I have compared most of the benchmarks posted in this thread. I hope I am not offending anyone by borrowing their pics.
Listing the benchmark results by best first - worst last:
EDIT: REMOVED BECAUSE OF HURT FEELINGS.
BTW: I felt my benches run smoother than what they would have done on an Intel system.![]()
Last edited by LIKMARK; 07-27-2008 at 02:00 PM. Reason: to be continued...
next
EDIT: Look above..
Last edited by LIKMARK; 07-27-2008 at 02:01 PM.
next again
EDIT: look at post 804
Last edited by LIKMARK; 07-27-2008 at 02:02 PM.
final
Edit: See post 804
Last edited by LIKMARK; 07-27-2008 at 02:02 PM.
some explanations:
I wanted to compare 8 Nehalem cores (HT imagined or not, they are listed as cores by apps) with 8 lower clocked Barcelona cores on dual socket (L1N64WS/B) with 4gigs of reg ram under Vista x64. I included the higher clocked qx benches to compare as I find it interesting
BTW: The third truecrypt pic and the last pic is of a QX6700@3GHz iirc
Last edited by LIKMARK; 07-26-2008 at 01:49 PM.
I can only speak for myself, but yes mine were run multithreaded. Running single threaded is.. ..what for? We all know Intel is better at single threaded apps, and single threaded apps is not the discussion here![]()
Jcornell: would you be able to do some of the benches at lower clocks? to compare?
How did you do the BOINC benchmark, did you add all the 'CPUs' (logical cores) together?
I'm still wondering if that wouldn't give SMT too much credit, though.
Okay, one can only hope for the WCGers it's really that good a boost..![]()
Nice chart![]()
Are all the Nehalem benches with single channel DDR3? JC, what is the problem with the RAM channels is it the CPU or the board?
Here the Cinebench chart with 2,4ghz gainestown with 8 threads.
real cores still own HT cores.
edit: fixed some typos (damn it was late when i did this graphs) see here
Bookmarks