Strange Super Pi results

[The Pat]

I have a HT Pentium 4 3Ghz, I got a super pi (1.5 xs) time for it with hyperthreading disabled: 53.797. I then did it again with the hyperthreading enabled and I got 54.656. I would have thought the hyperthreading would have caused a better performance, rather than slowing the time down.

 

[Jokester]

Superpi is single threaded so it gets no benefit from HT.

Jokester

 

[Defcon5]

And isnt 53 secs rather slow for a 3ghz p4?

Id have expected at least in the 40s

 

[stigggeh]

And isnt 53 secs rather slow for a 3ghz p4?

Id have expected at least in the 40s

nar i dont think its too slow, my northwood at 3.8ghz is 36.4 seconds (and thats with ram at 2-2-2-5)

screen shot here

 

[fenderbass86]

And to think Conroe will do it below 20s.

 

[stigggeh]

And to think Conroe will do it below 20s.

yeah well i suppose it was expected, myself and a lot of others where hitting 25 seconds a year ago with air cooled dothans (granted these where overclocked).

now overclocked conroes are getting some silly scores at pi sub 17 seconds with air cooling.

 

[ob1]

superpi needs fast memory

 

[jbloggs]

I have a P4 3.4GHz Northwood (H/T), not overclocked, Super PI 1M runs in 40s.

 

[The Pat]

I do only have 512 of Ram. Also I thought the hyperthreading would improve it only slightly i.e. with the display data commands.

 

[Combat squirrel]

I do only have 512 of Ram. Also I thought the hyperthreading would improve it only slightly i.e. with the display data commands.

Not at all, HT presents a virtual dual core to the system, and doing so slows down single core stuff ever so slightly, super pi is SINGLE threaded only, so will only use 1 'cpu'

 

[Vertigo]

40.640s here on a 3.2Ghz Prescott

 

[ob1]

45 seconds on a 3.2ghz smithfield

Some guy got his to clock to 4.7ghz with 28 seconds for superpi, bet thats toasty

 

[FatRakoon]

My P4 3.6 Prescott was getting 35 Seconds

My AMD Newcastle @ 2.4Ghz was also getting 36, so one second slower than a P4 @ 3.6 yet got I think 1m25seconds on a 2M run, which was 2seconds faster than the P4!

Not yet run it on the x2 4400! - never thought about it, so here goes...

 

[Mul]

53 is way too slow. I get round about 43s 1M at 3.0Ghz on my P4 Northwood.

Mul