# Post your SuperPi Score!



## Geoff

This is the "official" SuperPi rank thread.  This has been updated with new rules, as well as a new layout of the ranks for easier review.

Results will ONLY be listed if they are run using the SuperPi Mod program linked to below, all results posted using the standard version of SuperPi will NOT be posted (this goes for all prior results as well). 

**New rule is that in order to submit a score for posting in this thread, you MUST have 100+ posts.***

Here are the following rules and terms:

* 

All tests must be run using SuperPi Mod
All tests must be run using the 1M test
All results must be accompanied by a screenshot showing CPU speed (CPU-Z Preferred)
Only results run using SuperPi Mod will be posted
Only one result per-person, per-system will be recorded
Must have 100+ posts

 
For those of you that don't know what SuperPi is, it's basically a little program that calculates Pi, and gives you a time based on how quickly your processor can perform it.   It's not multi-threaded so dual-core and quad-core processors don't show an improvement over single-core processors.   You can download it for free here.




*SuperPi Ranks:
(Updated: 1/27/10)​*

 *All-Time Top Three:
**1.)** 8.742 -- THERMAL-REACTOR *(i7 920 @ 4720)
*2.)** 8.953 -- Jet *(i7 920 @ 4536)
*3.)* *9.015 -- mikesrex *(i7 920 @ 4410)​
*Best Scores for:*

*i7 920 -- 8.742* (THERMAL-REACTOR) @ 4720
*E8500 -- 9.375* (Matticus) @ 4968
*E8600 -- 9.702* (WhiteFireDragon) @ 4826
*E8400 -- 9.968* (mikesrex) @ 4680
*Q9550 -- 10.888* (markallen) @ 4378
*Q9650 -- 10.982* (jevery) @ 4338
*Q9450 -- 11.887* (bomberboysk) @ 3996
*E7200 -- 11.965* (XDRoX) @ 4380
*i5 750 -- 12.572* (lovely?) @ 3360
*E6750 -- 12.796* (littlenInga) @ 4024
*Q6600 -- 12.906* (Nexolus) @ 3960
*E6600 -- 13.276* (tidyboy21) @ 3906

*Top 10 Intel:**1.) 8.742 -- THERMAL-REACTOR *(i7 920 @ 4720)
*2.) 8.953 -- Jet *(i7 920 @ 4536)
*3.) 9.015 -- mikesrex *(i7 920 @ 4410)
*4.) 9.266 -- just_a_noob *(i7 920 @ 4399)
*5.) 9.306 -- 87dtna *(i3 530 @ 4708)
*6.) 9.375 -- Matticus *(E8500 @ 4968)
*7.) 9.594 -- kkpudge7 *(i7 920 @ 4305)
* 8.) 9.702 -- WhiteFireDragon *(E8600 @ 4826)
*9.) 9.937 -- Bodaggit23 *(i7 920 @ 4196)
*10.) 9.951 -- ThatGuy16 *(E8400 @ 4806)​*Top 10 AMD:**1.) 15.678 -- El_Gappo *(Sempron 140 @ 4407)
*2.) 16.224 -- jasonn20* (X4 965 @ 4305)
*3.) 17.534 -- zer0_c00l *(X2 720 @ 3940)
*4.) 17.862 -- Mitch? *(X3 720 @ 3978)
*5.) 19.564 -- gigantojim *(X4 955 @ 3612)
*6.) 23.282 -- Glliw *(X4 940 @ 3000)
*  7.) 23.608 -- newjacksm *(X4 940 @ 3000)
* 8.) 24.628 -- dark666apoc *(X4 9850 @ 3250)
* 9.) 24.672 -- Mr. Johanssen *(Phenom 7750 @ 3300)
* 10.) 25.329 -- ThatGuy16 *(X2 5600+ @ 3439)
​ *Top 20 Intel:**
**11.) 9.968 -- bubblescivic *(E8400 @ 4680)
*12.) 9.968 -- mikesrex *(E8400 @ 4680)
*13.) 10.202 -- susik89 *(i7 920 @ 3798)
* 14.) 10.280 -- tidyboy21 *(E8500 @ 4599)
*15.) 10.307 -- jkrause6 *(i7 920 @ 4045)
* 16.) 10.390 -- yhahh *(E8400 @ 4599)
* 17.) 10.390 -- bebopin64 *(i7 920 @ 4031)
*18.) 10.406 -- yhahh *(E8400 @ 4500)
*19.) 10.824 -- lovely? *(E8400 @ 4410)
*20.) **10.888 -- markallen *(Q9550 @ 4378)​*
**Top 20 AMD:**
**11.) 29.688 -- El DJ *(X2 5200+ @ 3009)
* 12.) 31.188 -- PatPheFox *(X4 9600 @ 2812)
*13.) 37.797 -- Fear Of Dreams *(X2 BE-2400 @ 2422)
 *  14.) 42.032 -- voyagerfan99 *(X2 3800+ @ 2200)
 *  15.) 42.323 -- Gooberman *(X2 3800+ @ 2009MHz)
​* 


* *10.953 -- vix (E8400 @ 4260)
 10.982 -- jevery (Q9650 @ 4338)
11.024 -- Domain Man (Q9550 @ 4302)
 11.311 -- MouSe (i7 920 @ 3674)
* *11.375 -- F.i.T.H (E8400 @ 4203)
11.384 -- [-0MEGA-] (Q9550 @ 4100)
11.466 -- houseofbugs (E8400 @ 4050)
11.625 -- DirtyD86 (E8400 @ 4000)*
 * 11.731 -- zer0_c00l (E8400 @ 4005)
11.734 -- Springy182 (Q9550 @ 4016)
11.887 -- bomberboysk (Q9450 @ 3996)
11.953 -- MosIncredible (E8400 @ 3915)
11.965 -- XDRoX (E7200 @ 4380)
11.981 -- The_Chad (i7 920 @ 3398)
12.049 -- [-0MEGA-] (E8400 @ 4000)
12.330 -- Bodaggit23 (i7 920 @ 3430)
12.339 -- wilson (E8500 @ 3800)
12.572 -- lovely? (i5 750 @ 3360)
12.796 -- littlenlnga (E6750 @ 4024)
12.844 -- shenry (E8400 @ 3726)
12.859 -- Cleric7x9 (E8400 @ 3600)
12.906 -- Nexolus (Q6600 @ 3960)
13.172 -- Bootup05 (Q6600 @ 4005)
13.276 -- tidyboy21 (E6600 @ 3906)
13.315 -- markallen (E6750 @ 3880)*

 *13.639 -- Vipernitrox (E6420 @ 3300)*
 * 14.187 -- MatrixEvo (Q6600 @ 3600)
14.640 -- Russian777 (i7 920 @ 2670)
**14.695 -- linkin93 (E6300 @ 4003)*
 * 14.750 -- Ambushed (E6550 @ 3484)
14.926 -- Midnight_fox1 (Q6600 @ 3600)
14.976 -- Gareth (Q9450 @ 3200)
15.007 -- Intel_man (i5 750 @ 2800)
15.148 -- funkysnair (Q6600 @ 3600)
15.172 -- Casie (E6600 @ 3380)
15.335 -- Laquer Head (i7 720QM @ 2792)
**15.385 -- Aastii (E6750 @ 3400)*
 *  15.633 -- Nevakonaza (Q6600 @ 3500)
16.203 -- TFT (E6750 @ 3200)
16.229 -- Bootup05 (Q6600 @ 3400)
16.250 -- Bl00dFox (E6600 @ 3243)
16.359 -- skidude (Q9550 @ 2980)
16.375 -- Jet (E4500 @ 3500)*
 * 16.724 -- Kesava (Q6600 @ 3401)
16.879 -- MIK3daG33K (E4500 @ 3400)
16.895 -- Garethman!! (Q9450 @ 2840)

16.973 -- Nodz86 (Q9550 @ 2830)
17.125 -- Dazzeerr (Q6600 @ 2997)
17.282 -- Respital (E6850 @ 3000)
17.319 -- [-0MEGA-] (E6400 @ 3400)
17.457 -- gamerman4 (Q6600 @ 3000)
**17.598 -- ScOuT (Q9300 @ 3000)*
 * 18.304 -- Bootup05 (E6400 @ 3440)
18.533 -- Hyde01 (T9300 @ 2493)
18.750 -- gimmigzgy (E7500 @ 2926)
19.312 -- WhiteFireDragon (E2180 @ 3200)**
19.610 -- newguy5 (E6750 @ 2670)*
 *  20.484 -- fade2green514 (E6300 @ 2709)
20.592 -- ramodkk (E2160 @ 3000)
22.311 -- Kornowski (Q6600 @ 2405)
22.579 -- Darkserge (E2220 @ 2753)
23.016 -- voyagerfan99 (T8300 @ 2400)
31.251 -- Intel_man (E6300 @ 1866)
35.750 -- Darkserge (P4 @ 3910)
36.614 -- The_Other_One (Celeron M @ 1862)
**61.985 -- pokeman89 (P4 @ 2400)*
 *93.610 -- The_Other_One (Atom @ 1666)
135.125 -- Drenlin (Celeron @ 2790)
*


----------



## Burgerbob

Here's mine- 





Pretty good for my "old" CPU.


----------



## Jack Bauer

Heres mine not so good this was with my laptop I am no longer using my desktop until I build a new one.


----------



## frost02

mine is wonderful


----------



## `PaWz

Not bad I guess.


----------



## Jet

`PaWz said:


> Not bad I guess.



You can't push it higher than 2.8Ghz?


----------



## `PaWz

Jet said:


> You can't push it higher than 2.8Ghz?


When I put it any higher, the whole computer just freezes after a few minutes of prime95.  I'm not sure what the problem is.  Probably my 430w PSU?


----------



## kof2000

15 seconds.


----------



## Kornowski

I got 28 seconds, which isn't all that great.


----------



## Burgerbob

Kornowski said:


> I got 28 seconds, which isn't all that great.



Why not?!?


----------



## Kornowski

When you compare it to the other results here...


----------



## Jack Bauer

Kornowski said:


> When you compare it to the other results here...



Look at mine it is 56 seconds which yours is 28 which is a lot better than mine.


----------



## Kornowski

> Look at mine it is 56 seconds which yours is 28 which is a lot better than mine.



True, but compared to other Dual Core CPU's, but I supose because mine isn't OC'ed...


----------



## Burgerbob

Kornowski said:


> True, but compared to other Dual Core CPU's, but I supose because mine isn't OC'ed...



And the fact that dual core CPUs have no advantage over single cores with this program.


----------



## Jack Bauer

Kornowski said:


> True, but compared to other Dual Core CPU's, but I supose because mine isn't OC'ed...



Ya if you overclock your cpu your score will be right up there with OMEGA's.


----------



## Kornowski

> And the fact that dual core CPUs have no advantage over single cores with this program.



I completely forgot about that... 



> Ya if you overclock your cpu your score will be right up there with OMEGA's.



True


----------



## PohTayToez

46s with my 3200+ at 2.5Ghz... but I didn't stop watching my movie


----------



## ceewi1

15 seconds, specs in sig


----------



## Geoff

kof2000 said:


> 15 seconds.


Very nice!  I see I have a new record to beat 


Kornowski said:


> I got 28 seconds, which isn't all that great.





Kornowski said:


> True, but compared to other Dual Core CPU's, but I supose because mine isn't OC'ed...


28s isnt bad for a stock E6300, and dual-cores dont have an advantage 



ceewi1 said:


> 15 seconds, specs in sig


It must be overclocked, no way it's stock.  Do you have it around 3.6-3.7Ghz?


----------



## Jet

`PaWz said:


> When I put it any higher, the whole computer just freezes after a few minutes of prime95.  I'm not sure what the problem is.  Probably my 430w PSU?



Have you raised the CPU voltages?


----------



## Geoff

Jet said:


> Have you raised the CPU voltages?


It seems like so many people think all you have to do is raise the FSB.  When in reality there are so many other factors.

For example, for me to reach 3.3Ghz I had to lower the ram speed, raise the timings, increase the ram voltage, raise the vcore, set the FSB to 1.5v, disable specific chipset and CPU features, and a whole lot more.


----------



## Kornowski

If you want a small OC then you can just raise the FSB, right?


----------



## PabloTeK

I got to 2.0GHz without raising the voltage.


----------



## Kornowski

I managed to get 2.2GHZ without touching anything but the FSB... I'm back at stock now though.


----------



## Geoff

Kornowski said:


> If you want a small OC then you can just raise the FSB, right?





GCR said:


> I got to 2.0GHz without raising the voltage.


You could probably hit 2.2Ghz without touching anything else, but then your RAM will become a bottleneck, most likely before you need to increase the voltage.


----------



## taylormsj

39 seconds - pathetic


----------



## `PaWz

Jet said:


> Have you raised the CPU voltages?


I raised it by .5v and it still froze.  Maybe I need to cut my RAM in half and increase the voltage of everything? lol

I think the other reason I am hesitant to put it any higher is when I use Orthos or Prime95, the temp can get up to 70C.  I'm not sure if CoreTemp is just reading my cpu wrong, or what.  It says it's now at 43C, and that seems a bit hot for idle.


----------



## Kornowski

> 39 seconds - pathetic
> __________________
> AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ OC' @ 2.46 GHz (stock volts) Zalman CNPS9500-LED



How can an OC'ed X2 @ 2.46 not beat a stock E6300 @ 1.86, I know Intel is better, but it's OC'ed?


----------



## Burgerbob

taylormsj said:


> 39 seconds - pathetic



My 3200+ at 2.4GHz beat that by one second, that doesnt sound right.


----------



## taylormsj

Yeh but that application doesnt use 2 cores - only one - ALso kornowski - ive got old DDR ram and 1gb of it you have 2 DDR 2. Plus skt 939 suck now ??


----------



## Kornowski

> ALso kornowski - ive got old DDR ram and 1gb of it you have 2 DDR 2. Plus skt 939 suck now ??



It doesn't use RAM does it, I thought it was just the CPU?


----------



## garethcia

Kornowski said:


> It doesn't use RAM does it, I thought it was just the CPU?



haha


----------



## Kornowski

> haha



Yeah, That was helpfull, dumbass!


----------



## DrCuddles

garethcia said:


> haha


Why do you post in such a manner, you are just going to get yourself a bad reputation and banned fool.



Kornowski said:


> Yeah, That was helpfull, dumbass!


I concur, im sitting next to him telling him to stop posting this stuff but he says he doesnt care, he also just reported us for sending each other's PMs 

I wish he would grow up


----------



## Kornowski

> he also just reported us for sending each other's PMs



lol  So, It's not like it's against the rules!

See if you can run Super Pi on the School PC's Andy, see what they can do


----------



## Geoff

Kornowski said:


> How can an OC'ed X2 @ 2.46 not beat a stock E6300 @ 1.86, I know Intel is better, but it's OC'ed?


Core 2 Duo's are very efficient processors, I'm not that surprised.



Kornowski said:


> It doesn't use RAM does it, I thought it was just the CPU?


It mainly uses the CPU, but since you are running it to 1M then it does make a difference how much cache you have, and how fast your RAM is.  It's not going to lower it a couple seconds by any means, but if you have DDR2-533 running at high timings, and then go to say, DDR2-800 at low timings, it might make a slight difference and decrease the time a second or so.


----------



## Itanda

Wow.. 38 seconds.. Is that because its not overlocked.
http://img356.imageshack.us/my.php?image=superpivv9.jpg
-.-


----------



## Kornowski

> It mainly uses the CPU, but since you are running it to 1M then it does make a difference how much cache you have, and how fast your RAM is. It's not going to lower it a couple seconds by any means, but if you have DDR2-533 running at high timings, and then go to say, DDR2-800 at low timings, it might make a slight difference and decrease the time a second or so.



Ah right, it makes sense now, thanks for clearing that up


----------



## DrCuddles

Kornowski said:


> See if you can run Super Pi on the School PC's Andy, see what they can do



Haha, im jsut running it on my pc at home now, didnt read that bit till i got home, anyway i will definately do it tommorrow  see which IT room is the best to be in


----------



## Jughead

Here is mine at 19 seconds




Shot at 2007-07-08


----------



## Violent 777

Intel P4 3.2 GHz Hyperthreading
1 GB DDR 400 RAM
43 seconds... WOW! thats rather close to that 4600+


----------



## fatdragon

heres the score for my intel pentium dual core t2060


----------



## Geoff

Heres mine again:


----------



## 4NGU$

wow my Pc sucks it took 1min 58 for it to do that


----------



## kof2000

don't remember posting one or did i


----------



## Jughead

4NGU$ said:


> wow my Pc sucks it took 1min 58 for it to do that



What are your pc specs?


