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

Processor GFlops Compilation

JrRacinFan | Intel | i3 530 @ 4.4Ghz | 028.2245 | 06.4147 | 64-bit | HT On - 4 Threads/5 Iterations

Capture001.jpg
 
Table Updated.

Crap, I really slacked off letting those last two slip by my thread update radar!
 
Add me

Here's mine :)

Raovac | AMD Phenom II 1090T @ 4.030Ghz | 076.4836 | 18.9785 | 64-bit |
 

Attachments

  • Burntest.jpg
    Burntest.jpg
    98.3 KB · Views: 465
add me

Frick | AMD | AMD Athlon II x3 445 @ 3.1 Ghz| 013,634 | 04,38 | 32 bit

frickmflops.png
 
Table Updated.
 
mm67 | Intel | Pentium Dual Core E6500 @ 4000MHz | 25.33815 | 6.33454 | 64-bit
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • ibte6500.jpg
    ibte6500.jpg
    44.2 KB · Views: 1,443
Add Me

Athlonite | AMD | Phenom II x4 940 @ 3 GHz | 039.0858 | 013.0286 | 64-bit


Intel Burn test.JPG


now that i have an Quad core cpu :D

I'm still a little confuzzled when it come to working out the Gflops per GHz
as the above works out to be 3000 / 39.0858 = 76.754 which to me doesn't sound right even if i divide that by 4 for an per core score 76.754 / 4 = 19.1885 still sounds high when looking at the table for others with x4 940 CPU's
 
Last edited:
Table updated.

Gflops per GHz is simply figured by GFLOPs/GHz.

So it would be 39.0858 / 3 = 13.0286
 
crunchie | AMD | 1090T @ 4144Mhz | 078.3538 | 18.907 | 64-bit |


IBT4144.jpg
 
Last edited:
Table updated.

Gflops per GHz is simply figured by GFLOPs/GHz.

So it would be 39.0858 / 3 = 13.0286


Cheers I get it now what i was doin would have been fine for flops per MHz :slap:
 
DOM|Intel|i7 980X@4.4GHz|87.1836|19.8145|64-bit| testing new ram

Untitled704.jpg
 
Table Updated.
 
Thats an good OC there DOM
 
  • Like
Reactions: DOM
2DividedbyZero|Intel|i7 980X@4.4GHz|91.3266|20.7560|64-bit|

I have more oc room but 24/7 clocks =

 
add me

f**k forgot to add CPU-Z, another run =


2DividedbyZero|Intel|i7 980X@4.41GHz|91.65516|20.7834|64-bit|



damn that first result to hell 89...pssssshh
 
there's a wee bit of difference between you and Dom 2devidedbyzero maybe the bus speed difference could be it Dom's 133MHz and yours is 200MHz but with an lower multi of 22 vs doms 33
 
there's a wee bit of difference between you and Dom 2devidedbyzero maybe the bus speed difference could be it Dom's 133MHz and yours is 200MHz but with an lower multi of 22 vs doms 33

yeah thats probably the difference but also i did notice with DOMs settings...



that ratio is incorrect is it not? maybe this is cutting some bandwidth from him.

after my own testing i found 1600MHz with tighter settings and higher uncore better than 2000MHz mem look here OK, need some tried and tested memory o/c figures
 
DOM|Intel|i7 980X@4.8GHz|95.1979|19.8329|64-bit|

Untitled.jpg
 
that's a fair improvement from your last OC DOM I see you went with higher FSB and lower multi
 
Once again I've been caught slacking.

Table Updated.
 
Add Me

Dalamar | Intel | i7 2600k @ 3.4ghz | 049.4551 | 14.9861 | 64 bit
 

Attachments

  • 2600k-stock.jpg
    2600k-stock.jpg
    148.5 KB · Views: 580
Fatal | Intel | I7 950 @4.0 | 57.022325 | 15.67625 | 64-bit |

Intel.png
 
Back
Top