If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
What Core 2 To Buy Now?
Somewhere on teh interweb Fishface typed:
~misfit~ wrote: Ummm, 334 x 9 you say? OK, no problem. SuperPi 1M takes 19.031 seconds. So, perhaps an extra second and a half penalty for the lesser cache, around the same difference between the 4MB and 2MB cache processors, as I recall. I just checked the CPU usage while this was running, and it appears only partially multithreaded. The total CPU usage was 50 percent, with a higher and lower spiky curve oneach core... So should I re-think my overclock setting with this info? I'm running 300 x 11. Would I be better off with, say 330 x 10? 367 x 9? 412 x 8? 471 x 7 or even 550 x 6? My FSB is adjustable from 200 to 800 and I already know the CPU'll do 3.3GHz easilly at a reasonable temp/vcore. Would I be better off with a faster FSB and lower multi? Well, the higher FSB and lower multiplier should result in more memory bandwidth. I don't think the processors are as bandwidth starved as they once were, so it may or may not help, depending upon the application. I was very disappointed when I had to lower my speed with the Q6600 and raise the multiplier. Yes, very little difference that I can ascertain. SuperPi 1M 300 x 12 17.750 413 x 8 17.641 However, the CPU temps have increased a few degrees (same clockspeed, same vcore) so that's got to mean that the CPU is doing more work right? (I'm running SETI@home) Cheers, -- Shaun. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
What Core 2 To Buy Now?
Fishface wrote:
~misfit~ wrote: Ummm, 334 x 9 you say? OK, no problem. SuperPi 1M takes 19.031 seconds. So, perhaps an extra second and a half penalty for the lesser cache, around the same difference between the 4MB and 2MB cache processors, as I recall. I just checked the CPU usage while this was running, and it appears only partially multithreaded. The total CPU usage was 50 percent, with a higher and lower spiky curve on each core... I tried setting the "Core Affinity" of SuperPi mod to a single core and it took .008 seconds longer and it pegged the one core to 100%. I'm such a scientist... |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
What Core 2 To Buy Now?
Somewhere on teh interweb ~misfit~ typed:
Somewhere on teh interweb Fishface typed: ~misfit~ wrote: Ummm, 334 x 9 you say? OK, no problem. SuperPi 1M takes 19.031 seconds. So, perhaps an extra second and a half penalty for the lesser cache, around the same difference between the 4MB and 2MB cache processors, as I recall. I just checked the CPU usage while this was running, and it appears only partially multithreaded. The total CPU usage was 50 percent, with a higher and lower spiky curve oneach core... So should I re-think my overclock setting with this info? I'm running 300 x 11. Would I be better off with, say 330 x 10? 367 x 9? 412 x 8? 471 x 7 or even 550 x 6? My FSB is adjustable from 200 to 800 and I already know the CPU'll do 3.3GHz easilly at a reasonable temp/vcore. Would I be better off with a faster FSB and lower multi? Well, the higher FSB and lower multiplier should result in more memory bandwidth. I don't think the processors are as bandwidth starved as they once were, so it may or may not help, depending upon the application. I was very disappointed when I had to lower my speed with the Q6600 and raise the multiplier. Yes, very little difference that I can ascertain. SuperPi 1M 300 x 11 17.750 413 x 8 17.641 However, the CPU temps have increased a few degrees (same clockspeed, same vcore) so that's got to mean that the CPU is doing more work right? (I'm running SETI@home) Corrected above. I had 300 x 12, it should have been 300 x 11. CPU speed of 3.3GHz in both cases. -- TTFN, Shaun. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
What Core 2 To Buy Now?
Somewhere on teh interweb Fishface typed:
Fishface wrote: ~misfit~ wrote: Ummm, 334 x 9 you say? OK, no problem. SuperPi 1M takes 19.031 seconds. So, perhaps an extra second and a half penalty for the lesser cache, around the same difference between the 4MB and 2MB cache processors, as I recall. I just checked the CPU usage while this was running, and it appears only partially multithreaded. The total CPU usage was 50 percent, with a higher and lower spiky curve on each core... I tried setting the "Core Affinity" of SuperPi mod to a single core and it took .008 seconds longer and it pegged the one core to 100%. I'm such a scientist... ROFL! Yeah, I didn't think it was using both cores. I'd say that the .008 extra is possibly due to the CPU power that the OS is using. (I'm such a speculator.) -- TTFN, Shaun. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
What Core 2 To Buy Now?
What MB are you using and what ram?
bob The benchmarks look pretty good to me, despite what people are saying about the lacking L2. The degree of overclock is definitely not a given. My particular E4500 will not overclock as Shaun's. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
What Core 2 To Buy Now?
Bob Johnson wrote:
What MB are you using and what ram? I tried it in a Gigabyte P35-DS3L and a Biostar 965PT, both proven to overclock my E6400 to at least 3.2 GHz. RAM is 2 GB SuperTalent T667UB1G/M (DDR2-667 with Micron D9 chips), proven to overclock to at least 440 MHz with 2.1 volts at 4-4-4-10 timings. I tried the BSEL mod to make it appear to be a 1066 MHz part. I only tried up to 1.375 volts vCore, though. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Intel to come out with budget Core-2 based dual core Pentium | lyon_wonder | General | 4 | November 21st 06 12:00 AM |
Need Advise: Gaming laptop: Intel core 2 Duo OR Turion 64 X2 Dual Core TL-50 1.6GHz with nVIDIA | Goadude | General | 5 | November 15th 06 08:39 PM |
Which Notebook to buy? Intel Centrino, Core DUO, Core Duo 2, AMD Turion, Single Core | [email protected] | General | 4 | August 31st 06 02:11 AM |
Aopen CORE DUO miniPC MP945-VX dual core now available | [email protected] | Homebuilt PC's | 0 | May 7th 06 03:05 PM |
P5WD2 + 3.2 ghz 840 dual core, second core only runs at 2.8 ghz nomatter the load | doug | Asus Motherboards | 2 | June 26th 05 06:07 PM |