Re: Quad core benching like a dual
To:colin,
It sounded totally off the wall, I apologize dennis. I was just getting
frustrated that the core point kept being missed and I thought that was the
case again.
I figured out what was going on it was the benchmark software or at least
the way it was configured.
The one good point about the side-tracking onto my processor was I got to
thinking about threads and I wondered if there was a way to set the number of
threads or processes.
Therewas I never saw it before because there was never a need to set it
anyhow, I set it to four processes and got the results I used to get (1650).
Thanks for checking me,
Jim
--
Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1 heatsink, 4gb
Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor X, Nvidia
8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
"Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
> Its true though. The four-stick problem is a fact on a lot of consumer
> mobos. At 800 the memory controller is straining with a fully populated
> board. There have been dozens of cases in the Vista hardware_devices ng
> where that was the resolution for systems not booting with 4GB or 8GB of
> PC6400 ram installed. The nVidia chipsets seem particularly prone to this
> (nForce4, 650i, 680i and some others). In fact, I have such a board. I
> cannot run 8GB of PC6400 ram but I can take out one stick and all is well.
> I can run all four sticks at 667 though.
>
> "Power Obsessed" <screenedemail@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news
5B9F7AE-63CA-4695-8743-29AB9C5F98C7@microsoft.com...
> > Nevermind, that makes absolutely no sense. Why would I run my memory
> > slower
> > and remove some of it? Between people changing the subject or being too
> > busy trying to point out the downfalls of my processor I guess I'll never
> > get
> > an answer.
> > --
> > Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1 heatsink, 4gb
> > Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor X, Nvidia
> > 8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
> >
> >
> > "Dennis Pack" wrote:
> >
> >> Power Obsessed:
> >> If you're using 4x1GB sticks of ram, try clocking the ram at
> >> 667mhz
> >> or removing the stick from the 4th slot. Have a great day.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Dennis Pack
> >> XP x64 SP2, Vista Enterprise x64 SP1
> >> WHS, Office Professional Plus 2007
> >> "Power Obsessed" <screenedemail@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> news:315C7D74-C179-40C9-BFF7-EACB58DFE597@microsoft.com...
> >> >I do appreciate all you input but, we're veering off the subject. The
> >> >bottom
> >> > line is the benchmark rating I was getting before ,whether or not it is
> >> > using
> >> > four threads, was about 4 times as high as now.
> >> > So the quad core doesn't live up to the bells and whistles. All I know
> >> > is
> >> > it
> >> > worked VERY good and now it doesn't.
> >> >
> >> > Could someone please give me a clue as to the cause.
> >> > --
> >> > Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1 heatsink, 4gb
> >> > Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor X,
> >> > Nvidia
> >> > 8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> If you are quoting a KB that cites 3.12GB as a limit be aware that the
> >> >> author cites that number as an example only. The actual range I have
> >> >> seen
> >> >> is 2.0GB to 3.5GB. It depends on what the BIOS has set aside for
> >> >> device
> >> >> buffering, like video cards. It depends on the hardware on the
> >> >> system.
> >> >>
> >> >> "Power Obsessed" <screenedemail@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:37B438CC-D9FC-4C5F-976B-114C711C70D7@microsoft.com...
> >> >> > Atcually I would be limited to 3.12ghz (I have it overclocked). That
> >> >> > still
> >> >> > doesn't address the problem. According to past benchmark tests the
> >> >> > results
> >> >> > from CPU testing blew away all baselines that come with the
> >> >> > software.
> >> >> > (passmark). Single core and dual.
> >> >> > The majority of the time the task manager shows three if not four of
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > processors being utilized by whatever processes are running.
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1 heatsink,
> >> >> > 4gb
> >> >> > Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor X,
> >> >> > Nvidia
> >> >> > 8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "John Barnes" wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> You are limited to 2.4ghz for single thread execution, which almost
> >> >> >> all
> >> >> >> programs not designed for a supercomputer are. Single core
> >> >> >> processors
> >> >> >> got
> >> >> >> over 4ghz which is 80% faster. If you are multi-tasking quad cores
> >> >> >> are
> >> >> >> great and some of windows functions will run on the other cores
> >> >> >> making
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> overall performance of a single thread program faster since it
> >> >> >> doesn't
> >> >> >> have
> >> >> >> to multiplex the functions like the on single cores. Read Charlies
> >> >> >> article.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Power Obsessed" <screenedemail@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:CE40E4D5-939D-4D05-BEFE-D958210BA2A3@microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> > Passmark I have used this many times in the past and the results
> >> >> >> > for
> >> >> >> > my
> >> >> >> > CPU
> >> >> >> > were about 3 or four times as much. the overall score for my
> >> >> >> > system
> >> >> >> > was
> >> >> >> > 1660
> >> >> >> > now its 850.
> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> > Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1
> >> >> >> > heatsink,
> >> >> >> > 4gb
> >> >> >> > Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor
> >> >> >> > X,
> >> >> >> > Nvidia
> >> >> >> > 8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "Carlos" wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> Hi,
> >> >> >> >> What benchmarking program you are running?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> You might also want to read this excellent article from MVP
> >> >> >> >> Charlie
> >> >> >> >> Russel,
> >> >> >> >> "The Multi-Core Fallacy", here:
> >> >> >> >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/archive/2007/11/11/the-multi-core-fallacy.aspx
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Carlos
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Power Obsessed" wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > The last benchmark I ran was about a third of the normal level
> >> >> >> >> > as
> >> >> >> >> > far
> >> >> >> >> > as
> >> >> >> >> > performance. I checked the task manager and all for cores ARE
> >> >> >> >> > being
> >> >> >> >> > utilized.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > The first thought was faulty benchmark results and/or
> >> >> >> >> > software.
> >> >> >> >> > The
> >> >> >> >> > thing
> >> >> >> >> > that really concerned me was while looking at the task manager
> >> >> >> >> > performance
> >> >> >> >> > results all four cores spiked a 100%. They didn't stay there
> >> >> >> >> > but,
> >> >> >> >> > thats
> >> >> >> >> > outside the norm.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > I have rarely seen the levels rise above 50% so this coupled
> >> >> >> >> > with
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > benchmark has me concerned.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Anyone have any idea what is going on with this thing?
> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> > Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1
> >> >> >> >> > heatsink,
> >> >> >> >> > 4gb
> >> >> >> >> > Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb
> >> >> >> >> > Raptor
> >> >> >> >> > X,
> >> >> >> >> > Nvidia
> >> >> >> >> > 8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>