Measure your Dual/Multi Core Notebook CPU Speed - Bye Bye to SuperPI

@powerpack

The purpose of UAC is to make you confirm a number of everyday functions in order to try and protect your system from potential infections

In order to turn UAC off try the following:

1. Click on start and then click on your username picture top right of the start menu. (In your case your username might be just "admin" or something of that sort
2. Click on 'Turn User Account Control on or off.'
3. Uncheck (or check) User Account Control, select ok and restart

 

I did it, it worked. 31.075 w/T9400 2.53Ghz 6MB's L2. #11, beat the T7800 2.6Ghz 4MB L2.

Thanks!

 

I am still glad that my AMD Opteron is still owning most Intels in processing power
Opty 185 at 2.6GHz dual core : 29.027 seconds for 32M
Should be #5 on list

Sure it is not power efficient, but its got a ton of cpu power

If only I could get it working again, cause right now it has 0Ghz dual core

K-TRON

 

K-T I like your power but I must say $1250 for the power I got makes me very happy. I of course have been watching pricing for a while. This I jumped on sure in a few months will be passed. More for less but right now. Kicks butt!

And so sorry about your lappie. Fix it already. And any advice for us novices on what to do and not do?

 

Ran a Intel Dual T9600 @ 2.8ghz on a HP HDX 18t for a score of 29,699 on 32m.

 

Vista 64





XP 32





$19 T5200, installed and overclocked in a $180 Acer Aspire 3680.

Can't wait to pwn Penryns with a T7600ES @4.17GHz....

 

My little Asus . Was checking to see if smoke was coming out whilst running the benchmark . You never know with Asus

 

My Aspire 5930 results

A humble 35.432 Secs:


That puts me at #16 in the table.

Hope the OP updates this thread
I like to see my name in print

PS - Sorry I used the older version of wPrime

 

Gateway 6860-FX with an X9000 CPU (OS Vista Home Premium x64)

32m Test 25.049 seconds.

To bad i have to compete with desktop quad cores in the mobile segment

 

Nice time, but you do have an extreme CPU

I was wondering about that

???
How does it work???

 

Yeah i love my X9000, i debated over getting it for like 4 months. Glad i did though.


Yeah, some of the high end notebooks (mostly Clevo based) can plop in desktop quads. So they have a HUGE power advantage over us poor mobile gits.

But i cant even overclock beyond 3.0gHz so i'm sure someone with a X9000/X9100 overclocked in a Sager should be able to stomp my score (using an actual mobile CPU)

 

Is that with stuff running in the background? If not, then I find that quite strange. My T9300 consistently gets scores around 31 seconds (the fastest one out of 5 tries is below). People have said that the T8300 is only about 5% slower than the T9300 so I'm a bit surprised that your 36 second score is about 16% worse than mine.

EDIT: In case Gophn or someone else is still updating the chart in the first post, my computer is a Compal JFL92 running 32-bit Vista Home Premium and the processor is an Intel T9300 Core 2 Duo @2.5GHz. The exact score is 30.982 seconds for 32M. The 1024M score is 986.219 seconds (I only ran it once; if people really care, I can upload a picture of that one too).

 

Here is how it looked for me on the 32M test with 4 threads.
(I didn't have the task manager & CPU-Z open when it ran)
Else I had some stuff running... Outlook, SonicStage... Opera... Word...

So my little Vaio could possibl ydo better...


Quickpost this image to Myspace, Digg, Facebook, and others!

Vista Business SP1 32 Bit by the way.

 

Is there a reason you're using 4 threads rather than 2? I tried it with my T9300, but all it does is slow me down by 0.25 seconds or so. The processor only has 2 cores and the Penryns don't do hyperthreading.

 

Oddly enough mine does the opposite.. 4 threads are 0,5 sec faster than 2...

Its starnger that WPrime only recognizes a core speed of 1596MHz - rather than 2,5 - oh, and why does my laptop run at 2,4GHz with a 2,5GHz CPU?

In the end I'm not too fussed though. - the CPU is more than fast enough for years for me.

 

WPrime uses CPU-Z to measure the speed of the CPU when you start it up. Newer laptop CPUs automatically downclock to save energy when you're not doing anything -- I'm watching mine as I type this and it fluctuates between 1197 MHz and 1596 MHz with an occasional jump to 1995 MHz or even 2494 MHz. I'm not sure why; Vista is probably doing something or other in the background.

When you're actually running WPrime, I'm pretty sure it runs at the full 2.5 GHz (give or take a few MHz), but it doesn't necessarily shows you this speed. Still, it's quite strange that your processor would give you better results when running more threads than there are cores whereas mine does worse -- as far as I can tell, we have the same C0 stepping of the T9300 so one would think they behave the same way.

