MMM
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 191

Thread: AMD phenom II X6 hexacore vs Intel i7 quad HT

  1. #51
    Xtreme Rack Freak
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Belle River, Canada
    Posts
    1,806
    From my past experiences with WCG, Intel CPU has always had 5 ~ 10% performance advantage over AMD cpu. In some cases, AMD CPU suffered more performance loss.

    If you are after pure points generation, it might be better to stick with Intel.

    Main Rigs...
    Silver : i7-2600k / Asus P8H67-I Deluxe / 8GB RAM / 460 GTX SSC+ / SSD + HDD / Lian Li PC-Q11s
    WCG rig(s)... for team XS Full time
    1. i7 860 (Pure Cruncher)
    2. i7-870 (Acts as NAS with 5 HDDs)
    3. 1065T (Inactive currently)

  2. #52
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    I've had my 1090T running since yesterday too, most results still pending validation though. Heres the CPU benchmark results. When I get a better idea of how its going to produce I'll let you all know

    OS: Ubuntu 9.10 64-bit


  3. #53
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    CT, USA!!!
    Posts
    2,821
    What clock speeds is that at?

  4. #54
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,152
    If you run HFCC or FAAH exclusively for a few days you'll get your exact output as they have quorum 1. Aka, no PV.


    24 hour prime stable? Please, I'm 24/7/365 WCG stable!

    So you can do Furmark, Can you Grid???

  5. #55
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    I have made no changes to BIOS so it should be running stock, but they are all running at 3.6. I suspect there is something wacky going on with ubuntu and the turbo mode on these chips. CPU-Z does not work on Ubuntu Linux so I ran CPUINFO and took screenies. Hope thats good enough for you all. I took screenies of all 6 cores so I could make sure it wasn't throttling 2 of them(like its supposed to...)








    I have done no over clocking with it yet, not intentionally anyway. I wanted to get it on for the supercomputer challenge and I will play with it after.

  6. #56
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    204,166
    I'm going to take a wild guess and say 25,000 ppd. If it ends up being more than that, my interest in these new Phenoms increases a lot.
    Audentes fortuna iuvat

    "Fortune favors the bold"

  7. #57
    Xtreme crazy bastid
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On mah murder-sickle!
    Posts
    5,878
    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy1982 View Post
    I have made no changes to BIOS so it should be running stock, but they are all running at 3.6. I suspect there is something wacky going on with ubuntu and the turbo mode on these chips. CPU-Z does not work on Ubuntu Linux so I ran CPUINFO and took screenies. Hope thats good enough for you all. I took screenies of all 6 cores so I could make sure it wasn't throttling 2 of them(like its supposed to...)

    <snip>

    I have done no over clocking with it yet, not intentionally anyway. I wanted to get it on for the supercomputer challenge and I will play with it after.
    I find disabling "Cool 'n Quiet" in the BIOS is worth the minute or so to do.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  8. #58
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    Quote Originally Posted by sierra_bound View Post
    I'm going to take a wild guess and say 25,000 ppd. If it ends up being more than that, my interest in these new Phenoms increases a lot.
    I would be happy to see this, I was hoping for 23k or so. I would definatly take 25k tho

    Quote Originally Posted by D_A View Post
    I find disabling "Cool 'n Quiet" in the BIOS is worth the minute or so to do.
    Its already been disabled, I'm wondering if that is what is keeping it from underclocking a few cores. It's supposed to be running at 3.2... The fact that is running at the "turbo mode" speed without underclocking a few cores had me a little worried at first, but it seems like all cores are running at 3.6

  9. #59
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    204,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy1982 View Post
    I would be happy to see this, I was hoping for 23k or so. I would definatly take 25k tho
    Hard to say with a totally new CPU which is why I said I was taking a wild guess. Yes, 25K would be very good. Anything on top of that would be gravy. If it's above 27K, then I'm driving to the nearest Fry's right away.
    Last edited by sierra_bound; 05-01-2010 at 02:47 PM.
    Audentes fortuna iuvat

    "Fortune favors the bold"

  10. #60
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    I like your estimate better then mine, and I hope you are closer to the truth then I!

  11. #61
    Xtreme crazy bastid
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On mah murder-sickle!
    Posts
    5,878
    At this point I'm guessing that "turbo mode" is just a more aggressive version of Cool 'n Quiet, or at least uses some of it's functionality. Regardless, that's a 400MHz overclock for free.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  12. #62
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    Yep, I wont complain about that. I think it's supposed to boost some cores and slow the other cores. It just isn't working right.

  13. #63
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    204,166
    AMD's turbo mode is similar to Intel's version. This is what Anandtech said about it:

    Turbo Core kicks in when 3 or more cores (on a 6-core part) are idle. When this happens, the frequency of those three cores is reduced to 800MHz, the voltage to the entire chip is increased, and the remaining three cores are turboed up by as much as 500MHz. It doesn’t get any more granular than this. If you have 3 or more cores idle, then the remaining turbo up. In any other situation the CPU runs at its normal clocks.
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/3641/a...o-core-enabled
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Audentes fortuna iuvat

    "Fortune favors the bold"

  14. #64
    Xtreme crazy bastid
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On mah murder-sickle!
    Posts
    5,878
    Looks like that chip is running at full "turbo" with all six cores then.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  15. #65
    Xtreme crazy bastid
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On mah murder-sickle!
    Posts
    5,878
    Just a thought ... CPUinfo might be reporting the LISTED speed of the cores rather than the actual running speed.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  16. #66
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    Yeah that's what it looks like. Only change I made in BIOS(besides setting the time) is turning CnQ off.

  17. #67
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    I would think the listed speed should be 3.2 though. You're a more experianced linux user then I, D A, you have any suggestions on better programs to use to monitor core speed? Its also reporting 3.6 at the system monitor.

  18. #68
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    431
    Quote Originally Posted by D_A View Post
    Just a thought ... CPUinfo might be reporting the LISTED speed of the cores rather than the actual running speed.
    Could be, in Windows you can get the CPU speed from the registry but its the max speed, not real time.

    fwiw, heres an X6 @ 4138 scoring 3414/10815 in bionc on win7-64.
    SS is in second post... http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=250930

  19. #69
    Xtreme crazy bastid
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On mah murder-sickle!
    Posts
    5,878
    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy1982 View Post
    I would think the listed speed should be 3.2 though. You're a more experianced linux user then I, D A, you have any suggestions on better programs to use to monitor core speed? Its also reporting 3.6 at the system monitor.
    There's a CPU frequency scaling applet that you can run in your task bar. I've used it before to let me monitor the CPU frequency but with the CnQ type stuff enabled it also lets you UNDERclock your CPU from the desktop. I disabled that part.

    Attachment 103741

    Attachment 103742

    There's also an app called "Perlmon" which just gathers all that kind of info from the various system files.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  20. #70
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    I run that one too, it says 3.6. Is that real-time though? In BIOS it says 3.2 Ghz but in Ubuntu everything says 3.6. I get a warning message when Ubuntu starts saying "cannot use CPU scaling" and I assume It's from disabling CnQ. I suppose I could Reboot and see if it changes. Do I REALLY want to lose that 400mhz though...

  21. #71
    Xtreme crazy bastid
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On mah murder-sickle!
    Posts
    5,878
    Well ... it's only supposed to be for when you're running a heavy single threaded load and it down clocks the other cores to help keep the heat down. Now I'm not gonna take any responsibility if you cook your shiny new hexa-core chip, but I'd GUESS that if you can keep the heat under control it SHOULD be ok.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  22. #72
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    Enabling Cool 'n Quiet in BIOS brought the speed down to 3.2. Now to restart and set it to run at 3.6, since I know that works.

    Here is the BOINC benchmark at 3.2ghz

  23. #73
    Xtreme crazy bastid
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On mah murder-sickle!
    Posts
    5,878
    What are you using to monitor your temperatures and what cooler are you using?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  24. #74
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    280
    I've got a TRUE on it, and LM-sensors but I haven't gotten it working yet.

  25. #75
    Xtreme crazy bastid
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On mah murder-sickle!
    Posts
    5,878
    have you run sensors-detect? (sudo sensors-detect)

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

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
  •