Here's a little teaser....

[PhilDoc]

Looks great to me, here's one from a Opteron 185.

[MAS]

s7e9h3n, what about

http://slil.ru/24945619

http://slil.ru/24945621

to test?

[Mad_Man]

only problem with this bench is that its non coherent. by a high margin, not just variation between runs.

here is ss from my 5200+@3.17Ghz, everytime it gives way another results lol...

i would preffer to see PCmark05 CPU tests results

[s7e9h3n]

s7e9h3n, what about

http://slil.ru/24945619

http://slil.ru/24945621

to test?

Dunno what these benches prove as they're single threaded tests

[MAS]

whether they single or multythreaded - that doesn't matter

they show the raw power of a core

here is K8 2GHz result

[s7e9h3n]

whether they single or multythreaded - that doesn't matter

they show the raw power of a core

here is K8 2GHz result

I was referring more to the bench that told me my Barcelona performed like a k8 venice @ ddr400 =P.

[MAS]

here is an old coolaler's ss
you can compare results
conroe is obviously a little faster
the program generates and verifies electronic signature on elliptic curves, this is pure INT test

[SOLDNER-MOFO64]

Tisk tisk, where are PC MARK cpu scores?

Where are 3D MARK cpu scores?

Where are NUCLEARUS runs?

Where are WINRAR benches?

Where is CINEBENCH scores?

This SSE drivel is all fine and well for the truely boring people, but REAL-WORLD users wanna see REAL-WORLD numbers.

C'mon.....lets run a benchmark that people know and can relate to.

[s7e9h3n]

Tisk tisk, where are PC MARK cpu scores?

Where are 3D MARK cpu scores?

Where are NUCLEARUS runs?

Where are WINRAR benches?

Where is CINEBENCH scores?

This SSE drivel is all fine and well for the truely boring people, but REAL-WORLD users wanna see REAL-WORLD numbers.

C'mon.....lets run a benchmark that people know and can relate to.

In order:

Will run when I install 32bit XP

Thought I gave those already?

Ok...will put it + Winrar in the queue gonna finish this WCG bench first..

Thought I ran that as well?

TBH, I don't find anything interesting in a lot of these benches myself, but some people don't have their own Barcelona setups to bench for themselves. All I can do is try to accomodate as many requests as I can and when I finally get my L1n64 to work with these chips, I'll run what I want to run

[pumero]

I tested it with Core 1 and Core 2 for comparison and the results are always the same.

Core 1:


Core 2:

[KTE]

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.

[s7e9h3n]

Is this what AMDs been telling you?

I'd like to know bcause my uncles been working with AMD negotiating on behalf of his firm for quite a while, in particular for mass orders of Barcelona and they've repeatedly insisted to him quite the opposite (they had B1s for testing too and were not impressed). Only Friday was the last talk they had, and the guy working with him is manager of business development.

OK...finally found BA rig for comparison....take a look here:

http://www.google.com/translate?u=ht...&hl=en&ie=UTF8

Here's a summary of his results using a pair of BA 2347's on a Tyan board:

First bench mark results (syntetisch):

SiSoft Sandra IIX (tested under servers 2003 hr. 32-Bit)

and/or two CCUs put

49.800/24,726 Dhrystone ALU (MIPS)
48.612/24,363 Whetstone FPU (MFLOPS)
7.166/4,282 MB/s memory range
58.839/27,382 MB/s Cache/Speicherbandbreite

143.637/71,667 iit/s Multimedia Integer x4 aEMMX/aSSE
184.910/94,299 fit/s Multimedia floating point x4 iSSE2


Cinebench 10 (1-Core/8-Core, tested under Longhorn 32-Bit/64-Bit)

32-Bit CB 10064
64-Bit CB 1813/12383 points factor: 6.83

Cinebench 9,5 (1-Core/8-Core, tested under Longhorn 64-Bit)

64-Bit CB 271/1519 points factor: 5.61




SuperPi

superpi 1M = 43s


3DMark2006 (tested tied up with ATI X1900XT 256MB, over PCI-E x8)

5463 points

From those results, I guess it's fair to conclude that the BA's ARE different than the B!'s, BUT not in the way that everyone (besides me ) has been ASSUMING to this point. I don't know about the Sandra Benches, but if you compare BOTH tsuehpsyde AND dave_graham's B1 Cinebench results from earlier in this thread with this guy's BA's, you'll see that the B1's results OBLITERATED the BA's. And for good measure, dave_graham even beat the BA's 1m score with his B1's. I know it's not exactly a mountain of evidence, but it's something

[s7e9h3n]

Upon further review, it looks like tsuehpsyde's B1's beat the BA's across the board in Sandra (with the exception of the memory bandwidth bench which is quite erratic.)