----------



## ETSA

Here is mine..


----------



## ThatGuy16

Kof, were did you learn how to crop?


----------



## ThatGuy16

[Rant]All you overclockers[/Rant]
I blame vista on this, dont you? yeah i thought so 







Just wait ill take it back up to 3.3Ghz "muhhahaha"  shoot maybe i would get 20s


----------



## kof2000

your system is on fire


----------



## ThatGuy16

kof2000 said:


> your system is on fire



it always says that, i hate speed fan....lol


----------



## oscaryu1

Celeron M 1.3GHz Laptop-

1m - 83 seconds


----------



## kof2000

vanilla amd 6000


----------



## Kornowski

How many PC's do you have Koff?


----------



## PabloTeK

I've seen a photo and he has about 10 methinks.


----------



## taylormsj

I did a test and got 46 seconds at the stock 2.0GHz and got 38 seconds on overclocked 2.6 GHz. My mates amd athlon 4000 got 30 seconds at 2.8 GHz which is very impressive


----------



## Geoff

taylormsj said:


> I did a test and got 46 seconds at the stock 2.0GHz and got 38 seconds on overclocked 2.6 GHz. My mates amd athlon 4000 got 30 seconds at 2.8 GHz which is very impressive


For an Athlon 64, sure


----------



## kof2000

theres a overclocked sempron running at 3.7ghz and scored 14 seconds


----------



## Geoff

kof2000 said:


> theres a overclocked sempron running at 3.7ghz and scored 14 seconds


I highly doubt that, because a Core 2 Duo at 3.7Ghz would score about 13/14s.


----------



## kof2000

super pi world record 

http://www16.big.or.jp/~bunnywk/cgi-bin/superpi.cgi


----------



## Geoff

kof2000 said:


> super pi world record
> 
> http://www16.big.or.jp/~bunnywk/cgi-bin/superpi.cgi


What exactly are you trying to prove?  There was no 14s Sempron on that list.  The closest thing listed was an Athlon 64 @ 3.8Ghz, and that did it in 21s.


----------



## kof2000

holy! 







and this almosts one hour 

866	57'40"	SST	AMD Athlon 1900+	Unknown
1.85V	1740MHz
145.0*12.0	Retail BOX
(Stock)	SOYO
Dragon+


----------



## kof2000

[-0MEGA-];705471 said:
			
		

> What exactly are you trying to prove?  There was no 14s Sempron on that list.  The closest thing listed was an Athlon 64 @ 3.8Ghz, and that did it in 21s.


just to show the fastest there is 8 seconds.


i will find it again if i can. it was in a forum he has pics of it oced to 3.7ghz and ran it 1m at 14seconds.


----------



## Geoff

kof2000 said:


> just to show the fastest there is 8 seconds.
> 
> 
> i will find it again if i can. it was in a forum he has pics of it oced to 3.7ghz and ran it 1m at 14seconds.



Yes, but you showed me that chart and expected me to believe that someone got 14s with a Sempron @ 3.7Ghz.  Which is obviously not true if an A64 @ 3.8 can only do it in 21s.


----------



## kof2000

the dude showed pictures unless they're photoshopped  couldn't find the link anymore.

anyways, heres a vanilla celery d.


----------



## Geoff

For a second I thought you were showing that Sempron, lol.  It sounds like the Sempron score was edited, unless for some reason the A64 @ 3.8Ghz for some reason was performing less then it should.


----------



## dmw2692004




----------



## Bl00dFox

Heres mine:


----------



## kof2000

if you use the original super pi it will count as 17 seconds they round everything off lol


----------



## Bl00dFox

kof2000 said:


> if you use the original super pi it will count as 17 seconds they round everything off lol



Wont 16.250 be rounded to 16 seconds?


----------



## kof2000

vanilla pentium d


----------



## MatrixEVO

SUPER PI!!!

Thought I would revive this thread the Omega made.

Very happy with my score!


----------



## Geoff

Nice score!  I get 17s at the same speed, so i'm not sure if it's because yours has twice the cache, newer model or because you are under XP.


----------



## Jet

It's the cache. My fastest Superpi was around 17s as well


----------



## Quentin_T




----------



## tidyboy21




----------



## taylormsj

I get 28 Seconds on my machine with no other program opened, my mate has a QX9850 @ 3.3 GHz gets 15 seconds and i ran it on a machine @ college with a P4 2.0 GHz with HT it got *1 min 22 seconds* lmao


----------



## Jet

People with the version that only displays two digits should download a more recent version to get the more precise one.


----------



## zer0_c00l




----------



## colt1911




----------



## tidyboy21




----------



## nexolus

lol i just got 1 minute 8 seconds on my dad's desktop. athlon XP 3000+ processor. sad.


----------



## Joe2005

32s

Pretty bad 

Edit: Update now 29 seconds with 3.03Ghz (still have to see if it's totally stable but it seems to work alright.)


----------



## Shane

nexolus said:


> lol i just got 1 minute 8 seconds on my dad's desktop. athlon XP 3000+ processor. sad.



Faster than mine.... 1 min 17 secs

LMAO


----------



## Joe2005

You guys are only doing 1M right?


----------



## Shane

Joe2005 said:


> You guys are only doing 1M right?



well i did


----------



## Joe2005

LoL I dind't think your's would be THAT much worse than mine


----------



## Shane

Joe2005 said:


> LoL I dind't think your's would be THAT much worse than mine



well considering your processor is 2.8Ghz and mines only 2Ghz i would also have thought yours would have been alot faster


----------



## Geoff

Nevakonaza said:


> well considering your processor is 2.8Ghz and mines only 2Ghz i would also have thought yours would have been alot faster


Not to mention he's using an Athlon 64, while your using a Sempron.


----------



## Eternal Rest

I'm not sure if this is good or not, I'm still planning on OCing in the near future.


----------



## Geoff

Eternal Rest said:


> I'm not sure if this is good or not, I'm still planning on OCing in the near future.


Thats good for stock.  SuperPi is only single threaded, so it doesn't make a difference if you have a single core or quad core.


----------



## Joe2005

Nevakonaza said:


> well considering your processor is 2.8Ghz and mines only 2Ghz i would also have thought yours would have been alot faster



I think the ram is the bottleneck of my system, but I could be wrong.


----------



## Eternal Rest

[-0MEGA-];834657 said:
			
		

> Thats good for stock.  SuperPi is only single threaded, so it doesn't make a difference if you have a single core or quad core.



If I overclock it though my scores should improve, correct?


----------



## Joe2005

Eternal Rest said:


> If I overclock it though my scores should improve, correct?



Inless you screw it up or something your scores will improve.


----------



## nexolus

i dunno if ram has much to do with this, it's strictly processing. this rig only has 512MB ram and the AMD athlon xp 3000+.


----------



## Motoxrdude

56s on a tk-53.


----------



## 2048Megabytes

I got 37 seconds using my AMD Athlon 64-bit 4000 Socket 939 processor running at 2411 megahertz.  I used the 1 megabyte calculation.  Interesting.


----------



## Geoff

nexolus said:


> i dunno if ram has much to do with this, it's strictly processing. this rig only has 512MB ram and the AMD athlon xp 3000+.


Not so much, it's mainly based on your processor speed and cache.


----------



## enshei

36 seconds with an inspiron 6400. T2250 @1.73GHz


----------



## TFT

1M calculation = 13 seconds


----------



## Jet

*SuperPi Competition (Version 2)*

*Results​*





1.  13.665--tidyboy21 (E6600 @ 3870)




 2.  14.453--colt1911 (E6850 @ 3600) 



 3.  14.516--MatrixEvo (Q6600 @ 3500)
*4. 15------**kof2000 (?)
* *4. 15------**MatrixEvo (E6750 @ 3335)
6. 16.203--TFT (E6750 @ 3200)* 
 *7.  16.250--Bl00dFox (E6600 @ 3243)
**8.  16.375--Jet (E4500 @ 3500)*
* 9.  17.319--[OMEGA] (E6400 @ 3400) 
** 10.  19------Jughead (Pentium M @ 2666)
*  *10.  19------Quentin_T (E6700 @ 2933)*

 * 20------'PaWz (E4300 @ 2812)*
*21------Eternal Rest (Q6600 @ 2400)
** 25.329--ThatGuy16 (X2 5600+ @ 3439)   *****Top AMD******
* 28------Kornoski (E6300 @ 1866)*
* 30------kof2000 (X2 6000 @ 3000)
** 30------dmw2692004 (E6300 @ 3243)*
* 30------zer0_cool (X2 5600+ @ 2800)*
*32------Joe2005 (A64 4000+ @ 2830)
** 36------taylormsj (X2 3800+ @ 2600)
** 36------enshei (T2250 @ 1730)*
* 37------2048Megabytes (A64 4000+ @ 2400)*
*38------Itanda (X2 4600+ @ ?)**
38------BurgerBob (A64 3200+ @ 2400)
** 39------kof2000 (Pentium D 945 @ 3408)*
* 41------fatgragon (T2050 @ 1600)
** 43------Violent 777 (Pentium 4 @ 3200)*
* 46------PohTayToez (A64 3200+ @ 2564)**
56------Jack Bauer (Pentium M @ 600)** 
68------nexdus (XP 3000+)*
* 77------Nevakonaza (A64 2800+ @ 2000)*
* 892-----(VIA C3 @ 800)


*
*Need Screenshot (ie, actual proof), preferably with the more accurate version3.  15------Ceewi (E6600 @ ?)**
6. 15.666---INTELCRAZY (E6850 @ 3400)*


----------



## INTELCRAZY

INTELCRAZY at 15.66s


----------



## Geoff

Jet, i'll add that to the first post, thanks for doing that!


----------



## ThatGuy16

Its been a while, heres a whole 2 sec faster 





I guess its the cache that makes the x2's slower in PI


----------



## Jet

Eh, not done yet. Wait another 10 min. I'll PM you the code for it then.


----------



## Jet




----------



## Jet

TFT said:


> Gee, I 'm very happy with my new rig and I normally run it at just over 3GHz but for the Super PI I overclocked it some more to 3.45GHz and that's where the 13 seconds came in. I've down clocked it again because the temperature was quite high.
> 
> Was I fair in doing that or should my figure have been based on everyday clock speed. I don't want a position that's not been obtained fairly.



By all means, it is fair. As long as it gets through Superpi, you're fine . The main thing I need you to do is to provide a screenshot of the 13 seconds before it is official. I'm doing that with all the top ten entries.


----------



## TFT

Tried the original overclocking to 3.45GHz but refused to boot so here's the figures for 3.2GHz clock speed.

16.203s


----------



## MatrixEVO

Q6600 @ 3.5GHz


----------



## jimkonow

89 seconds....P4 @ 2.02GHz


----------



## MatrixEVO

jimkonow said:


> 89 seconds....P4 @ 2.02GHz



Nice!


----------



## Kornowski

> 28------Kornoski (*E6300 @ 1866*)
> 30------kof2000 (X2 6000 @ 3000)
> 30------dmw2692004 (*E6300 @ 3243*)



How's that work? 
Not a bad score for stock was it


----------



## ducis

what distance??


----------



## Kornowski

1M, just like the rest


----------



## ThatGuy16

top AMD


----------



## nexolus

k i got 45s on my pentium 4 3.0GHz


----------



## steelmole

Hmm, my athlon 1800xp (still my current processor, very soon to be superceded by a Q6600) managed it in 82 seconds.


----------



## Geoff




----------



## Kornowski

Why is my E6300 rather high up?


----------



## Jet

Man, I'm struggling to get my E4500 above 3.5. It just doesn't like me. Hmm. Only 50Mhz would most likely bump me into 6th....


----------



## Geoff

Jet said:


> Man, I'm struggling to get my E4500 above 3.5. It just doesn't like me. Hmm. Only 50Mhz would most likely bump me into 6th....


Same here, I got up to 3.4 from 3.29 and my score didn't improve, I'm guessing because when it was at 3.29 it had a higher FSB since I was running it at a 7x multiplier instead of the stock 8x.


----------



## nexolus

my p4 is now at 34 seconds


----------



## Kornowski

Somebody explain why my stock E6300 was so high please?
Higher than an OC'ed one?


----------



## Jet

[-0MEGA-];840140 said:
			
		

> Same here, I got up to 3.4 from 3.29 and my score didn't improve, I'm guessing because when it was at 3.29 it had a higher FSB since I was running it at a 7x multiplier instead of the stock 8x.



Yep. A fresh windows install will always help. Maybe just have an extra small hard drive with a fresh windows install to keep around for benching....

That's funny that it didn't improve. I wouldn't have thought FSB has that much impact on this. Try running it a few times, maybe some process was stealing a lot of resources or something.



Kornowski said:


> Somebody explain why my stock E6300 was so high please?
> Higher than an OC'ed one?



Either the non-stock was running lots of other programs, or the Windows installation is really messed up, or (most likely) it was a typo or he ran 2M or something.


----------



## mat2317

My 1st test  P4 @ 3.5 Ghz ~ 48sec


----------



## MatrixEVO

mat2317 said:


> P4 @ 3.5 Ghz ~ *40sec*



Sorry to correct you, but you mean 48 seconds. Atleast that is what it shows in the picture.


----------



## mat2317

MatrixEVO said:


> Sorry to correct you, but you mean 48 seconds. Atleast that is what it shows in the picture.



Oops, Typo. Sorry


----------



## Jet

Heh. Booted at 3.57, though still not stable. My cooler isn't getting very hot, so's I think I'll lap my (warranty far gone anyway) processor before I try any more voltage.


----------



## MatrixEVO

Jet said:


> Heh. Booted at 3.57, though still not stable. My cooler isn't getting very hot, so's I think I'll lap my (warranty far gone anyway) processor before I try any more voltage.



What is your memory at? I noticed that I couldn't get to 3.6GHz because the voltage on the memory wasn't high enough.

Anyways, here's my new score. I'm in second place now.


----------



## Jet

Ech. My OCZ Gold DDR2-800 likes high voltages, but I can only give it 2.1 (the warranty is up to 2.2V +5%, or a little over 2.3V). I have a hard time reaching even DDR2-900.


----------



## nexolus

lol k my [email protected] got 32 seconds.


----------



## Geoff

My latest


----------



## ThatGuy16

i hate you 

If the q6600 price drops, i might grab a DS3R or L and a q6600


----------



## Geoff

ThatGuy16 said:


> i hate you
> 
> If the q6600 price drops, i might grab a DS3R or L and a q6600




I love the Q6600, it has to be one of the best overclocker-friendly CPU's, after all the QX6850 for instance doesn't usually get above 4GHz, so the Q6600 gets a higher overclock percentage for it's stock speed.


----------



## MatrixEVO

Nice score. Use the Super PI 1.5mod for more accurate scores though. I got my Q6600 up to 3.8GHz and it scored 13.xxx seconds, but it wasn't very stable so I didn't post it here.


----------



## Geoff

MatrixEVO said:


> Nice score. Use the Super PI 1.5mod for more accurate scores though. I got my Q6600 up to 3.8GHz and it scored 13.xxx seconds, but it wasn't very stable so I didn't post it here.


I tried it but for some reason it crashed under Vista.  Although I can run the original SuperPi, Orthos, 3DMark06, and I just finished gaming for over an hour straight.  So who knows...


----------



## newguy5

mine was 19 seconds.  i don't know where i can host a picture so i can't put the pic up.


----------



## newguy5

check that, i downloaded the latest version, 19.297

where can i host the img?


----------



## Geoff

newguy5 said:


> check that, i downloaded the latest version, 19.297
> 
> where can i host the img?



www.photobucket.com


----------



## newguy5




----------



## nexolus

I win.







q6600 [email protected]


----------



## Geoff

nexolus said:


> I win.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> q6600 [email protected]


wow, very nice!

What voltage is your CPU at?


----------



## nexolus

it was at 1.57 i believe. i may try to overclock it more when i get back home from NY next saturday


----------



## the_painter

i fail


----------



## Geoff

nexolus said:


> it was at 1.57 i believe. i may try to overclock it more when i get back home from NY next saturday


1.57v 

Stock is around 1.24, thats a huge voltage bump.  If you really want to keep this CPU for a while, I would lower it.  Are you using liquid cooling?


