Results 1 to 25 of 1126

Thread: Here's a little teaser....

Hybrid View

  1. 10-04-2007, 02:46 PM #1
    s7e9h3n
    s7e9h3n is offline
    Phenom™
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    5,163
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    hehe finally some action .Good luck!
    ok...looks like I may need to do some work to get this thing to run....so consider this a false/early alarm...sorry...for now
    FX56....
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. 10-04-2007, 02:56 PM #2
    s7e9h3n
    s7e9h3n is offline
    Phenom™
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    5,163
    Oh, and just in case I forgot to mention, a BIG to Asus [non] support for totally dropping the ball on this bios build.....
    FX56....
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. 10-04-2007, 10:03 PM #3
    tictac
    tictac is offline
    Fused
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    2,769
    Quote Originally Posted by s7e9h3n View Post
    Oh, and just in case I forgot to mention, a BIG to Asus [non] support for totally dropping the ball on this bios build.....
    .... ASUS need to fixed that....
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. 10-05-2007, 07:05 PM #4
    hargen
    hargen is offline
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by s7e9h3n View Post
    Oh, and just in case I forgot to mention, a BIG to Asus [non] support for totally dropping the ball on this bios build.....
    lol. Now, I can talk with you in this thread, and my account is activated as hargen. I can upload the test file here. In this test. Whether B1 have some performance bugs, such as lack of out-of-order loading or lack of two 128-bit sse loads/cycle?

    The source file and executable files are include in the following zip file.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by hargen; 10-05-2007 at 07:32 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  5. 10-05-2007, 08:46 PM #5
    zpdixon
    zpdixon is offline
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14

    Barcelona OpenSSL benchmarks

    s7e9h3n,

    If you have the occasion to boot Linux, can you run a quick "openssl speed" benchmark ? Or anyone else ? I am very interested into how Barcelona performs on cryptographic algorithms and hash functions.

    - Z
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  6. 10-06-2007, 12:26 AM #6
    informal
    informal is offline
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,215
    Quote Originally Posted by zpdixon View Post
    s7e9h3n,

    If you have the occasion to boot Linux, can you run a quick "openssl speed" benchmark ? Or anyone else ? I am very interested into how Barcelona performs on cryptographic algorithms and hash functions.

    - Z
    Here you go,Openssl tested on Barcelona:
    http://www.tecchannel.de/server/proz...28/index9.html

    It rocks in this test.
    Bulldozer IPC decrease procedure ! <=Terrace posted way too much
    My latest blog
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. 10-06-2007, 12:45 AM #7
    zpdixon
    zpdixon is offline
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14
    Informal: I should have mentioned that I was aware of this bench... The pb is that they just tested RSA with 1 key size, while I am looking for complete "openssl speed" results (representing the 30 or so combinations of algorithms and key sizes.)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. 10-06-2007, 12:04 AM #8
    Lightman
    Lightman is offline
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    3,437
    Quote Originally Posted by hargen View Post
    lol. Now, I can talk with you in this thread, and my account is activated as hargen. I can upload the test file here. In this test. Whether B1 have some performance bugs, such as lack of out-of-order loading or lack of two 128-bit sse loads/cycle?

    The source file and executable files are include in the following zip file.
    Welcome to XS!

    I tried your util on my X2 F3 and it says it's not a Barcelona !

    Great little test though! I like it!
    RiG1: Ryzen 7 1700 @4.0GHz 1.39V, Asus X370 Prime, G.Skill RipJaws 2x8GB 3200MHz CL14 Samsung B-die, TuL Vega 56 Stock, Samsung SS805 100GB SLC SDD (OS Drive) + 512GB Evo 850 SSD (2nd OS Drive) + 3TB Seagate + 1TB Seagate, BeQuiet PowerZone 1000W

    RiG2: HTPC AMD A10-7850K APU, 2x8GB Kingstone HyperX 2400C12, AsRock FM2A88M Extreme4+, 128GB SSD + 640GB Samsung 7200, LG Blu-ray Recorder, Thermaltake BACH, Hiper 4M880 880W PSU

    SmartPhone Samsung Galaxy S7 EDGE
    XBONE paired with 55'' Samsung LED 3D TV
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. 10-06-2007, 01:04 PM #9
    s7e9h3n
    s7e9h3n is offline
    Phenom™
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    5,163
    Quote Originally Posted by hargen View Post
    lol. Now, I can talk with you in this thread, and my account is activated as hargen. I can upload the test file here. In this test. Whether B1 have some performance bugs, such as lack of out-of-order loading or lack of two 128-bit sse loads/cycle?

