Quote Originally Posted by Supertim0r View Post
give them a try, it's worth
OK mate. Just keep in mind that I know the code of the files already so I'm aware of what they do. Crap Cleaner works wonders too. In fact, there's another software called "cleaner" which totally erases empty marked spaces on the HDD that seems to help benches a little which I normally would use. I try to keep things simple so they are reproducible. I don't have hours to do this, I bet I have less than half the free time than most XS visitors, daily and I'm quite phobic to staying indoors much.
Quote Originally Posted by T_M View Post
But if we are trying to test CDT (the point of the thread) then we should at least be following what we are told is the procedure.
I already have. As a volunteer tester since the beginning of this thread due to seeing the reluctance of most others from doing so, one who normally doesn't even run Super Pi, ever, travelling 2x 1000 miles to build a system just for that testing; don't you reckon I would've tried what was said out word for word many times until I become a fly? Just because I didn't write out 512-512 doesn't mean I didn't test it on every testing to know there is no difference in 32M for me. It's not like I haven't tested 512-512 to not know. However, if it makes you happy that I only keep 512-512 from now on on every single test, then fair enough.
Notice that 512 is a close number to what cache ends up?
Yep, but it makes zero difference in my case since around 50x 32M tries now and the cache ends up >515 with me regardless of what pagefile I set, even if I set it to no pagefile. 1M is definitely slower with 512-512 PF for me, repeatedly.

I'm going to be changing to the Abit board in ~2 hours so if you want me to run any other tests on DS4, then please mention it now. Won't be building it back again.

1M slows down with this CDT method quite considerably (for me now) and it slows down with CW too (slows with anything that increases cache including extracting a big RAR file). Same CDT/CW that gave gains before. I had a feeling since the start that the slowing down is caused by one typical service being disabled but I haven't ran many tests to confirm this yet I have experienced it before. Which service? Plug and Play and yes that's odd. Another one I already know about is the Themes services. If disabled on this build it will slow the time down very much yet not on another XP install I have.

Join us in part two when we unravel the mysteries of Super Pi after it sleeps with CDT...