----------



## nexolus

yeah i didn't leave it there, it's down to 1.35 or so now. and I'm on a zalman 9700. it's at 3.0GHz and it's at 19C right now  it's also freezing in this house haha


----------



## f.i.t.h

heres mine


----------



## taylormsj

please update mine

Opteron 165 - 3.05 GHz - 28 seconds


----------



## newguy5

crazy, my e6300 at work did it in 29 seconds whereas my e6750 at home did it in 19.


----------



## taylormsj

Whats crazier, is that AMD chips need to run over a GHz faster than core 2 duo's to get the same score lmao !!


----------



## Geoff

taylormsj said:


> Whats crazier, is that AMD chips need to run over a GHz faster than core 2 duo's to get the same score lmao !!


And the same was true when it was the Pentium 4's vs Athlon 64's.


----------



## nexolus

update the scores please


----------



## Geoff

nexolus said:


> update the scores please



Done.


----------



## taylormsj

wehay i beat some core 2 duos


----------



## zer0_c00l




----------



## littlenlnga




----------



## littlenlnga

update the scores please


----------



## newguy5

omega,

my processor is not oc'd, so you can put me down @ 2.67


----------



## Geoff

newguy5 said:


> omega,
> 
> my processor is not oc'd, so you can put me down @ 2.67


Will do.


----------



## Vipernitrox

here's mine at stock speed (everything)
going to start overclocking it now.

one thing concerns me... When i tried to calculate at 1m like you requested. I got an error "not exact in round" i looked it up and it ment my cpu was unstable??? I haven't done any overclocking yet... Only set my ram timings at the specifications kingston provided (including voltage).
after i started at 16k and worked my way up i did got the 1m calculation. But when i try that again now i get the same error...


----------



## nexolus

try using this version: http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/126/


----------



## Vipernitrox

thnx it worked  oc is holding up


----------



## nffc10

I got 28 seconds with my Athlon 6000+ @ 3.12Ghz


----------



## littlenlnga

update scores please


----------



## jimkonow




----------



## Geoff

Sorry for the hold up guys, I will have the updated scores posted shortly.


----------



## Vipernitrox

done oc'ing right now (see non oc'ed score couple of posts above here).
and crap... ended 0.4 secs behinds you omega...


----------



## INTELCRAZY

Vipernitrox said:


> done oc'ing right now (see non oc'ed score couple of posts above here).
> and crap... ended 0.4 secs behinds you omega...



How did you make it time into the hundredths?


----------



## nexolus

download the version i posted at the top


----------



## Darkserge

Good old P4 478 pins with 5% overclocked

38.375s


----------



## littlenlnga




----------



## Shadowhunter

Pshhh, I pwn all you n00bs. Northwood status baby! 

P4 2Ghz Northwood, 400mhz FSB


----------



## Geoff




----------



## Geoff

Just updated my score as well, it shows that a higher bus speed does improve performance quite a bit, especially since the clock speed is actually about 4MHz slower.


----------



## littlenlnga

you forgot to change the (Updated 1/28/08)


----------



## tidyboy21

I think that this is the fastest I'm going get out of it. Had it up to 3.999GHz but not at all stable. Still, I think this is pretty respectable for an air cooled e6600.


----------



## Vipernitrox

ok enough oc'ing for me, i've had it. My final score:


----------



## newguy5

i want to see what the stock e8400 can do.  somebody buy one and post up!


----------



## andy_mitch92

i got 43sec on a stock cedar mill p4 (3ghz)
overclocked to 4ghz i got 35sec... i think thats a pretty good indication that ocing works


----------



## Geoff

tidyboy21 said:


> I think that this is the fastest I'm going get out of it. Had it up to 3.999GHz but not at all stable. Still, I think this is pretty respectable for an air cooled e6600.


1.66V??


----------



## Matt_91

21 seconds


----------



## tidyboy21

[-0MEGA-];884275 said:
			
		

> 1.66V??



lol, I know. I'm thinking of upgrading in the near future so it didn't bother me that much. It was idle at 38c and load temps went up to 66c which is not bad for that vcore.


----------



## Geoff

tidyboy21 said:


> lol, I know. I'm thinking of upgrading in the near future so it didn't bother me that much. It was idle at 38c and load temps went up to 66c which is not bad for that vcore.


Temps aren't a problem for me, when I run my Q6600 at 1.60v it still idled around 30C, I just don't feel comfortable running the voltage any higher then 1.51v.


----------



## tidyboy21

[-0MEGA-];884506 said:
			
		

> Temps aren't a problem for me, when I run my Q6600 at 1.60v it still idled around 30C, I just don't feel comfortable running the voltage any higher then 1.51v.



I know what you mean, I would not have it at 1.66v 24/7, in fact I wouldn't go over 1.5v. I take it that the water cooling setup has made a big difference. I'm still toying with the idea when I get my Maximus Formula (Special Edition) and a Q9450 or E8500.


----------



## jacklazara

28 Sec


----------



## kof2000

newguy5 said:


> i want to see what the stock e8400 can do.  somebody buy one and post up!




i'll play around with my e8400 this weekend unless someone post it before me or clocks higher than mines


----------



## ThatGuy16

Stock i think the 8400 is getting around 13 sec. at 4.5-4.8Ghz they are getting 9's


----------



## kof2000

nope. it would need at least 3.8 and perforrmance ram to get near 13.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Maybe you should look at this thread
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=173999&page=21



			
				has33 said:
			
		

>



It takes 3.5ghz to get 13sec


----------



## kof2000

thats because that cpu is 3mb cache per core. i was refering to 2mb per core cpu.


----------



## Geoff

ThatGuy16 said:


> Maybe you should look at this thread
> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=173999&page=21
> 
> 
> 
> It takes 3.5ghz to get 13sec


4.7Ghz, holy crap.  That guy really knows how to overclock!


----------



## newguy5

kof2000 said:


> i'll play around with my e8400 this weekend unless someone post it before me or clocks higher than mines



i want to see it just stock first, then OC it.


----------



## Michael

Here's mine:








Did I make the list?


----------



## ThatGuy16

newguy5 said:


> i want to see it just stock first, then OC it.



Im ordering friday or monday all my new stuff, so maybe by wednesday i'll have some results


----------



## Cleric7x9

45nm FTW


----------



## ThatGuy16

Download the superPI mod version, it gives 0.000 readings 

Can't wait to get mine, should be fun!


----------



## INTELCRAZY

Cleric7x9 said:


> 45nm FTW



Haha...our CPU's can run an idle of what an E6600 runs at full load


----------



## kof2000

pretty sure thats a fake super pi score  cuz i just got mines stock and it is not 12 seconds 

you can fake super pi scores and among other benchmark in case you didnt know


----------



## Cleric7x9

kof2000 said:


> pretty sure thats a fake super pi score  cuz i just got mines stock and it is not 12 seconds
> 
> you can fake super pi scores and among other benchmark in case you didnt know



yeah, its not fake, good try though. how would you like me to prove it?


----------



## Cleric7x9

kof2000 said:


> thats because that cpu is 3mb cache per core. i was refering to 2mb per core cpu.



also, there is no 'per core' cache, its a shared cache; read the outside of your box.


----------



## INTELCRAZY

kof2000 said:


> pretty sure thats a fake super pi score  cuz i just got mines stock and it is not 12 seconds
> 
> you can fake super pi scores and among other benchmark in case you didnt know



You have no room to discuss fake... Your signature is like Pamela Anderson's boobs...



Cleric7x9 said:


> yeah, its not fake, good try though. how would you like me to prove it?



Just authenticate it... Some ppl have nothing better to do than otherwise accuse others of lying, when in truth it actually falls upon them.


----------



## Cleric7x9

how do i authenticate it?


----------



## ThatGuy16

I know its real, at 4.0ghz they get about 11sec. so at 3.6ghz i would say 12sec is right.

You need the SuperPI *MOD*

here: http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/366/Super_PI_Mod_v1.5.html


----------



## kof2000

Cleric7x9 said:


> yeah, its not fake, good try though. how would you like me to prove it?




well i didnt i didnt say it is fake. i'm saying it can be faked. and didnt see the 6 multiplier there. 

anywho, did your chip come in yet thatguy16?

this chip is an easy clocker.

you're right thatguy16 you da man!

the 4ghz part seems accurate but don't know about 3.6 i went straight from 3-4

i did try at stock at it is 15 seconds







too bad core temp doesnt work with vista 64 yet...





didnt even remove old as5


----------



## bigbird

19 sec


----------



## Michael

makmillion said:


> *Did I make the list?*


[image removed, forgot I have hotlink protection enabled :/]


----------



## ThatGuy16

lol


----------



## Cleric7x9

i went straight to 3.6 because i wanted a 1:1 ratio without overclocking RAM






there we go, with my name in notepad for those unbelievers out there. also, thats with the superpi mod


----------



## ThatGuy16

Have you thought about turning off speedstep?

I can't wait to get mine, should be here tuesday!


----------



## Geoff

ThatGuy16 said:


> Have you thought about turning off speedstep?
> 
> I can't wait to get mine, should be here tuesday!


It's actually C1E


----------



## Michael

ThatGuy16 said:


> lol



I got pwn'd for hotlinking images from my own site [email protected]


----------



## ThatGuy16

[-0MEGA-];887120 said:
			
		

> It's actually C1E



And EIST, right?

I can't wait for my 8400 to get here... im so impatient


----------



## PabloTeK

22.835 seconds apparently @ 2.8GHz, not sure if that's any good or not...


----------



## ThatGuy16

Thats good for that chip


----------



## Cleric7x9

yeah, i havent turned it off only because i dont use my computer all day, but it stays on, and with the OC it cant hurt to have the multiplier lower when its not in use.


----------



## Vipernitrox

omega,
could you update my score, it's on page 5?
i promise it's last i'll post with this cpu


----------



## Michael

..could you add mine, omega? I'm on page 21 I believe 

-mak


----------



## Geoff

Vipernitrox said:


> omega,
> could you update my score, it's on page 5?
> i promise it's last i'll post with this cpu


Could you post it again please.



makmillion said:


> ..could you add mine, omega? I'm on page 21 I believe
> 
> -mak


I'm not updating the list every day, I updated it on the 28th so I will get around to it sometime this week.

You guys need to stop getting better scores


----------



## newguy5

hmmm...so one e8400 is 12 seconds, the other is 15 seconds on stock.  kind of a large discrepancy.  interesting.


----------



## ThatGuy16

newguy5 said:


> hmmm...so one e8400 is 12 seconds, the other is 15 seconds on stock.  kind of a large discrepancy.  interesting.



his isn't stock, its 3.6ghz, he has speed step enabled.


----------



## Vipernitrox

[-0MEGA-];888055 said:
			
		

> Could you post it again please.
> 
> here you go


----------



## lovely?

yay AMD socket 754 i love you!


----------



## Geoff

lovely? said:


> yay AMD socket 754 i love you!


What processor is that?  It would be best if you could post a CPU-Z screenshot to go along with it.


----------



## newguy5

ThatGuy16 said:


> his isn't stock, its 3.6ghz, he has speed step enabled.



the hell is speed step?  what is the stock speed of the e8400?


----------



## newguy5

Cleric7x9 said:


> 45nm FTW



okay so 12 seconds and it's under stock speed at 2.4ghz.  what?


----------



## Geoff

newguy5 said:


> the hell is speed step?  what is the stock speed of the e8400?





newguy5 said:


> okay so 12 seconds and it's under stock speed at 2.4ghz.  what?


It's not at 2.4GHz, he has C1E enabled which lowers the multiplier on the Core 2's by 2x, which gives it a lower speed when the CPU is idle or doesn't need much processing power.  The point of it is to lower the temps when the PC is idle, as well as lowering the voltage which is useful in mobile devices.


----------



## Cleric7x9

[-0MEGA-];888472 said:
			
		

> It's not at 2.4GHz, he has C1E enabled which lowers the multiplier on the Core 2's by 2x, which gives it a lower speed when the CPU is idle or doesn't need much processing power.  The point of it is to lower the temps when the PC is idle, as well as lowering the voltage which is useful in mobile devices.



thank you, so many ppl are having trouble understand this concept lol


----------



## newguy5

Cleric7x9 said:


> thank you, so many ppl are having trouble understand this concept lol



meh, the e8400 doesn't impress me that much though.  would have expected better.  i would have rather gotten it over my e6750 had it been available 6 weeks ago, but seeing the performance, i don't think it's significantly better like the hype predicted.


----------



## Geoff

newguy5 said:


> meh, the e8400 doesn't impress me that much though.  would have expected better.  i would have rather gotten it over my e6750 had it been available 6 weeks ago, but seeing the performance, i don't think it's significantly better like the hype predicted.


The E8xxx processors are nearly identical to the E6xxx, it really just has a 45nm process and more cache.


----------



## Cleric7x9

[-0MEGA-];889120 said:
			
		

> The E8xxx processors are nearly identical to the E6xxx, it really just has a 45nm process and more cache.



they do beat them in benchmarks, but not by nearly enough to justify anybody upgrading from an e6x50 to an e8xxx. however, i did notice a pretty significant difference in my upgrade from an e6420 to an e8400


----------



## newguy5

Cleric7x9 said:


> they do beat them in benchmarks, but not by nearly enough to justify anybody upgrading from an e6x50 to an e8xxx. however, i did notice a pretty significant difference in my upgrade from an e6420 to an e8400



i didn't realize they were so similar.  yeah, i can see how the e6420 to e8400 would be an upgrade.  my work computer is an e6300 and did the superpi in 29 seconds while my home e6750 did it in 19, both stock.  pretty significant.


----------



## ThatGuy16

ok, heres a fully stock superpi shot with the e8400








kof2000 said:


> well i didnt i didnt say it is fake. i'm saying it can be faked. and didnt see the 6 multiplier there.
> 
> anywho, did your chip come in yet thatguy16?
> 
> this chip is an easy clocker.
> 
> you're right thatguy16 you da man!
> 
> the 4ghz part seems accurate but don't know about 3.6 i went straight from 3-4
> 
> i did try at stock at it is 15 seconds
> 
> too bad core temp doesnt work with vista 64 yet...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> didnt even remove old as5



I can't beleive i missed your post all together 

Just got the chip, im still tweaking. I got up to 3.5ghz and got 13sec, and working on 3.6ghz (stable). I'm new to these intel bios, im hoping for 4.0ghz stable as just about everyone is getting with 1.3-1.38v


----------



## kof2000

nice,

normally it gets real hot so i have to clock at night


----------



## lovely?

hey kof. why does your sig say you have a qx9650 but cpu-z claims you have an overclocked 8400? i cant see why anyone with a 9650 would buy one of those...


----------



## lovely?

[-0MEGA-];888333 said:
			
		

> What processor is that?  It would be best if you could post a CPU-Z screenshot to go along with it.



oh sorry, its an AMD 3400 clocked at 2.65GHZ, im too lazy to post up the screenie.

why is that a bad score for my processor? (my system has been slow lately,)


----------



## kof2000

cuz i got the 8400 couple days ago.


----------



## lovely?

lol what was the purpose? its not like your rig left anything to be desired


----------



## newguy5

ThatGuy16 said:


> ok, heres a fully stock superpi shot with the e8400



cool.  good score.  thanks for posting.


----------



## Geoff

kof2000 said:


> cuz i got the 8400 couple days ago.


It's a nice processor, so now at least you have a decent system instead of a made up one like you have in your sig now.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Kof you might be using too much voltage, im running orthos right now at 4ghz @ 1.28v! (43*c load). I'll post a screenshot of a pi run @ 4ghz in a bit, i got 11.9 sec


----------



## ThatGuy16

Hit the 11's


----------



## ThatGuy16

hit the 10's, what place does this put me in?


----------



## Geoff

4.3GHz, wow!!!

That puts you in first place, lol.  And this is why I don't update it every day


----------



## Vipernitrox

*has to restrain himself to not order his own e8400*
damn those are nice times...


----------



## Geoff

Vipernitrox said:


> *has to restrain himself to not order his own e8400*
> damn those are nice times...


Wait for the 45nm quads


----------



## Vipernitrox

[-0MEGA-];892135 said:
			
		

> Wait for the 45nm quads


 
bit expensive tough, my build is fine for now. If i upgrade i'll do the whole package: mobo, memory, cpu, graphics card.