    The source file and executable files are include in the following zip file.
    FX56....
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  10. 10-06-2007, 01:27 PM #10
    BrowncoatGR
    BrowncoatGR is offline
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Thessaloniki, Greece
    Posts
    1,307
    Quote Originally Posted by s7e9h3n View Post
    I dunno if im misinterpreting the numbers but those results seem slow to me
    Seems we made our greatest error when we named it at the start
    for though we called it "Human Nature" - it was cancer of the heart
    CPU: AMD X3 720BE@ 3,4Ghz
    Cooler: Xigmatek S1283(Terrible mounting system for AM2/3)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte 790FXT-UD5P(F4) RAM: 2x 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600Mhz Gold 8-8-8-24
    GPU:HD5850 1GB
    PSU: Seasonic M12D 750W Case: Coolermaster HAF932(aka Dusty )
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  11. 10-06-2007, 02:14 PM #11
    xPliziT
    xPliziT is offline
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wayne NJ
    Posts
    206
    I think it does not that bad.

    This is from a Athlon 64 @ 3500 MHz.
    Especially the sse load operation seems to be much much faster than the Athlon 64's. 2 loads/cycle vs 0.5 loads/cycle....
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version.  Name: id2.png  Views: 966  Size: 23.1 KB  ID: 65372  
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  12. 10-06-2007, 08:30 PM #12
    DeepThought86
    DeepThought86 is offline
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by xPliziT View Post
    I think it does not that bad.

    This is from a Athlon 64 @ 3500 MHz.
    Especially the sse load operation seems to be much much faster than the Athlon 64's. 2 loads/cycle vs 0.5 loads/cycle....
    That's FANTASTIC. This is what I get on a Sempron 3000+ :
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version.  Name: bm.gif  Views: 855  Size: 10.9 KB  ID: 65387  
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  13. 10-07-2007, 02:59 AM #13
    pumero
    pumero is offline
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by s7e9h3n View Post
    I tested it with Core 1 and Core 2 for comparison and the results are always the same.

    Core 1:


    Core 2:
    Power Rig: Core i7-5930K, ASRock X99 Extreme6/3.1, 16GB G.Skill DDR4-2400, Asus Strix GTX980 OC
    Time Sink: Core i7-5775C, ASRock Z97E-ITX/ac, 16GB AMD DDR3-2133, Silverstone PT-09 w/ 120W Power Brick
    HTPC: Athlon 5350, ASRock AM1H-ITX, 4GB DDR3, Supermicro SC-101i
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  14. 10-07-2007, 04:09 AM #14
    KTE
    KTE is offline
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,792
    Quote Originally Posted by pumero View Post
    I tested it with Core 1 and Core 2 for comparison and the results are always the same.

    Core 1: http://img267.imageshack.us/my.php?i...d2core1lh9.png
    Core 2: http://img524.imageshack.us/my.php?i...d2core2vu9.png
    Do you mean not the same? Those results you posted are both different to one another, first one is worse than a P4 2.8GHz, second one is very slightly better.

    These short tests seem to have a large inaccuracy when being run, since they're that quickly over - just look at the deviation.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  15. 10-07-2007, 06:54 AM #15
    Lightman
    Lightman is offline
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    3,437
    Quote Originally Posted by KTE View Post
    Do you mean not the same? Those results you posted are both different to one another, first one is worse than a P4 2.8GHz, second one is very slightly better.

    These short tests seem to have a large inaccuracy when being run, since they're that quickly over - just look at the deviation.
    KTE he put words properly... Basically he tested Core Duo (32bit Intel CPU) and then he tested Core 2 Duo (64bit Intel CPU)
    Besides this test is very consistent, at least for me! Maybe it has to do something with OS or BIOS that some of you are getting big result variations?

    @pumero Thanks for your input!

    @s7e9h3n I'm really grateful for your work! If I would live in US then you've got a beer on me (or if you ever come to UK )! Still waiting for some OC!
    PS. Can you try RealStorm benchmark?
    Last edited by Lightman; 10-07-2007 at 06:59 AM.
    RiG1: Ryzen 7 1700 @4.0GHz 1.39V, Asus X370 Prime, G.Skill RipJaws 2x8GB 3200MHz CL14 Samsung B-die, TuL Vega 56 Stock, Samsung SS805 100GB SLC SDD (OS Drive) + 512GB Evo 850 SSD (2nd OS Drive) + 3TB Seagate + 1TB Seagate, BeQuiet PowerZone 1000W

    RiG2: HTPC AMD A10-7850K APU, 2x8GB Kingstone HyperX 2400C12, AsRock FM2A88M Extreme4+, 128GB SSD + 640GB Samsung 7200, LG Blu-ray Recorder, Thermaltake BACH, Hiper 4M880 880W PSU

    SmartPhone Samsung Galaxy S7 EDGE
    XBONE paired with 55'' Samsung LED 3D TV
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules