Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Home and Garden
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-12-2012, 11:33 PM   #1
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default Povray on ARM

Finally figured out how to compile 3.7 on ARM!

Povray 3.7
Code:
FX 8350 (4m/8t, 4.1 GHz turbo):        1985.83 pps ; 121.09 pps/module/GHz
Core i5 3317U (Ivy Bridge)
  (2c/4t, 1.7 GHz, 2.4 GHz turbo):      573.68 pps ; 119.52 pps/core/GHz
Core i7 2600 (Sanyd Bridge)
  (4c/8t, 3.4 GHz, 3.5 GHz turbo):     1618.48 pps ; 115.61 pps/core/GHz
Core i5 4570 (Haswell)
  (4c/4t, 3.2 GHz, 3.4 GHz turbo):     1540.24 pps ; 113.25 pps/core/GHz
Core i5 660 (Nehalem)
  (2c/4t, 3.33 GHz, 3.46 GHz turbo):    694.34 pps ; 100.34 pps/core/GHz
Core i5 3317U (Ivy Bridge)
  (2c/2t, 1.7 GHz, 2.4 GHz turbo):      474.19 pps ;  98.79 pps/core/GHz
Core i5 2400S (Sandy Bridge)
  (4c/4t, 2.5 GHz, 2.6 GHz turbo):      991.64 pps ;  95.35 pps/core/GHz
Core i7 2600 (sandy Bridge)
  (4c/4t, 3.4 GHz, 3.5 GHz turbo):     1318.28 pps ;  94.16 pps/core/GHz
Core i5 660 (Nehalem)
  (2c/2t, 3.33 GHz, 3.46 GHz turbo):    561.51 pps ;  81.14 pps/core/GHz
Core 2 Duo E8400 (2c/2t 3.0 GHz):       462.46 pps ;  77.08 pps/core/GHz
Phenom II x6, 1090T 
  (6c/6t, 3.2 GHz):                    1388.11 pps ;  72.30 pps/core/GHz
FX 8350 (4m/1t, 4.2 GHz turbo):         292.03 pps ;  69.53 pps/module/GHz 
AMD E-450 (2c/2t, 1.6 GHz):             159.86 pps ;  49.95 pps/core/GHz
Exynos 5250 (1 thread, 1.7 GHz):         83.95 pps ;  49.38 pps/GHz
Exynos 5250 (2c/2t, 1.7 GHz):           160.62 pps ;  47.24 pps/core/GHz
Snapdragon 801, MSM8974AB
  (1t, 0.96 GHz):                        35.34 pps ;  36.81 pps/GHz
PowerPC 970MP 
  (G5, 4c/4t, 2.5 GHz):                 357.72 pps ;  35.77 pps/core/GHz
PowerPC 7400 (G4, 0.47 GHz):             16.20 pps ;  34.71 pps/core/GHz
Pentium 4 HT (1c/2t, 3.2 GHz):          105.92 pps ;  33.10 pps/core/GHz
Pentium 4m (1c/1t, 1.5 GHz):             48.99 pps ;  32.66 pps/core/GHz
S4 Pro APQ8064 (1t, 1.026 GHz):          31.58 pps ;  30.78 pps/GHz
Pentium 4 HT (1c/1t, 3.2 GHz):           86.04 pps ;  26.89 pps/core/GHz
Atom N270 (1c/2t, 1.6 GHz):              42.05 pps ;  26.28 pps/core/GHz
OMAP4430 (2c/2t, 1.0 GHz):               50.73 pps ;  25.37 pps/core/GHz
OMAP4470 (2c/2t, 1.5 GHz):               72.88 pps ;  24.29 pps/core/GHz
Exynos 4210 (2c/2t, 1.2 GHz):            48.15 pps ;  20.06 pps/core/GHz
S4 Pro APQ8064 (4c/4t, 1.5 GHz):        110.76 pps ;  ????? pps/core/GHz
Snapdragon 801, MSM8974AB 
  (4c/4t, 2.5 GHz):                     177.66 pps ;  ????? pps/core/GHz
The systems:

FX8350 - FreeBSD 10, gcc 4.8 / gcc 4.9
Core i5 4570 - Ubuntu 14.04, icc 14.0.3
Core i5 3317U - Ubuntu 14.04, icc 14.0.3
Core i5 2400S - Ubuntu 14.04, icc 14.0.3
Phenom IIx6 1090T - Ubuntu 14.04, gcc 4.8
AMD E-450 - Ubuntu 12.04, gcc 4.6
Pentium 4 HT - Debian 7, gcc 4.7
Pentium 4m - Debian 7, gcc 4.7
Atom N270 - Ubuntu 12.04, icc 12

