Official x300/x305 Owner's Lounge

well, i'll post results in some days :S !!

 

Cool, I want to upgrade too
Let's see the results, maybe it is good enough too open this ...!

 

what do you need to know about the qx9300. i can use my bios and unclock it as low as 1.6ghz and as stable as 3.2ghz. i see what you want to know the difference at 2.0ghz and 2.53ghz correct? if so what game and any questions you want i will be glad to help out.

 

what bios ?? the toshiba x300 stock one ???? the intel version or nforce ??

I know that some laptop let's you overclock, but does the x300 bios too ??

 

no i don't have the toshiba. i have the ocz whitebook. but since you said that you wanted to know the performance difference between the clock speeds, i am willing to show you how it can affect games at ???clock speed that you want.

then when you get results you can decide if you would want to make that move.

 

ok !! don't know how to thank you but it's a hard thing for you to show since we don't have the same gpus but..

If you have time, just to see if the 12mb cache does anything, run the benchmarks at 2.0 and then at 2.53

let's start with 3dmark vantage! only run the cpu benchmarks.
cinebench r10
crysis - cpu benchmark - lowest fps and average @ 2.0 and @ 2.53

3dmark 2006 - only cpu - since it does not use the 4 cores it should be interesting to see 2.0 vs 2.53

Cs source - again since it does not use 4 cores - 1650 * 1050 - aa 8x - af 8x vsync on - everything maxed out except hdr ( don't like it ) map de_port. Add 20 bots. What's the lowest fps that you see ??


I think it's enough.

PS : anything else that you think it's relevant !

 

No problem. you just have to give me a while because i have to download all of them and then run it i will post results when i have them completed., you will have it though by the end of the day. it is 12:00pm my time right now.

 

I like also to see those results

 

no problem i can do vantage now since thats first on my list. brb

 

vantage
3.2ghz



2.53ghz


2.00ghz



that is only one benchmark i will run the rest later.

 

Ah, I must run vantage on my system too I have nothing to compare with
You use Windows7, right ???

 

that is impossible :S

3dmark vantage gives me around 20000 cpu for the q9000 !!!

 

you have to disable phyx on the gpu
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Nvidia-Drivers-Cheat-3DMark-Vantage-Score-88713.shtml

http://forums.vr-zone.com/news-around-the-web/292795-nvidia-cheats-3dmark-vantage.html


http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1048824/nvidia-cheats-3dmark-177

 

ok !! thank you for that info !!

i'll post my result . brb

q9000 - vantage - cpu 7802 that's some diference !!

 

yeah it is. i wonder why i am 300 ahead of you.
can you post your system specs. we should be the same except gpu's
i have a pm45 chipset.
here is all my info.
http://www.ocztechnology.com/produc...book-small_intel-ati_crossfire_edition-small_

what's yours?

are you set to high performance?


reason why i am asking some computer components respond different when in a different system. (do you get what i mean?)

 

i get the point but probably the 6mb cache vs 12mb caches makes de diference here !! it has to do smt!!

Also windows 7 maybe helping there

i have the tipical x300-156
q9000
4gb dd3
9400 for power saving or sli 9800M gts
nforce mcp79 chipset

 

mmmmm. i see ok. just
qx9300
4gb of ddr3 @1333
3870 crossfire
intel pm45 + ich9m

ok i will try the other ones to see what happens.

what did you get tunay?

 

Ah, sorry I haven't done it yet. Starting now, I have just come home...

 

it's fine just post results. i am going to run 3dmark06. only the cpu benchmark thought and see what happens.

 

hah, beat this one

 

3dmark 2006 - cpu 2774

@ 2.53 you will be around 3600

 

I'm close to your CPU then,
http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/6900/3dmark06.jpg
Mine is 2532

 

i am running it. right now i am on my phone. i will post results on
3.2ghz
2.53ghz
2.00ghz


tunay do you have an external of 1204*1024 i think the default is.

 

I have an external but, 15 inc. How ever I can try to connect it now, just a sec

 

lol I can't highes I can go is 1024 x 768

 

yep !! and that's why I'm almost sure that the q9000 is a bottleneck for my sli cards. I should be getting around 13k with the qx9300.

I say this because my 3dmark score barely changes when i overclock the 2x9800 !!

