• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Processor GFlops Compilation

I may do this with my old 1GHz Pentium III, for the lols.
 
Table Updated
 
I'm not sure how I did my math when I submitted but I think per Ghz mine is supposed to be 15.0887.
 
You did it right the first time. 60.3551/4.2=14.3702
 
Add me

I'll add my gaming system and laptop when i get home but for now heres 3 to add to your collection :)

Arrakis+9 | AMD | Athlon II X3 440 @3.0Ghz | 025.0815 | 8.3605 | 64-bit | Customer New Build Computer

Arrakis+9 | AMD | Athlon 64 X2 4200+ @ 2.20Ghz | 006.8183 | 3.0992 | 64-bit | Work Comp 2

Arrakis+9 | Intel | C2D E6700 @ 2.66Ghz | 013.0403 | 4.9023 | 64-bit | Work Comp 1


Untitled930.jpg

gflops2.jpg

gflop1.jpg
 
Last edited:
add me

Here is my gamer pc and my laptop

Arrakis+9 | Intel | i7 970 @ 3.33Ghz | 066.13084 | 19.8590 | 64-bit | 6 theads @ stock settings

Arrakis+9 | Intel | i5 M430 @ 2.52Ghz | 013.6474 | 5.4156 | 64-bit | 4 theads @ stock settings

gflop3.jpg

gflop 4.jpg
 
Add Me

***
Using latest linpack (from MS site) and Windows 7 SP1 RTM leak. Both are required for AVX instruction in IBT.
***

Dalamar | Intel | i7 2600K @ 4Ghz | 099.2521 | 24.988 | 64-bit | AVX Instruction (W7SP1+updated linpack)

See this thread if you don't believe it.
 

Attachments

  • 2600K-4-avx.jpg
    2600K-4-avx.jpg
    114.1 KB · Views: 632
Dalamar said:
***
Using latest linpack (from MS site) and Windows 7 SP1 RTM leak. Both are required for AVX instruction in IBT.
***

Dalamar | Intel | i7 2600K @ 4Ghz | 099.2521 | 24.988 | 64-bit | AVX Instruction (W7SP1+updated linpack)

See this thread if you don't believe it.
Click to expand...

not doubting the power of intels latest and greatest midrange but did using a newer linpack set increase your score ? either way the results would be skewed if your not using what came with the intel burn test package
 
Table Updated.

I don't know if AVX accelerated scores will be included yet though. I'm thinking no, but I'd like a little input.

On one hand it is showing the GFLOPs the processor is capable of. However, I don't feel it adheres to the spirit of the compilation in showing the raw horsepower of a processor without special instruction sets being used to artificially enhance it.
 
I say boo to artificial tomfoolery until a new thread for SB and BD is done that way it's even Stevens
 
Sandy bridge 2600K

name | Processor Maker | CPU Model and Clock | Average GFlops | GFlops Per GHz | 64-bit or 32-bit | Notes

xbonez | Intel | Core i7 2600K @ 3.4Ghz | 044.64 | 13.12 | 64-bit | RAM an 9-9-9-24 @ 1600Mhz

xbonez | Intel | Core i7 2600K @ 4.8Ghz | 061.11 | 12.73 | 64-bit | RAM an 9-9-9-24 @ 1600Mhz

stock%20(3).png


oc%20(2).png
 
One thought is you could put the SB procs using AVX in bold red and note it at the top of the chart, that way you can have your pie and eat it too
 
mmmmmmmm PIE
 
@arrakis+9
Where did you get your background pictures?
Also i got a result, but anyway i am showing it:
 
Arrakis+9 said:
not doubting the power of intels latest and greatest midrange but did using a newer linpack set increase your score ? either way the results would be skewed if your not using what came with the intel burn test package
Click to expand...

I tried using the latest linpack before installing SP1 and the gflops were the same. IBT will eventually update as AVX BSOD'd my previously stable (20 ibt, 2 hours memtest) OC right quick. Clearly it is more stressful.


My opinion: Mark AVX-supporting+enabled processors separately. You have data showing both the "real" gflops per ghz and data showing AVX boost per ghz.
 
Add me

_JP_ | Intel | Core 2 Duo E7400 @ 2.8GHz | 015.6537 | 05.5906 | 32-bit | Testing new cooler, didn't went over 45ºC

attachment.php


_JP_ | Intel | Mobile Core 2 Duo P8400 @ 2.26GHz | 014.9112 | 06.5978 | 32-bit | for the lulz, got to 68ºC

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • CPU_results_Tower.JPG
    CPU_results_Tower.JPG
    137 KB · Views: 1,834
  • CPU_results_Laptop.jpg
    CPU_results_Laptop.jpg
    111.3 KB · Views: 2,256
zsolt_93 | Intel | Core 2 Quad Q9400 @ 3.000GHz | 035.7192 | 011.9064 | 64bit | @ 1.056-1.088 V, EIST On, DDR2 750MHz
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • ibt.jpg
    ibt.jpg
    195.3 KB · Views: 1,529
Please add me!

15th Warlock | Intel | Core i7 2600K @5Ghz | 070.51265 | 14.10253 | 64bit | First run at 5Ghz, no AVX acceleration used.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this might be the first entry at 5Ghz, I'm sure that now that SB is out this will become a lot more common occurrence, and perhaps we'll see entries at 6Ghz soon :)

burntest5ghz.jpg
 
Tables updated.

I've decided to seperate out the results using AVX into a new table so they can be compared directly and aren't confusing in the main table.
 
Add me

Arctucas|Intel|i7 950@4.28GHz|058.2678|014.6139|64-bit

GFlops.jpg
 
mm67 | Intel | i7 950@4.0GHz | 058.1531 | 014.5383 | 64-bit

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • ibt_standard.jpg
    ibt_standard.jpg
    46.7 KB · Views: 1,578
add me

Decided to go big and beat out the 1090t's in the list :p

what im more impressed is that i only had to change the bclk to 170 and left everything else on auto :laugh:

Arrakis+9 | Intel | i7 970 @ 4.25Ghz | 84.5531 | 19.8948 | 64-bit | 6 threads All settings on auto

4.25.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top