----------



## kchinger

My laptop is 38.812. Intel Core 2 Duo T2050.

My old P4 2.4Ghz does it in 62 seconds. 

My E8400 will be...? I'll let you know in a week or so.


----------



## Kornowski

That's nice man, I need to OC my E6300 again now


----------



## Shane

Kornowski said:


> That's nice man, I need to OC my E6300 again now



danny why not upgrade to a e8400?

£164 

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-192-IN

3Ghz stock and 4mb more cache for you


----------



## taylormsj

Almost a 100% overclock, i see core 2's with lower clock speeds getting better scores than this pentium, seems like cache and FSB plays a significant part in PI times.


----------



## Geoff

taylormsj said:


> Almost a 100% overclock, i see core 2's with lower clock speeds getting better scores than this pentium, seems like cache and FSB plays a significant part in PI times.


Cache plays a pretty significant role, my E6300 lagged behind even at 3.2GHz.


----------



## Kornowski

Nevakonaza said:


> danny why not upgrade to a e8400?
> 
> £164
> 
> http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-192-IN
> 
> 3Ghz stock and 4mb more cache for you



Nah, I'm just going to OC my 6300 again 



			
				[-0MEGA-];898641 said:
			
		

> Cache plays a pretty significant role, my E6300 lagged behind even at 3.2GHz.



The E6300 is still a pretty good CPU, right?


----------



## Shane

Kornowski said:


> Nah, I'm just going to OC my 6300 again The E6300 is still a pretty good CPU, right?


+ohh yeah without a doubt,I was just saying the e8400 are even better overclockers i heard 

il have to update my super pi score now see where it gets me lol.


----------



## taylormsj

Kornowski said:


> Nah, I'm just going to OC my 6300 again
> 
> 
> 
> The E6300 is still a pretty good CPU, right?



Yeh, get some overclocking done, but dont be a whimp around 2.5 GHz, hit at least 3 GHz !!! (thats an order !!)


----------



## Geoff

Kornowski said:


> Nah, I'm just going to OC my 6300 again
> 
> The E6300 is still a pretty good CPU, right?


You can OC it a lot higher then that, I had mine at 3.21GHz.  And yes it's a decent processor, but compared to even the E6320 the cache makes a difference in SuperPi.


----------



## lovely?

heres what i had before:








heres what i have now:


----------



## kevlee89

hm, is that decent?


----------



## Kornowski

taylormsj said:


> Yeh, get some overclocking done, but dont be a whimp around 2.5 GHz, hit at least 3 GHz !!! (thats an order !!)



Haha! Alright, sure thing Taylor!


----------



## lovely?

kevlee89 said:


> hm, is that decent?



yeah, im guessing it is, you can see my e4500 is only slightly better at a slightly lower speed, but i can see where the cache difference matters a lot


----------



## taylormsj

kevlee89 said:


> hm, is that decent?



Youll get a better score if you odnt have anything running in the background


----------



## Geoff

Also if you set the priority to high you might get a bit better score.


----------



## massahwahl

when it asks how many loops you want to calculate how many are you doing?


----------



## denverbronco26

it took mine like 2 mins and 15 secs


----------



## MosIncredible

denverbronco26 said:


> it took mine like 2 mins and 15 secs



I'm at 1m 46s with a P4 @ 2.18Ghz for the next 32 or so hours.


----------



## jimkonow

Pentium M 740 in a Dell Latitude D610, Dad's work laptop......this is a dell that i actually like!! the memory timings are 4-4-4-12, even though its only 512 MB of ram. 1.8 GHz Pentium M with 2mb of L2 Cache. 533MHz FSB.


----------



## Cleric7x9

^^is that the machine in your sig?


----------



## Geoff

Cleric7x9 said:


> ^^is that the machine in your sig?



I'd say no, because the CPU-Z SS says Pentium M, where as his sig says P4.


----------



## ETSA

Taken today with no setup, just ran it when i saw the thread.


----------



## Geoff

Don't worry guys, i'll get around to updating this thread at some point.


----------



## lovely?

jimkonow said:


> Pentium M 740 in a Dell Latitude D610, Dad's work laptop......this is a dell that i actually like!! the memory timings are 4-4-4-12, even though its only 512 MB of ram. 1.8 GHz Pentium M with 2mb of L2 Cache. 533MHz FSB.



wow my freakin AMD 3400 was clocked to 2.7GHZ but it only got one second lower then a laptop with a worse processor? wow lol


----------



## jimkonow

pentuim M pwns 
L2 cache has alot to do with your score, by the way


----------



## shenry

Here's mine. I'm gonna clock it higher when I get a better HSF.


----------



## Fritzjavel

i don't get it, i upgraded from a sempron @ 1.8ghz(about 50-54 sec at the 1M) to a AMD Phenom Quad Core 2.2ghz 20-23sec... shouldn't it be less sec since its a quad core?? and does that mean the total is 2.2 ghz or each core is at 2.2 ghz


----------



## Geoff

Fritzjavel said:


> i don't get it, i upgraded from a sempron @ 1.8ghz(about 50-54 sec at the 1M) to a AMD Phenom Quad Core 2.2ghz 20-23sec... shouldn't it be less sec since its a quad core?? and does that mean the total is 2.2 ghz or each core is at 2.2 ghz


SuperPi is only single threaded, so it doesn't matter how many cores you have.

And each core is 2.2GHz, however that does not mean you have a 8.8GHz CPU.


----------



## Fritzjavel

AWWW??? I bought it cause i thought WOW 4 cores each @2.2 my machine will fly like a raptor(jet).. then what does it mean??


----------



## Geoff

Fritzjavel said:


> AWWW??? I bought it cause i thought WOW 4 cores each @2.2 my machine will fly like a raptor(jet).. then what does it mean??


It will in certain tasks.  Basically with a quad core it means you can do more CPU-intensive tasks at the same time without as much of a slow down.  For instance you can be playing a game, while compressing files, while running a virus scan, etc.  Also most games take advantage of at least having two cores, so it improves game performance.


----------



## Fritzjavel

what game uses the four quad cores cause the penom is MAD new CPU...


----------



## Geoff

Fritzjavel said:


> what game uses the four quad cores cause the penom is MAD new CPU...


While the Phenom is fairly new, Intel has had quad cores (better performing as well) for quite some time.

Very little to no games take advantage of quad cores, and most new games only show a fair bit of performance gain with a dual core processor over a single core processor.


----------



## Fritzjavel

then how can I test the speed of the quad core for real compared to my sempron??


----------



## Geoff

Fritzjavel said:


> then how can I test the speed of the quad core for real compared to my sempron??


You could run a benchmarks such as PCMark or 3DMark.


----------



## Fritzjavel

thank you imma run one right now... and post my scores


----------



## Fritzjavel

my PC Mark 05 score is 5364.. and my computer is a AMD Quad Core @2.2ghz,ATI Raedon 2400 XT, 3gig ram, and 500gb HDD.. i was expecting a higher score but O' Well


----------



## Geoff

Fritzjavel said:


> my PC Mark 05 score is 5364.. and my computer is a AMD Quad Core @2.2ghz,ATI Raedon 2400 XT, 3gig ram, and 500gb HDD.. i was expecting a higher score but O' Well


What are you comparing it to?


----------



## Jack Bauer420

[URL=http://imageshack.us]
	


[/URL]


----------



## MosIncredible

Before





After


----------



## Geoff

Jack Bauer420 said:


> [URL=http://imageshack.us]
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL]


I can't even read that...


----------



## ETSA

Not updated yet?


----------



## Kesava

39 seconds....


----------



## Fritzjavel

What does a intel dual core get?
in benchmarks??


----------



## ThatGuy16

Which one?


----------



## markallen

Here's mine..








It shows my multipier is 6 but it is set at 8.Something to do with the speed stepping thing that Intel has.


----------



## Darkserge

markallen said:


> Here's mine...



dont forget screenshot your proof of CPU Z


----------



## shenry

Update? Before it gets out of hand?


----------



## Geoff

shenry said:


> Update? Before it gets out of hand?


I'm thinking about it


----------



## markallen

I updated my screenshot.


----------



## Vipernitrox

i posted this pic on page 5 but you forgot to update 
here is it again.


----------



## Shane

Seems a little slow compared to most of what you guys have...but considering the e6300 has only 2Mb l2 cache i dont think its that bad of a score.

24 Seconds running at 2.3Ghz.






*And can a Mod or the thread starter please update the Results on the first page?*


----------



## Kornowski

Shane, have you raised your voltage? Yours is 1.4 and stock is 1.32500


----------



## markallen

This is my latest try.


----------



## Shane

Kornowski said:


> Shane, have you raised your voltage? Yours is 1.4 and stock is 1.32500



i think the voltage settings was set to auto so it must have raised them a bit


----------



## Kornowski

Nevakonaza said:


> i think the voltage settings was set to auto so it must have raised them a bit



You should set it to manual; 1.32500, you'd get better temps too.


----------



## Shane

Kornowski said:


> You should set it to manual; 1.32500, you'd get better temps too.



But because ive overclocked wouldnt it need 1.4 volts? because thats what the system set them at.


----------



## Kornowski

Nope, it may not need it, I got to 2.8Ghz on stock volts (1.32500v)


----------



## Darkserge

P4 3400 to 3909Mhz!!!!!!


----------



## markallen

So when is this thread going to be updated?


----------



## Ramodkk

Here's my current one:






I know, sucks!


----------



## Geoff

markallen said:


> So when is this thread going to be updated?


I'll probably delete the list in the first post and just have this a "post your..." thread, so we can all see each others.

The original score sheet was given to me by another member, I don't really feel like taking the time to update it every few days.


----------



## markallen

[-0MEGA-];923924 said:
			
		

> I'll probably delete the list in the first post and just have this a "post your..." thread, so we can all see each others.
> 
> The original score sheet was given to me by another member, I don't really feel like taking the time to update it every few days.



No problem.Perfectly explained.


----------



## Vipernitrox

i'm willing to give it a update every once in a while, like once in 1 or 2 weeks or so. Is there a way to move over the right of this thread to me?


----------



## Geoff

Vipernitrox said:


> i'm willing to give it a update every once in a while, like once in 1 or 2 weeks or so. Is there a way to move over the right of this thread to me?


That would be great, I don't have a problem with that.

I can't turn over the "rights", but what you can do is PM me the updated list and I will edit the thread.


----------



## Kornowski

20.91 seconds, which I guess isn't bad...


----------



## MrRandom

Heres mine, not great but im proud compared to some of the others


----------



## ETSA

It doesn't really matter it isn't being updated...

But yea, great score....


----------



## MrRandom

haha, just figured id post it up


----------



## Geoff

ETSA said:


> It doesn't really matter it isn't being updated...
> 
> But yea, great score....


We don't have lists for the 3DMark threads and such...

You don't need to have a list, I just like looking at peoples score and then forgetting about it


----------



## Respital

Here's Mine 

For some reason my cpu usage only went up to 50%... 


http://img442.imageshack.us/my.php?image=superpicalculationay2.jpg


----------



## Geoff

Respital said:


> Here's Mine
> 
> For some reason my cpu usage only went up to 50%...
> 
> 
> http://img442.imageshack.us/my.php?image=superpicalculationay2.jpg


Because SuperPi is not multi-threaded, so dual/quad cores don't benefit.


----------



## Respital

Oh, okay .. i suggest they make it multi threaded


----------



## WeatherMan

E6400 @ 3.44

Fastest Ive done is 16.360 @ 3.65 in XP with around 18 processes an all weirdo services disabled


----------



## Geoff

The list has been updated!

Thanks Vipernitrox!


----------



## Respital

[-0MEGA-];925939 said:
			
		

> The list has been updated!
> 
> Thanks Vipernitrox!



Uhh i got a score of 17.282 seconds (and seen as my previous post) and my score isn't up there.. but u said it was updated.. could i be added in ? 
Thanks


----------



## Geoff

Respital said:


> Uhh i got a score of 17.282 seconds (and seen as my previous post) and my score isn't up there.. but u said it was updated.. could i be added in ?
> Thanks


Probably because you only posted a link so he skipped over it on accident, so I just added it.

Now the photo you took had the processor at 2GHz, I'm guessing speedstep was on so it should be running at a stock speed of 3GHz correct?


----------



## Respital

[-0MEGA-];926014 said:
			
		

> Probably because you only posted a link so he skipped over it on accident, so I just added it.
> 
> Now the photo you took had the processor at 2GHz, I'm guessing speedstep was on so it should be running at a stock speed of 3GHz correct?



Speedstep ?... I'm not sure what that is but it was at 3Ghz when it was calculating Pi .. Is there any way to turn off "Speedstep" and is it better or worse .. ? "Speedstep" changes the cpu frequency from 2Ghz idle and 3Ghz under full load correct ? 

Wooo this is my 100th post


----------



## markallen

You can disable speedstep in the BIOS..


----------



## ETSA

I should be on that list, I am angry  :-(


I did post, I guess it went unnoticed....


----------



## Geoff

ETSA said:


> I should be on that list, I am angry  :-(
> 
> 
> I did post, I guess it went unnoticed....



Sorry, it's been so long since I updated it probably just got lost.  Would you mind posting it again?


----------



## Ramodkk

Heres my new one with the E2160:







On stock, better than my old X2 3800+, which lasted 47 seconds! 

(CPU-Z picture says its 1200MHz, 6x multipier but it's actually 1800MHz 9x multi)


----------



## pies

Here's mine with a e6550
The cpus @ 2.5 sorry it's a bit hard to read.


----------



## ThatGuy16

you missed mine!!  



ThatGuy16 said:


> hit the 10's, what place does this put me in?


----------



## MosIncredible

ThatGuy's batch is cheat.  I can barely boot at 4.0GHz with the vcore his is stable at.


----------



## Ramodkk

He does have a newer mobo though... I gues x38 is better at OC'ing 45nm CPUS?? 

*edit* I just reached 23s at 2700MHz, will post screen tomorrow...


----------



## MosIncredible

It's the batch. Everyone I've seen with mine takes around 1.4v for 4.0GHz stable. I knocked my clocks down to 3.85 for comfort.


----------



## ThatGuy16

MosIncredible said:


> ThatGuy's batch is cheat.  I can barely boot at 4.0GHz with the vcore his is stable at.



4Ghz stable at 1.248v on load 

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s145/Coreyhm1/4hours2.jpg


----------



## Vipernitrox

Sorry respital my bad i didn't notice you like omega said.
And i only took the scores of off the last page of this thread (srry thatguy16)
If you want your score to be added in repost it.

I'll update it every once in a while (i really hate redoing the formatting every time).


----------



## ETSA

http://www.computerforum.com/87599-post-your-superpi-score-27.html

middle of page


----------



## Darkserge

Can you remove 38------Darkserge (P4 @ 3570)
because mine is 35.750--Darkserge (P4 @ 3910)


----------



## Ramodkk

Heres my newest one at 3.0GHz


----------



## Kornowski




----------



## Ramodkk

You beat me Danny you!


----------



## ThatGuy16

download the PI mod version, you may have beat danny's score.. sinces the version your using rounds it off


----------



## Kornowski

Yeah, you may have beaten me, Omar... 

Try this version of Super PI out;
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/366/


----------



## Ramodkk

Oh man! The last OC I had wasn't stable so my last SUPER PI score doesn't really count.
Here's my newest one: (not rounded (mod super_pi))


----------



## Kornowski

Nice Omar! Those are some sweet temps!


----------



## Ramodkk

Yeah, thanks! 

Dude this is how faster my comp is now. My old X2 3800+ gave me 47 seconds!!  No overclock though.

This one on stock gave me 33s


----------



## markallen

Here is my lastest with no rounding off.


----------



## Ramodkk

That's perfect man!


----------



## Ramodkk

Here's my last one:


----------



## tidyboy21

Puts me in 4th place I believe


----------



## ETSA

I am still no on there, oh well, who cares...


----------



## Geoff

ETSA said:


> I am still no on there, oh well, who cares...


It hasn't been updated yet since you re-posted your score.


----------



## zer0_c00l

*[email protected]*


----------



## Geoff

Woot! lol

Now just another 1GHz overclock and you'll be up with what my Q6600 was at


----------



## zer0_c00l

thats a pretty good oc for a phenom 2.3ghz....im trying for 3ghz today..that was just turning the multi x14 i havnt messed with fsb yet or core voltage


----------



## shenry

When you updated I didn't see mine so I'll post a new one for you






4th place now right?