 

Same here.
I rather, do not see big differences when I overclock

 

ok here it is
3.2ghz



2.53ghz


2.00ghz during this one my computer was auto defraging and updating adove. i will re run.


well let me pull up my record for 2.53ghz full 3dmark06 run.

because after doing some research. our cards are a battle for each other. meaning that we are VERY VERY CLOSE IN PERFORMANCE. VERY VERY CLOSE it's scary. so lets run some benchmarks. at 2.00 since we have the same specs. if you don't believe let me know and i will post some links to prove it. i always wanted to see the 9800m gts (or 8800m gts) vs the 3870 CF. there was a thread on this but never got completed on the ocz forums. i can't really OC the gpu's unless you really want me to.


what games do you have. i will also contunie to finish adolfotregosa request

as i download them.

 

Dobble as mine @ 3.2ghz lol

 

re run at 2.00ghz.


this one is alittle older when i didn't know about ati's to much (i just got the quad and i was with a 8600m gs for a while. so at 2.53 you are right. i think i can 13,5-13,8 is i really tried.
)

 

Do you kill other processes when you run those tests?

 

nope just re run. i was de fraging and i was updating adobe reader at the same time. i don't like cheating that's why i put up pictures. i would of told you if i did something else to it. even the time span isn't long enough to do that.

 

Okay, just wondred...

 

Lol. ok. i am going do cinebench and see what happens later on.


what games do you have that has a benchmarking tool.

ex: dmc4, farcry2, crysis, ut3 xterrain and i can't think of any more at this point.

 

I have only GTA IV for now. That is becouse I have a lot of school work to-do and I didn't install any other games after I tried Win7 and went back to Vista. I play GTA at weekends and when I got some free time. I'm going to PM you a message

BUT does some one know what;
Intel Dynamic Acceleration Mode is ?
And Should I have Intel VirtualizationTechnologi enabled or disabled ?

 

well !! that qx9300 at stock has potencial.

just like i predicted 3dmark cpu about 3600 and 13k marks since they are about the same power.

Even at 2.0 it has a lilte better performance.

Well, when mine arrives i'll post my results.

thank you for your help on this

 

dynamic acceleration is available on intel chipsets. basically both fsb and multipliers change to save power or give you power !
Intel virtualization !! well if you use virtualbox or vmware it helps on performance. So "On" does nothing bad, so keep it on !

 

So if I disable Dynamic acceleration, my cpu will stay at 2.80 all time ?

 

actually I think it will then be stuck at lower speeds.

 

as for the p8400 scores:

3dmark06 cpu at stock 2.26: 2010
3dmark06 cpu at 2.55: 2263

funny that my score at 2.55Ghz is almost that of the qx9300 at 2.0Ghz.
damn i need to upgrade my proc... i knew it was a bottleneck, just didnt realize how much.... ouch

 

300 points from T9600 at 2.80 Ghz

 

My CPU score is 1826 for a 2.0ghz P7350, so doesn't seem too high lol

i am sorry this is off topic but just ridiculous lol

The following is supposedly an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.


Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:


First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving.

As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:
1) If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the
temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.
2) If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.


So which is it?
If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that, "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you", and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over.


The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not
accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct... leaving only Heaven thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting "Oh my God!"


THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A."

 

but i thought 3dmark06 didnt support quad core proccessing? this deffinately shows those cores being used. with our procs they are almost the same, 6mb cache, the only difference is true speed, and we seem to gain 100 pts per .1ghz. if 3dmark06 doesnt use all cores, then explain the difference there? cant just be the cache? can it?

 

3dMark06, does not support 4 cores. So, the only diffrence is cach and like you said "true speed"

 

but 3661 is his cpu score at 2.5ghz, mine at 2.5ghz is only 2263, your telling me that double the cache equals almost 2/3 more performance? i could see 2 more cores adding almost twice the speed... but cache?

 

The cache actually plays an important role in CPU tests. It is similar to a web browsers cache, where a lot of the objects are already stored, thus increasing the speed web pages load up. I also believe that it fully utilizes 2 cores to the max, whereas the other 2 are for the computer operation, therefore allowing the program to completely allocate resources to the 2 main cores, rather than a dual core processor having to allocate several percent to normal computer operation.

 

That was very clear definition Dude55, Thank You

 

thanks dude55, i guess that could account for it, but still... damn.

dondadah88:

could you run the 3 benches for 64bit crisis? i would be really curious to see how it stacks at 2.5 with high settings, no AA, and 1680x1050 res? please? i will run the benches in a bit at 2.5 to see how i fare. these are the settings i play at normally, but i dont normally overclock.

 

Dude55 : Are we still stuck at datasheet for overclocking ?