Quote from Jakg :

Windows does a lot of **** in the background all the time. It's not the calculation being inconsistent (if it were then surely you would get a different Pi each time...?), try doing a test with 3DMark06 - each time your score will be different for the same reason.

Would n'lited copy of XP do the trick if thats the issue?

edit: i did turn everything off except the AERO

Or kill all unnecessary processes from the task manager and set superpi to high priority

killing aero made a BIG difference just look at the chart almost 2 secs cut down to 22.906

Quote from anik360 :

Would n'lited copy of XP do the trick if thats the issue?

edit: i did turn everything off except the AERO

What i did when i wanted to get the best times - remove EVERYTHING. Install, then install only ESSENTIAL drivers. Disable anything in device manager you don't need. Apply performance patches (ie install SP3), turn off all non-essential services. Remove startup crap. Set EVERYTHING for good performance (ie turn it to Classic, disable all windows sounds etc).

Then bootup and kill all the services you don't need (including some you do, i killed a few SVChost's). Set SuperPi to realtime, maximise SuperPi, then kill explorer itself and close task manager. Then run it. If your PC is stable then run it a few times to get your best score, if it isn't then write a nice batch file to kill all the tasks you don't need and add it to the startup along with a batch file that starts SuperPi in Real Time.

Yes i'm hardcore lol.

I remember reading that atm the best OS for SuperPi was Server 2003, but i could be wrong. If you want to get into SuperPi more than this, and getting a life doesn't seem like a good option () then your best bet is try looking around here, however that might be an alien language to most of you

Of course, on a dual core it makes a LOT less difference, but on my single core i wanted every single MHz i could get.

*sniff* i miss my old CPU. 3.07 GHz, still beats most of the dual cores in SuperPi and single threaded applications and yet it sold for £18...! if only i had the balls to do a few 3.1+ GHz runs!

Tried again:

44.158s

DK

hows mine?

might leave it on overnight doing the 32m one lol see how it goes lol

Well I finally got around to doing a 1MB run...please don't laugh. 3 minutes 12.656 seconds.
- Intel Celeron (socket 478, 128k L2 cache, northwood core) @ 2.55ghz
- 224MB of DDR @ 230mhz (3-3-3-7)
~Bryan~

That's my score: http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1mft3.gif

Quote from Gmm :

That's my score: http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1mft3.gif

supa fast!

Can u teach me how to overclock?

496 MHz FSB? What motherboard, out of interest?

Takumi - It isn't stable, don't worry.

Q6600 arrives tommorow, and its being heavily overclocked as soon as i get it, so ill blitz it

Quote from Gmm :

That's my score: http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1mft3.gif

water cooling?

Quote from Jakg :

496 MHz FSB? What motherboard, out of interest?

Takumi - It isn't stable, don't worry.

Of course isn't stable I don't have RL (nowadays) in order to pass orthos at 1.584v. I'm an overclocker and I want the limit in order to pass a Superpi. Mi MB only acept up to 497 FSB... It's a Gigabyte P35-DQ6

My config 24/7 is that (I have to pass orthos during more time, but I don't have it ), 1.568v vcore by air, Thermalright Ultra 120 & some Xigmateck HDT's I'm testing. 66 degrees each core passing orthos I think is a nice temp. I have to test less vcore or more fsb, of course (and adjust timmings)

I need a CPU with more multi (+9x), I'm waiting for de 45nm... And RL with peltier of course

19.7 seconds on a 2.7ghz Q6600, not bad.

Quote from Takumi_lfs :

Did you overclock your CPU?

I have 3500+ witch is slower than yours.

I'm showing 2.2

I don't think its clocked, correct me if i'm wrong it will have been a long time ago if I did clock it.

An AMD 3400+ is 2.2Ghz, you haven't overclocked it.....I think you'd remember something like that.

Quote from hardcoreobscure :

I'm showing 2.2

I don't think its clocked, correct me if i'm wrong it will have been a long time ago if I did clock it.

How come yours is faster? damn I just hate AMD now

got 2,2ghz too but with Socket939 singlecore

What socket are you running on? dualcore?

Got free 6420 from my friend as he upgraded to Q6600 and finished installing and overclocking to 2.78 GHZ anything more and I have to put the Fan speed higher and make it more LOUDER here is the result 20.719s

list updated... Its getting huge.. O_o

I'm going to have to overclock more....my computer is new yet is in the low-middle pack of the rest of the computers.

Edit: I closed all my un-needed applications, closed explorer.exe and I came up with a 25 second time! I moved up ONE complete position...YAY.

Overclocked Dell FTW!

35.844s

17.4 on a 3ghz Q6600. If i did all the stuff jakg mentioned it would blitz it probably, didnt bother clearing it out or anything, and vista's aero apparently takes away a bit of performance. Still massively chuffed though.

Last run i did was a 19.2 with the procy at 2.7 and slack memory timings(5-5-5-15). that extra 300mhz, faster FSB and tightened memory make it 2 seconds faster

4800+ @ 37.735 sec

Quote from Takumi_lfs :

How come yours is faster? damn I just hate AMD now

got 2,2ghz too but with Socket939 singlecore

What socket are you running on? dualcore?

No just a socket 939 singlecore