The difference between mAJORD's score and mine is quite interesting.
DDR3-1600 CAS 7-7-7 is 3.57 % faster than DDR2-1200 CAS 5-5-5 in this quite memory intensive benchmark.
The difference between mAJORD's score and mine is quite interesting.
DDR3-1600 CAS 7-7-7 is 3.57 % faster than DDR2-1200 CAS 5-5-5 in this quite memory intensive benchmark.
Smile
Shows how fast low latency DDR2 can be still :p
I should probably try for 1333 CAS 5 or something, but I don't think the RAM can do it
Score's 2290
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/5277/arauna2290wm.jpg
Pentium E6300 @ 400*10 = 4,000 MHz
Dual-Channel 6GB DDR2 800 CL5 5-5-15 2T
Radeon HD 3850 256MB (I don't think THAT will have any real affect)
Looking at the C2Q @ 4GHz's scores, I think a bit over half of that score is fine.
Last edited by Bobsama; 01-09-2010 at 05:46 PM.
My toys:
Asus Sabertooth X58 | Core i7-950 (D0) | CM Hyper 212+ | G.Skill Sniper LV 12GB DDR3-1600 CL9 | GeForce GTX 670-2048MB | OCZ Agility 4 512GB, WD Raptor 150GB x 3 (RAID0), WD Black 1TB x 2 (RAID0) | XFX 650W CAH9 | Lian-Li PC-9F | Win 7 Pro x86-64
Gigabyte EX58-UD3R | Core i7-920 (D0) | Stock HSF | G.Skill Sniper LV 4GB DDR3-1600 CL9 | Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512MB | WD Caviar 80GB IDE, 4TB x 2 (RAID5) | Corsair TX750 | XClio 188AF | Win 7 Pro x86-64
Dell Dimension 8400 | Pentium 4 530 HT (E0) | Stock HSF | 1.5GB DDR2-400 CL3 | GeForce 8800 GT 256MB | WD Caviar 160GB SATA | Stock PSU | (Broken) Stock Case | Win Vista HP x86
Little Dot DAC_I | Little Dot MK IV | Beyerdynamic DT-880 Premium (600 Ω) | TEAC AG-H300 MkIII | Polk Audio Monitor 5 Series 2's
Memory at 1600 8-8-8-24-1T I tried to get the screen shot a peak load.
Last edited by dengyong; 01-10-2010 at 08:26 AM. Reason: imageshack lost my picture
i7-860 with tight timings 7-8-7-24
5830
i7-860 Farm with nVidia GPU's
Dell Latitude = 1401
i7-860 Farm with nVidia GPU's
Dragon backround with Intel CPU? Sounds fishy. XD
Smile
Put up some results...Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
I'm confused.Put up some results...I already posted my result a while ago...maybe I should run Aurana on my netbook.
Smile
No I'm confused, I didn't read the whole thread.I'm confused.
just a quick post to say my mem is running DDR3-1810 9-9-9-24
i950 (3035B684)
Gigabyte EX58A-UD3R
3x4GB G.Skill PC3-12800 7-8-7-24
HIS Radeon HD 6970 2GB & Dell 3007WFP-HC
Asus Xonar DX
128GB C300, Velociraptor & Sammy F3's
Corsair AX850W
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
Update.. Thanks for the Dual core results..
Corrected, pyro. Cheers
not much difference at 8-8-8-24
6087
i950 (3035B684)
Gigabyte EX58A-UD3R
3x4GB G.Skill PC3-12800 7-8-7-24
HIS Radeon HD 6970 2GB & Dell 3007WFP-HC
Asus Xonar DX
128GB C300, Velociraptor & Sammy F3's
Corsair AX850W
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
Turbo was never able to engage. So it's 1.6 GHz.
I might try my workstation later on, but it's gonna be tricky because it's 2000 miles away at home.
So I'll have to do it through remote desktop or team viewer. Not sure what kinda of overhead that will come with.
Main Machine:
AMD FX8350 @ stock --- 16 GB DDR3 @ 1333 MHz --- Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0 --- 2.0 TB Seagate
Miscellaneous Workstations for Code-Testing:
Intel Core i7 4770K @ 4.0 GHz --- 32 GB DDR3 @ 1866 MHz --- Asus Z87-Plus --- 1.5 TB (boot) --- 4 x 1 TB + 4 x 2 TB (swap)
Here it is... 4265 frames
As you can see from Process Explorer... The CPU usage is very poor...
This was done through TeamViewer... I have no idea how much of an impact it has on this benchmark.
