Any simple tests out there like Sandra?

glen

Lifer
Apr 28, 2000
15,995
1
81
In order to help me think about and justify a hardware upgrade, I want to run something like Sisoft Sandra so I can quantify my current set up. What free cpu tester are folks using these dyas?
 

glen

Lifer
Apr 28, 2000
15,995
1
81
Yes, it is and I am downloading it now.
I have been out of the loop for so long now, I just wondered if there was something better out there.
 

glen

Lifer
Apr 28, 2000
15,995
1
81
Back in the day when 3 Fingers's Crusher demo was the most important thing in the world for evaluating your Quake2 set up, I sort of knew what the benefits and limits of certain benchmarks were, and I could look at the numbers and I really knew what they meant to me as far as their real world results. That was about 10 years ago, so I thought I would check here. 3Fingers and quake2 is why I found anandtech in the first place!
 

glen

Lifer
Apr 28, 2000
15,995
1
81
SiSoftware Sandra

Benchmark Results
Dhrystone ALU : 5682MIPS
Whetstone iSSE2 : 5683MFLOPS
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.

Performance vs. Speed
Dhrystone ALU : 2.83MIPS/MHz
Whetstone iSSE2 : 2.83MFLOPS/MHz
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.

Performance vs. Power
Processor(s) Power : 74.54W
Dhrystone ALU : 76.23MIPS/W
Whetstone iSSE2 : 76.24MFLOPS/W
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.

Performance Test Status
Run ID : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+ (2.01GHz, 512kB L2)
Platform Compliance : x86
NUMA Support : No
SMP (Multi-Processor) Benchmark : No
Total Test Threads : 1
Multi-Core Test : No
SMT (Multi-Threaded) Benchmark : No
Processor Affinity : P0C0T0
System Timer : 3.58MHz
Number of Runs : 64000 / 640

Processor
Model : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+
Speed : 2.01GHz
Model Number : 3000
Cores per Processor : 1 Unit(s)
L2 On-board Cache : 512kB, ECC, Synchronous, Write-Back, 16-way, Exclusive, 64 byte line size

Features
SSE Technology : Yes
SSE2 Technology : Yes
SSE3 Technology : No
Supplemental SSE3 Technology : No
SSE4.1 Technology : No
SSE4.2 Technology : No
EMMX - Extended MMX Technology : Yes
SSE4A Technology : No
HTT - Hyper-Threading Technology : No

Performance Tips
Notice 5008 : To change benchmarks, click Options.
Notice 5004 : Synthetic benchmark. May not tally with 'real-life' performance.
Notice 5006 : Only compare the results with ones obtained using the same version!
Tip 2 : Double-click tip or press Enter while a tip is selected for more information about the tip.
 

glen

Lifer
Apr 28, 2000
15,995
1
81
None of that means anything to me.
Back in the old days, 120FPS on quake 2 meant something.
Now, it seems to me that another thign I should think about if I upgrade is windows.
If there is no reason to go to vista, and vista is slower than XP - why not keep XP and gain faster results?
Right?
 

nvalhalla

Member
Nov 30, 2004
34
0
0
Here is my 1.6GHz E2140 overclocked to 2.8 for comparison.

SiSoftware Sandra

Benchmark Results
Dhrystone ALU : 23663MIPS
Whetstone iSSE3 : 17809MFLOPS
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.

Performance vs. Speed
Dhrystone ALU : 8.45MIPS/MHz
Whetstone iSSE3 : 6.36MFLOPS/MHz
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.

