AMD or Intel as well as the memory brand - page 28
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Script:
Athlon 64 X2 4200+ @ 1 GB (?), cache 1 MB / DDR2 PC-3200 (?) 3 GB (BLACK_BOX): script ff=77.84 sec*1.0GHz (?) = 77.84;
Xeon W5590 @ 3.47 GHz, cache 1 L2 + 8 L3 / RAM DDR3 PC-10670 12 GB (begemot61): script ff=27.53 sec*3.47GHz = 95.53;
Core 2 Duo Q8200 @ 2.33 GHz, cache 4 MB (?) / RAM 4 GB PC-6400 (forex-k): script ff=46.84 sec*2.33GHz = 109.14;
Pentium Dual CPU E2180 @ 2 GHz, czche 1 MB L2 / RAM 2 GB (kombat): script ff=55.94 sec*2.0GHz = 111.88;
Celeron 900 @ 2.20 GHz, cache 1 MB / DDR2 PC-6400 2 GB (Svinozavr): ff=52.18 sec*2.2GHz = 114.8
Core 2 Duo E7200@2.53, cache 3 MB / 4GB RAM (Mathemat): script ff=46.27 sec*2.53GHz = 117.06;
Opteron 2439 SE @ 2.8 GHz, cache 3 MB L2 + 6 MB L3 / RAM DDR2 4 GB PC-5333 (begemot61): ff=42.33 sec*2.8GHz = 118.52;
Celeron 430 1.8GHz, cache 0.5 MB / DDR2 PC-5333 2 GB (kombat): script ff=68.53 sec*1.8GHz = 123.354;
Core 2 duo 1800 MHz laptop, cache 1 MB (?) / 2 GB (DDR2-667) (keekkenen): script ff=75.77 sec*1.8GHz = 136.39;
Phenom II X3 720 @ 3.72 GHz, cache 1.5 MB L2 + 6 MB L3 / RAM ? (Belford): script ff=37.91 sec*3.72GHz = 141.03;
AMD 5050e @ 2.6GHz, cache 1 MB / RAM 8 GB PC-5970 (four2one): script ff=60 sec*2.6GHz =156;
Athlon 64 X2 6000+ @ 3.01 GHz, cache 2 MB / RAM 3 GB PC-6030 (lea): script ff=52.85 sec*3.01GHz = 159.08;
Athlon X2 3800 (2000 MHz), cache 1 MB / DDR2 PC-5360 2GB RAM (joo): script ff=82.07 sec*2GHz (?) = 164.14;
Athlon 64 X2 4000+ @ 2.1 GHz, cache 1 MB / DDR2 PC-5625 2 GB RAM (skv.): script ff=80.17 sec*2.1GHz = 168.36;
Pentium 4 @ 3 GHz, cache 512 MB / RAM 1.15 GB DDR2 PC-2570 (?) (Dmido): script ff=64.49 sec*3 GHz = 193.47;
Celeron 325 @ 2.53 GHz, cache 256 K / DDR2 PC-6400 1 GB (benik): script ff=103.3 sec*2.53GHz = 261.35;
Pentium 4 670 @ 3.8 GHz, cache 2 MB / DDR2 PC-4266 2 GB (begemot61): script ff=78.57 sec*3.8GHz = 298.57;
Here's the same thing in table form:
BLACK_BOX
Athlon 64 X2 4200+ @ 2.2 GHz, cache 2x512 KB L2
DDR1 PC-3200 (?) 3 GB
77.84*2.2=171.25
Phenom II X3 720 @ 3.72 GHz, cache 3x512 KB L2 + 6 MB L3
315*3 = 945
DDR1 (PC-1600?) 1.5GB
The results are strange....maybe the formula for HZ*s is a bit left-handed? Isn't it better to compare just by sec? Although it's clear that it won't give efficiency, but it turns out that overclocked proceses up to about 4 Hz win in speed in sec 4-10, but in the calculation lose purely to their retarded fellows...
Eh, if we could make a table of price*sec, it would be interesting, although AMD X3 or maybe something from old generation would come out on the first place, but Xeon would definitely fall back...
The results are strange....maybe the formula for HZ*s is a bit left-handed? Isn't it better to compare just by sec? Although it's clear that it won't give efficiency, but it turns out that overclocked processors up to 4 Hz win in speed in sec 4-10, but in the calculation lose purely to inhibited fellows...
We are trying to compare mat-computing technologies and not pure speed. Alas, new Intel's stones are evidently superior to AMD's ones by their script (about four years ago it would have been vice versa).
The only case where AMD has cut in with Intel is Opteron (with 6 cores and lots of cache). Pardon, there is also BLACK_BOX, but not everything is clear there yet.
P.S. And the idea with the "price*sec" table is not bad either.
P.P.S. With your memory type, maybe (PC-6400 or DDR2-400), but what is its real frequency?
Dmido писал(а) >>
The results are strange....maybe the HZ*s formula is a bit left-handed? Isn't it better to compare just by sec?
It depends on what we're evaluating. If you are strictly following the topic of this thread (who is better: AMD or Intel), then this formula is the best. It shows you which company's stones are better on average.
But if you are trying to figure out from the results what configuration is better to choose for yourself, this ff is just like an average temperature in a hospital. Basically, it doesn't tell you anything. So, what do I care if the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ BLACK_BOX shows better performance results than Xeon W5590? It's clear that Xeon is better. :-)
Benik, don't forget, the calculations here are done on one core. And also dispel the myth that until now the maths is only AMD :)
А вот если по результатам пытаться сообразить какую конфигурацию лучше выбрать самому, то этот ff, конечно, как средняя температура по больнице.
I'm not arguing. It depends on what your budget is. You can do as I did, upgrading an ancient Pentium 1.8 GHz with 0.5 MB L2 (Northwood) along with memory (and motherboard) for 7.5k. HDD hasn't done it yet, it's too old...
2 Dmido: corrected my RAM and added the result to the EA.
>> thank you for the effort.
And at the same time we are dispelling the myth that until now mathematics is only AMD :)
It does not disperse very well. :-)
You may notice that according to the results of the script new Intel stones crushed AMD:
1st place - BLACK_BOX Athlon 64 X2 4200+.
2nd place - begemot61 Xeon W5590
3rd place - forex-k Core 2 Duo Q8200
4th place - kombat Pentium Dual CPU E2180
5th place Svinozavr Celeron 900
6th place Mathemat Core 2 Duo E7200
7th place kombat Celeron 430
And only 8th (!) place begemot61 Opteron 2439 SE
...
And by expert the situation is almost the opposite:
1st place - four2one AMD 5050e
2nd place - Belford Phenom II X3 720
3rd place - Mathemat Core 2 Duo E7200
...
Is it not because the AMD-compatible rocks are better in mathematics?
P.S. Oh, dear, I didn't notice that BLACK_BOX is from AMD camp. But, ok. I'll keep my rating. I did it for nothing... :-)