Hey DA,
I just ran 3 repeated bench runs on my new i7 940 - not a dog this time
Take your pick, rest same as usual (BOINC 6.5.0, Server 08 x64)
Hey DA,
I just ran 3 repeated bench runs on my new i7 940 - not a dog this time
Take your pick, rest same as usual (BOINC 6.5.0, Server 08 x64)
Thanks
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Told ya the last one was a dog
Still makes my stuff look sick.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Speaking of, the socket A took 6:40 for one HCC WU... I guess the time for Athlon XPs really has passed, even for the best of them.
Well yes ... kinda. If that's what ya got then it's better than running nothing, but you wouldn't buy one over a quad of any description.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Originally Posted by xoqolatl
Deneb benchmarks:
some completion times:
Scores are low because of slow memory, I could get them higher if I had more time.
how many ppd ?
Not if you have them already and have "free" electricitySpeaking of, the socket A took 6:40 for one HCC WU... I guess the time for Athlon XPs really has passed, even for the best of them.
quotes because I technically paid for it in my room&board costs at school but it isn't like that price changes because I use more or less power
Now, this summer, I am pretty certain the majority of my cardboard army will be retired because of electric costs. Money permitting I'll replace them with a single quad or something that would spank them all. Or, a dual quad like in my wet dreams...
The Cardboard Master Crunch with us, the XS WCG team
Intel Core i7 2600k @ 4.5GHz, 16GB DDR3-1600, Radeon 7950 @ 1000/1250, Win 10 Pro x64
dunno, I had to give the chip back and these two screens are everything I got.
www.teampclab.pl
MOA 2009 Poland #2, AMD Black Ops 2010, MOA 2011 Poland #1, MOA 2011 EMEA #12
Test bench: empty
Hey Xoqolatl, thanks for the bench on the deneb. I was seriously expecting it to do better, boinc really spanks the cpus much harder than other possibly skewed results on the deneb using other benchmarks I've seen on other forums
Edit:
I was reasoning it might be better for me to just go Deneb and be done with it as I already have a am2+ rig setup so costs would be low to go that route. I think I am Sold on a 920 i7 now maaaaaby a 940 if I wait little longer for the cash.
MD.
Last edited by Firechicken; 01-13-2009 at 08:57 AM.
Custom Avi By: Martijn, Custom Calvin V.S. EN by:RSmura
I would not call the results "skewed". Phenom II 940 really performs the same as Q9450 in most apps. It just so happens that it is slower on WCG-specific workloads.I was seriously expecting it to do better, boinc really spanks the cpus much harder than other possibly skewed results on the deneb using other benchmarks I've seen on other forums
www.teampclab.pl
MOA 2009 Poland #2, AMD Black Ops 2010, MOA 2011 Poland #1, MOA 2011 EMEA #12
Test bench: empty
Those deneb score should be a bit higher, my x2 runs fpu at 2550 at 2.8GHz.
Well at least they should be higher with 800Mhz faster and k10 based (+1-5%)
i5 3570k | Asus Z77-V Dlx | 16Gb 2400 HyperX Pred | ASUS 6950 2Gb DCuII | X-fi Titanium | Samsung SA350
Corsair AX860i | Hyperx 3k 120Gb,i520 120Gb,320 7200.11,2x2Tb WdB | Corsair H80i | Antec P280 | win7 x64
Wait...
You mean there are other apps that count for how we rate a CPUs performance, besides WCG?
If there are, they're of limited usefulness.Wait...
You mean there are other apps that count for how we rate a CPUs performance, besides WCG?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
How about posting the completed workunit stats of off the WCG site? (ie. computation time and granted credit)
That would be all that's necessary to determine the PPD
AMD Phenom II X4 940 @ 3.6GHz:
3400 MIPS per CPU (x4)
7138 MFLOPS per CPU (x4)
Windows Server 2008 Standard (AMD64)
--
Dual AMD Opteron 2350 @ 2.0GHz:
1998 MIPS per CPU (x8)
4083 MFLOPS per CPI (x8)
Windows Server 2008 Standard (AMD64)
Last edited by Particle; 01-28-2009 at 08:31 PM.
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.
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.
I just realized I need to post my i7 benchmarks! I'll be back.
For my part I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of the stars makes me dream.
.
.
i7-920@3900, dfi lp ut x58, vista ult sp1 x64, boinc 6.5
1/29/2009 2:43:49 AM||Running CPU benchmarks
1/29/2009 2:43:49 AM||Suspending computation - running CPU benchmarks
1/29/2009 2:44:20 AM||Benchmark results:
1/29/2009 2:44:20 AM|| Number of CPUs: 8
1/29/2009 2:44:20 AM|| 3522 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
1/29/2009 2:44:20 AM|| 11886 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
1/29/2009 2:44:21 AM||Resuming computation
dx58so
w3520@4100
4x1gb corsair ddr3-1333
gtx 295
TR ultra-x, 2 scythe ultrakaze push/pull
xclio stablepower 1000
vista ultimate
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
-------------------------------
would you crunch if you thought it would save her life?
maybe it will!
Which version of BOINC are you running to get those, Particle?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
It looks like BOINC Client 6.2.28. Is the newer one faster?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yeah, a little bit. 6.5.0 is, dunno bout the 6.4.5 official or the latest betas.
I just tried the latest beta and my throughput tanked. I'm down to 2400. Going back to the one on their website now.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I'll add this. Gaming Rig in sig.
2/3/2009 6:52:30 PM||Benchmark results:
2/3/2009 6:52:30 PM|| Number of CPUs: 8
2/3/2009 6:52:30 PM|| 3465 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
2/3/2009 6:52:30 PM|| 11586 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
EDIT: I'm still running Boinc 6.1 on Vista Business X64
Donate to XtremeSystems!
Workstation: Intel Core i7 4770, Asus Maximus VI Gene, 32GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR3-1866, eVGA SC GTX Titan, 256GB Crucial M4, Corsair HX850, Corsair H100i. Corsair Carbide 350D
Fileserver: 2x AMD Opteron 2425HE, Supermicro H8DME-2, 24GB DDR2-667, Supermicro 846TQ 24bay Chassis, Redundant 920w, 256 Crucial M4 boot, 20TB Storage
Notebook Asus Zenbook UX32VD-DH71, Intel Core i7 3517u, 10GB DDR3-1600, 256GB Crucial M4, Geforce GT 620M
Updated
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Need to update my current rig.
3879 Whetstone
10682 Dhrystone
Specs in sig.
Last edited by Lu523; 02-02-2009 at 05:46 PM. Reason: spelling.
The XS WCG team needs your support.
A good project with good goals.
Come join us,get that warm fuzzy feeling that you've done something good for mankind.
Everything is better when "Wet".
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks