BOINC benchmark: post results

[Emerica]

any reason why?

Well being 64 bit it helps my WCG score. Also, I have noticed that it is a little more stable and has more services disabled by default than XP x64 which makes it better on resources.

[Durkadurka]

QX9650 @ 4GHz, 4x1GB DDR2-1066 5-5-5-15, Vista Ultimate 64-bit SP1

25.03.2008 04:51:16||Benchmark results:
25.03.2008 04:51:16|| Number of CPUs: 4
25.03.2008 04:51:16|| 4218 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
25.03.2008 04:51:16|| 8712 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

This is weird, I've reinstalled Vista, without installing SP1, and now I get these scores:

08.04.2008 08:47:46||Benchmark results:
08.04.2008 08:47:46|| Number of CPUs: 4
08.04.2008 08:47:46|| 4036 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
08.04.2008 08:47:46|| 11675 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
08.04.2008 08:47:46||Resuming computation

Less Floating Point and a dungload more of Integer.

[[XC] NetburstXE]

My results:

4/8/2008 8:52:29 AM||Running CPU benchmarks
4/8/2008 8:52:29 AM||Suspending computation - running CPU benchmarks
4/8/2008 8:53:00 AM||Benchmark results:
4/8/2008 8:53:00 AM|| Number of CPUs: 1
4/8/2008 8:53:00 AM|| 1465 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
4/8/2008 8:53:00 AM|| 2946 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
4/8/2008 8:53:02 AM||Resuming computation

[karl_eller]

Q6600 @ 3.47Ghz (385x9), 4Gb RAM @ 770 Mhz, Vista HP x64 (SP1), BOINC v5.10.30

8/04/2008 11:11:25 PM||Running CPU benchmarks
8/04/2008 11:11:26 PM||Suspending computation - running CPU benchmarks
8/04/2008 11:11:56 PM||Benchmark results:
8/04/2008 11:11:56 PM||   Number of CPUs: 4
8/04/2008 11:11:56 PM||   3282 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
8/04/2008 11:11:56 PM||   9042 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
8/04/2008 11:11:57 PM||Resuming computation

Eller

[anubis]

2.04.2008 11:33:16||Processor: 2 GenuineIntel Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 3.00GHz [x86 Family 15 Model 6 Stepping 5] [fpu tsc pae nx sse sse2 mmx]

8.04.2008 11:53:59||Running CPU benchmarks
8.04.2008 11:53:59||Suspending computation - running CPU benchmarks
8.04.2008 11:55:01||Benchmark results:
8.04.2008 11:55:01|| Number of CPUs: 2
8.04.2008 11:55:01|| 1411 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
8.04.2008 11:55:01|| 2141 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
8.04.2008 11:55:02||Resuming computation

[Ashraf]

Q9550 @ 3.40GHz, Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit

4/16/2008 8:11:33 PM||Benchmark results:
4/16/2008 8:11:33 PM|| Number of CPUs: 4
4/16/2008 8:11:33 PM|| 3445 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
4/16/2008 8:11:33 PM|| 9515 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
4/16/2008 8:11:34 PM||Resuming computation

Indeed better than my previous E6600.

[VietOZ]

X3350 @ 3.6ghz (450x8), Windows XP x64

4/16/2008 7:28:12 PM||Benchmark results:
4/16/2008 7:28:12 PM||   Number of CPUs: 4
4/16/2008 7:28:12 PM||   3680 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
4/16/2008 7:28:12 PM||   11168 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

a little bit better than my Q6600 @ the same clock. After observing this rig on WCG website for more than a week, I notice the output is just about the same (with Q6600).. maybe a little more (very little).

[DDTUNG]

X3350 @ 3.6ghz (450x8), Windows XP x64

4/16/2008 7:28:12 PM||Benchmark results:
4/16/2008 7:28:12 PM||   Number of CPUs: 4
4/16/2008 7:28:12 PM||   3680 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
4/16/2008 7:28:12 PM||   11168 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

a little bit better than my Q6600 @ the same clock. After observing this rig on WCG website for more than a week, I notice the output is just about the same (with Q6600).. maybe a little more (very little).

Thanks for the information. That's why I am staying with Q6600 G0 for now.

DDTUNG

[loonym]

I've noticed with all things being equal, mem timings, fsb, cpu multi, that my ip35 pro scores slightly better than msi 780i.

[VietOZ]

Thanks for the information. That's why I am staying with Q6600 G0 for now.

DDTUNG

no problem boss, Q6600 G0 is still the way to go for now .. specially with the recent price cuts. My 2 new X3350 are going to be here tommorrow. I'm gonna replace the B3s with those and one of the B3 is going to replace my last C2D.

Time to get some harpers

[DDTUNG]

no problem boss, Q6600 G0 is still the way to go for now .. specially with the recent price cuts. My 2 new X3350 are going to be here tommorrow. I'm gonna replace the B3s with those and one of the B3 is going to replace my last C2D.

Time to get some harpers

I've replaced quite a few B3s with G0s as well.

Looks like you are expanding your farm again. Keep it up, just don't get too close.

DDTUNG

[WrigleyVillain]

So Victor what becomes of these reject B3s? Inquiring mobos would like to know...

[DDTUNG]

So Victor what becomes of these reject B3s? Inquiring mobos would like to know...

I wouldn't call them rejects.

Some have been sold to XS WCG members, some on eBay, and some in Hong Kong to other buyers.

DDTUNG

[Martijn]

P4 630 @ 3.6, Vista x64:

4/17/2008 10:15:51 PM||Benchmark results:
4/17/2008 10:15:51 PM|| Number of CPUs: 2
4/17/2008 10:15:51 PM|| 1445 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
4/17/2008 10:15:51 PM|| 4503 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

[Gamekiller]

my quad - q6600 @ 3.6ghz

4/17/2008 5:17:41 PM||Benchmark results:
4/17/2008 5:17:41 PM|| Number of CPUs: 4
4/17/2008 5:17:41 PM|| 3410 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
4/17/2008 5:17:41 PM|| 10613 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

[jcool]

Thanks for the information. That's why I am staying with Q6600 G0 for now.

DDTUNG

Yeah, even though these 45nm quads consume WAY less power at the same clocks. I just found out today that my Q6600 drains 270W alone with prime smallFFT running at 4Ghz.. and that's only 1,45V Vcore

[Gamekiller]

How is that chips vcore so low at 4ghz. ='[

I'm at 1.504v (real) for 3.6.. o_o

[jcool]

It's because it draws more ampere at the same volts than any other Q6600 I've ever seen.

Let me explain that to you: Every Intel CPU, given the same type and stepping, has the same TDP (thermal design power).
This means that every G0 Q6600 draws up to 95W at its stock rated speed and voltage.

Now, as you may know, these chips all have different Vids (=stock Vcore) - a high Vid for a Q6600 would be 1,325V for example, while a low vid would be 1,225 (like mine).

So how is it that my chip uses the same amount of power as another chip with a higher vid? Simple, it draws more amperes to reach its designated wattage.

As you may know, you can calculate the CPU's (or any, really) power needs with a simple formula (P=U*I, P being the power measured in watts, U being the voltage measured in volts and I being the current measured in amperes).

So in order to reach those 95W, my chip drains about 77,5A at stock (95W=1,225V*77,5A) while the chip with a 1,325V VID drains only 71,7A.

As you increase the clockspeed and voltage, these differences become larger and larger, and while low Vid CPUs often use less Vcore for the same clockspeed than high Vid chips and are therefore often called "better" OC chips, they often drain even more ampere and genereate more heat than any high Vid chip.

Mine draws about 270W (186A!) at 4Ghz when running prime smallFFT, that's the kind of heat you can't just compensate with a true

[Gamekiller]

haha my VID is 1.3250v
my luck that i get a sucky chip

[jcool]

Your chip isn't neccessarily a sucky one. For instance, you could already run into temp problems with my chip @3,6Ghz, even though it only needs 1,32V I'm already hitting 60C+ coretemp, and that is under water.

[D_A]

What BOINC version are you guys using for these? I had to go back to Karl's last post to find one mentioned.

[Gamekiller]

I'm in the mid 50s with my TRUE at full load. Might go lower if I had a real TIM and not this cheap stuff. I'd like to go for 3.8ghz but my board has a huge FSB hole from what I'm seeing.

[loonym]

What BOINC version are you guys using for these? I had to go back to Karl's last post to find one mentioned.

I use 5.10.45 windows x64 ver.

[jcool]

See - so your Q6600 might never be able to handle 4Ghz or more 24/7, but you can get your 3,6Ghz easily. Mine would burn out instantly if it was aircooled

[D_A]

I use 5.10.45 windows x64 ver.

What are you running that CPU at? 3.6? 3.8? 240? (lemme know how if you are, k.)