Prescott 2.4 BenchMarks

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
P

ProfessorFate

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 2001
3,826
0
0
Originally posted by: jhites
Thanks PF for the info and

letting us know what not to buy. ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting anyone buy or not buy anything. :D

Compare the 2M Super-PI times to Duvie's posted in this thread.
Here's the quote with his rig:

"1M = 39sec
2M = 1min 34sec
8M = coming soon......

-------------------------
P4 2.4c@3.5 (1.58v) 292fsb
Abit IC7 i875
Enermax 430watt PSU
(2x512) Pc3500 Geil Ultra PLat.
WD 36.7GB Raptor HDD
WD 40GB ATA100 HDD
Pioneer DVR-104
Lite-On LTD163 DVD-Rom
Radeon 8500 AIW"

The 2.4 Prescott at a slower clock beats it by 1 second.
Everybody has different hardware so it's pretty hard to compare box to box.
 
DAPUNISHER

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
31,909
32,142
146
Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
Originally posted by: Thor86
Nice results, now get that thing to 200+fsb already. :p
Click to expand...
dont waste your time....

my 2.4a prescott is @ 200fsb ~ performance is ....pathetic!
its slower then a 2.4b clock for clock @ any speed
rolleye.gif


Prescott does nothing for gaming at all.
gamers should not even concider these chips over a northwood.


....itll be for sale by tomorrow :(
Click to expand...
Hate to say I told you so....
 
DAPUNISHER

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
31,909
32,142
146
Originally posted by: ProfessorFate
Originally posted by: jhites
Thanks PF for the info and

letting us know what not to buy. ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting anyone buy or not buy anything. :D

Compare the 2M Super-PI times to Duvie's posted in this thread.
Here's the quote with his rig:

"1M = 39sec
2M = 1min 34sec
8M = coming soon......

-------------------------
P4 2.4c@3.5 (1.58v) 292fsb
Abit IC7 i875
Enermax 430watt PSU
(2x512) Pc3500 Geil Ultra PLat.
WD 36.7GB Raptor HDD
WD 40GB ATA100 HDD
Pioneer DVR-104
Lite-On LTD163 DVD-Rom
Radeon 8500 AIW"

The 2.4 Prescott at a slower clock beats it by 1 second.
Everybody has different hardware so it's pretty hard to compare box to box.
Click to expand...
After comparing SuperPi times, be certain to compare times with him running POVRAY ;)

 
T

THUGSROOK

Elite Member
Feb 3, 2001
11,847
0
0
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Compare the 2M Super-PI times to Duvie's posted in this thread.
Here's the quote with his rig:

1M = 39sec
2M = 1min 34sec

P4 2.4c@3.5 (1.58v) 292fsb
Click to expand...

ok,
just to post some info, here's some of my results....

2.4a @ 3.6ghz noHT 200fsb 400ddr ~ *Win98se*

1M = 43sec
2M = 1min 37sec

the only impressive scores i saw was in the memory bandwidth department ~ and as we know those results dont really mean squat.

Aida32 = 5928/1817
PCM2k2 = 12500

gaming results arent worth posting.
 
S

SinfulWeeper

Diamond Member
Sep 2, 2000
4,567
11
81
Originally posted by: Soulkeeper
definately looks better than a celeron !!
Click to expand...

Damn you :|... I think I killed my keyboard on that one when I spit out my beer laughing.
Ahh well, it gave me reason to open up my new one :)
 
P

ProfessorFate

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 2001
3,826
0
0
Originally posted by: SinfulWeeper
Originally posted by: Soulkeeper
definately looks better than a celeron !!
Click to expand...

Damn you :|... I think I killed my keyboard on that one when I spit out my beer laughing.
Ahh well, it gave me reason to open up my new one :)
Click to expand...


Ok, let me see if I can ruin your new keyboard.

Reran some Super_PI and POV-Ray times at 199FSB.
Even with a 9FSB increase to 199 using a 1:1 ratio versus the 4:5 ratio used in my first benchies resulted in slower times as reported by Thugs.


So here's the results with a 9FSB increase and 4:5 DDR timings at 2.5-4-4-8 instead of 2.5-3-3-7.
199FSB- = 3545Mhz
4:5 DDR = 492Mhz @ 2.5-4-4-8

Super_PI
1M = 39 Sec
2M = 1 Min, 30Sec
8M = 7Min, 0Sec

POV-Ray = 29Min, 58Sec


EDIT: These benchies were at 197FSB, not 199. 197FSB=3545. Sorry, it was late last night.
rolleye.gif
 
I

Insane3D

Elite Member
May 24, 2000
19,446
0
0
THUGSROOK -

For the love of god man...why are you still running Win98SE??? :confused:


*thinks of Win9x and gets violently ill*

;)

 
T

THUGSROOK

Elite Member
Feb 3, 2001
11,847
0
0
the prescott can not run GAT Streetracer or F1 ~ i dont know why, all my northwoods can upto 430ddr 1:1.
NBS667 is also a nogo ~ again northwoods can run that setting upto 250fsb 5:4.
(the 1mb cache? heat?)

thats a major loss in performance for me.
so in your case ~ yes the 4:5 ratio is gonna kick my arse even with lame cas.

also ~ the heat gets to my vid card.
my vid card OC had to be lowered.
 
