Author: Slater Wold
Date: 16:20:15 05/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 27, 2002 at 15:58:48, Aaron Gordon wrote: >Why not go ahead and test using my already compiled binaries on my FTP for >18.14? Work is already done so I don't need to go and compile anything. Sat >there for 12 hours on the box and notice it's faster, eh? You can sit there for >years if you like.. without it being setup properly it'll never be any faster no >matter how long you sit there. LOL. It's setup fine Aaron. >As far as Crazy overclocking.. this box can do 1.8GHz air-cooled and like I said >before we can test all you'd like. I never said anything about comparing that P4 >to my box at 2.1GHz via dry ice. And the P4 wins in the Sandra benchmarks. >I only mentioned what COULD be possible and >what people could easily buy if I end up building such a thing. >Try loading the latest via 4in1 drivers (www.viahardware.com) on that AMD >machine. I've had those on this machine for a while. Also for Geforce1's.. try using the Detonator v23.11 drivers. So far >they seem to be the fastest for me. You can get those at www.guru3d.com. This >should help however a poor board and low memory bandwidth will still hinder >the box. I'm pretty sure you were testing that 1.73GHz AMD box on a dual board. >This also hinders results as those aren't fast boards even compared with mid-low >end single cpu boards. I'd be surprised if that board even had the option to >enable 4-way interleaving. Also see my previous post about you comparing P4-FPU >w/ SSE2 to the AthlonXP's straight FPU. Again not fair testing. Yes it does, and yes it's selected. >On May 27, 2002 at 09:15:01, Slater Wold wrote: > >>On May 27, 2002 at 08:49:48, Aaron Gordon wrote: >> >>>Thats about a heap of crap. Plain and simple. 139fps for the Athlon 1.73? It is >>>extremely obvious you did absolutely nothing increase memory performance on that >>>box. Did you even load the via 4in1 drivers? My "junk" Thunderbird 800 @ 850 >>>pulled more fps than that in Q3 using normal SDRAM and a Geforce2 MX. I think it >>>even pulled more fps than that with an old Voodoo3 even. Also, why not compare >>>crafty using my 18.14 AMD & P4 binaries? Both are fully profiled for the cpu in >>>question. >>> >>>Here are some older screenshots I took way back when I had my Tbird and Abit >>>KT7a.. all tests were done in low detail with sound off to test only >>>bus/memory/cpu. >>> >>>Thunderbird 1GHz @ 600MHz, 100MHz bus, 100MHz SDRAM, Geforce2 Ultra >>>1260 frames in 5.6 seconds - 241.5 fps >>>ftp://speedycpu.dyndns.org/pub/overclockstuff/pics/fasttbird.jpg >>> >>>Thunderbird 1GHz @ 883MHz, 160MHz bus, 160MHz SDRAM, Geforce2 Ultra >>>1260 frames in 3.2 seconds - 390.5 fps >>>ftp://speedycpu.dyndns.org/pub/overclockstuff/pics/fasttbird3.jpg >>> >>>Thunderbird 1GHz @ 1653MHz, 157MHz bus, 157MHz SDRAM, Geforce2 Ultra >>>1260 frames in 2.6 seconds - 480.0 fps >>>ftp://speedycpu.dyndns.org/pub/overclockstuff/pics/fasttbird4.jpg >>> >>>Remember, this is my OLD box with SDRAM, 1GHz AMD Thunderbird and a Geforce2 >>>Ultra. My box pulls over 600 fps easily with those settings and around 400 fps >>>with the standard 800x600 32bit settings with my Geforce3 (@ 270/600). In crafty >>>my box at 1.86Ghz gets about 1.2 Million nps with my CraftyK7 18.11. That >>>P4-2.53 has a LONG way to go. Also, if you're having ANY doubts about any of >>>this come up to Grand Prairie and test it for yourself. Like I said before.. >>>You're always welcome to come up & lan, benchmark, etc. I still have that Tbird >>>1GHz, Abit KT7a (SDR) w/ Gf2 Ultra.. currently running air-cooled at 1.5ghz at >>>the moment. You're welcome to play around on that machine as well. >>> >>>It's a shame I don't have the money to upgrade this box I have now.. The box I >>>could build has the potential of being %30-50 (perhaps more) faster than what I >>>have now. Specs: AMD Thoroughbred @ 2.2Ghz with cascaded freon compressors, >>>single 512mb PC3200 DIMM @ 230fsb (460DDR, also with two 172 watt liquid cooled >>>peltiers) on an Epox 8K3A with the Epoxs' chipset cooled also with an 86watt >>>peltier. A SUMA (3.3ns ram) Geforce4 Ti4200 oced to 350MHz core / 750MHz memory >>>(again, cooled with two 172 watt peltiers). All the peltiers will be cooled with >>>copper maze blocks from dangerden, use arctic silver 3 compound and run off an >>>800GPH pump with 1 inch tubing splitting off into 3/8" tubes for the individual >>>waterblocks. A dangerden Supercube copper radiator to dump the heat from the >>>water. The power supply that will be used to power the peltiers is custom built >>>(will provide pictures if requested, it's an interesting heap) DC psu (variable >>>from 1 to 50V) from some friends at Devry. As crazy as this may sound it is >>>completely doable and will fit inside a full tower case minus freon compressors >>>which will be in a seprate section below the tower (similar to Kryotech's setup >>>but not as pretty). Yes, it will require massive ammounts of power but it will >>>be ridiculously fast (and not to mention cost LESS than $3,000). >>> >>>It appears that the crude benchmarking you have done only mentally justifies the >>>$3,000+ you spent on that box. You are only kidding yourself... >> >>Well, I thought you'd know me a little better than that Aaron, but whatever. >> >>The video card I used was a Creative Labs GeForce 1. I have a better video >>card, however XP didn't want anything to do with it. So I was forced to use the >>GF1. I have screenshots if you'd like them. Hell, I'd be more than welcome to >>let you in my house to see on this screen those results yourself. And this is >>of course, with all the latests drives I could find. At least, I know they were >>the same exact version. >> >>And once again, please don't come at me with some Mad Scientist overclocking >>stuff, I told you that in an e-mail originally. Probably 3% of all the PC users >>in the world overclock their computers, and of that 3% I'd say about 0.1% of >>those take it to your extremes. A moderatly overclocked box is fine, but >>something that takes dry ice to run? Come on man, get real. >> >>I welcome ANYONE who would like to, to send me an AMD optimized Crafty 18.15 >>EXE. And I will tell you, I spent SEVERAL hours tonite trying to get my since >>1.73Ghz to hit over 940k nps, and it won't do it. Plain and simple. And the P4 >>was getting 965k nps with the EXE off Hyatt's FTP. Like I said, if you think >>you've got one, send it to me. I seriously doubt you have. >> >> >>Like I said, I've sat here for over 12 hours playing on both these machines, and >>I know without a doubt in my mind, this P4 is faster than a single AMD 1.73Ghz. >>In some applications, by a lot. In others, only by a slim %. But I haven't run >>a program vs program where the P4 hasn't won yet. >> >>Sorry if that upsets you, no reason to get rude.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.