 

Faster than expected... Duo T9600 @2.8Ghz, 1066 Mhz Bus

2 Threads: 27.597
4 Threads: 27.217

 

Yeah, I had stuff on. I did select 2 threads. What should I close?

 

I tried it with 2 threads/cores selected.
But I plan on trying it with the newest version of wPrime, and running it more than once to see the fastest time

 

Well - I ran it with CPU-Z next to it - my T9300 only goes up to about 2,4GHz... I wonder where 100MHz went...

 

Do you have RMClock, etc running in the background ?

You can also run Orthos - Small FFTs to stress the cores, and then monitor the max frequency in CPU-Z.

 

No, I haven't had RMclock - I had Sonic Stage, Outlook, Word running alongside...

I'm off trying orthos now...

Edit.
Running Orthos now - with stuff alongside it
2493MHz - that sounds better to me.

 

My Q6600 @ 3.2 GHz scores 25.7 running with 2 threads, so the guy with the X9000 tops me with 2 threads. For applications that are only using a couple threads max, not all 4, the newer T9300 / T9600 / etc CPUs are quite competitive.

 

This is more like it with a fresh OS install. Any slots in that table?

 

This is interesting - I had plenty of stuff running and you're only a tad quicker... (previous post quoted)

Does this mean clean instals are overrated?

 

Interesting. Did you overclock your processor? The Everest window shows the T8300's speed to be 2561MHz, but wPrime does not.

If you're referring to Wishmaker's post then, no, I think all it means is that your T9300 is only a tad worse than his T8300 even when you run stuff in the background.

 

Its an EVEREST thing. It went over 2.6 in some cases. Must be a bug in Everest or the processor overclocks itself .

 

Yes, I am referring to wishmaker's post.

I mean - its a small difference, and Sonic Stage easily uses about 5-7% of the processor playing music...

Maybe I can be bothered to actually test it in safe mode at one point... that would be a more realistic "show of power" - but I can't get myself away from my active system

 

Let me know when you bench in safe mode .


Has anyone managed to overclock my Penryn in an U6 system?

 

OK - I just ran wPrime in Safe Mode:
Results:
32M
2 Threads: 30.809s
4 Threads: 30,965s

Pic:

 

I think I hit the limit with mine . In safe mode mine is a Wolfdale .

 

Ok.
Not a big difference.


Edit:
1s difference.

 

I knew from the start that yours is faster. Now I have a rough approx by how much .

 

There should have been a difference - but its astonishing how small it is.

 

We deserve a slot in the table .

 

I tried the same thing, but in Safe Mode, my computer appears to behave differently with respect to overloading the threads:

32M
2 Threads: 30.513
4 Threads: 29.983

So with the same exact processor, it seems I can gain half a second just by going to safe mode and another half a second by changing the number of cores. And indeed, Penryns appear to transform into Wolfdales when you go to Safe Mode.

 

This is the result I originally got in the "normal mode" - faster with 4 threads compared to 2...

Strange.

 

I think the 4 threads thing works better for dual cores than it does for my quad to run 8. These are all at 4 threads, 1 per core. (Using 1.55) I get around 14.5 at 2.4 GHz, 13.3 at 3.0, 12.9 at 3.2, 12.2 at 3.4, and 11.6 at 3.6. I've found that 3320 is the perfect speed / voltage / temperature sweet spot on my CPU.

 

A new test with a custom safe mode start-up and 4 threads.

 

Not bad - well done.
I ran it under battery & max powersaver - 2 threads - 35.somethign seconds

 

hwbot.org/user.do?userId=7412

I'm already on an HWBot team, and my laptop sucks, but my desktop doesn't...
10.440 32m
5 min 31.390s 1024m (331.390s if my math is right)
Q6600 @ 4014, 4gb pc6400 ram, IP35 Pro MB, water cooled

 

There you go. A new run no OS tweaks no nothing. . Everest seems to exaggerate. I love my new RAMS .

 

Did you overclock Wishmaker?

 

Yes . The o/c tool measures 2675. WPrime 2580 and Everest the huge figure. ???


P.S: perfect weather for that. -2 degrees outside in my garden . Running wPrime was making my laptop drop temps not increase them .

 

I any case, I hit my target and I will stop now before my Asus ends up in flames . I must say, this tiny processor is quite overclockable .

I just got under 30 s, 29.97 rebooted to launch my normal Vista start-up programs and the jpg is corrupt . Oh well...I know I can get it under 30 s so i am happy .

Broken jpg. Tried opening with every program. Tried renaming it to gif, bmp, etc.
Nothing .

 

Strange... anyway.
I wouldn't bother overclocking my laptop (but also because I would fear I could break something...)
And 2,5GHz is more than I need anyway

 

Congratulations!

 

As long as the temps are okay, nothing will break. As I said, I was doing it on -2 degrees. My hands are frozen now. I can barely type .

 

Ui - but why not

 

you guys try to overclock too much.