D

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
Originally posted by: ProfessorFate
Originally posted by: SinfulWeeper
Originally posted by: Soulkeeper
definately looks better than a celeron !!
Click to expand...

Damn you :|... I think I killed my keyboard on that one when I spit out my beer laughing.
Ahh well, it gave me reason to open up my new one :)
Click to expand...


Ok, let me see if I can ruin your new keyboard.

Reran some Super_PI and POV-Ray times at 199FSB.
Even with a 9FSB increase to 199 using a 1:1 ratio versus the 4:5 ratio used in my first benchies resulted in slower times as reported by Thugs.


So here's the results with a 9FSB increase and 4:5 DDR timings at 2.5-4-4-8 instead of 2.5-3-3-7.
199FSB- = 3545Mhz
4:5 DDR = 492Mhz @ 2.5-4-4-8

Super_PI
1M = 39 Sec
2M = 1 Min, 30Sec
8M = 7Min, 0Sec

POV-Ray = 29Min, 58Sec
Click to expand...


GETTING BETTER....

Please ppl make sure when you compare POV-Ray results you use 26min 17sec for me....My 22min 40sec is using 2 instances to enable the power of hT and pick up 18-19% speed by having each instance render 1/2 of it....

If you want to know how to do it I will give you the link to do it as it is very simple and quick comand line (10 characters) that you can punch in to tell it to split it....

You defintely have a ddr speed increase over me with 475-490ddr as I am running a 3:2 ratio and 390 ddr but I get to use cas 2,3,3,8 timings NO GAT.....

I am not sure why my 1m time is better but my 2m was slower....
 
A

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: slag
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: slag
Originally posted by: myocardia
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't almost all of those benchmarks considerably lower than a 3.4ghz 2.4C?

edit: BTW, a 2.4ghz Prescott is a 2.4E, not a 2.4A.:D
Click to expand...

yeah, they are lower. my 2.6c @ 3275 mhz gets a 10241 cpu score.
Click to expand...

only with HT enabled.
Click to expand...


Well yeah. Why would I disable it. It comes with the chip. Why anyone would want to disable HT is beyond me.

Do you remove half the spark plugs from your car before you drive it?

If we are comparing stock chip to stock chip, I wouldn't want to castrate the HT.
Click to expand...

Because it give a huge artificial increase in sandra?
 
A

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: ProfessorFate
Test System Specs

Intel Prescott 2.4A Prescott, 533FSB, 1MB L2-Cache, Non HyperThreading
Thermalright SP-94 w/ Thermaltake 90MM # 9025A-2B (56CFM/35DB)
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe, Bios 15
2X256 OCZ 3700 Gold, V1
BFG FX5900 @ 470/980
WD 36GB Raptor on Sata 1
Enermax 431watt PSU
XP PRO-SP1, Detonator 53.03s


Let?s dispense with the pleasantries and go straight to Overclock results.

--------------------------------------


Benchmarks @ 190FSB, CPU @3420Mhz, DDR @ 2.5-3-3-7, 4:5 ratio running @ 475Mhz.
CPU vcore @1.5v (1.424-1.456v under load)- this chip likes juice, DDR @2.85v


System running in a Lian-Li PC65 with 4 21CFM Panaflos. For CPU benchmarks this was sufficient but when benching with an O'clocked chip and O'clocked Video card performing graphic benchmarks it was necassary to remove the side panel to keep the FX5900 from crashing to the desktop. I've got some Sunon 40CFM fans coming to see if that will be keep the graphics card happy with the side panels on.


First up some Gamimg Benchmarks:

GunMetal BenchMark 2-BM1:

Min FPS =19.69
Ave FPS = 31.95
Max FPS= 62.07

----------------------------

X2 Rolling Demo, Default settings = 116.98 FPS

----------------------------

3dMark 2001SE, Default settings = 18394

----------------------------

AquaMark3
GFX =5832, CPU =9346, Total Score =44444

----------------------------

Memory Scores:

Aida v3.85 Read/Write = 5356.2037

----------------------------

CPU Scores:

Sandra 2004 CPU Arithmetic
DHRY = 8927
WHET = 2271/4196

---------------------------

Super_PI 2m = 1 min, 33 Sec

--------------------------

POV-Ray 3.5 Benchmark v1.02 = 31 Min, 4 Sec

---------------------------

Pretty solid performance from this chip not sporting Intel's current 800FSB or Hyper Threading technology. CPU temps were reasonable using the top notch SP-94 HSF although things got a little warm when the FX5900 heated up.
Here's a look at CPU and MB temperatures under load. System was loaded running Super-PI 32M and POV-Ray Benchmarks concurrently.

First the sytem was run loaded for 15 minutes with the Lian-Li side Panels removed:

Temps are CPU/MB

15 minutes = 43C/31C

At 15 minutes the side panles were refitted and system was left under load and checked at 30 and 45 minute intervals.

30 minutes = 50C/33C

45 minutes = 51C/34C

-----------------------

PF :beer:
Click to expand...

 
DAPUNISHER

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
31,909
32,142
146
Please ppl make sure when you compare POV-Ray results you use 26min 17sec for me....My 22min 40sec is using 2 instances to enable the power of hT and pick up 18-19% speed by having each instance render 1/2 of it....
Click to expand...
I will not! :D HT shows it's stuff on tasks like that, therefor the lack of HT on the 2.4A is just another reason to stay away from it ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom