20140103, 08:54  #1 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
4730_{10} Posts 
RPS benchmarks
Just for interest. Post your bench!!!
i7 3630QM at 3.2 GHz "28 watts with core temp software" with HT on (can't turn HT off on this laptop) AVX FFT length 200K, Pass1=640, Pass2=320 on both instances 1.158 ms k=5 n=3801694 1.164 ms k=5 n=3812730 
20140104, 12:05  #2 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
2·5·11·43 Posts 
Paul's 4770K at 3.9 GHz, HT off.
0.975 ms k=5 n=4100030 AVX FFT length 224K 0.977 ms k=5 n=4200010 AVX FFT length 224K 1.050 ms k=5 n=4300000 AVX FFT length 240K 1.042 ms k=5 n=4400024 AVX FFT length 240K Edit: Paul, correct me if I am wrong. Thank you. Last fiddled with by pinhodecarlos on 20140104 at 12:06 
20140106, 14:28  #3 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
678_{10} Posts 
benchmarks only useful with all cores busy and then divide it by number of cores you run for total throughput.
At the oldie Xeon machines here it takes pretty long for 1 test, yet each box i can run 8 cores meanwhile total box consumption 170 watt. Built those machines a few years ago for total peanuts, like 200 euro each. Chip inside L5420 has SSSE so not AVX. All those new i7's, they have fast AVX, yet only 4 real cores. Where is the big progress in crunching there? the L5420 or something i run here at 2.5Ghz, they were produced http://ark.intel.com/nl/products/339...z1333MHzFSB So januari 2008. If we calculate then derived truth from Moore's Law each 18 months doubling in speed, then now januari 2014 we should have a new chip available that's: 6 years == 72 months => 72 / 18 = 4 doublings => 2^4 = 16 times faster than the chips i got. Only gpu's seem to speed up, though also goes slower now than a few years ago for progress there. 
20140106, 15:34  #4  
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
4730_{10} Posts 
Quote:


20140106, 15:41  #5 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
2·3·113 Posts 
You didn't write a questionmark :)
Last fiddled with by diep on 20140106 at 15:41 
20140106, 15:45  #6 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
2×5×11×43 Posts 

20140106, 16:00  #7 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr
7·491 Posts 
Note that this is with all 4 cores loaded and with 2400MHz RAM.

20140106, 16:12  #8 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
2·3·113 Posts 
I only have completiontime for all iterations.
LLR graphical shows iteration times CLLR64 is considerable faster however. It is textmode. Just prints result in lresults.txt Machine was only actively used at 8 cores by CLLR64 when it printed result of the prime find here. Which is pretty much average time of the n's around it that it tested. 69*2^26499391 is prime! Time : 5925.793 seconds. So if i use calculator that makes iteration time 5925793 /2649939 = 2.2362 ms Really great for 2.5Ghz @ 8 cores Xeon from 2008. 
20140504, 10:11  #9 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
4730_{10} Posts 
Anyone here with some benches on AMD Opteron 6300 series? Does AVX works as on the Intel processors?

20140504, 11:22  #10 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)
3·449 Posts 

20140504, 11:39  #11 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
2·5·11·43 Posts 
I was in doubt because it is much cheaper to buy an AMD server with 4 processors than one from Intel. Thank you.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Benchmarks  MurrayInfoSys  Information & Answers  3  20110414 17:10 
LLR benchmarks  Oddball  No Prime Left Behind  11  20100806 21:39 
benchmarks  Unregistered  Information & Answers  15  20090818 16:44 
Benchmarks for i7 965  lavalamp  Hardware  21  20090106 04:32 
Benchmarks  Vandy  Hardware  6  20021028 13:45 