----------



## Gogey

Couldn't get a cpu-z screen cause of the multiplier being lowered, so coretemp will have to do.

I wanna find out how high I can get it :O


----------



## Ramodkk

[-0MEGA-];931887 said:
			
		

> Woot! lol
> 
> Now just another 1GHz overclock and you'll be up with what my Q6600 was at



Which you sold! 

 

*ON TOPIC: HERE's MY FINAL ONE*


----------



## markallen

The Q6600 that Omega sold!!!!

Which I'm running right now.


----------



## Cleric7x9

zer0 cool, im sorry to say it, but thats pentium 4 super pi time.


----------



## zer0_c00l

Cleric7x9 said:


> zer0 cool, im sorry to say it, but thats pentium 4 super pi time.


25.329--ThatGuy16 (X2 5600+ @ 3439)
28------taylormsj (Opteron 185 @ 3055)
28------Kornoski (E6300 @ 1866)
30------kof2000 (X2 6000 @ 3000)
30------dmw2692004 (E6300 @ 3243)
30------zer0_cool (X2 5600+ @ 2800)
32------the_painter (X2 6000+ @ 3015)
 no its not


----------



## Geoff

markallen said:


> The Q6600 that Omega sold!!!!
> 
> Which I'm running right now.





Glad to see that it's running well, what speed are you up to?


----------



## DirtyD86




----------



## lovely?

hey dirty what multiplier did you use to get your fsb to 1333? i would love to get that instead of the 1066 i was using...

and i would also like to know if the higher fsb means that i wont be able to use my stock intel cooler like i have been...


----------



## DirtyD86

lovely? said:


> hey dirty what multiplier did you use to get your fsb to 1333? i would love to get that instead of the 1066 i was using...
> 
> and i would also like to know if the higher fsb means that i wont be able to use my stock intel cooler like i have been...





334 x 9. the multiplier is locked at 9 with the exception of speedstep which drops it to 6. my fsb is actually at 1335 so its not exact


----------



## mep916

DirtyD86 said:


> 334 x 9. the multiplier is locked at 9 with the exception of speedstep which drops it to 6. my fsb is actually at 1335 so its not exact



Disable speedstep brotha.


----------



## markallen

[-0MEGA-];932895 said:
			
		

> Glad to see that it's running well, what speed are you up to?



I settled on running it @ 3.2 Ghz.It runs plenty fast at that speed.After I get my new cooler I'll try to bump it up some.It was running alittle hotter than I liked at anything over 3.2 Ghz.


----------



## Geoff

markallen said:


> I settled on running it @ 3.2 Ghz.It runs plenty fast at that speed.After I get my new cooler I'll try to bump it up some.It was running alittle hotter than I liked at anything over 3.2 Ghz.


3.2GHz is still a great speed!


----------



## Ramodkk

Man, I couldn't get my E2160 past 3.0GHz.  And it takes 1.475v to be stable so I decided to stay at 2.88GHz... It's still amazing though, $70 US chip!


----------



## markallen

[-0MEGA-];933275 said:
			
		

> 3.2GHz is still a great speed!



Yeah it's a great speed .I am converting two video files right now and playing a game..


----------



## Respital

Here's My New Score 

15.813 Seconds 

http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picalde6.jpg


----------



## Ramodkk

The image is too small!  but your score is great man!


----------



## Respital

ramodkk said:


> The image is too small!  but your score is great man!



Thanks bro


----------



## Ramodkk

It's cool man 

I'm happy just by the fact that my $70 chip scored better than all the AMD's in the list!


----------



## Respital

ramodkk said:


> It's cool man
> 
> I'm happy just by the fact that my $70 chip scored better than all the AMD's in the list!



Lol sweet .


----------



## Vipernitrox

i just pmed omega the updated score. It'll be on in the next couple of days.

The upcoming month is going to be pretty busy for me. I'm moving out of my parents house, into an apartment with my girlfiriend. So don't expect an update very soon.



> Post your SuperPi Score!
> 
> middle of page


ETSA.... if you try and repost your score dont link to the thread in general... i'll just end up in the last page of the thread. For example, you posted this link on page 9. I followed the link and i ended up on page 10...
Just post a link to the original screenshot.


----------



## Ramodkk

Include my latest one in the update:


----------



## Geoff

List Updated!

Thanks again Viper!


----------



## Ramodkk

Nice! good job on update.

Except one thing, Geoff, you put on the wrong clock speed and time for my E2160 score! 

My last one was @ 3.0GHz and time was 20.592s


----------



## Ambushed

Mines such a joke, well here it is:




3200+ athlon 939sc @ 2ghz


----------



## Ramodkk

Image is too smal! ^


----------



## Ambushed

Fixed.


----------



## Ambushed

Update:


----------



## ThatGuy16




----------



## mep916

What's the best score with that chip at that speed? Looks good to me...


----------



## ThatGuy16

Looks good to me too


----------



## Ambushed

Damm, that looks good for a duo doesn't it?


----------



## Geoff

ThatGuy16 said:


>


----------



## DirtyD86

Thatguy, i think you just inspired me to buy an e8400 

any chance of you updating the scores on the first page omega?


----------



## oregon

4.5GHz??? damn.

that's not on air is it?


----------



## DirtyD86

oregon said:


> 4.5GHz???
> 
> that's not on air is it?



naw his system is watercooled


----------



## ThatGuy16

I love my E8400, lucky me received a good batch 

My ram is limiting me, my ram is what stops me at 4.5Ghz


----------



## Ramodkk

Get some BallistiX 

BTW how do you know when the RAM is the one limiting your OC?


----------



## ThatGuy16

Usually ram will completely lock your computer up, sometimes it will freeze with a solid artifact looking screen.

And while tweaking you can sort of figure it out, like looser timings, more volts to the ram will help. But adding voltage to the CPU does nothing, that tells you its the ram. Also, alot of times ram will cause the system to lock up a number of minutes into windows, while theres no load to the cpu.

Its hard to explain


----------



## shenry

ThatGuy16 that owns!


----------



## The_Beast

I got 19s with my E6550


----------



## Shane

shenry said:


> ThatGuy16 that owns!



yeah awesome score thatguy,the e8400 is realy some processor ay 

Man i love intel


----------



## Ramodkk

Of course I love Intel too, I got 22s with my "cheap" E2160 @ 2.7GHz 

Kind of a small upgrade over my X2 3800+ which gave me 47s


----------



## Kornowski

Not bad, I guess... Had my CPU @ 3GHz.


----------



## f.i.t.h

Stock E8400 (3ghz)


----------



## oregon

I got 16s with my E6550 overclocked to 3.3

EDIT: 15s with it at 3.5


----------



## czepluch

Got 13 sec with my E8400 @ 3.5 I think it was


----------



## ThatGuy16

Still not fast enough for me!!!!!


----------



## Geoff

4.6GHz!!   That is simply amazing!


----------



## Respital

[-0MEGA-];961479 said:
			
		

> 4.6GHz!!   That is simply amazing!



I'd have to agree. 
Couldn't you get that high?
I bet you could.


----------



## ThatGuy16

If i could ever figure out whats stopping me at 4.6Ghz, i would really show you what this puppy is made of


----------



## Geoff

ThatGuy16 said:


> If i could ever figure out whats stopping me at 4.6Ghz, i would really show you what this puppy is made of


3.0 to 4.6GHz... 

I bet my water cooling parts are helping though, eh?


----------



## mep916

ThatGuy16 said:


> If i could ever figure out whats stopping me at 4.6Ghz, i would really show you what this puppy is made of



Erm, I think you've found your chips limit. 4.6 is nothing to sneeze at, my friend.


----------



## Cleric7x9

4.6Ghz!!! wowowowowowow


----------



## just a noob

i got 45 seconds on my [email protected] stock, and i cant overclock since its in an oem box, id post a pic if i could figure out how


----------



## shenry

Press the "Print Screen" key which is next to the scroll lock key on standard keyboards. Then go into paint and go edit -> paste. Then cut out the bits you don't want and save the file as a jpeg. Then upload to an image hosting site. A good one is imageshack.us Then post an image with the little picture of a mountain and a sun.


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

would it matter if there was programs and browsers in the background while running Pi?


----------



## shenry

It works a bit better with no programs in the background. Best thing to do is to run it once your computer has just finished booting up.


----------



## just a noob

[/URL][/IMG] hopefully this one is big enough?


----------



## Geoff

just a noob said:


> [/URL][/IMG] hopefully this one is big enough?


Nope.


----------



## Mitch?

[ 512K]
+ 000h 00m 38s

AMD X2 4000+ @ 2333mhz, DDR 800 2gb DC


----------



## JlCollins005

im not sure exactly how u tell if its good or not but mine says this

this is on my E2160


----------



## JlCollins005

and i just ran another at 512k 

[ 512K]
+ 000h 00m 14s


----------



## mep916

I could care less about your SuperPi score. Your desktop wallpaper is somewhat distracting.


----------



## Ramodkk

^ Just somewhat!


----------



## JlCollins005

yea lol i just would like to know if thats semi good or what


----------



## Ramodkk

That's a good time. My old 3800+ X2 gave me 47s

*Off topic:*

W00t! I didn't even notice my 3,000th post...


----------



## Vizy

ramodkk said:


> W00t! I didn't even notice my 3,000th post...



congrats dude. 

here is my time:


----------



## JlCollins005

well i noticed mr johanssen ran 512K]
+ 000h 00m 38s

AMD X2 4000+ @ 2333mhz, DDR 800 2gb DC

so i figured mine was alright


----------



## mep916

For that chip at stock, I'd say that's about right.

I'm referring to your E2160, BTW.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Why is it i'm getting the vibe i have everyone beat? 

I done a run yesterday at 4.6ghz again and got 10.2s.. now, if i could just get past this wall i'm hitting at 512+ FSB


----------



## mep916

ThatGuy16 said:


> now, if i could just get past this wall i'm hitting at 512+ FSB



Get some LN2.


----------



## JlCollins005

well id overclock it but im not risking ne thing since im tryin to sell this pc


----------



## ThatGuy16

mep916 said:


> Get some LN2.



Its not the processor, or ram... i think i may be hitting the boards limit  

I have faith that i'll get past it 

(crossing fingers)


----------



## Intel_man

I just did it and got a 34 secs. 


It's a stock Intel E6300 @ 1.86GHz


----------



## JlCollins005

did u do the 1m or the 512


----------



## Intel_man

I did it with 1m.


I managed to nudge the 33 secs on my second try.


----------



## Vizy

i got the 30 secs on the 1m the first time, the second time and every time fter that i got 32 secs.


----------



## JlCollins005

i guess i dont understand this cuz the 6300 is better than the 2160 and i have a faster time


----------



## Intel_man

Probably because I'm running alot of background applications...


----------



## Ramodkk

mep916 said:


> For that chip at stock, I'd say that's about right.
> 
> I'm referring to your E2160, BTW.



That's a pretty good time for a stock E2160. Mine gave me 33s on stock.


----------



## XDRoX

19.563s with an E2200 @ 3.322GHz


----------



## colt1911




----------



## Shane

XDRoX said:


> 19.563s with an E2200 @ 3.322GHz



what cpu cooler do you have?


----------



## XDRoX

I have a Zalman 9500.
I just got a new CPU, the E7200.
Here is my time with it:


----------



## mep916

Very nice...you OC'd the crap out of that chip.


----------



## Judgement day

celeron


----------



## Cleric7x9

Judgement day said:


> i would just like to inform you that superpi scores are in fct very dangerous, last ightt i burnt my foresckin becuase my superpi sore was too intense
> 
> so then i could not shag my raptor drive, which i have becuase im so damn cooler than all of you
> 
> fuuuuuuuuck
> 
> 
> also, id like to add, i know where you live [OMEGA] so you better f'ing watch your back, im wacthing you....
> 
> celeron



oh noes teh e-threatz


----------



## mep916

Cleric7x9 said:


> oh noes teh e-threatz



lol. If you wanna get at Omega, you're gonna have to get through me first.


----------



## Shane

are the Zalman 9500 quiet?

a worthy replacement of a AC7 pro?


----------



## mep916

Nevakonaza said:


> are the Zalman 9500 quiet?



From what I understand, they're pretty loud. Louder than the 9700. 



Nevakonaza said:


> a worthy replacement of a AC7 pro?



I'm sure the Zalman would perform better.


----------



## Intel_man

mep916 said:


> lol. If you wanna get at Omega, you're gonna have to get through me first.



hehe... he's just probably trolling.


----------



## Geoff

Judgement day said:
			
		

> i would just like to inform you that superpi scores are in fct very dangerous, last ightt i burnt my foresckin becuase my superpi sore was too intense
> 
> so then i could not shag my raptor drive, which i have becuase im so damn cooler than all of you
> 
> fuuuuuuuuck
> 
> 
> also, id like to add, i know where you live [OMEGA] so you better f'ing watch your back, im wacthing you....
> 
> celeron


Who are you?


----------



## Ramodkk

Who _is _he?

BTW Nevakonaza, have you considered Tuniq Tower?


----------



## Judgement day

[-0MEGA-];976488 said:
			
		

> Who are you?




an egg


----------



## EndofAll

No idea.. at all what i'm doing. I honestly don't know if this is good or bad.


----------



## Cleric7x9

@endofall, when you click calculate, change it to 1M instead of 16k, then run the test.


----------



## Kornowski

ramodkk said:


> Who _is _he?
> 
> BTW Nevakonaza, have you considered Tuniq Tower?



Tuniq Tower FTW!


----------



## Ramodkk

He shouldn't be having any problems with the AC Freezer 7 Pro though...


----------



## myPCrocks

How is this ?


----------



## lovely?

do a 1m test instead...


----------



## tacohead

lmao thats horrible, upgrading to e8400 in a week!


----------



## Geoff

EndofAll said:


> No idea.. at all what i'm doing. I honestly don't know if this is good or bad.



haha, you need to set it to 1M (One Million), not 16K.  It shows 0 seconds for that


----------



## ThatGuy16

you need to download the mod version of Super PI, it shows ms


----------



## Kesava




----------



## Kesava

just out of interest... why does my 3rd core do all the work. no matter what im doing, its allways running the most.


----------



## Shane

ramodkk said:
			
		

> BTW Nevakonaza, have you considered Tuniq Tower?



i have actualy yes,but i think its just i need new thermal paste 


Kornowski said:


> Tuniq Tower FTW!



Danny is this much better than AC7 pro? in your opinion?

Heres the SuperPi score of my Uncles P4 rig at 3Ghz....its sooooooo slow 






i think my older AMD Sempron rig at 2Ghz with less cache is faster


----------



## Kornowski

Nevakonaza said:


> Danny is this much better than AC7 pro? in your opinion?



Yeah, I think it's a lot better. This thing would keep your beers cool if you wanted it to 

Kuz, Nice! A Q6600, I want one


----------



## Shane

Kornowski said:


> Yeah, I think it's a lot better. This thing would keep your beers cool if you wanted it to
> 
> Kuz, Nice! A Q6600, I want one



dan just buy a Q6600 or Q6700,theyre a great price right now.

i dont think it will be long before i upgrade.


----------



## Geoff

The Q6600 isn't all that amazing, get the E8400!


----------



## ThatGuy16

If you get a good E8400 such as myself (lucky ) then you should be able to do 4.4Ghz for benchmarks on air!

Right now, 4.6 is as high as i can get mine. And believe it or not, its my motherboard that hitting its limit!


----------



## Geoff

ThatGuy16 said:


> If you get a good E8400 such as myself (lucky ) then you should be able to do 4.4Ghz for benchmarks on air!
> 
> Right now, 4.6 is as high as i can get mine. And believe it or not, its my motherboard that hitting its limit!



You should have gotten the E8500 @ 3.16GHz


----------



## ThatGuy16

[-0MEGA-];989459 said:
			
		

> You should have gotten the E8500 @ 3.16GHz



Believe it or not, the E8500's seems to be worse overclockers 

And at that the E8400's are a mixed bunch, on average they'll do 4.0Ghz stable at 1.35v. Mine does it at 1.23v .


----------



## Ramodkk

Lucky *donkey*!! 

I want one...


----------



## Kornowski

Nah, A Q6600 would do be fine!


----------



## lovely?

im getting 20 seconds right now at 3GHZ, ill be buying a xigmatek 120mm rifle cooler in a few weeks, then i'll pump it up to 3.4 ghz and REALLY see what this can do.


