Amd athlon x4 631 problem

[InternalSys]

I got the same configuration amd athlon 631 and the Asrock motherboard as ive seen on some post, but the scores that my PC have seems to low, maybe there is some problem, so can anyone tell me what are your Windows experience score and the passmark score of the CPU on stock frequency

Mine PC scores are:

Passmark: 3700 CPU Mark score, the average score on passmark should be more then 4500 heh

Windows experience index: 7,2

[Thefumigator]

Originally Posted by InternalSys

I got the same configuration amd athlon 631 and the Asrock motherboard as ive seen on some post, but the scores that my PC have seems to low, maybe there is some problem, so can anyone tell me what are your Windows experience score and the passmark score of the CPU on stock frequency

Mine PC scores are:

Passmark: 3700 CPU Mark score

Windows experience index: 7,2

Basic questions:
Are you using "high performance" energy profile in (windows control panel) Power Options?
Are you using the same version of passmark used by the other user you are comparing to?
Are you overclocking as the other user might be doing?
Are you up to date with windows update, drivers, etc. (not that relevant most of the times)
What about power supply? is it good enough?

[InternalSys]

Originally Posted by Thefumigator

Basic questions:
Are you using "high performance" energy profile in (windows control panel) Power Options?
Are you using the same version of passmark used by the other user you are comparing to?
Are you overclocking as the other user might be doing?
Are you up to date with windows update, drivers, etc. (not that relevant most of the times)
What about power supply? is it good enough?

- Yes it is high performance mode, its even clocked by Asrock Utility on 3ghz


- Well the score is pritty the same on all versions ive tried on other PCs too

- I clocked it a bit

- Well yeh drivers are updated

- THe power supply is the cheapest ive ever used some HANTOL supply that theoretiacly can peak up to 500 W but its hardly reachable, and i dont know but maybe thats the problem


PS: I wanted to say also that i got Geforce 9500 GT 1 GB ram i borrowed from my friend, and the same GPU had like 30k score on 3dmark 03 , while here it has only 13k score thats pritty a dissater heh

[InternalSys]

Iam asking cos i got em like a day ago, and if theres something wrong with the parts so i can return em and get new parts

[newtekie1]

There is a lot that goes into a benchmark score. RAM speed makes a huge difference with these benchmarks. Passmark is affected greatly by RAM speed and timings, so if you are using slower RAM in your setup I can see 3700 be a reasonable score, I'm seeing 4300 everywhere for the 631, so a 600 point swing isn't unreasonable.

The same thing with the 9500GT. The 1GB variants were almost always DDR2, which killed the card's performance. The DDR3 versions performed way better. A highly overclocked 9500GT DDR2 scores in the 15,000 range in 3DMark03, so if your 9500GT is at stock 13,000 sounds right.

So there is nothing wrong with your parts.

[Thefumigator]

Originally Posted by InternalSys

PS: I wanted to say also that i got Geforce 9500 GT 1 GB ram i borrowed from my friend, and the same GPU had like 30k score on 3dmark 03 , while here it has only 13k score thats pritty a dissater heh

The only way to reach 30k in 3dmark 03 using a 9500GT, is overclocking the card. There's no way that card would even reach 20k in 3dmark 03 without overclock.

Notice that when using 3dmark, whatever version, you have to leave the default options as is (screen resolution and others). If you decrease resolution you will get a better score. If your friend didn't change anything to 3dmark then another way that I can think to increase the score is setting the driver to "low quality"/"performance" (correct me if I'm wrong)

here you have an example of brutal overclock to reach 30k
http://be.hwbot.org/submission/834459_massman_3dmark03_geforce_9500_gt_gddr3_128_ bit_29234_marks/


Then take a look at memory speed as newtekie1 suggested

[InternalSys]

Originally Posted by Thefumigator

The only way to reach 30k in 3dmark 03 using a 9500GT, is overclocking the card. There's no way that card would even reach 20k in 3dmark 03 without overclock.

Notice that when using 3dmark, whatever version, you have to leave the default options as is (screen resolution and others). If you decrease resolution you will get a better score. If your friend didn't change anything to 3dmark then another way that I can think to increase the score is setting the driver to "low quality"/"performance" (correct me if I'm wrong)

here you have an example of brutal overclock to reach 30k
http://be.hwbot.org/submission/834459_massman_3dmark03_geforce_9500_gt_gddr3_128_ bit_29234_marks/


Then take a look at memory speed as newtekie1 suggested

Well my default ram speed is 1333 MHZ, i havent tried to overclock it yet and it has 2 GBs of RAM

About the 9500GT i tested the same GPU on my friend PC , the only difference is that he had 512 memory while this one have 1 gig of memory and the both memories are the same sddr2, and his card scored way more then 20k i tested it like a month ago.