PowerPC 4700 - Debian 7, gcc 4.6

Exynos 5250 (Chromebook) - Ubuntu 14.04, gcc 4.8
Snapdragon 801 MSM8974AB (HTC One M8) - Android 4.4, gcc 4.8
S4 Pro APQ8064 (Nexus 4) - Android 4.4, gcc 4.6
OMAP 4430/4470 (Nook Tablet, Nook HD+) - Android 4.3, gcc 4.6
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉

Last edited by jhu; 09-08-2014 at 01:59 PM.
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2012, 10:03 AM   #2
Soulkeeper
Diamond Member
 
Soulkeeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 5,948
Default

interesting results, thanks
__________________
A8-3870 @3.3GHz 1.3125v
16GB 1866 9-9-9-23 1t 1.35v
Linux software/gaming exclusively
linuxsociety.org
Soulkeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2012, 06:43 PM   #3
soccerballtux
Lifer
 
soccerballtux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,314
Default

if you wanted to calculate these in a normalized clock/clock score for the lazy brain dead among us that would be appreciated. This is a great thread.
__________________
4.0Ghz&2.6Ghz-CPU-NB Ph2-965BE || GA790X-UD4P 8GB DDR800 || Gigabyte GTX670 || Soyo 24" PMVA Heatware

Last edited by soccerballtux; 06-14-2012 at 06:17 PM.
soccerballtux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2012, 07:14 PM   #4
TuxDave
Lifer
 
TuxDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 10,473
Default

Found this nice graphic for additional comparisons to other processors.

http://www.purepc.pl/files/Image/art..._wykres_10.png
__________________
post count = post count + 0.999.....
(\__/)
(='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")signature to help him gain world domination.
TuxDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 12:54 AM   #5
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Next I'll benchmark my Nook Color
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 12:01 AM   #6
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Updated with pps and pps/GHz. Looks like Exynos is faster than first generation Atom per GHz. I wonder how the new Medfield performs?
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 09:32 AM   #7
soccerballtux
Lifer
 
soccerballtux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,314
Default

This is a cool thread.
It'll be interesting to see how the hard abi, and neon, affect things.
Also, A15 out now which is ~25% faster clock/clock.
Pretty soon we won't need Intel...
__________________
4.0Ghz&2.6Ghz-CPU-NB Ph2-965BE || GA790X-UD4P 8GB DDR800 || Gigabyte GTX670 || Soyo 24" PMVA Heatware
soccerballtux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 10:31 AM   #8
Arkadrel
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,678
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhu View Post

Povray 3.6 here are the numbers:

Exynos 4210 @ 1.2 GHz (Samsung Galaxy SII, ARM Cortex A9), Debian 6.0,
gcc 4.4 -mfloat-abi=softfp -mcpu=cortex-a9
Parse Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 4 seconds (4 seconds)
Photon Time: 0 hours 1 minutes 43 seconds (103 seconds)
Render Time: 1 hours 49 minutes 59 seconds (6599 seconds)
Total Time: 1 hours 51 minutes 46 seconds (6706 seconds)

For comparison

Athlon II x4 (K10h), 2.8 GHz, one thread
gcc 4.4.5, -march=barcelona, -ffast-math -unroll-loops
Parse Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 1 seconds (1 seconds)
Photon Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 16 seconds (16 seconds)
Render Time: 0 hours 13 minutes 23 seconds (803 seconds)
Total Time: 0 hours 13 minutes 40 seconds (820 seconds)

^ neat
Also holy cow that Athon II kicks arse compaired to the others.
Now do one with a Ivy Bridge
Arkadrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 11:59 AM   #9
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkadrel View Post
^ neat
Also holy cow that Athon II kicks arse compaired to the others.
Now do one with a Ivy Bridge
They're actually all single thread. What's more interesting is pps/GHz, and you'll see even the lowly celeron beat K10h. Ouch!
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 12:08 PM   #10
Ferzerp
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 5,365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhu View Post
What's more interesting is pps/GHz
Not really. That's an incredibly meaningless metric on its own.
Ferzerp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 12:24 PM   #11
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soccerballtux View Post
This is a cool thread.
It'll be interesting to see how the hard abi, and neon, affect things.
Also, A15 out now which is ~25% faster clock/clock.
Pretty soon we won't need Intel...
I wouldn't count on that. These guys did a comparison of armel vs. armhf on the Raspberry Pi. The numbers are better for armhf, but the ranges vary quite a bit.

Hmm, looks like Debian armhfs beta installer is downloadable. I don't know how I missed that. I'll report back later!
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 12:30 PM   #12
Arkadrel
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,678
Default

A "ARM Cortex A9" @4ghz would give a Celeron 220 a run for its money

I wonder what its power usage would be like?
How easy would it be to overclock one to around 4ghz?

Does anyone feel like pulling apart a mobile phone,
and slapping a heatsink onto the chip and trying?


edit:

http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/03/t...hip-to-3-1ghz/

Quote:
Lab workers at Taiwan's semiconductor giant have successfully run a dual-core ARM Cortex-A9 processor at 3.1GHz under normal conditions.
Hmmm looks like they "could" make Cortex-A9's around 3.1ghz if they wanted to.
It wouldnt be a "speedy" chip (still slower than celeron 220, going by the pps/GHz above),
but it might be enough to run windows 8 and still have a semi enjoyable experiance.

(weird its max rated at 2,000mhz, but they can get them running stable at 3.1ghz in labs)

I wonder when we ll see the first ARM chips ment for PC users.

Last edited by Arkadrel; 08-12-2012 at 12:39 PM.
Arkadrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 12:31 PM   #13
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferzerp View Post
Not really. That's an incredibly meaningless metric on its own.
It actually isn't. The Celeron 220 is Core 2 based. And that's about the time when Intel started to overtake AMD in performance. The pps/GHz is a decent proxy for IPC (Core 2 is nearly 2.5x faster per clock vs. Netburst, ouch!) and the number is, not surprisingly, fairly consistent across the range of a processor family so it's easy to see what pps numbers a processor would get at a certain frequency.
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉

Last edited by jhu; 08-12-2012 at 12:37 PM.
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 12:44 PM   #14
Ferzerp
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 5,365
Default

It has absolutely no practical meaning by itself. It is only when combined with clockspeed and power usage that it has any meaning at all.
Ferzerp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 01:24 PM   #15
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferzerp View Post
It has absolutely no practical meaning by itself. It is only when combined with clockspeed and power usage that it has any meaning at all.
Uhm, data, in general, has no practical meaning without context, but you also forgot price, which is more important (eg. Oracle touting it's TPS with TCO numbers on different hardware, etc.). With pps/GHz, it's easy to figure out how one particular chip will perform compared with another particular chip, then compare prices to see if the performance gain (if any) is worth the money to upgrade.
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 02:04 PM   #16
NUSNA_Moebius
Golden Member
 
NUSNA_Moebius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,362
Default

I assume POVRay 3.7 tests the FPU more than anything in these chips?

The Exynos, N270, P4m, and PPC750 all have 64 bit FPUs, with the K10h and Celeron 220 having 128 bit yes? From even such a small amount of data, you can interpolate other processors into it, simply based on their FPU widths. I assume any AVX equipped i series or AMD BD module to be about twice the pps/GHz.
__________________
MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL! - Current muses: Ghost Recon: Phantoms, War Thunder, Firefall

Geezer computer - Phenom II x4 925 @ 3.5 GHz | Diamond ATi Radeon 5850 1 GB | 2 x 2 GB DDR3-1600 | MSI 770-C45 Mobo | Asus Xonar DS Sound card | Win7 64 | 1 TB HDD | LG 32" HDTV

Last edited by NUSNA_Moebius; 08-12-2012 at 02:07 PM.
NUSNA_Moebius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 02:31 PM   #17
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NUSNA_Moebius View Post
I assume POVRay 3.7 tests the FPU more than anything in these chips?

The Exynos, N270, P4m, and PPC750 all have 64 bit FPUs, with the K10h and Celeron 220 having 128 bit yes? From even such a small amount of data, you can interpolate other processors into it, simply based on their FPU widths. I assume any AVX equipped i series or AMD BD module to be about twice the pps/GHz.
Povray 3.7 is multithreaded, 3.6 is only single threaded. The program uses the SIMD registers as scalar entities. Looking through the code, there's not much that can be vectorized in critical paths and AVX2 probably will not be of much benefit for this program. Watching the program compile, the only things getting autovectorized are in the file manipulation routines.
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉

Last edited by jhu; 08-12-2012 at 02:36 PM.
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 03:14 PM   #18
NUSNA_Moebius
Golden Member
 
NUSNA_Moebius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,362
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhu View Post
Povray 3.7 is multithreaded, 3.6 is only single threaded. The program uses the SIMD registers as scalar entities. Looking through the code, there's not much that can be vectorized in critical paths and AVX2 probably will not be of much benefit for this program. Watching the program compile, the only things getting autovectorized are in the file manipulation routines.
Sorry I get a bit confused as to how SIMD, Vector Units, FPUs, etc al all work in their own manner.

But is the SIMD width directly affecting how much data is getting shoved through?
__________________
MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL! - Current muses: Ghost Recon: Phantoms, War Thunder, Firefall

Geezer computer - Phenom II x4 925 @ 3.5 GHz | Diamond ATi Radeon 5850 1 GB | 2 x 2 GB DDR3-1600 | MSI 770-C45 Mobo | Asus Xonar DS Sound card | Win7 64 | 1 TB HDD | LG 32" HDTV
NUSNA_Moebius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 05:40 PM   #19
Haserath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 745
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soccerballtux View Post
This is a cool thread.
It'll be interesting to see how the hard abi, and neon, affect things.
Also, A15 out now which is ~25% faster clock/clock.
Pretty soon we won't need Intel...
Improvements made by ARM's army of designers mean that the Cortex-A15's performance is significantly improved: official figures put the chip's integer performance at around 1.5 times that of the Cortex-A9, while floating-point performance is doubled.
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwar...ung-exynos-5/1

You can say that again. I was thinking they were going to start out with 2ghz dual cores though, but 1.7ghz would still put this a league ahead of an A9.

It's amazing that these chips will be using 12.8GB/s memory bandwidth when the desktop APUs are merely getting 30GB/s or less.
Haserath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 06:16 PM   #20
Intel17
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth.
Posts: 3,194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soccerballtux View Post
This is a cool thread.
It'll be interesting to see how the hard abi, and neon, affect things.
Also, A15 out now which is ~25% faster clock/clock.
Pretty soon we won't need Intel...
Whatever you say, man.

Last edited by Intel17; 08-12-2012 at 06:26 PM.
Intel17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 03:08 AM   #21
Arkadrel
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,678
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haserath View Post
Improvements made by ARM's army of designers mean that the Cortex-A15's performance is significantly improved: official figures put the chip's integer performance at around 1.5 times that of the Cortex-A9, while floating-point performance is doubled.
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwar...ung-exynos-5/1

You can say that again. I was thinking they were going to start out with 2ghz dual cores though, but 1.7ghz would still put this a league ahead of an A9.

It's amazing that these chips will be using 12.8GB/s memory bandwidth when the desktop APUs are merely getting 30GB/s or less.
@1.5x int and 2x fp, that would give it how many pps in this type of bench? 50ish? still lower than a celeron 220.

I agree about the memory bandwidth however, Im guessing there gonna put it to good use:

1) "promises 1080p video playback at 60 frames per second with full support for wireless displays and 3D stereoscopic videos."

2) "the image processor portion can capture pictures and video from an eight megapixel sensor at 30 frames per second and features hardware post-processing units including 3D noise reduction, image stabilisation and optical distortion compensation"

Also impressive:
Comes with USB3 and SATA3.
Arkadrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2012, 02:54 AM   #22
nenforcer
Golden Member
 
nenforcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,497
Default

This is a great thread I will be very interested in following these numbers starting with the release of Windows 8 RT this fall and obviously Debian 7.

Also interested in Qualcomm Snapdragon Krait and nVidia Tegra 4? since those are suppose to be considered the flagship ARM Cortex A15 processors.
__________________
nForcer 2
======
AMD Sempron 3300+ @ 2.2GHz Barton Sock A 512Kb L2
ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe nForce 2 MB
Seagate 7200.10 7200 RPM 250GB IDE w/ 8MB Cache Perpendicular
EVGA Geforce 7800GS 256MB AGP 8X
BFGTech Ageia Physx 128MB PPU PCI
1GB (512MBx2) Crucial Ballistix DDR400 4-4-4 Dual Channel
nVidia Soundstorm Dolby Digital Coaxial
Sony CPD-E540 21" CRT Monitor 1600x1200 85Hz VSYNC Off
Windows XP SP3
nenforcer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2012, 10:19 AM   #23
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nenforcer View Post
This is a great thread I will be very interested in following these numbers starting with the release of Windows 8 RT this fall and obviously Debian 7.

Also interested in Qualcomm Snapdragon Krait and nVidia Tegra 4? since those are suppose to be considered the flagship ARM Cortex A15 processors.
Same here, but I don't have access to all that hadware.
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2012, 10:55 AM   #24
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nenforcer View Post
This is a great thread I will be very interested in following these numbers starting with the release of Windows 8 RT this fall and obviously Debian 7.
Windows RT is a stillborn child tho. Almost all OEMs rejected it in favour of x86 tablets.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare
Competition is good at driving the pace of innovation, but it is an inefficient mechanism (R&D expenditures summed across a given industry) for generating the innovation.
ShintaiDK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2012, 12:18 AM   #25
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,059
Default

Exynos hard float numbers are up. Had to install Debian wheezy armhf on my phone. Loads of fun. Looks like performance is about on par wth a Pentium 4 and better than first generation Atom.
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉

Last edited by jhu; 08-20-2012 at 12:29 AM.
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.