----------



## Shane

lovely? said:


> im getting 20 seconds right now at 3GHZ, ill be buying a xigmatek 120mm rifle cooler in a few weeks, then i'll pump it up to 3.4 ghz and REALLY see what this can do.



that doesnt seem right...i think i get around 22 seconds at 2.7Ghz


----------



## Kornowski

I just got 20.9 Seconds...


----------



## Ambushed

14.750s - Stock fans


----------



## bomberboysk

EDIT: Got my cpu stable @ 3.7Ghz, Here is the result


----------



## sokol

Here is Mine 11sec.


----------



## Respital

bomberboysk said:


> EDIT: Got my cpu stable @ 3.7Ghz, Here is the result



Mhmm...
That makes me want to buy a Q9450 even more.
I wasn't even expecting that much of an over clock possible from it.


----------



## bomberboysk

Q9450 clocks pretty well, i was stuck @ 3.4Ghz until nvidia came out with the p06 bios for the 790i, and its only a .1 increase in vcore in bios After vdroop its about 1.26 idle/1.206 load, ran prime95 small fft's stable for 8 hrs, id recommend it.


----------



## tidyboy21

I guess this puts me in 1st place.


----------



## zer0_c00l




----------



## Sir Travis D

Darnit kornowski, you beat my by .1 seconds. My laptop's 1m score is 21 seconds flat.


----------



## Kornowski

Good score, Travis 

Bomber. Wow


----------



## Sir Travis D

I downloaded superpi 1.1e, the first link from a google search of superpi. I noticed people have 1.5 mod or different versions, is my version different ?


----------



## Kesava

the mod version tells you the milliseconds instead of just the seconds


----------



## Sir Travis D

ill try it again with the mod, maybe i'll beat danny > : [

o.0 I got over 25 seconds this time with the mod ...

edit: 2nd time I got 21.8, so I don't think it's accurate..


----------



## Kesava

maybe cos you had different things running. its not different in any other way.


----------



## whizkidd

there's my comp in the attachment.


----------



## Kesava

your only supposed to do it to 1 million.
you did it to 32 million.


----------



## whizkidd

i felt like doing all of them.
either way...it gives more numbers.


----------



## f.i.t.h

This really needs to be updated
Mine:     13.65s


----------



## fade2green514

21 seconds
core 2 duo e6300 @ 2668


----------



## f.i.t.h

Omega, I pm'ed you an updated highscore list, use it if you wish.


----------



## Geoff

Scores updated.


Thanks F.i.T.H!


----------



## tidyboy21

I think that this is the best time that I'm gona get, not bad though hey  This is on air by the way.


----------



## jdbennet

512k (19 iterations) took 19s on my Pentium 4 HT 630 3ghz on XP Home.

The same on a Core2 T2350 1.86ghz took 14 seconds

considering that SuperPi apparently doesnt use threading it shows how much more efficient the core architecthure is compared to netburst


----------



## lovely?

use 1m, we use 1m so we can compare our scores easier.


----------



## Geoff

jdbennet said:


> 512k (19 iterations) took 19s on my Pentium 4 HT 630 3ghz on XP Home.
> 
> The same on a Core2 T2350 1.86ghz took 14 seconds
> 
> considering that SuperPi apparently doesnt use threading it shows how much more efficient the core architecthure is compared to netburst



Don't use 512K, use 1M as stated in the first post.


----------



## mac550

36 seconds for me


----------



## jdbennet

i got confused, will rerun


----------



## Mitch?

1M at 5 minutes 25 seconds on a 500 mhz Celeron with 256mb PC-100 ram!!
so take that, 21st century hardware.


----------



## vix

Hi Guys!

Just did a first run @ 4.26 GHz.  Not the top score, but I'm working on it...


----------



## f.i.t.h

^ Nice, keep going you may be the next to become number one.
I might as well post my most recent one up.


----------



## Cleric7x9

Cleric7x9 said:


> i went straight to 3.6 because i wanted a 1:1 ratio without overclocking RAM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there we go, with my name in notepad for those unbelievers out there. also, thats with the superpi mod



just curious why im not on the list


----------



## f.i.t.h

^ Sorry, i just updated from the last update date.
Did that make sense?
Yours seems to be before then.

I'm adding it too my list that I'm gonna keep updating.


----------



## fade2green514

Cleric7x9 said:


> just curious why im not on the list



how did you get 12 seconds at 2399mhz.. i have a core 2 at 2668 and only scored 21 seconds

btw: the superpi in the first post doesnt do milliseconds anymore. will update my score with milliseconds.

edit:




new score: 20.484 seconds, 2710mhz


----------



## Droogie




----------



## Respital

tidyboy21 said:


> I think that this is the best time that I'm gona get, not bad though hey  This is on air by the way.



Wow.
That's the fastest so i think thatguy16 should go buy some ln2 to compete lol.
How much air is that on anyways?
You got like some wind turbines on that thing or what?


----------



## fade2green514

thatguy16 : try lowering ram timings. i got about a fourth of a second out of lowering the timings from 5-5-5-15 to 4-4-4-12. could help some if its stable.


----------



## Geoff




----------



## ThatGuy16

Respital said:


> Wow.
> That's the fastest so i think thatguy16 should go buy some ln2 to compete lol.
> How much air is that on anyways?
> You got like some wind turbines on that thing or what?



i have gotten 10.02s at 4.7ghz, didn't get a screenshot though 

I'm in Pennsylvania right now, you wait till i get home


----------



## mep916

ThatGuy16 said:


> I'm in Pennsylvania right now, you wait till i get home





Yeah, I thought for sure you had a SuperPi at 4.7 GHz...


----------



## f.i.t.h

Almost at 13 seconds


----------



## Cleric7x9

fade2green514 said:


> how did you get 12 seconds at 2399mhz.. i have a core 2 at 2668 and only scored 21 seconds



well i was at 3.6Ghz, not 2.4Ghz. You are seeing a lowered multiplier because the CPU wasnt being used at the moment. also, the e8400 is better than the e6300 for reasons other than just clock speed.


----------



## fade2green514

Cleric7x9 said:


> well i was at 3.6Ghz, not 2.4Ghz. You are seeing a lowered multiplier because the CPU wasnt being used at the moment. also, the e8400 is better than the e6300 for reasons other than just clock speed.



its a core 2 duo. the processor has no difference except cache size and wire size. and even though it has a 300% of my processors cache size that should only make up about 5-10% (maximum) of any performance difference.

i can see it performing that well at 3.6ghz, but cpu-z tells us its at 2.4ghz. you should probably get a proper reading from it.


----------



## Cleric7x9

fade2green514 said:


> its a core 2 duo. the processor has no difference except cache size and wire size. and even though it has a 300% of my processors cache size that should only make up about 5-10% (maximum) of any performance difference.
> 
> i can see it performing that well at 3.6ghz, but cpu-z tells us its at 2.4ghz. you should probably get a proper reading from it.



sigh  

you should look up EIST and C1E.

it drops the clock speeds when the CPU is not being used. CPU-Z is correct, and so am i. you are wrong. the reading is proper.


----------



## mep916

Cleric is correct. EIST and C1E can be disabled in the BIOS.


----------



## Geoff

fade2green514 said:


> its a core 2 duo. the processor has no difference except cache size and wire size. and even though it has a 300% of my processors cache size that should only make up about 5-10% (maximum) of any performance difference.
> 
> i can see it performing that well at 3.6ghz, but cpu-z tells us its at 2.4ghz. you should probably get a proper reading from it.


Nope, clock for clock the E8xxx series will outperform the E6xxx series, they are newer, use a 45nm process, and a better performing architecture.

Also, C1E reduces the multiplier and voltage when the CPU isn't being used, you aren't seeing the actual clock speed that was used when the test was ran.


----------



## Cleric7x9

mep916 said:


> Cleric is correct. EIST and C1E can be disabled in the BIOS.





			
				[-0MEGA-];1038901 said:
			
		

> Nope, clock for clock the E8xxx series will outperform the E6xxx series, they are newer, use a 45nm process, and a better performing architecture.
> 
> Also, C1E reduces the multiplier and voltage when the CPU isn't being used, you aren't seeing the actual clock speed that was used when the test was ran.



thanks for the support guys


----------



## ThatGuy16

Just so i stay in first 






4.7Ghz, hopefully soon enough. Wish i had a screenshot when i got 10.02s, but it froze


----------



## jdbennet

13.0 seconds???????????????????? WTF - superpi must be broken or something

i ran it on a server with these specs:

2x X5365 Xeons (Quad Core @ 3.0GHz,  8MB Cache and  1333MHz FSB) - Server 2008 Enterprise x64 and 8gb ram

if superpi took advantage of SMP it would be like 1 second lol


----------



## skidude

On my new laptop. Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 2.83Ghz (stock)


----------



## Geoff

^^ Very nice!


----------



## bomberboysk

Edit: Was able to get her up to 3.9Ghz stable, 12.231, [email protected]


----------



## Mitch?




----------



## tidyboy21

ThatGuy16 said:


> Just so i stay in first
> 
> 4.7Ghz, hopefully soon enough. Wish i had a screenshot when i got 10.02s, but it froze



Oh, thanks a lot, lol. Only just beat me lol. My e8500 has gone back, the performance degraded too much. Some of these chips degrade in performance when you use over 1.45v. I think the chip I received was not too good any way, it needed 1.41v to get over 4 GHz. You are lucky to have such a great chip, congrats.


----------



## Mitch?




----------



## TruXter




----------



## fade2green514

fade2green514 said:


> how did you get 12 seconds at 2399mhz.. i have a core 2 at 2668 and only scored 21 seconds
> 
> btw: the superpi in the first post doesnt do milliseconds anymore. will update my score with milliseconds.
> 
> edit:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> new score: 20.484 seconds, 2710mhz



update plz


----------



## mep916




----------



## f.i.t.h

fade2green514 said:


> update plz


I have got an updated list (I update it every few days), if Omega wants it, ill PM it to him, but this list isn't updated that often.


----------



## e837c417e5b2e17f

Hehehe...






Host machine is an Athlon 64 X2 5000+, 2.8 GHz.


----------



## fade2green514

fade2green514 said:


> how did you get 12 seconds at 2399mhz.. i have a core 2 at 2668 and only scored 21 seconds
> 
> btw: the superpi in the first post doesnt do milliseconds anymore. will update my score with milliseconds.
> 
> edit:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> new score: 20.484 seconds, 2710mhz



bump!


----------



## Ramodkk

fade, I can't see your PI Score, your background is kinda in the way


----------



## Adam135

My new build  - 






Only 1GB of ram as the second module is faulty


----------



## Geoff

Here's mine at 3.45GHz.


----------



## fade2green514

cmon you can get past 3.45ghz with that cant you omega.. thats a 45nm


----------



## Geoff

fade2green514 said:


> cmon you can get past 3.45ghz with that cant you omega.. thats a 45nm


I'm leaving it here for now, I'm running into some issues when trying to adjust the voltage.


----------



## EndofAll

Here's mine E2180 @ 2900.3mhz (Currently stuck at 2.9, with vcore issues)


----------



## lovely?

EndofAll said:


> Here's mine E2180 @ 2900.3mhz (Currently stuck at 2.9, with vcore issues)



nice 1 endofall, what ever happened with your last computer, you never PM'ed the status?


----------



## Scubie67

[-0MEGA-];1049843 said:
			
		

> I'm leaving it here for now, I'm running into some issues when trying to adjust the voltage.



I figured the Q9550 would Oc higher than that especially with that board.Most Q9450's can beat that.Do you think it may have some conflicts with the MB Omega?


----------



## fade2green514

are you water cooling that Q9550?


----------



## Jerrick

I cant wait for my new build to be finished.


----------



## Geoff

Scubie67 said:


> I figured the Q9550 would Oc higher than that especially with that board.Most Q9450's can beat that.Do you think it may have some conflicts with the MB Omega?


Again, that is on stock voltage, I haven't raised it yet.



fade2green514 said:


> are you water cooling that Q9550?


Yes.


----------



## Scubie67

[-0MEGA-];1050089 said:
			
		

> Again, that is on stock voltage, I haven't raised it yet.
> 
> 
> Yes.[/QUOTE
> 
> Whoops must have missed that.Thats not bad then I guess.I was hoping you could hit  3.8 to 4.0 with the rampge Mb and Q9550,would be nice with a quad


----------



## Geoff

Scubie67 said:


> Whoops must have missed that.Thats not bad then I guess.I was hoping you could hit  3.8 to 4.0 with the rampge Mb and Q9550,would be nice with a quad


You're hope has come true.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Nice! how stable is it? I keep hearing sketchy overclocking results on the new quads. I want a Q9550, but it needs to do at least 4.0


----------



## Scubie67

[-0MEGA-];1050101 said:
			
		

> You're hope has come true.




 Sweet !... Have you gamed with it yet to compare with your E8400 and Q6600 builds?


----------



## Ambushed

That is insane.


----------



## Geoff

ThatGuy16 said:


> Nice! how stable is it? I keep hearing sketchy overclocking results on the new quads. I want a Q9550, but it needs to do at least 4.0





Scubie67 said:


> Sweet !... Have you gamed with it yet to compare with your E8400 and Q6600 builds?


Nope, not yet.  I need to get the perfect match between voltages and RAM timings.  4.0-4.1GHz seems to be the sweet spot, as it required a huge voltage bump to hit 4.3GHz, which isn't worth it for everyday use.  I will run 3DMark06, and if it passes that I will run some more stress tests.

A small update 







EDIT:  Woot!  I am now #3


----------



## Scubie67

[-0MEGA-];1050127 said:
			
		

> Nope, not yet.  I need to get the perfect match between voltages and RAM timings.  4.0-4.1GHz seems to be the sweet spot, as it required a huge voltage bump to hit 4.3GHz, which isn't worth it for everyday use.  I will run 3DMark06, and if it passes that I will run some more stress tests.
> 
> A small update
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT:  Woot!  I am now #3




Hehe..If you spent a little more money and got the Q9650 you might have #1 spot  

 Edit *  NM, LOL ...I forgot since you started this post you can have the # 1 spot anytime you want it .


----------



## Geoff

Scubie67 said:


> Edit *  NM, LOL ...I forgot since you started this post you can have the # 1 spot anytime you want it .


haha, I may just do that


----------



## fade2green514

lol just photoshop your picture to make it look legit. HOLY CRAP 3 seconds with a pentium 3!!!

lol who cares enough to spend the time i just benchmark it and show my real score..


----------



## mikesrex

an E8400 on a Gigabyte P45-DS3R motherboard that Gigabyte sent my buddy and I for testing.  Haven't really messed with it too much, but managed to hit 9's on air and GSkill DDR2 RAM


----------



## ThatGuy16

1.664v on air!? that chip won't last long, i try and limit myself at around 1.55 for benchmarks, and I'm on water.


----------



## EndofAll

*New score*

Finally got past the Vcore issue with a bios update. 






Cooler: Xigmatek S1283 HDT series./ OCZ Freeze compliant


----------



## fade2green514

ThatGuy16 said:


> 1.664v on air!? that chip won't last long, i try and limit myself at around 1.55 for benchmarks, and I'm on water.



yea, hes pushing it with that voltage, but im sure he didnt leave it there.. lol he just wanted to beat your score!

plus, he has chuck norris on his desktop. that made his benchmark go quite a bit faster anyways.


----------



## Geoff

That's not even Chuck Norris.


----------



## just a noob

i can't wait till i get a party on my desk lol, then i can beat you all


----------



## Ambushed

mikesrex said:


> an E8400 on a Gigabyte P45-DS3R motherboard that Gigabyte sent my buddy and I for testing.  Haven't really messed with it too much, but managed to hit 9's on air and GSkill DDR2 RAM



Thats now the top score!, grats.


----------



## mikesrex

ThatGuy16 said:


> 1.664v on air!? that chip won't last long, i try and limit myself at around 1.55 for benchmarks, and I'm on water.



I thought the whole point of superpi numbers was to see how quick of a time we can get.  My goal here is to run  a budget build on air and with DDR2.  The Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme works pretty well keeping the temps down.  When I'm not going for 9 sec superpis on air, this processor is running 460X9 and vcore is around 1.35 V.


----------



## Kornowski

[-0MEGA-];1051014 said:
			
		

> That's not even Chuck Norris.




Yeah. It is.


----------



## Geoff

Kornowski said:


> Yeah. It is.


No, it's an impersonator.


----------



## mikesrex

[-0MEGA-];1051096 said:
			
		

> No, it's an impersonator.



dang maybe I can get that thing to clock faster if I find a real pic of Chuck Norris.

When do I get my name on the #1 slot on the first post here?


----------



## Kornowski

[-0MEGA-];1051096 said:
			
		

> No, it's an impersonator.




You know this, how?


----------



## Geoff

Kornowski said:


> You know this, how?


It just doesn't look like him, this is another shot:







I mean that other photo could be, but I don't think it's him.


----------



## Scubie67

One thing about chuck is he would never do anything half a$$ed.He would never use a dual core(2) when he could have a Quad(4)   ."ducks from all the E8400 flames".


----------



## EndofAll

Whens my score going up?


----------



## Motoxrdude

[-0MEGA-];1051137 said:
			
		

> It just doesn't look like him, this is another shot:
> 
> I mean that other photo could be, but I don't think it's him.



It's chuck norris when he was a little younger.


----------



## mikesrex

[-0MEGA-];1051137 said:
			
		

> It just doesn't look like him, this is another shot:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean that other photo could be, but I don't think it's him.



I'm pretty sure that is Chuck Norris in the pic I posted.  He has been famous for several decades, after all.

When is the list updated?


----------



## fade2green514

yea he was younger in that picture. now hes all clean cut.


----------



## bubblescivic

mikesrex said:


> I'm pretty sure that is Chuck Norris in the pic I posted.  He has been famous for several decades, after all.
> 
> When is the list updated?



I would like to know as well because the 9.968s SuperPi 1M time was done on my G.Skill/Gigabyte Sponsored computer. Mike and I have spent countless hours working on our rigs and tuning them to do crazy stuff like this.


----------



## Geoff

mikesrex said:


> When is the list updated?


Hopefully sometime by next month, I actually haven't updated it for a while, people have been kind enough to send me PM's with the updated info, then I edit the post.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Ambushed said:


> Thats now the top score!, grats.



great, now i have to beat it.. i can do 4.65Ghz with 1.47v :muahahaha:

you wait, its coming!


----------



## Geoff

Well I can build a multi-threaded version that utilizes all 4 cores, then what?!?!?


----------



## ThatGuy16

Bring it!!


----------



## mikesrex

ThatGuy16 said:


> great, now i have to beat it.. i can do 4.65Ghz with 1.47v :muahahaha:
> 
> you wait, its coming!



Keep us posted how it goes.  some processors clock very well with lower voltages than others.  I've heard the E0 stepping E8400's will be able to do higher clocks 24/7 than the C0's.


----------



## Scubie67

Wow I thought the X48 were the highest OC MB.I didnt know a P45 Mb would Oc like that.I guess if your not planning to crossfire it might be a good option?


----------



## mikesrex

Scubie67 said:


> Wow I thought the X48 were the highest OC MB.I didnt know a P45 Mb would Oc like that.I guess if your not planning to crossfire it might be a good option?



the Gigabyte board we are using will Crossfire


----------



## Scubie67

mikesrex said:


> the Gigabyte board we are using will Crossfire




Arent the P45 boards x8 ,not full x 16 crossfire though?


----------



## bubblescivic

ThatGuy16 said:


> great, now i have to beat it.. i can do 4.65Ghz with 1.47v :muahahaha:
> 
> you wait, its coming!



you have a nice processor there, shame it hasn't run 9s superpi yet. 



			
				[-0MEGA-];1051525 said:
			
		

> Well I can build a multi-threaded version that utilizes all 4 cores, then what?!?!?



then we will do our best to beat the score that we have already set using dual clovers or similar equipment



Scubie67 said:


> Arent the P45 boards x8 ,not full x 16 crossfire though?



mine is crossfire compatible, but the second slot is only PCIe 8x. no worries, because if i cared that much about 3d performance i wouldn't have a 9s superpi time.


----------



## houseofbugs

I believe I just took 3rd place.






Mark my word ill be in first once my OG project is done. (see my thread in CPU and OC)


----------



## just a noob

wait until i get a ln2 pot and an e8600 or something, lol 5ghz+


----------



## Ambushed

All these new comers ares blowing us away.


----------



## bubblescivic

just a noob said:


> wait until i get a ln2 pot and an e8600 or something, lol 5ghz+



something that's in the works... we know the RAM and motherboard is capable...




















Ambushed said:


> All these new comers ares blowing us away.



we don't mean to try to just come in and post our stuff and leave, we want to strive for a better score even if it means taking an acceptable risk to reap the reward of being in the top spot.


----------



## just a noob

seems to me i saw something like that over at xtreme systems(i mean that graphing paper and whatnot) but, i can't seem to locate a metal lathe anywhere, so i can't make a pot, maybe i'll just have to make due with a tin can and some dry ice


----------



## bubblescivic

just a noob said:


> seems to me i saw something like that over at xtreme systems(i mean that graphing paper and whatnot) but, i can't seem to locate a metal lathe anywhere, so i can't make a pot, maybe i'll just have to make due with a tin can and some dry ice



LOL that was my post i go by an0nym0us on XS


----------



## lovely?

bubblescivic said:


> something that's in the works... we know the RAM and motherboard is capable...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we don't mean to try to just come in and post our stuff and leave, we want to strive for a better score even if it means taking an acceptable risk to reap the reward of being in the top spot.


im guessing for the best thermal transfer, you should go for a square inside, and cut the dry ice into matching sticks, so that the most possible dry ice contacts the metal.


----------



## Yeti

lovely? said:
			
		

> im guessing for the best thermal transfer, you should go for a square inside, and cut the dry ice into matching sticks, so that the most possible dry ice contacts the metal.


A square inside would be hard to machine since something this size would be done on a lathe, especially if it is a single piece.  To get a more even heat distribution acetone, or some other low-freezing-point liquid, is added to the dry ice which is typically crushed.


----------



## houseofbugs

So when is my score getting put on the first post?


----------



## bubblescivic

Yeti said:


> A square inside would be hard to machine since something this size would be done on a lathe, especially if it is a single piece.  To get a more even heat distribution acetone, or some other low-freezing-point liquid, is added to the dry ice which is typically crushed.


precisely what i was going to say. also, the square really wouldn't really be beneficial at all and just add to labor costs since it would require CNC instead of just a lathe. 



houseofbugs said:


> So when is my score getting put on the first post?


i'm wondering that myself.


----------



## just a noob

give it a month or so


----------



## newguy5

i honestly don't understand the necessity to be on the top spot.  it's not like you're going to get a raise at your job for this...

i'm still at number 20ish and i just have a stock (aka not OC'd) e6750 that i've had for 9+ months.  pretty crazy only 20ish people have beat me to be honest.  clearly there are only like 20 people here that actually care to be on the top 

/rant off


----------



## bubblescivic

newguy5 said:


> i honestly don't understand the necessity to be on the top spot.  it's not like you're going to get a raise at your job for this...
> 
> i'm still at number 20ish and i just have a stock (aka not OC'd) e6750 that i've had for 9+ months.  pretty crazy only 20ish people have beat me to be honest.  clearly there are only like 20 people here that actually care to be on the top
> 
> /rant off



it's not really about holding the top spot, it's about knowing that your cpu on air cooling ran the benchmark 4/10 of a second faster than anyone else here. why do people drag race or race bikes? i don't know where you're from, but down here in Texas when you set out to do something... you make sure it's done right and to the best of your ability. you've always gotta strive to be better, whether it's in benchmarking or whatever other hobby you're in to.


----------



## Cleric7x9

bubblescivic said:


> it's not really about holding the top spot, it's about knowing that your cpu on air cooling ran the benchmark 4/10 of a second faster than anyone else here. why do people drag race or race bikes? i don't know where you're from, but down here in Texas when you set out to do something... you make sure it's done right and to the best of your ability. you've always gotta strive to be better, whether it's in benchmarking or whatever other hobby you're in to.



lulz somebody didnt get hugged enough as a child


----------



## bomberboysk

_JUST_ under 12 seconds


----------



## Scubie67

bomberboysk said:


> _JUST_ under 12 seconds



Wow that is really good with a Q9450 on Air.Hmm ...wonder what a Q9650 would do?


----------



## bomberboysk

Scubie67 said:


> Wow that is really good with a Q9450 on Air.Hmm ...wonder what a Q9650 would do?



I swear i could get it to an even 4Ghz if the vdroop on this board wasnt so bad.... Maybe ill have to pick up a 50k VR and do the vdroop mod on it.


----------



## Okedokey

bomberboysk said:


> I swear i could get it to an even 4Ghz if the vdroop on this board wasnt so bad.... Maybe ill have to pick up a 50k VR and do the vdroop mod on it.



not being rude, but how does a 15 yr old kid afford your system.


----------



## Cleric7x9

bigfellla said:


> not being rude, but how does a 15 yr old kid afford your system.



parents


----------



## bomberboysk

Cleric7x9 said:


> parents



Actually i saved up about 1.5k(including what i had in the bank)... Mom chipped in the rest since i basically live at my dads.


----------



## Ramodkk

bigfellla said:


> not being rude, but how does a 15 yr old kid afford your system.



There's this thing called "work"...


----------



## fade2green514

O_O

that's impressive. its not mine though, lol

he used air cooling and didn't overvolt! =)


----------



## newguy5

bubblescivic said:


> it's not really about holding the top spot, it's about knowing that your cpu on air cooling ran the benchmark 4/10 of a second faster than anyone else here. why do people drag race or race bikes? i don't know where you're from, but down here in Texas when you set out to do something... you make sure it's done right and to the best of your ability. you've always gotta strive to be better, whether it's in benchmarking or whatever other hobby you're in to.



i live in dallas and am from texas.  not sure how that mentality has anything whatsoever to do with texas though.


----------



## zer0_c00l




----------



## bomberboysk

Put it down to 2 cores to get a run in @ 3996Mhz.


----------



## bubblescivic

fade2green514 said:


> O_O
> 
> that's impressive. its not mine though, lol
> 
> he used air cooling and didn't overvolt! =)



in cpu-z it shows a 1.376vCore meaning he did overvolt. mikesrex and i also used air cooling, i bet that guy can hit 520x9 and yield the same result mike and i did. we're currently in the process of building a Gigabyte/G.Skill ram combo with DDR3 that should smash our previous attempt of 9.968s.


----------



## mikesrex

fade2green514 said:


> http://www.overclock.net/attachments/intel-cpus/67425d1204687304-holy-crap-i-love-cpu-untitled.jpg
> 
> O_O
> 
> that's impressive. its not mine though, lol
> 
> he used air cooling and didn't overvolt! =)



negative ghostrider the pattern is full, voltage is significantly higher than stock.


----------



## Geoff

zer0_c00l said:


>


You need to get SuperPi Mod.


----------



## bubblescivic

newguy5 said:


> i live in dallas and am from texas.  not sure how that mentality has anything whatsoever to do with texas though.



I guess down here in Southeast/East Texas we have a little more pride in what we do. I've never been out that way, but I suspect that Dallas folks are proud of what they do out there too. I'd like to attend Quakecon with some of my friends, hopefully we'll register and go next year. I'll probably be rockin a Nehalem by then though.


----------



## /\E

newguy5 said:


> i live in dallas and am from texas.  not sure how that mentality has anything whatsoever to do with texas though.



I've noticed it myself, living in Dallas... And I've been in other parts of Texas but, the people of Texas have more of a competitive attitude about things. It's nothing to be ashamed of or brag about, it's just there...


----------



## zer0_c00l

There ya are OMEGA with mod


----------



## funkysnair

is this any good?????


----------



## funkysnair

at 3.6ghz 1.480v on water


----------



## f.i.t.h

I forgot that i never posted this one.
This was as far as i got before needing to raise the voltage, so i set it back to stock.

PS: Omega, I pmed you the updated scores.


----------



## Geoff

Scores updated, thanks again f.i.t.h!


----------



## ThatGuy16

Its on now! i think my E8400 is getting volt hungry


----------



## Gareth

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 at 2.84GHz


----------



## Shadowhunter

*Pentium D 820 45 Seconds*








Stock clock Pentium D 820, 45 seconds.


----------



## mikesrex

ThatGuy16 said:


> Its on now! i think my E8400 is getting volt hungry








I'm your huckleberry


----------



## mep916

lol.


----------



## bubblescivic

lets do this "tick tock" style. that guy... it's your turn to "tock" then it will be our turn to tick once again.


----------



## mikesrex

bubblescivic said:


> lets do this "tick tock" style. that guy... it's your turn to "tock" then it will be our turn to tick once again.



and this time I got DDR3 RAM to play with


----------



## Scubie67

bubblescivic said:


> lets do this "tick tock" style. that guy... it's your turn to "tock" then it will be our turn to tick once again.



 I sense this competition will end with some new cpu purchases from newegg


----------



## just a noob

hehe i can't wait until winter, i can bench on air at -20*F


----------



## alexyu

Nothing special, 36sec.


----------



## ThatGuy16

mikesrex said:


> I'm your huckleberry



LOL 

Now that i have a couple days off work, maybe i can start some benching


----------



## mep916

ThatGuy16 said:


> Now that i have a couple days off work, maybe i can start some benching



Smoke 'em, thatguy.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Ill try more later 

I got up to 4.707Ghz with 1.535v. But my ram, and or board is giving me a headache. I got 10.03x secs. But anything above 4.65ghz, i have to raise my performance level on my ram, so it gives me more Ghz but slower PI time. So basically, 4.7ghz would be the same time as 4.68ghz..

I haven't given up yet, I'd like to see someone get 4.7 at that voltage


----------



## just a noob

maybe i should use an old pentium 4 and start ramming 1.9v through it to get to 8ghz lol


----------



## Kornowski

I dare you to get over 5Ghz... That's a dare!


----------



## ThatGuy16

Kornowski said:


> I dare you to get over 5Ghz... That's a dare!



Don't you dare me!


----------



## Kornowski

I *DOUBLE* dare you!


----------



## Geoff

I TRIPLE DOG dare you!


----------



## Scubie67

I wonder if a processor will give some warning signs other than heat before it croaks?


----------



## [trs]ALUMINUM

Here is my score:


----------



## ThatGuy16

[-0MEGA-];1055307 said:
			
		

> I TRIPLE DOG dare you!



NO!!! not the the *TRIPLE DOG *dare!!


----------



## mikesrex

ThatGuy16 said:


> Ill try more later
> 
> I got up to 4.707Ghz with 1.535v. But my ram, and or board is giving me a headache. I got 10.03x secs. But anything above 4.65ghz, i have to raise my performance level on my ram, so it gives me more Ghz but slower PI time. So basically, 4.7ghz would be the same time as 4.68ghz..
> 
> I haven't given up yet, I'd like to see someone get 4.7 at that voltage



what timings are you running on the RAM?  tighter timings will yield better results in superpi, maybe you could tighten them up and hit 9's?

The main reason I wanted to get some 9's out of the E8400 on air with DDR2 RAM is that someone told me it couldn't be done.  With water I'm sure you can get some mid 9's after testing.  Keep us posted how it goes!


----------



## ThatGuy16

mikesrex said:


> what timings are you running on the RAM?  tighter timings will yield better results in superpi, maybe you could tighten them up and hit 9's?
> 
> The main reason I wanted to get some 9's out of the E8400 on air with DDR2 RAM is that someone told me it couldn't be done.  With water I'm sure you can get some mid 9's after testing.  Keep us posted how it goes!



I have hit 9's before, but froze taking a screen shot 

My timings are fine, i have played with them. The only thing that lets me hit 4.66+Ghz is setting the performance level for my ram to 10 or above. (it should be 7, if it were at 7 then i would hit sub-10s at ~4.66Ghz). The thing is, with lower performance level (faster) my MCH voltage needs to go up in order for it to boot. Well, the max voltage i can set for it in bios is +0.375v which isn't enough when i hit 520+ FSB

In the end, i belive i'm hitting my boards limits


----------



## mikesrex

ThatGuy16 said:


> I have hit 9's before, but froze taking a screen shot
> 
> My timings are fine, i have played with them. The only thing that lets me hit 4.66+Ghz is setting the performance level for my ram to 10 or above. (it should be 7, if it were at 7 then i would hit sub-10s at ~4.66Ghz). The thing is, with lower performance level (faster) my MCH voltage needs to go up in order for it to boot. Well, the max voltage i can set for it in bios is +0.375v which isn't enough when i hit 520+ FSB
> 
> In the end, i belive i'm hitting my boards limits



isn't the X38 supposed to be a better board than the P45?


