache and memory?

[T_M]

Do you know why suddenly your cache etc went up from 380?

[Zeus]

Come on KTE, get yourself a C2D setup and show the same sort of gains for crying out loud!

Come over to my place with your harddisk and do it on my machine if there's no other option. (i'm in Holland hehe)

Geez, if you can get the same sort of gain on a C2D setup you will be king of the hill for sure!!

[kiwi]

That's the goal I've failed to reach with my 3.6Ghz C2D testing so far.

If balance means start 32M when system cache = available memory then that is easy to do with CDT, at least I always can

[dinos22]

OK. You saw my old CDT tests right HERE.

Stock 8M best time was around 10m25s
With best CopyWaza was around 10m20s
With best CDT was around 10m15s
.................................................. ......


Now to CopyWaza for a brief moment:

I already KNOW what I get with CW. We're not testing that here because its an old tweak. One thing I messed up is I used a 3.74GB file instead of 4GB. I doubt its a huge difference (from previous experience on this setup): http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d.../winrar4gb.png

3 runs and the slowest was 10m 18s and the fastest was this @ (383MB/153MB): 10m 16.647s: http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...s-copywaza.png

THEN, fed up, I tried CDT again 3 times. I wanted to get 500MB/500MB like Kev...

5th CDT test ran (420MB/524MB): 7m 44.188s
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...n/8M-7m44s.png

Holy fork

It dropped 7 seconds EACH loop consistent!

You need to know one thing.. I CANNOT run the first result below 7 seconds in ANY case what-so-sever (Error non convergent hundreds of time) UNLESS I did CDT and the System cache went above 500MB.

I doubted that result a bit

Still not perfect like Kevs, so I tried again for a run->> look at the time upper right corner for all shots.

6th CDT test ran (431MB/530MB): 7m 27.533s
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...n/8M-7m27s.png



Simply unbelievable. That's like you testing 100 ES Phenoms being sore clockers at 3GHz max and cold bug -50C and then suddenly, you chose to test another one and it reaches 7GHz no cold bug

That is far far below the best. I was just shell shocked completely. What is happening? It dropped 7-10 second each loop!??! (yes I ran a mobile stop watch because I couldn't believe it )

Now I NEVER ran CDT again, but straight after the above finished (and I recorded it) I ran 8M again.

7th CDT test ran (411MB/520MB): 7m 27.604s
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d.../8M-7m27s6.png



These are not the fastest. It can be beat by using this method better although I ran out of time. Someone explain to me what is happening?

Also, keep your eye on the 32M time (stock of today). Tomorrow morning I'll go in again and test 32M after CDT.

I believe you can possibly gain anywhere from 10-30 seconds with a C2 in 32M if done perfectly. Maybe more, but I've not tried.

BTW the clocks of the CPU/RAM are not highest, they're just what I prefer. They can be thrown higher to 3550 stock volts (which is 2/3 benchable) and 3700/435 2-3-3-6 stock volts on all components, max. The clocks above I used are ALL only altered in BIOS at bootup (no PLL tweaking) and because they're full stable (no errors possible).

Hope you had a good read.

OMG I JUST FELL OFF THE CHAIR

[Zeus]

Having the available cache matching the system is cache is easy, i accomplished that in each and every copy waza session i did, most often available cache is even exceeding system cache by a small amount.

I think the whole memory subsystem is in balance if one can achieve ~512mb for both.

[mrlobber]

Having the available cache matching the system is cache is easy, i accomplished that in each and every copy waza session i did, most often available cache is even exceeding system cache by a small amount.

This NEVER happens for me, never. The only way I can get available memory > system cache is when I rar a big file in superpi's folder right before the 32M run. In all other cases (copywaza, CDT, whatever) I see a pattern like available memory + 20 Mb = system cache. The OS is the default XP SP2 Corporate install with initial "commit charge" after reboot showing between 60 and 70 Mb (I wonder where people get those 100+ Mb figures with "clean install"? ) Right now, testing Windows 2003 server with the same results.

