- Joined
- 21 Jan 2007
- Posts
- 303
- Location
- GLENROTHES-FIFE
Neo4 said:
Oi, that's COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT......I'll have £20 via paypal for the use of my name thanx
NUCLEARUS BENCHMARK :)
- Thread starter SOLDNER-MOFO64
- Start date
- Status
Oi, that's COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT......I'll have £20 via paypal for the use of my name thanx
not understanding the black art of OC..
hows this work ?
03......... BILKO1 - INTEL QX6600 @ 3600Mhz - 18,879
04......... gadget - INTEL QX6850 @ 3775Mhz - 18,477
would changing the ram or timings help ? so confussed !!
btw nice score
BILKO1
shouldnt i have or get a better score with that cpu ?
hows this work ?
03......... BILKO1 - INTEL QX6600 @ 3600Mhz - 18,879
04......... gadget - INTEL QX6850 @ 3775Mhz - 18,477
would changing the ram or timings help ? so confussed !!
btw nice score
BILKO1shouldnt i have or get a better score with that cpu ?
lay-z-boy said:
not saying or said that i have a more expensive cpu just asking if my score should or could be better with my CPU as it got a 1333fsb and a further 1775mhz on each core than say someone like BILKO and for me i feel a bit disapointed PS i got the CPU for free and its still not even out
as im not into oc i dont understand it i'm running default setup on vista standard cfg. no tweeking or adjustments, just wonder if theres much more i can do.
would be nice to see what this bad boy can hit. if i knew what i was even doing.
Last edited:
depends on other processed running, ram timings, fsb speed, timings/latency on motherboard (usually invisible, but the cause of the difference in most boards having better/worse performance with same cpu/chipset/ram), luck to a big degree...
if you search out the winrar benchmark page, you will find 2 odd results in the chart, the top 2/3 is dominated by intel, save for 2 amd's of those 1 was running crucial 10'th aniversery DDR2 at something like 400mhz @ 3-3-3-8, the other (me) is also running much tighter timings than most others (DDR1 @ 281 @ 3-3-3-8-1T iirc) and has the older, lower latency L2 cache. the crucial thing in that bench it seems is mem latency. someone got 1000kb/s from a single core amd 64 @ ~2900 mhz with BH5 at something like 260 2-2-2-5 1T (that, doubled up would yield a 2000 score for an amd X2, and almost top the charts in theory at least!)
if you search out the winrar benchmark page, you will find 2 odd results in the chart, the top 2/3 is dominated by intel, save for 2 amd's of those 1 was running crucial 10'th aniversery DDR2 at something like 400mhz @ 3-3-3-8, the other (me) is also running much tighter timings than most others (DDR1 @ 281 @ 3-3-3-8-1T iirc) and has the older, lower latency L2 cache. the crucial thing in that bench it seems is mem latency. someone got 1000kb/s from a single core amd 64 @ ~2900 mhz with BH5 at something like 260 2-2-2-5 1T (that, doubled up would yield a 2000 score for an amd X2, and almost top the charts in theory at least!)
gadget^ said:not saying or said that i have a more expensive cpu just asking if my score should or could be better with my CPU as it got a 1333fsb and a further 1775mhz on each core than say someone like BILKO and for me i feel a bit disapointed PS i got the CPU for free and its still not even out
as im not into oc i dont understand it i'm running default setup on vista standard cfg. no tweeking or adjustments, just wonder if theres much more i can do.
would be nice to see what this bad boy can hit. if i knew what i was even doing.
My cpu is special too cant say too much Intel might come and get me
I played with ram timings and tried different slots etc until i got a better score. I'm running XP pro sp2 no tweaks. I'm maxxed out now as on standard air cooling but i have ordered a 775 kit for my Mach 2 gt 
Had to do a lot of tweaking and crashing compared to how simple my last top score was, but I've managed to improve my score quite a bit.
Come on, there must be someone on OCUK with a faster single core than me... Then again as my girlfriend put it "so that means your the top of the people who are using the old technology?" I think she hit the nail on the head..
EDIT: Mofo64 I've just noticed this beats your single core score on XS forums
Come on, there must be someone on OCUK with a faster single core than me... Then again as my girlfriend put it "so that means your the top of the people who are using the old technology?" I think she hit the nail on the head..
EDIT: Mofo64 I've just noticed this beats your single core score on XS forums
Last edited:
verbal said:Had to do a lot of tweaking and crashing compared to how simple my last top score was, but I've managed to improve my score quite a bit.
Come on, there must be someone on OCUK with a faster single core than me... Then again as my girlfriend put it "so that means your the top of the people who are using the old technology?" I think she hit the nail on the head..
EDIT: Mofo64 I've just noticed this beats your single core score on XS forums
Not far behind you! I'll have to try once I reformatted windows, this ones a bit screwed. Will running the memory in dual channel help at all? could take a stick out to get its speed up!
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 4,128
- Location
- Fife
E2160 @ 351 x 9 (gt_junkie's old chip)
RAM @ 1170MHz 5-5-5-15
Was hoping to crack 10K but it's refusing to boot any higher.
RAM @ 1170MHz 5-5-5-15
try harder next timegt_junkie said:
Was hoping to crack 10K but it's refusing to boot any higher.
Last edited:
- Status