Iam gonna take adidional 2 GB ram stick too

And about the CPU score, My friend bought actually the same CPU - A6 3650, a month ago, which is actually the same CPU, but mine has disabled GPU acceleration, and his CPU scored like almost 5k score on the PASSMARK test on same RAM speeds, the only difference was that i got less RAM then him he has 4k and i have 2k RAM


About the PS, ive made a configuration on a site that shows the power ure components use and it says that, they use like 270 Wattts, while the maximum amount of power this PS can get is 230 watts - HANTOL 500w

So what should i buy first, new PS better with at least 300 watts of real power, or another memory stick

Here you are some screeenshots, detailed info for my PC:

http://postimage.org/gallery/a0253bq/99eaaac3/

[InternalSys]

And i would also like to say that i tested it again on passmark withhout the 3ghz overclock, but with 1900 MHZ RAM speed, the CPU was on stock frequency and its scored only 3200 thats too low for this CPU since the average score on that CPU, global rate is like 4400 points, So can anyone tell me what to do, take a PS or whateva

[HossHuge]

Here's my AMD Athlon II X4-631 (Rig 2 - listed below)



At stock and my ram at 1866 I was getting around 3600 cpu score

[InternalSys]

Originally Posted by HossHuge

Here's my AMD Athlon II X4-631 (Rig 2 - listed below)

http://img.techpowerup.org/120304/Untitled1vgh.jpg

At stock and my ram at 1866 I was getting around 3600 cpu score

How come this CPU has 4400 average on PAssmark scores, this is not possible, and btw can you tell me whats ure Windows EXPERIENCE CPU and RAM index

[HossHuge]

Originally Posted by InternalSys

How come is 4400 average on PAssmark scores with 631 then, this is not possible

The problem is that you have no idea how many of the 61 samples are overclocked.



Remember, it's a benchmark listing. People are trying to post the highest score possible.

Edit: and BTW my Windows experience index is 7.4

[InternalSys]

Originally Posted by HossHuge

The problem is that you have no idea how many of the 61 samples are overclocked.

http://img.techpowerup.org/120304/n1...985388_827.jpg

Remember, it's a benchmark listing. People are trying to post the highest score possible.

Edit: and BTW my Windows experience index is 7.4

Ahh well how the heck then, i got only 7,2 Windows CPU experience index and 5,5 RAM index pff

[InternalSys]

And btw you can check which one is clocked and which one isnt in the program theres full detailed info about RAMS latencies freqs and everything. I was talking about STOCK clocked CPUs, all of them had amore then 4k SCORE, and the overlocked had like 6k and more score on passmark x64 bit


PS: Please take screenshot from ure windows experience index and show it :P

[HossHuge]

2 things.

1. post your system spec in the user cp. It helps everyone help you.
2. I'm getting higher Windows score cause my cpu is clocked higher than yours by about 350mhz. BTW don't put to much stock in the windows score. I've read that different builds give different scores.

Edit: I see your new here so another thing to keep in mind is that they don't like double posting. Try to use the edit button. Welcome 2 TPU.....

Edit #2.

[InternalSys]

Originally Posted by HossHuge

2 things.

1. post your system spec in the user cp. It helps everyone help you.
2. I'm getting higher Windows score cause my cpu is clocked higher than yours by about 350mhz. BTW don't put to much stock in the windows score. I've read that different builds give different scores.

Edit: I see your new here so another thing to keep in mind is that they don't like double posting. Try to use the edit button. Welcome 2 TPU.....

Edit #2.



http://img.techpowerup.org/120304/windows.jpg

http://postimage.org/image/vs3wiu5b3/

Sorry about the doubleposts, i was used from other forums to doublepost cos it wasnt forbidden. And about the CPU score.... prolly thats Motherboard problem since my friend with the actually same CPU A6 - 3650 had almost 5k score on stock freq. He is using an ASUSTEK MB



This is my win experience index, i also got other problems there like 4,4 score on Windows Aero with Geforce 9500GT which is not possible

http://postimage.org/image/vs3wiu5b3/

[Mathragh]

Didnt you have only 1 RAM stick?
If so, that explains about all, 1 stick means only single channel memory, meaning half the bandwith, meaning a lot less performance, both in the Windows Performance Index, as in CPU benchmarks.

[Dent1]

Originally Posted by InternalSys

How come this CPU has 4400 average on PAssmark scores, this is not possible, and btw can you tell me whats ure Windows EXPERIENCE CPU and RAM index

Originally Posted by InternalSys

This is my win experience index, i also got other problems there like 4,4 score on Windows Aero with Geforce 9500GT which is not possible

http://postimage.org/image/vs3wiu5b3/

Windows Experience isnt a respected benchmark in industry. It's actually hard to take you seriously whenever you mention it! If you want to measure two CPUs use Passmark, 3D Mark CPU score, SuperPi, WPrime, Sis Sandra etc.