Performance Test Status
Run ID : Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU E2140 @ 1.60GHz (2C, 2.80GHz, 1MB L2, 1.40GHz FSB)
Platform Compliance : x86
NUMA Support : No
SMP (Multi-Processor) Benchmark : Yes
Total Test Threads : 2
Multi-Core Test : Yes
Cores per Processor : 2
SMT (Multi-Threaded) Benchmark : No
Processor Affinity : P0C0T0 P0C1T0
System Timer : 2.80GHz
Number of Runs : 64000 / 640

Processor
Model : Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU E2140 @ 1.60GHz
Speed : 2.80GHz
Cores per Processor : 2 Unit(s)
Type : Dual-Core
L2 On-board Cache : 1MB, ECC, Synchronous, ATC, 4-way, 64 byte line size, 2 threads sharing

Features
SSE Technology : Yes
SSE2 Technology : Yes
SSE3 Technology : Yes
Supplemental SSE3 Technology : Yes
SSE4.1 Technology : No
SSE4.2 Technology : No
EMMX - Extended MMX Technology : No
SSE4A Technology : No
HTT - Hyper-Threading Technology : No

Performance Tips
Notice 5008 : To change benchmarks, click Options.
Notice 5004 : Synthetic benchmark. May not tally with 'real-life' performance.
Notice 5006 : Only compare the results with ones obtained using the same version!
Tip 2 : Double-click tip or press Enter while a tip is selected for more information about the tip.
 

nvalhalla

Member
Nov 30, 2004
34
0
0
SiSoftware Sandra

Benchmark Results
Multi-Media Int x8 iSSSE3 : 153332iit/s
Multi-Media Float x4 iSSE2 : 83703fit/s
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.

Performance vs. Speed
Multi-Media Int x8 iSSSE3 : 54.74iit/s/MHz
Multi-Media Float x4 iSSE2 : 29.88fit/s/MHz
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.

Performance Test Status
Run ID : Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU E2140 @ 1.60GHz (2C, 2.80GHz, 1MB L2, 1.40GHz FSB)
Platform Compliance : x86
NUMA Support : No
SMP (Multi-Processor) Benchmark : Yes
Total Test Threads : 2
Multi-Core Test : Yes
Cores per Processor : 2
SMT (Multi-Threaded) Benchmark : No
Processor Affinity : P0C0T0 P0C1T0
System Timer : 2.80GHz
Rendered Image Size : 640x480

Processor
Model : Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU E2140 @ 1.60GHz
Speed : 2.80GHz
Cores per Processor : 2 Unit(s)
Type : Dual-Core
L2 On-board Cache : 1MB, ECC, Synchronous, ATC, 4-way, 64 byte line size, 2 threads sharing

Features
SSE Technology : Yes
SSE2 Technology : Yes
SSE3 Technology : Yes
Supplemental SSE3 Technology : Yes
SSE4.1 Technology : No
SSE4.2 Technology : No
EMMX - Extended MMX Technology : No
SSE4A Technology : No
HTT - Hyper-Threading Technology : No

Performance Tips
Notice 5008 : To change benchmarks, click Options.
Notice 5004 : Synthetic benchmark. May not tally with 'real-life' performance.
Notice 5006 : Only compare the results with ones obtained using the same version!
Tip 2 : Double-click tip or press Enter while a tip is selected for more information about the tip.
 

jdogg707

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2002
6,098
0
76
Originally posted by: glen
None of that means anything to me.
Back in the old days, 120FPS on quake 2 meant something.
Now, it seems to me that another thign I should think about if I upgrade is windows.
If there is no reason to go to vista, and vista is slower than XP - why not keep XP and gain faster results?
Right?

Just like every other time this questions is asked, it will come down to what you use your computer for. If you are using it for Word processing and e-mail, what you have will more than likely be OK. If you want to get back into gaming, encode video, do Photoshop work, etc. then you will want to upgrade. The primary uses for your machine will dictate how much you upgrade and what you necessarily need to spend the most cash on. Share with us what you use the machine for and we can better assist you with deciding on an upgrade.

As for Windows XP vs. Vista, for gaming I would say Vista simply because of DX 10. That is unless you want to run some of your older games a little faster and then install Vista later when you start playing DX10 titles. For the basics, I don't think it will matter. If you are comfortable with XP, it will be viable for another couple of years, but ultimately you will be upgrading at some point...so I say join everyone else in the shitpool that is Vista and learn to live with it.