1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Generic CPU Bench

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by btarunr, Oct 12, 2008.

Page 7 of 19
  1. Oct 20, 2008 at 9:56 AM #151

    DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,546 (2.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,384
    Read the thread.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  2. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:16 AM #152
    lemonadesoda

    lemonadesoda

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,366 (1.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    986
    Fundamentally, on Core 2 is better executing 32 bit code than 64 bit code. The ONLY time 64-bit code will win over 32 bit code is when using shed loads of 64-bit data, which can be done "in one step" rather than multiple step under 32 bit.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  3. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:27 AM #153
    lemonadesoda

    lemonadesoda

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,366 (1.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    986
    I dont find that a helpful, friendly or useful comment in any way.

    The OP has been frequently updated. There is no request to use and report ONLY the x86 bench. The scoreboard needs to be ONE or the OTHER, or there needs to be TWO scoreboards. Clarity required in OP.

    DONT make users have to read 156 posts for some buried information that you have at your fingertips.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  4. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:28 AM #154
    Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    45,256 (10.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,495
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    everyones moved over to the x86 version as it gives faster results. when i posted results in x64, i was told to use the x86 version.
     
    lemonadesoda says thanks.
    10 Year Member at TPU
  5. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:30 AM #155
    lemonadesoda

    lemonadesoda

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,366 (1.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    986
    Although it is a bit of work for btar, then AMD64 results should therefore be taken out of the table, and the OP should mention this requirement.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  6. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:33 AM #156

    DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,546 (2.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,384
    Yet the problem and solution are both in this thread, so reading it is both helpful and useful. Would it be friendlier if I'd give you a lolly or icecream when you're reading it? Or does that only work for dentists?
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  7. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:42 AM #157
    lemonadesoda

    lemonadesoda

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,366 (1.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    986
    Try not to be so grumpy in the morning. The problem is rudeness. The solution is courtesy and information.

    You're right, they're both in the thread!

    P.S. I'll call you on the ice-cream please.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  8. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:50 AM #158
    Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    45,256 (10.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,495
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    grab me a cornetto on the way, plz.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  9. Oct 20, 2008 at 11:03 AM #159

    DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,546 (2.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,384

    Agreed, courtesy = read the thread. According to your logic we have the same discussion every page because people should not read the thread. If you take the courtesy to read up on a thread it won't get stuck in an endless loophole.

    Also I do agree that bta could add the information to the op, that's a different matter though.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  10. Oct 20, 2008 at 11:18 AM #160
    Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    45,256 (10.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,495
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    it doesnt matter if the scoreboards include x86 or x64, because it seems x86 is faster on every system. That means, anyone can run the x86 and compare to everyone else.

    We would only need a seperate scoreboard, if x64 was faster, and therefore not everyone could run it.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  11. Oct 20, 2008 at 11:50 AM #161
    btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    32,479 (9.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    16,390
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Originally, the app was made such that it will run 64-bit in a 64-bit environment. So it's by your choice, you're forcing it to run 32-bit, why should I prescribe which app you run? As for mentioning in the scoreboards, it will make a clutter out of an already sumo 1st post. I can add a column on the first table mentioning which environment the thing was run on, but wouldn't the take the fun off ranking people based on the throughput, and the remarks? Those who secured high scores in 64-bit and left, would be owned by people who optionally chose to force 32-bit in a 64-bit environment. Your environment is part of your system, just as your processor. The app should behave in relation to your environment, so I wouldn't spoil the scoreboards with "he has the highest score, but he forced 32-bit on 64-bit". Let it be abstract. If someone is interested in how you did it, he'll be a nice student and go through the thread. If you benched on 64-bit and want an improved score, use the second app..you choose what to bench it on.

    There are people who benched on 64-bit and left the thread, so I'm neither removing the original app, nor removing 64-bit entries.

    Added a little note for newcomers to this thread.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2008
  12. Oct 20, 2008 at 12:04 PM #162

    DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,546 (2.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,384
    You don't have to prescribe, though some pointers on how to improve scores are welcomed by many.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  13. Oct 20, 2008 at 12:04 PM #163

    SLK320 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Scores in x86 mode.

    [​IMG][​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2008
  14. Oct 20, 2008 at 12:09 PM #164
    btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    32,479 (9.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    16,390
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Alright, added that hint.
     
  15. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:01 PM #165
    Xtant25

    Xtant25

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2007
    Messages:
    178 (0.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    Tulsa,OK
    Heres mine E8600 @ 5250Mhz On Modded Mach II Phasechange.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2008
  16. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:26 PM #166

    MKmods Case Mod Guru

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,697 (1.81/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,748
    Location:
    Nevada
    Yea AMD, ever upward
    [​IMG]
    I switched memory to 1T
     
  17. Oct 20, 2008 at 10:46 PM #167
    Chicken Patty

    Chicken Patty WCG Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    28,341 (8.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,234
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    ^^hey MKMOds, great scores dude, I just got my new ram, so time to play :)
     
  18. Oct 21, 2008 at 1:36 AM #168
    Chicken Patty

    Chicken Patty WCG Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    28,341 (8.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,234
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    looks like running forced 32 bit did a huge difference for me. My best at 3.4 GHz was about 23.5K. Now at 3.2GHz I got 28242 :)

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  19. Oct 21, 2008 at 5:41 AM #169
    Chicken Patty

    Chicken Patty WCG Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    28,341 (8.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,234
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    best run till date

    [​IMG]
     
  20. Oct 21, 2008 at 6:03 AM #170
    OzzmanFloyd120

    OzzmanFloyd120

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    3,047 (0.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    297
    Location:
    Pontaic Michigan
    Man, I wish I had access to my phenom rig right now :(
     
  21. Oct 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM #171
    Chicken Patty

    Chicken Patty WCG Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    28,341 (8.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,234
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    where is it?
     
  22. Oct 21, 2008 at 5:46 PM #172
    OzzmanFloyd120

    OzzmanFloyd120

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    3,047 (0.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    297
    Location:
    Pontaic Michigan
    It's up in Traverse City at my parent's house. I'm moving and I left it up there because it's a bulky PC and the wifi on it was giving me crap. Right now I'm using the rig from my case mod.
     
  23. Oct 21, 2008 at 6:00 PM #173

    MKmods Case Mod Guru

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,697 (1.81/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,748
    Location:
    Nevada
    sweet, broke 30K
    [​IMG]
     
  24. Oct 21, 2008 at 6:24 PM #174
    Silverel

    Silverel

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,773 (0.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    Location:
    Detroit, MI
    Yeah... the server was actually running when I did this. Scores might be a little low :laugh:

    [​IMG]
     
  25. Oct 21, 2008 at 7:15 PM #175
    FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    18,490 (6.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,802
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Does anyone actually know what this application is working with? Is it using addition, subtraction, multiplication, and/or division? Is it operating on floating-point decimals or integers? Are they 64-bit or 32-bit operations? Does it only support up to 4 cores?
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
Page 7 of 19

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)