• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

3.2GHz you've most likely never seen before

Wow you got your hands on 840! I have been looking to find one of those for my next modeling /gaming system. AMD i heard could not find one to test their x2 against . Were did ya get it.
 
The reason it does is because most applications are not SMP coded, so they take NO benefit whatsoever, no matter how many CPUs you have.

Of course you're OCed 4GHz CPU is going to beat a 3.2GHz.
 
Originally posted by: Acanthus
why in the world wouldnt you increase the multiplier on an Unlocked ES!
Click to expand...

It might not clock very well - also the heat
realize that (if the vcore sensor is correct) he is running TWO 3.2GHz Prescotts at 1.5v. That's an awful lot of heat
any temps? what cooling?
 
Originally posted by: whatever
Originally posted by: Acanthus
why in the world wouldnt you increase the multiplier on an Unlocked ES!
Click to expand...

It might not clock very well - also the heat
realize that (if the vcore sensor is correct) he is running TWO 3.2GHz Prescotts at 1.5v. That's an awful lot of heat
any temps? what cooling?
Click to expand...

Toms went to 4ghz.
 
I haven't spent any time attempting to play around with the clock speeds just yet. I'm concentrating on stock runs/evaluations at the moment. I'll give the OC a look on Monday, after I've gotten some SETI times for the TeAm to compare with.
 
http://server.counter-strike.net/images/misc/sandra3dc.png

And this is the one that shows why it sucks-ass.....With Cas 3-4-4-8 at 1t (not fully stable at 600ddr) I can hit like 7800's.....It is bandwidth starved like the old days of P4s and single channel Pc2100....It is a virtual bottleneck and there is no way it can feed buth cpus.....

Intel needs to run these things with a much higher FSB and dual FSBs to boot....
 
Originally posted by: Duvie
http://server.counter-strike.net/images/misc/sandra3dc.png

And this is the one that shows why it sucks-ass.....With Cas 3-4-4-8 at 1t (not fully stable at 600ddr) I can hit like 7800's.....It is bandwidth starved like the old days of P4s and single channel Pc2100....It is a virtual bottleneck and there is no way it can feed buth cpus.....

Intel needs to run these things with a much higher FSB and dual FSBs to boot....
Click to expand...

it would have helped had they used the 266/1066 fsb instead of the 200/800 (although it might still be somewhat starved in that case, it would be a LOT better)
 
Originally posted by: Ronin
Soon, from what I'm told, but not yet.

As requested:

SuperPI
Click to expand...

Hmmm thats much faster than a single 3.2 ghz P4. Does SuperPi benefit from a dual-core setup? Because when i turn on/off HT on my P4, there is no effect, so thats why I am wondering how dual-core increased the speed here?
 
Originally posted by: Impaqt
My 640 @ 4Ghz beats all those scores.... Whats up with that?

NOT impressed.............
Click to expand...

Jesus, where you been for the last year ? OF COURSE it doesnt....Goooooooood
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top