(click to enlarge)
Main Machine:
AMD FX8350 @ stock --- 16 GB DDR3 @ 1333 MHz --- Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0 --- 2.0 TB Seagate
Miscellaneous Workstations for Code-Testing:
Intel Core i7 4770K @ 4.0 GHz --- 32 GB DDR3 @ 1866 MHz --- Asus Z87-Plus --- 1.5 TB (boot) --- 4 x 1 TB + 4 x 2 TB (swap)
Phenom II 3.8ghz
Memory @ 6-6-6-30-24-1T
Score 3717.
Definitely likes tighter timings.
Here's an idea: why don't you tier the ranks by core count (2-core, 4-core, 6-8 core, 12+ core)? Just an idea.
My toys:
Asus Sabertooth X58 | Core i7-950 (D0) | CM Hyper 212+ | G.Skill Sniper LV 12GB DDR3-1600 CL9 | GeForce GTX 670-2048MB | OCZ Agility 4 512GB, WD Raptor 150GB x 3 (RAID0), WD Black 1TB x 2 (RAID0) | XFX 650W CAH9 | Lian-Li PC-9F | Win 7 Pro x86-64
Gigabyte EX58-UD3R | Core i7-920 (D0) | Stock HSF | G.Skill Sniper LV 4GB DDR3-1600 CL9 | Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512MB | WD Caviar 80GB IDE, 4TB x 2 (RAID5) | Corsair TX750 | XClio 188AF | Win 7 Pro x86-64
Dell Dimension 8400 | Pentium 4 530 HT (E0) | Stock HSF | 1.5GB DDR2-400 CL3 | GeForce 8800 GT 256MB | WD Caviar 160GB SATA | Stock PSU | (Broken) Stock Case | Win Vista HP x86
Little Dot DAC_I | Little Dot MK IV | Beyerdynamic DT-880 Premium (600 Ω) | TEAC AG-H300 MkIII | Polk Audio Monitor 5 Series 2's
btw: There's two X5482s in my machine. Not one.
Main Machine:
AMD FX8350 @ stock --- 16 GB DDR3 @ 1333 MHz --- Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0 --- 2.0 TB Seagate
Miscellaneous Workstations for Code-Testing:
Intel Core i7 4770K @ 4.0 GHz --- 32 GB DDR3 @ 1866 MHz --- Asus Z87-Plus --- 1.5 TB (boot) --- 4 x 1 TB + 4 x 2 TB (swap)
Thanks for the suggestion. I've though about doing something like that,
With Hyperthreading , Tri-cores, cheap multi-core CPU's, low frequency multi socket server CPU's its become a bit blured as to how to "grade" them!
I was thinking two options:
1. Seperate Dual quad, Hex etc
2. A comment / recogniton of "Top Dual core" etc next to the relevent result.
Fits with my own experience. This thing seems to hate multi-socket. It's not unlike some other realtime renderers I've seen in that regard such as Cedega's software Direct3D 9 renderer (SwiftShader). It nearly dies on 12 cores and runs MUCH better with 6.
I like this idea. I'll finally be on top of SOMEthing this way. hehe
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
A LOT of things hate multi-socket... lol
You really need to write for them to get much out of dualies...
Main Machine:
AMD FX8350 @ stock --- 16 GB DDR3 @ 1333 MHz --- Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0 --- 2.0 TB Seagate
Miscellaneous Workstations for Code-Testing:
Intel Core i7 4770K @ 4.0 GHz --- 32 GB DDR3 @ 1866 MHz --- Asus Z87-Plus --- 1.5 TB (boot) --- 4 x 1 TB + 4 x 2 TB (swap)
4904 on a dual E5450 @ 3.6 with 4x2gb FB-DIMM's @ 400mhz 5-5-5-x with i5000x chipset and snoop filter disabled.
65-80% thread utilization, 8 cores 8 threads, WinXP-64.
All along the watchtower the watchmen watch the eternal return.
Up date !!!
q9550 @ 4.4 GH
I wonder if limiting to one stick per channel might give better timings or lower latency... (I've got 4 sticks per channel in my workstation...)
Not like I'm gonna try it though... since I don't have physical access to it while I'm at school, nor do I want to mess my ram config anymore...
Main Machine:
AMD FX8350 @ stock --- 16 GB DDR3 @ 1333 MHz --- Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0 --- 2.0 TB Seagate
Miscellaneous Workstations for Code-Testing:
Intel Core i7 4770K @ 4.0 GHz --- 32 GB DDR3 @ 1866 MHz --- Asus Z87-Plus --- 1.5 TB (boot) --- 4 x 1 TB + 4 x 2 TB (swap)
UPdated OP..
Well done Gaul!, big freq for a 9550.
Added some Classes.. and jazzed things up a bit, get a bit of competition spirit going :P
Let me know if you think it's a poor choice..
eg, No class for Quads/Hex.. they have the biggest chance of being in the top 3 at this stage..
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks