Nuclear Multi-Core CPU benchmark

[rogue1979]

E6400@2816MHz - 8786
E6600@3300MHz - 10,345
E2180@3300MHz - 10,505
Brisbane 4000+ @2.65GHz 6850

I find it odd that the 2180 with 1MB L2 cache can beat the 6600 with 4MB L2 cache at the same speed???????

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
E6400@2816MHz - 8786
E6600@3300MHz - 10,345
E2180@3300MHz - 10,505
Brisbane 4000+ @2.65GHz 6850

I find it odd that the 2180 with 1MB L2 cache can beat the 6600 with 4MB L2 cache at the same speed???????

Like i thought, this benchmarks is FSB hungry.

 

[dguy6789]

19881

 

[dust]

18992 at 3,2Mhz. I'll try with the 456fsb to see if I can beat the i7@3,7[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

 

[dust]

@3,66Mhz(8x456)

ALU -6900
FPU -8624
MTS -29417

21687 marks. Hell yeah!!

 

[soccerballtux]

Link is broken!

 

[VirtualLarry]

13232, with an E5200 @ 3.75Ghz (12.5 x 300).

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I just downloaded it again and retested on my QX6700 and I get 13752 @ 2.67GHz (stock QX6700) whereas before I was getting 15737 @ 3.73GHz (vaporphase cooling, not setup at this time so I can't retest at that OC).

Wow, this overclocked E5200 is almost equal to a QX6700 at stock. Pretty neat. (Look at the cost difference for those CPUs!)

 

[vmarkx3]

i7 920 @3.0Ghz is scoring 18989

 

[Qbah]

15 370 marks - Q9450 stock (2.66GHz)

That red color is very hard to read though... I didn't see the overall score for quite a while and I was wondering which one were you folks showing

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
13232, with an E5200 @ 3.75Ghz (12.5 x 300).

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I just downloaded it again and retested on my QX6700 and I get 13752 @ 2.67GHz (stock QX6700) whereas before I was getting 15737 @ 3.73GHz (vaporphase cooling, not setup at this time so I can't retest at that OC).

Wow, this overclocked E5200 is almost equal to a QX6700 at stock. Pretty neat. (Look at the cost difference for those CPUs!)

Oh yeah without a doubt these QX's are not sold to be ran at stock, the price/performance if you do that is pretty ridiculous. I paid $1400 for mine but I got it the first days they came out back in Nov 2006 and I was willing/eager to pay the premium so I could start using it asap. For the money it made me since then I would have paid 10x as much to have it even a year earlier.

 

[Andrew1990]

Athlon X2 5800 Brisbane @3.0GHz (Stock)

ALU Score: 4712
FPU Speed: 5599
Multi Thread Speed: 9110
Total: 7649

Next I will see if bumping my chip up to 300x10 to see if the HT speed makes any more difference.

 

[zagood]

e5200@3.33ghz: 11102

 

[Shmee]

my i7 at 19x160 got 18838. HT is off.

 

[BlueAcolyte]

9181. My system feels wimpy.

 

[TridenT]

8568 E7200 2.53GHz
4GB DDR2 800 5-5-5-18
Vista 32-bit. (Only 3GB avail)

 

[bruceyg]

Q6600@3Ghz scores 15700

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Originally posted by: rogue1979
E6400@2816MHz - 8786
E6600@3300MHz - 10,345
E2180@3300MHz - 10,505
Brisbane 4000+ @2.65GHz 6850

I find it odd that the 2180 with 1MB L2 cache can beat the 6600 with 4MB L2 cache at the same speed???????

Like i thought, this benchmarks is FSB hungry.

I ran a test, 200MHz FSB versus 400MHz FSB. This is with QX6700. Same 2.4GHz for both tests (12x200 versus 6x400):

2.4GHz (6x400 Mhz) = 12670

2.4GHz (12x200 MHz) = 11739

So that's an 8% increase in the Nuclearus score for a doubling (2x) of the FSB.

 

[alkalinetaupehat]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx
New link for the program.

http://nuc-rus.narod.ru/eng.htm

Bringing this up to save needless sifting...

Q9450 @ Stock: 14,953 marks

Rig in sig as is. Heh, maybe I'll see what she does overclocked...

 

[TurtleCrusher]

I was being a jerk. Haha.

My bad.

 

[MagickMan]

14501, see sig.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx
Were obviously not talking perfect scaling to the FSB speeds. I'm saying that it must have a good 10-25% increase of the performance. Look at what i was quoting and you'll see the 2180 not only beat the E6600 but did it with 1/4 the cache. Its common knowledge the Core2 architecture is fairly crippled when it has such low cache. Core2's benefit greatly with 2mb rather then 1mb, but it has diminishing returns after 3mb. So, really the only thing that changed was FSB.

I don't understand why you are being defensive, all I did was add more data from a controlled study where the only variable I changed was the FSB. I thought the added results supported your assertions.

 

[Drsignguy]

19810 with my Q9450 @ 3.4

 

[alkalinetaupehat]

Bumped up my Q9450 to 3.2Ghz and got 18734 marks.

 

[Nightsilencer]

Link not working?

Says "page not found".

 

[Indyboy2]

Phenom II 940 @ 3.4 15212