Ok that that mean I shoukd be getting a top spec Core 2 Duo rather than a Quad Q6000? (sorry of topic, blame Jakg :tilt

Core 2 Duo's are faster in most current games, but more and more games are becoming multi-threaded which take advantage of all 4 cores. If you will be using this PC for a while, then Quad core is the way to go (on a £1k rig), but if you plan on upgrading it "every now and then" then an E8400 would tide you over 'till Nehalem.

Quote from Ovidiu23 :

In which way?(sarcastic or serious) . Well, now i keep it at 3600 so is kinda normal.

nevermind, tiredd... I'll tell ya tomorrow

Quote :

Core 2 Duo's are faster in most current games, but more and more games are becoming multi-threaded which take advantage of all 4 cores.

I read somewhere recently that basically no current games are deriving any extra performance benefits by going over 2.5 gh or thereabouts, that the bottleneck will always be the GPU, and not the CPU (processors are more powerful than any current game requires).

Can't remember the source, but the benchmarks did seem to speak for themselves..

PS, I'm extremely sleep deficient, and may be hallucinating.

Thanks for the advice I'm going to probably leave the quad for now and get a decent Duel core 2....well until I change my mind again

moved

Quote from Jakg :

Core 2 Duo's are faster in most current games, but more and more games are becoming multi-threaded which take advantage of all 4 cores. If you will be using this PC for a while, then Quad core is the way to go (on a £1k rig), but if you plan on upgrading it "every now and then" then an E8400 would tide you over 'till Nehalem^.

^Note: Nehalem will be a rather large "upgrade", as it ushers in a new socket (read: new motherboard) and DDR3 only (iirc).

Should be fantastic though.

Here's mine with a Q6600 Oc to 3.0Ghz:

Quote from RossUK :

Here's mine with a Q6600 Oc to 3.0Ghz:

surely it should be getting more that 17s...

Quote from harjun :

surely it should be getting more that 17s...

Nah its about right for what I have it OC'd to. See here:

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=pcb_spi

16.552 Q6600 @ 3204MHz | 4GB

The one guy has, so mine is OK for 3.0 Ghz. If if was a QX6600 then I would expect faster, but not a Q6600.

EDIT: Does superpi mod use all 4 cores?

Quote from RossUK :

Nah its about right for what I have it OC'd to. See here:

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=pcb_spi

16.552 Q6600 @ 3204MHz | 4GB

The one guy has, so mine is OK for 3.0 Ghz. If if was a QX6600 then I would expect faster, but not a Q6600.

but my e2180 gets the same as that at 3.2Ghz lol and i've got 2gb or RAM

Quote from harjun :

but my e2180 gets the same as that at 3.2Ghz lol and i've got 2gb or RAM

This that 16secs that you dont have a screen shot of?
that shows 20 secs at 3ghz
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=36415&page=6

Just OC'd to 3.3Ghz (Seems pretty stable) and got 15.609s

AMD Phenom 9850 @ 3.0.... thats at a stable overclock but only had the cpu less then a week but not to sure what she can do yet.

Quote :

Just OC'd to 3.3Ghz

Do you have any additional cooling to go with that? Wonder what a safe limit is

Quote from Electrik Kar :

Do you have any additional cooling to go with that? Wonder what a safe limit is

I use a Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro since stock intel coolers are pretty rubbish. Its running at about 58-60 Celsius atm, which is fine

I don't think I'll try any higher, but I think about 3.6 is the safe maximum.

Quote from andybarsblade :

This that 16secs that you dont have a screen shot of?
that shows 20 secs at 3ghz
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=36415&page=6

I got 16.375 seconds (no screenshots, but I just hope im trustable) at 2.8 GHz using a slimmed down copy of XP with everything tweaked out.

SuperPi only uses one core.

@Elektrik Kar - Most Q6600 G0s will have a limit of around 3.6 GHz, but there is a golden batch that will do 4 GHz on air cooling.

Quote from harjun :

but my e2180 gets the same as that at 3.2Ghz lol and i've got 2gb or RAM

Quote from andybarsblade :

This that 16secs that you dont have a screen shot of?
that shows 20 secs at 3ghz
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=36415&page=6

Harjun, google: e2180 3.2 superpi, then look at all the people who have set their e2180 at 3.2ghz and then come back and tell everyone here that you can get yours to do it in 16 seconds.....when everyone else with one gets around 19 seconds.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and lets just say you miss read the results when you did it, but please, just stop going on about it.

...or ignore my post then lol.

If my CPU at 2.8 GHz (with 4 mb of Cache for SuperPi to use, 8 MB total) and a slimmed down copy of XP can do it in 16 seconds it's not unreasonable to see a 3.2 GHz CPU (with only 1 MB of cache) to do it in 16 seconds, too.


I just wish I had the screenshot to prove it to you...

What CPU was it?

His or mine?

I have an Intel Xeon X3210, which is a (now cancelled) Intel Q6420 with the "prefetchers" optimised for server use (which makes about a 3% performance hit in games). It's 2.13 GHz at stock.

His CPU is an E2180.

Quote from Jakg :

His or mine?

I have an Intel Xeon X3210, which is a (now cancelled) Intel Q6420 with the "prefetchers" optimised for server use (which makes about a 3% performance hit in games). It's 2.13 GHz at stock.

His CPU is an E2180.

.....what CPU did you use @2.8 to get 16 seconds.

I believe you more than Harjun, obviously, so if you used and e2180 at 2.8 to get that time then ok, but if you used a different CPU then it doesn't really mean anything in comparisons to Harjun, does it, i.e. Harjun is still bullshitting.

I would love to try a no nonsense copy of xp just to see how much better it is compared to my full fat vista

Quote from Jakg :

His or mine?

I have an Intel Xeon X3210, which is a (now cancelled) Intel Q6420 with the "prefetchers" optimised for server use (which makes about a 3% performance hit in games). It's 2.13 GHz at stock.

His CPU is an E2180.

With my E2140 @ 3.1Ghz and Ram highly OC'd I got a low 20s run. 16 seconds is VERY hard to belive.

What do you guys think about this time? Same cooling as before, just higher CPU clock and lower RAM clock with tighter RAM timings.