The FX-51's bandwidth is insane compared to the Barton 2500+, I'll be getting an FX based system as soon as the socket 939 come around I feel Zap, cool glad you can provide us with some 64 bit crunching
yes but it isnt SOOOOO much better to justify with the silly silly SILLY price hopefully when a few more models come out and intels prescott comes out prices will drop massively neeeeeeeeed somehing faster, 3.3GHz is soooooooooooooo slllloooooooooowwwwwwwww
As promised here you go: Remember this was running in Windows 2K in 64-bit mode. Memory FSB was 200mhz on all tests. I have WinXP-64 if some one has a 64-bit SuperPI program 2200mhz: 2400mhz: And the max stable (Under air cooling for now) 2500mhz 36secs... SK8N Motherboard 1GB Kingston HyperX CAS3 DDR400 I will play around with the FSB, Multi and timings to see if I can get even lower.
im thinking the only P4 that is going to beat that is a 3.2EE overclocked to about 3.5ish or maybe a normal 3.2 with its ass clocked off properly some seriously impresive numbers there zap from what i have seen so far a 2.5GHz fx51 is a pretty decent overclock i want to see a time with a couple of xeons or opterons zap, you must have access to quad opteron beasts at AMD, just have a bit of a play with one, go on, you know you want to
woah, just notice you are in newark hall, i lived there 2 years ago, 2001-2002, room b218, ill actually die if you say that is what room you are in, that would be so messed up woah creepy do they make a version of superpi for unix?? i was snooping around and found this found a P4C@4.5 that for 31s too nice
just how many opterons are we talking here?? please say 32 or more apparently the supercomputer at the university of tokyo can generate the first million digits within 5 secs, in 1995
impressive Zap I'd love to see what OPP gets on his FX-51 3015Mhz @ 232Mhz fsb... BTW, the SK8V is a faster board... you'd get better scores from that IMO
no offence but i had no idea those were so slow i knew they werent meant for speed but i am really shocked it is hard to believe that that cpu at 1.2 does 10 min and a PentiumM at 1.4 is 50sec just goes to show that it isnt all about the MHz oh well at least its quiet
Well its a quiet day at work - so I benched a cross-section of what we have lying around the office: First up - the SQL 2000 Server, running Win2k Server. It mysteriously "went down" just before the test was run... 1min 3 secs not bad - HT enabled but other than that totally stock - not much call for overclocking in the office. Next up, my machine. A rather old Dell P4: 2mins 9 secs - owch, a lot slower than the first one. Next a Dell ultralight laptop - its owner is on hols so its on my desk: 1min 10 secs Wow thats not far off the time the 2.4ghz P4 got, and way faster than my old P4 1.6Ghz Ignore what CpuZ says about the core speed - the CPU would have been running at its full speed of 1.4ghz when it was running Super PI Next up one of the venerable old Dell workstations we have: 2mins 47secs Definately showing its age. One of the marketing girls has a new Siemens desktop: 2min 34secs Hmm Celerons suck lol. Very old Dell Dimension sitting in a corner - not sure what it does?: 5min 54secs Loads of time to go make coffee and go flirt with the marketing staff And last and least, a laptop currently being used as a doorstop: 7min 50secs Beat that! lol Maybe I should go do some actual work now...
people say that the pentium m 1.4 does really well against a 2.4 p4, but they forget that the rated speed on a pentium m is the minimum speed that it will run at, ie on batteries. In saying this i would also argue that cpu-z doesnt read the clock of the p-m's correctly. no flaming please.