Have tried both IDE as well as SATA HDD's, 2Mb and 8Mb cache as well.

[Kasparz]

Does anyone tried using usb flash because of fast access times or ramdisk for spi?
Second, does anyone tried writing .bat script that automatically copy files?

[mrlobber]

Does anyone tried using usb flash because of fast access times or ramdisk for spi?
Second, does anyone tried writing .bat script that automatically copy files?

Running Pi from ramdisks do not make a difference, this has been tested before. However, placing pagefile on ramdisk might give you a chance to optimize your copy waza better, so in this sense it might help.

Bat scripts didn't make a difference for me. Then again, nothing has made it so far (for me)

[Kasparz]

Well, if you find best filesize/pagefile size then you could make script to automatically copy files as every preparation takes time and if you're running with temporary cooling solutions then you can't control temperature and do alot of tweaking at the same time.

[MaSell]

Does anyone tried using usb flash

Do it . Times like with Pentium 3

[KTE]

Hi fellas

I've experienced a heavy unexpected grievance so I'm trying to not stay in solitude so I start thinking about it and do something other.

I ran Super Pi 32M like you guys run. Here are the quick results.

Same exact setup as last time
Maxmem=600
Pagefile 384-384
Fully tweaked Windows

I started the day with this as my fastest (no extra tweak): 47m 54.694s
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...-complete2.png

1st stock run - (375MB/135MB): ~47m 15s

2nd run - Free'd full RAM - (554MB/67MB): 45m 00.613s
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...on/32M-45m.png

A screenshot during CDT working in the background: http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...leron/high.png

1st and only run with CDT @ (523MB/533MB): 37m 00.513s
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...on/32M-37m.png

Latest figures:



Roughly a 10 minute drop there.

===============

T_M: It usually takes me 3-5 tries to get above 500MB cache running what Jon/Kev run.

[dinos22]

so are you running LargeSys Cache on slow and fast runs on only fast runs as that will give you a massive boost in times on its own

[dduckquack]

10mins... the hell!

how much with cw only?

still waiting for the c2d results though

[KTE]

so are you running LargeSys Cache on slow and fast runs on only fast runs as that will give you a massive boost in times on its own

The reg tweak? Thats there by default on every run, even on the 47m ones. The only difference between each run is like I stated: no CDT tweak / some other tweak / CDT tweak. Never ran CW this time at all, no time and it doesn't gain me more drop than 47m to 45m, so useless for me.

[KTE]

Here's a good comparison of that setup. Best 32M times: http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17725

Look at Intel 32M number 52 and 54. They are closest to my specs.

My system at 3550MHz/DDR424 is the same in PCMark 04 to a P4 2.8GHz Northwood stock. You can see some comparison in the review here too: http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardwar...le.php/3398581

52. Just Learnin - 34min 30sec 310ms - Pentium 4 3.2Ghz Northwood@3600mhz - P4 3.2 C @ 3.6 GHz, X800 XT AIW
54. Snafu - 42min 11sec 990ms - Pentium 4 3.0Ghz Northwood@3000mhz - P4 3.0C @ 3000

Look at how I was 5 minutes slower than snafu before today and now after trying CDT I'm 5 minutes ahead with a much weaker system. I need 3750MHz on my setup usually to match his 3GHz P4 in performance. That's just beyond belief. I have a feeling this procedure can affect your times in other number benches too.

[hipro5]

KTE, do you use registry's LargeSystemCache=1 ?.....

[mrlobber]

Spent another 5 hours tonight on my C2D setup, the same as here http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=117, except I switched for a 160Gb 8Mb cache HDD.

Still no difference between copywaza and CDT for me lol

The only thing I could feel having different from KTE's testing is, of course, the hardware, as well as I'm using a single drive. Then again, OPB is talking about CDT on a single drive with 2 partitions, at least that's the info I have so that shouldn't make a difference between a successful / unsuccessful tweak.

Hipro, it seems KTE is running LSC=1, that's what he said from the very beginning

Too bad I don't have any Netburst cpu to test, would be very encouraging if I could repeat KTE's performance