Also note that the guy is running the same mobo as Dave....

[PhilDoc]

I'll have to look through the other results. Two things right off the top of my head though, I couldn't tell if he got it to run in dual chanel and He was running the 2347s not the 2350s you guys are running. He's also running the card in a X8 slot and my experience you'll lose score.

[s7e9h3n]

I'll have to look through the other results. Two things right off the top of my head though, I couldn't tell if he got it to run in dual chanel and He was running the 2347s not the 2350s you guys are running. He's also running the card in a X8 slot and my experience you'll lose score.

I'm the only one running 2350's here....everyone else has been running 2347's - that's why I wasn't using my results to compare to And my PCIE runs @ x8 as well.....

EDIT: And IF he did happen to accomplish running in Dual Channel for those benchmarks, that would make it even more sad

[PhilDoc]

You're right, my mistake. Just assumed everyone got the 2350s for review. The results are sad.

[KTE]

s7e9h3n that's awesome mate!

I have some evidence against him now to pass on (because he's been arguing like a child oppositely). Its enough to show the point quite clearly although I did see the guy talking about waiting for a new Tyan BIOS further on in the thread with sad faces, which in sign language would tell me something is not too perfect.

If all went perfect with the system then that shows B1 as representative of BA, simply put.

[Lightman]

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?

[s7e9h3n]

Aren't the CPU1 & CPU2 DCT0 & DCT1 the four memory controllers of the two CPUs?
What is your BIOS version?

No, I believe the 667mhz is indicating the speed of his DDR2. DCT0 and DCT1 are memory channels 0 and 1 on each of the 2 onboard chipsets. My Bios version?



But note that the mobo I'm running isn't currently available anywhere. In fact, it hasn't yet officially been announced. My board is a Tyan s3993 built on the yet-to-be-released Serverworks/Broadcom HT2100 Chipset....

[s7e9h3n]

Dunno if this is correct, but here's Winrar: (note this bench is single threaded)



and here's that Realstorm bench - which, btw, isn't correctly identifying my hardware....

[dave_graham]

just thought i'd toss my 2 cents in here. there were two bios' floating around for the Barcelona before release...one offered significantly more performance than the other but it wasn't production. the actual pre-production bios was more consistent in performance (i.e. perf wasn't wildly across the spectrum) but was "slower" in measurable performance.

yes, BIOS' can have significant performance impact on CPUs.

in any case, i'm still trying to work through some day job work but if anyone's in Chicago on this coming wednesday night, let me know...I'll be in town.

dave

[s7e9h3n]

If all went perfect with the system then that shows B1 as representative of BA, simply put.

Now, that wasn't exactly what I was trying to prove as there ARE differences between BA's and B1's. But, like I've been saying, these differences are relegated to specific situations and seemingly don't appear in the tests that we currently are comparing....

[s7e9h3n]

just thought i'd toss my 2 cents in here. there were two bios' floating around for the Barcelona before release...one offered significantly more performance than the other but it wasn't production. the actual pre-production bios was more consistent in performance (i.e. perf wasn't wildly across the spectrum) but was "slower" in measurable performance.

yes, BIOS' can have significant performance impact on CPUs.

in any case, i'm still trying to work through some day job work but if anyone's in Chicago on this coming wednesday night, let me know...I'll be in town.

dave

Agreed about the Bios comment, but may I ask which bios you were running on your s3992?

[BenchZowner]

Use the latest Beta version of WinRAR S7e9h3n ( 3.71 Beta 1 ), it's multithreaded and the fastest out there [ most optimized for newage cpus ].

[twilyth]

I apologize if I missed it, because I have been trying to follow this thread as closely as I can. Have there been any results using WCG work units on either a 2P 2347 or 2350 - with or w/o oc? Even boinc benchmarks would be helpful. Just trying to get an idea for what a Phenom 4x4 rig might be able to do.