This Is Weird...

Does this seem a little odd to you?....

Super Pi 2m

Acer Aspire 5102WLMi (Turion64 x2 TL-50 1.6 GHz) 2m 22s

 

Based on what I've seen a couple of other people report with the X2, not really surprising. I think it was Metamorphical was using her sister's X2 about a week ago and remarked at the same thing (about 2m 3s on the same proc). Seems after all the hype that the performance didn't quite live up after all. Perhaps when 64-bit operating systems become the norm it will make a better showing.

 

Yeah... After that i'll never get an AMD

 

I found that the TL-60 got 43 seconds on 1M, still looking for something closer to what you have.

 

My core solo got 37 sec for 1m.

Stick to intel

 

Well as far as I know Super Pi dosent yet take advantage of dual-core processors, so its only running 1 of the cores. Current times arnt an accurate showcase of what the Core Duo's can really do.

 

Intel processors are better at number crunching than AMD's processors.

 

Super Pi is not a definative benchmark, never has been and never will be. There are other programs which will calculate Pi, even quicker. Try Pifast and see the amount it takes to calculate Pi to 2million or any number and the amount Super Pi takes. Super Pi is considered as a benchmark because it is free, easy & small. It is not a real test of a CPU's full capability.

So, if you want to run Super Pi all day and get world records, then yeah get Intel.

 

wow my core duo got it in 1m 21s

 

I don't know why people look to SuperPI to measure their cpu... And who says 2 minute test should be used as standard?

If your cpu was just calculating PI all day long it woudn't be much use. SuperPI favours the core duo processor by a quite a margin to all other processors. If you was to test it in many different benchmarks such as the rigorous testing done at anandtech then you'll see a much better indications of how one cpu compares to another. Anandtech doesn't use SuperPI... And for good reasons too.

Just take a look at the sticky and you'll have a good laugh too:

"amd athlon 64 x2 4400+ doing it in 1:33 ?
My core duo 1.66 does it in 1:26 ..."

"AMD Athlon 64 FX-60
2M digits: 1:23"

1.66 duo is no way faster than an athlon 64 x2 4400+. What's even more funny the 1.66 duo is nearly on par with the FX-60... A fairly useless benchmark.

 

althought the core duo is a great cpu and should be around the top notch cpu's in most if not all tests. My p4 3.2ghz HT got 1m : 28s when oc'd to 3.54ghz, and thats not far from an fx chip, yet an fx chip would blow the net burts hunk of junk P4 out of the water in everything except multitasking. So yeah super pi is nothing more then a tool for pissing contests...thats it.

p.s my mt40 turion did super pi in 1m : 31s

 

Why not? Because it's slower in this one completely arbitrary benchmark which has *nothing* to do with real-world performance?
I assume that's all you use your computer for then? Because otherwise you might as well say you'd never buy Intel because they have no A in their processor name. The relevance to quality/performance is the same.

 

This is the reason I went for the turion over a pentium M. for what I did the turion worked better for me. Yet the pentium m did super pi faster. Id rather have performance over a test.

 

Wrong. Super pi doesnt favor anything. Its a simple number crunching excersise. It simply shows that for number crunching the core duo is as fast as an athlon 64. It doesnot say that its as fast as it for other things - just for number crunching. ok.

 

Here is my super pi I did today.

 

Wrong... All it shows it calculates Pi faster than other processors. Other number crunching tasks may not show the same difference. It only shows that it specifically calculates Pi better and specifically for that benchmark. Favour maybe the wrong word but it was LATE! All I was saying the benchmark is not very good for measuring overall cpu performance and from all the general results I saw in the sticky the core duo wins by quite a margin. OK?