Edit:

Download 3D Mark 2011 trial, that will give us a better idea of how your entire rig is performing, CPU and GPU.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dmark11/download/

[InternalSys]

Ok guys, thank you. Ill get another ram module these days and ill test it after

[Mathragh]

Originally Posted by Dent1

Windows Experience isnt a respected benchmark in industry. It's actually hard to take you seriously whenever you mention it! If you want to measure two CPUs use Passmark, 3D Mark CPU score, SuperPi, WPrime, Sis Sandra etc.

That is besides the point here though, also, WPI does give a rough estimate of the performance, and it is certainly able show the difference between single and dual channel memory.

Edit:

Originally Posted by InternalSys

Ok guys, thank you. Ill get another ram module these days and ill test it after

Allrighty, awaiting the results!

[InternalSys]

Sorries but i forgot to ask, since this first module is 2gb Transcend 1333 mhz, the second one should be same 1333 or i can take 1600 then , overclock em both in bios to work on 1600 both, it should be doable since i already overclocked this first one , up to 1800 mhz and it worked fine

[Dent1]

Originally Posted by Mathragh

That is besides the point here though, also, WPI does give a rough estimate of the performance, and it is certainly able show the difference between single and dual channel memory.

Edit:

Allrighty, awaiting the results!

Wait wait.

The problem with Windows Experience is the score is capped at the slowest performing component.

The reason why you are only getting 5.9 overall is because thE Hard Disk is getting 5.9 - So the bechmark capped the result.

For example, CPU 9.0, Graphics 9.0, RAM 9.0, Gaming Graphics 9.0, Hard disk 7.0 - The overall will be 7.0 because of the cap on the slowest component.

In essence as far as the Windows Experience is concerned the bottleneck is the Hard Disk, which is rediculous. This is why I say dont use Windows Experience!

If the OP's mate gets a higher score its because his HD probably isnt restricting his maximum score. The OP is getting capped at 4.4 for the same reason.

[Mathragh]

Originally Posted by InternalSys

Sorries but i forgot to ask, since this first module is 2gb Transcend 1333 mhz, the second one should be same 1333 or i can take 1600 then , overclock em both in bios to work on 1600 both, it should be doable since i already overclocked this first one , up to 1800 mhz and it worked fine

If you plan to run them both at 1600, and you know your current can do 1800, then imho the best course of action is to buy another one of the same stick you already have. This will negate any compatibility issues.

Originally Posted by Dent1

Wait wait.

The problem with Windows Experience is the score is capped at the slowest performing component.

The reason why the OP is only getting 5.9 overall is because his Hard Disk is getting 5.9 - So the bechmark capped the result.

For example, CPU 9.0, Graphics 9.0, RAM 9.0, Gaming Graphics 9.0, Hard disk 7.0 - The OVERAL will be 7.0 because of the cap on the slowest component.

In essence as far as the Windows Experience is concerned the bottleneck is the Hard disk, which is rediculous. This is why I say dont use Windows Experience!

Please read the whole thread. He was not referring to the total score, he was referring to the RAM score, also, all his CPU scores are consistently lower, with the CPU out of the question, everything seems to lead to the RAM being sub-par. The fact that he actually has one stick, makes it a 99% certainty.

[Dent1]

I actually agree that he probably has a memory bandwidth problem. His memory score should increase once he ups to dual channel. I was just pointing out the overall will stay at 4.4 because of the video card. I hate that benchmark with a passion.

[Mathragh]

Originally Posted by Dent1

I actually agree that he is probably has a memory bandwidth problem. His memory score should increase once he ups to dual channel. I was just pointing out the overall will stay at 4.4 because of the video card. I hate that benchmark with a passion.

Haha, so it seems!

And I agree, its definately not the best way of measuring system performance, as a matter of fact, it is not a benchmark at all, it is just a rough estimate of what your total system performance will be. And in this it does its job.

I actually dont really have a problem with it, as long as you remember that its not a benchmark, its just showing how your system will perform at certain tasks in a very basic way.

Edit: it can also be important to run if you want to let windows optimise some settings for the hardware, it isnt much, but for the non-techies among windows users its a nice and streamlined method of tuning windows to your hardware.

[InternalSys]

But, how come i got 4,4 Windows Aero score and 6,5 gaming score. While on the old 7300GT 512 with lots older configuration i had higher Windows Aero score. And also i tested the same GPU at friends PC, just his version have lower memory- 512, and it performs way better on all the benchmarks. We tested it on 3dmark 03 his card had 25k or more score on default res and settings while i got 13k only, thats really weird