• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

How long does your PC take to SuperPI 1M !!!!!!

rkb442 said:
Sorry to be off topic but i'm gona get a new hard drive and i see you have Windows 2000 shall I install windows 2000 instead off XP but whats the difference.

Thanks :)
Click to expand...

Oh did u just change it to classic veiw
 
My laptop.....

laptop-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
I get 42.172s for 2 x Dual-Core XEON DP 5060 (4 core, 8 threads) !! :( :( :(

These have got to be the worst CPUs / £ ever !

EDIT: Just run this on some other machines I have here, and the results are all in the 40/50 area i.e.

P4M 760 @ 2ghz 532 FSB (1 core, 1 thread) - 42 secs
P4 530 Prescott @ 3ghz 798 FSB (1 core, 2 threads) - 46 secs
P4 Northwood @ 3.2ghz 798 FSB (1 core, 1 thread) - 48 secs
P4 Northwood @ 2.6ghz 530 FSB (1 core, 1 thread) - 1 min 4 secs

Either something is very wrong with this program or past Intel chips are a big pile of steaming **^&*^%^&%£ !!

How the hell are people getting <15s for this stuff ?
 
Last edited:
wizardmaxx said:
Penguin and Mitch. Those times do look kind of low - mine does it in 47sec and i would have thought that all your processors would have annialated mine.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that all these benchmark programs are affected not only by processor speed, but also a great deal by RAM timings and FSB.

The machines I've tested on are all Dell's and as such are all running very safe timings and can't be changed. As these machines are aimed at business users, they've gone for stability rather than out and out performance.

Having said that, 42 seconds for the dual-core dual-cpu Xeon rig is just awful. To quote from Dell's web site, the Precision range is designed as the

"Ultimate performance workstations. Designed specifically for professional-grade applications such as 3D rendering, analysis, digital video editing or animation"

Riiiiiiigghhht...
 
9.204 on an x6800 @ 423.22x13... sadly this is not my score though :rolleyes:

33.472 on 3500+ @305x8.5

32.781 on 805 @ 202.5x20

Now, if only i wasn;t such a n00b, i'd be able to post pics :/
 
MSPenguin said:
<snip>
P4M 760 @ 2ghz 532 FSB (1 core, 1 thread) - 42 secs
P4 530 Prescott @ 3ghz 798 FSB (1 core, 2 threads) - 46 secs
P4 Northwood @ 3.2ghz 798 FSB (1 core, 1 thread) - 48 secs
P4 Northwood @ 2.6ghz 530 FSB (1 core, 1 thread) - 1 min 4 secs

Either something is very wrong with this program or past Intel chips are a big pile of steaming **^&*^%^&%£ !!

How the hell are people getting <15s for this stuff ?
Click to expand...
Those times do seem a bit slow, even for Northwoods.
My P4 Northwood 3.4c 200FSB did 1M SuperPi in 36 secs. I was using 2x512Mb Mushkin BH5 DDR @ 2-2-2-5.

DDR Ram timings made a big difference with the P4s.
 
e6600 at 3.4 does it in 14 secs. thats at 380 fsb with geil ram.

I have had the fsb at 400 but it was unstable and I didnt fancy putting too many volts through it. Im amazzed how much better the core 2 is than the optys and a64's in here.
 
its almost unbelievable how fast the core 2s are compraed to the socket 939 / am2 stuff here...i really am considering upgrading my main rig to core 2 after seeing 13/14 seconds super pi times, more than twice as fast as my 3500 @ 3050.
 
ghgh said:
its almost unbelievable how fast the core 2s are compraed to the socket 939 / am2 stuff here...i really am considering upgrading my main rig to core 2 after seeing 13/14 seconds super pi times, more than twice as fast as my 3500 @ 3050.
Click to expand...
Does a twice as fast SuperPi time equate to twice as fast real world performance though?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom