ooztuncer Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Today finally I put my new system in action. Here is the first trial: http://weboperative.com/OCIDB/index.php?Qw...s&Qis=M&Qtmp=FS As I progress further I will continue to post and as soon as I find my stable speed I will also post in the OCDB Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
momoceio Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 JESUS! Are you using a vapochill something to keep that bad boy cool? I see it says modified Mach I. Nice numbers... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry_Games Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 i hear those P5B's are great performers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thraxz Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 They sure can run up the FSB. If that's your aim, they're really, really good at it. However their performance at about half of those FSBs above 400 aren't so hot. Something I've been trying to get across for sometime. Example? http://weboperative.com/OCIDB/thraxz/pi1.JPG That's not much slower of a time than Ooz's considering there's a ~300MHz CPU gap. BTW: NICE OC Ooz. Very nice! Now get 'er stable of there! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ooztuncer Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 ...However their performance at about half of those FSBs above 400 aren't so hot... Actually, it is better than you think I believe. See my results of super pi 1m: 9x400 (3338): 14.344 sec 8x450 (4448): 14.344 sec even tough timings are worse and strap changed to 1266 while running 8x450, the result is exactly same! which means 50mhz fsb/ram speed bump was enough to regain the performance drop due to nb latencies. By the way, first entry is done in the database @ 4.05 ghz > http://www.diy-street.com/forum/showpost.p...48&postcount=52 I know I still have room but I played with it only couple of hours - more to come!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thraxz Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 9x400 (3338): 14.344 sec8x450 (4448): 14.344 sec even tough timings are worse and strap changed to 1266 while running 8x450, the result is exactly same! which means 50mhz fsb/ram speed bump was enough to regain the performance drop due to nb latencies. By the way, first entry is done in the database @ 4.05 ghz > http://www.diy-street.com/forum/showpost.p...48&postcount=52 That's HORRIBLE performance in my opinion, Ooz. Especially considering there are boards out there like... the 975x/g (That may have a 440FSB warm boot iissue but gives a better 8/8x xfire set up over the p965's 8x/4x PCIe solution along with the best performance clock to clock I've seen yet) or more importantly the ABit QuadGT that does not even HAVE a strap over 1066 and has been shown to prime at 500FSB. It would squash that board at those FSB. EVEN SO... NICE clocks and congrats on the entry that's much faster than my 3.83 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ooztuncer Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 completely agree on the abit quad board. As i have mentioend couple of times already, if that board was on the market 1.5 months ago I would be all over it. After all, I purchased this board for $160 shipped (wifi edition) which is not too bad. However, the aim of my post wasn't to show the performance per say, but the difference between 1066 strap and 1266 strap. On p5b deluxe, you don't need to hit 485 or 500mhz to close the performance gap - 445-450 mhz is sufficient. Jump into another topic > it is really strange to see the diminishing returns. 1m @ 4005: if I recall correctly something around 12.89secs. (will check it) 1m @ 4275: 12.047... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thraxz Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Well I think that's an instability/bad setting somewhere considering a 4.5Ghz rig is running VERY low 11s.... n/m that's on the AB9 pro. The 4.4G P5B is at 11.8s. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ooztuncer Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 i found my results: 4005: 12.860 secs (http://weboperative.com/OCIDB/index.php?Qw...s&Qis=M&Qtmp=FS) 4275: 12.047 secs (http://weboperative.com/OCIDB/index.php?Qw...s&Qis=M&Qtmp=FS) and if you say 4400: 11.800 secs, then it seems that my results might be OK. but still with 395mhz increase (4005 to 4400) super pi score lowers only 1 second - isn't it strange? EDIT: probably I should compare 32m or winrar type of test. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thraxz Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 and if you say 4400: 11.800 secs, then it seems that my results might be OK. but still with 395mhz increase (4005 to 4400) super pi score lowers only 1 second - isn't it strange? EDIT: probably I should compare 32m or winrar type of test. That's not strange so much as it is the characteristics of that board. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now