New Multi-Threaded Pi Program - Faster than SuperPi and PiFast

[poke349]

Don't worry about saying one performs better than the other. The truth is both AMD and Intel uarchs have their strengths and weaknesses. If they were both good and bad at the same tasks and performed exactly the same it would make for a pretty boring conversation. Differences are good for this reason.

@Poke and Chumbucket: You two come to different conclusions as to where the performance and bottlenecks are on each platform. I suggest that you may both be correct. AMD has a great HyperTransport platform to work with, and needs to be pused at full load to shine. Core 2 gets choked up under load because of Chumbuckets' explanation and FSB bandwidth anemia.

PS: Dropping my memory from 1066 to 800 only increased my 25M score by less than 0.3 seconds. Not as bad of a hit as I was expecting.

But then... I'm comparing Core 2 and K10. I've completely left Core i7 out of the equation.

Anyways...
Anyone got a Core 2 @ 3.2 GHz? My workstation is, but it's down and it's not coming back online for a few more weeks.


.3 seconds ~ 2%. That isn't much. Going from triple to dual channel @ 1600 MHz on my friend's i7 only made about 2% difference @ 100m... (the larger you go, the bigger the impact of memory bandwidth)

I know on dual-Harpertown, the difference between 667MHz and 800 MHz is huge - like 10% @ 500m... and it gets bigger and bigger as you scale up the size.

My rig,

Dual Xeon X5482 @ 3.2 GHz + 64 GB (16 x 4GB) @ 800 MHz

beats,

Dual Xeon X5470 @ 3.33 GHz + 128 GB (16 x 8GB) @ 667 MHz

by around 5 - 10% at 250m - 1b.

These aren't your normal desktops, so ignore the sheer quantity of ram. It's the speed that matters.



There's probably a threshold somewhere where extra bandwidth isn't going to help much. Though I haven't bothered to try to find it.


P.S.
Toradora = WIN!!!!! (sorry for looking at your desktop icons )