----------



## ThatGuy16

mikesrex said:


> isn't the X38 supposed to be a better board than the P45?



Yeah, it is. The X38 and X48 are the same chip. Only the X48s are higher "binned"

I need to update my bios again though, that would probably help. Last time i updated, i couldn't get above 4.5Ghz. After the update... well i got to 4.7


----------



## just a noob

get cellshock ram, people get insanely nice clocks out of it, i've only found one place that actully sells it though, 10 dollar postage on the stupid sticks of ram, though


----------



## bubblescivic

mikesrex said:


> isn't the X38 supposed to be a better board than the P45?



this just goes to show that money doesn't actually buy better performance. the X series boards are nice, but i honestly can't see the point in spending more than $150 bucks on a good motherboard since Gigabyte provides so many good boards at that price point. i mean he's got a faster clock speed, just as good of ram... etc, the biggest difference is the northbridge. P45 is a monster.


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

ThatGuy16 said:


> I got up to 4.707Ghz with 1.535v.
> 
> I haven't given up yet, I'd like to see someone get 4.7 at that voltage



you have an unbelievable chip, no doubt. however, wolfdales just got a new E0 revision that can also clock really high with relatively low vcore. e8600 E0 does 4.4ghz without a sweat at around 1.3x vcore, and some got clocks higher than 6.0ghz using L2N. i guess new one extra multiplier helps, but it's mainly the E0.

i'm currently waiting about a month for all the current revisions to be depleted from stock, then i'll buy myself a new e8500 with E0


----------



## bubblescivic

WhiteFireDragon said:


> you have an unbelievable chip, no doubt. however, wolfdales just got a new E0 revision that can also clock really high with relatively low vcore. e8600 E0 does 4.4ghz without a sweat at around 1.3x vcore, and some got clocks higher than 6.0ghz using L2N. i guess new one extra multiplier helps, but it's mainly the E0.
> 
> i'm currently waiting about a month for all the current revisions to be depleted from stock, then i'll buy myself a new e8500 with E0



i'd love to get my hands on an E0 stepping cpu, that and a 45nm quad as well. i guess i'll have to wait til after my HTPC & mATX builds.


----------



## zer0_c00l




----------



## bubblescivic

zer0_c00l said:


>



tighten up those timings soldier! should net you a few tenths at 4-4-4-12 if your ram can do it.


----------



## Geoff

bubblescivic said:


> tighten up those timings soldier! should net you a few tenths at 4-4-4-12 if your ram can do it.


It's DDR3 remember.


----------



## zer0_c00l

tighten up those timings soldier! should net you a few tenths at 4-4-4-12 if your ram can do it.[/QUOTE]

ive tried wont post lol


----------



## bubblescivic

[-0MEGA-];1059162 said:
			
		

> It's DDR3 remember.


yeah i forgot. damn... what's up with these ddr3 machines not putting up numbers. we got one to like 10.1xx seconds but no 9s yet. 



zer0_c00l said:


> tighten up those timings soldier! should net you a few tenths at 4-4-4-12 if your ram can do it.



ive tried wont post lol[/QUOTE]

yeah i just realized your ram wasn't ddr2. i guess just shoot for max fsb and cross your fingers.


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

here's mine. nothing special, 19.312sec with e2180 @ 3200


----------



## bubblescivic

WhiteFireDragon said:


> here's mine. nothing special, 19.312sec with e2180 @ 3200



nice clock for an e2180... is that the max that you've gotten out of the cpu? i ask bc i will have one to fool with for a day or two before it's doomed to run at stock clock in an HTPC case for my gf's new 32" LCD TV


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

bubblescivic said:


> nice clock for an e2180... is that the max that you've gotten out of the cpu? i ask bc i will have one to fool with for a day or two before it's doomed to run at stock clock in an HTPC case for my gf's new 32" LCD TV



i tinkered around with it a little. i've OC'ed it up to 3.5ghz, but have not tested any higher because temps were not acceptable on stock cooler. it seems to have an fsb wall of 400, so theoretically it should be able to reach 4ghz (400x10) if temps  were not a problem. at the stock 2.0ghz, it undervolts to only .98v set in bios.


----------



## zer0_c00l

WhiteFireDragon said:


> i tinkered around with it a little. i've OC'ed it up to 3.5ghz, but have not tested any higher because temps were not acceptable on stock cooler. it seems to have an fsb wall of 400, so theoretically it should be able to reach 4ghz (400x10) if temps  were not a problem. at the stock 2.0ghz, it undervolts to only .98v set in bios.



go buy a cooler!!!! and share


----------



## Fear_Of_Dreams

I dont even need to post a screen cuz im not even on the charts:

41 seconds.


----------



## R41Z3N

I get the same 38 or 39 seconds on my stock of 2.2Ghz, then oc at 2.6 I still get 38 or 39... Is this not enough of an overclock or is there something else?


----------



## zer0_c00l

R41Z3N said:


> I get the same 38 or 39 seconds on my stock of 2.2Ghz, then oc at 2.6 I still get 38 or 39... Is this not enough of an overclock or is there something else?



well AMD cpu's arent great at the Pi...they are good!!!  but not at bench programs


----------



## Fear_Of_Dreams

zer0_c00l said:


> well AMD cpu's arent great at the Pi...they are good!!!  but not at bench programs



And thats why i love them 

They are always there when the REAL task needs to be done!


----------



## zer0_c00l

Fear_Of_Dreams said:


> And thats why i love them
> 
> They are always there when the REAL task needs to be done!



nothing wrong with AMD....i own many


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

R41Z3N said:


> I get the same 38 or 39 seconds on my stock of 2.2Ghz, then oc at 2.6 I still get 38 or 39... Is this not enough of an overclock or is there something else?



try to disable all the background programs like anti viruses when benchmarking


----------



## Fear_Of_Dreams

WhiteFireDragon said:


> try to disable all the background programs like anti viruses when benchmarking



That wont help with an AMD system lol. 

Iv ran super pi in safe mode and got the same score.

The wonders of 100mhz:


----------



## bubblescivic

Scubie67 said:


> I sense this competition will end with some new cpu purchases from newegg



damn right, i'm waiting for nehalem



Fear_Of_Dreams said:


> That wont help with an AMD system lol.



ROFL!


----------



## Jerrick

With superPI I get around 20 seconds. With another program I can do 1m in 1.03 seconds. Funny. =p

Ill OC up to 3ghz and see if I ccan get myself higher up on the list.


----------



## bubblescivic

Jerrick said:


> With superPI I get around 20 seconds. With another program I can do 1m in 1.03 seconds. Funny. =p
> 
> Ill OC up to 3ghz and see if I ccan get myself higher up on the list.



yeah there are other programs that can test it, but SuperPi has a vast database of all kinds of cpus/setups to compare your results with. you can go to hwbot and look at all kinds of records on SuperPi. what processor/motherboard/ram are you running? and cooling?


----------



## pies

11s at 4.0ghz


----------



## Shane

pies said:


> 11s at 4.0ghz


very nice


----------



## DirtyD86

just got 12.04 @ 4.0ghz


----------



## just a noob

wonder what an e8600 at 5ghz could get, oh well, thats another day when i have more cash


----------



## PsychoRobot

*15 sec with a q9550*

i don't know why it isn't faster


----------



## 2048Megabytes

Last time I did this calculation was on 12-6-2007.  I got 37 seconds using my AMD Athlon 4000+ Single-Core Processor running at 2.4 gigahertz using the 1 megabyte calculation. 

Since I upgraded my system I decided to run it again.  The new processor is an AMD Athlon 4600+ Dual-Core (2.4 gigahertz).  Ran it a few times and 35 seconds was the best score using the 1 megabyte calculation.  Apparently all the calculations are just run with a single core since the score is about the same as the single-core processor.


----------



## fade2green514

lol there are 12 people in the other forums that i normally browse through that beat the top score here.

it's really too bad that i can't afford a good system with great cooling lol

the top score on that forum was 7.719s.. of course he was above 6ghz

my processor only scores around 17 seconds though. still got my old e6300 running in a computer at my aunts house, with my old gigabyte motherboard and 7800gt gpu.


----------



## DirtyD86

finally got 4.0 rock solid stable


----------



## Cleric7x9

DirtyD86 said:


> finally got 4.0 rock solid stable :D[/QUOTE]
> 
> wow, great temps man!


----------



## DirtyD86

Cleric7x9 said:


> wow, great temps man!



yeah the highest its gone is 61. i was hoping to stay in the id 50s but i think i can live with it. for being air cooled i guess its actually pretty decent


----------



## Kornowski

Will get around to OC'ing it. Oh, and obviously I have EIST still turned on, so it downclocks when not being used. Like just taking a screenshot;


----------



## f.i.t.h

11.716 Seconds


----------



## sgtsampay

And here is mine:





Note: Why isn't my picture showing up?...


----------



## Casie

E6600 @ 3.38 15.172 ~sweet~


----------



## bubblescivic

fade2green514 said:


> lol there are 12 people in the other forums that i normally browse through that beat the top score here.
> 
> it's really too bad that i can't afford a good system with great cooling lol
> 
> the top score on that forum was 7.719s.. of course he was above 6ghz
> 
> my processor only scores around 17 seconds though. still got my old e6300 running in a computer at my aunts house, with my old gigabyte motherboard and 7800gt gpu.



yeah, but we're talking about guys with cascades/LN2 right? AFAIK all the scores here are on air/water. i think i'm going to sell off one of my rigs to go with a nehalem when it officially drops.



f.i.t.h said:


> 11.716 Seconds



nice... jack that FSB up, i wanna see what x38 will do!



sgtsampay said:


> And here is mine:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note: Why isn't my picture showing up?...


maybe add http:// ?


----------



## Darkserge

Woot overclocked E2220 beat ALL AMD CPU!


----------



## f.i.t.h

bubblescivic said:


> nice... jack that FSB up, i wanna see what x38 will do!



I havent tried getting over 4GHz (445MHz FSB).

I'll need to get a new cooler if I try, its hitting 70*C under load, but usually under load it doesnt go above 66*C.

I dont even know my idle temps, its been so long since my rig has been idle.


----------



## Geoff




----------



## f.i.t.h

^ Damn, you always get ahead of me. Nice work though.
BTW. I attached some new high scores, sorry if I missed anybody.


----------



## ThatGuy16

f.i.t.h said:


> I havent tried getting over 4GHz (445MHz FSB).
> 
> I'll need to get a new cooler if I try, its hitting 70*C under load, but usually under load it doesnt go above 66*C.
> 
> I dont even know my idle temps, its been so long since my rig has been idle.



I've gotten my X38-DS4 up to 524 FSB, though i haven't dropped my multiplier on my CPU to test the board for max FSB.


----------



## Geoff

Scores updated thanks to f.i.t.h!


----------



## Bob Jeffery

We should bring this thread back to life. I think there is a multi-threaded super pi beta somewhere. I cant find a working download link for it though. Its called "multi-pi".


----------



## Geoff

Yes there are a few multi-core version of SuperPi, but it's just not the same.  Thanks for bringing the thread back to life!


----------



## Shane

wow just ran super pi for 1m and got 16s im shocked but happy 

i have that intel power saving thing on so ignore the 2142mhz im running at 3.2Ghz







shame Superpi doesnt take advantage of multi core or we would see these quad scores much hight than faster clocked duals i think?


----------



## Bob Jeffery

THIS IS SPARTAAAAAA!!!!!!! lol for some reason my print screen quality is always bad....


----------



## Mitch?

finally got it to run stable at 3.5ghz and i used my old link to the non-modded super pi, so it's just 26 seconds, but that latter one was just barely 24 seconds (19th), and it was goin like 1.3 seconds/step. it's running pretty warm right now, so i figured i'd let it cool off whenever my room did to get it just right.


----------



## Intel_man

Hmm... I'm surprised that my 6300 does 30 seconds at stock. Hmm.. the picture seems to say 1.60GHz but it's really 1.86 when in use.


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

wow you guys are chicken. benching under 1.30v lol. i run 1.4 - 1.45v 24/7 100% load crunching for wolfdales. short session benches get up to 1.6v


----------



## Intel_man

WhiteFireDragon said:


> wow you guys are chicken. benching under 1.30v lol. i run 1.4 - 1.45v 24/7 100% load crunching for wolfdales. short session benches get up to 1.6v



My mobo's HP. I can't do anything about it atm.


----------



## Shane

[-0MEGA-];1116483 said:
			
		

> Scores updated thanks to f.i.t.h!



you forgot me lol


----------



## mac550

ill push it higher when i get time




Omega can you update the list in your OP



Intel_man said:


> Hmm... I'm surprised that my 6300 does 30 seconds at stock. Hmm.. the picture seems to say 1.60GHz but it's really 1.86 when in use.



how did you get XP to look like windows 7?


----------



## Michael

Michael said:


> Here's mine:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I make the list?



I still haven't been added to the list? 

-Michael


----------



## Shane

mac550 said:


> ill push it higher when i get time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omega can you update the list in your OP
> 
> [/URL]



Thats weird....im running at 3.2Ghz and get the same 16 seconds?


----------



## mac550

wtf? how does that work?


----------



## Geoff

mac550 said:


> wtf? how does that work?


Several possibilities, it could be that your FSB is higher, memory speed is faster, or that his at 3.6GHz simply isn't as stable.


----------



## Intel_man

mac550 said:


> *how did you get XP to look like windows 7?*



Windowsblind themes on Deviant Art.


P.S. I'm still a bit surprised at my CPU's performance. It's @1.86 and is as fast as a 3.3GHz E6300.


----------



## Kornowski

[-0MEGA-];1151144 said:
			
		

> Several possibilities, it could be that your FSB is higher, memory speed is faster, or that his at 3.6GHz simply isn't as stable.



Is a high FSB bad though?


----------



## Geoff

Kornowski said:


> Is a high FSB bad though?


It should be a good thing unless it's causing some sort of instability, since the FSB can only be so high.


----------



## mx344

amd 5200+ @ 2.945 ghz  32 sec.


----------



## Shane

mac550 said:


> wtf? how does that work?



look back on page 69 of this thread,mines posted up at 16 seconds,and i have a slower FSB so i dunno lol.


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

i just took first place . so far it's 9.907s, but i'm working for lower. will post screenshot in a bit.


----------



## mac550

[-0MEGA-];1151562 said:
			
		

> It should be a good thing unless it's causing some sort of instability, since the FSB can only be so high.



i will be doing a overclocking session when i get watercooling so ill have time to get it running stable. i think the problem is the FSB speed, it was at 1800.
*http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4137782.stm*


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

*9.875s*, it's just a quick run so not the healthiest voltages because i have not tuned everything in BIOS yet.


----------



## bubblescivic

WhiteFireDragon said:


> *9.875s*, it's just a quick run so not the healthiest voltages because i have not tuned everything in BIOS yet.



nice score! damn dude, i wish i had a reason to go to E8500/E8600, but i can't justify spending hundreds to get 93/100 seconds faster than my E8400. i7 for me all the way. is that on air cooling? what's your complete setup?


----------



## just a noob

whitefire, buy a k|ngp|n f1 pot and do ln2 on it, then i'll really congradulate you :S


----------



## Shane

omg WhiteFireDragon thats some serius overclocking   you done there,dont like the voltage though


----------



## just a noob

thats not very extreme at all, not where he comes from anyway  average overclock for an e8600 over there is probably close to 5.7ghz(benchmarked at least)


----------



## Masterfulks

54 seconds on my p4 2.6ghz dell.

My i7 system should be here any minute. This should be a quick fun test.


----------



## Dystopia

well, I'm waitin for my proc to come in, then i'll run it.

Jack, i like your picture!


----------



## Masterfulks

14 seconds on my i7 920.


----------



## Intel_man

Masterfulks said:


> 14 seconds on my i7 920.



You need screenshots for proof or OMEGA isn't going to post it on there.


----------



## Michael

Here's an updated SuperPi reading of my desktop:






Here is the SuperPi score of my laptop:






I downloaded the SuperPi linked in the first post, but it doesn't show milliseconds.. 

-Michael


----------



## Masterfulks

Intel_man said:


> You need screenshots for proof or OMEGA isn't going to post it on there.



What nobody takes anybodies word on the internet anymore!


----------



## Intel_man

Masterfulks said:


> What nobody takes anybodies word on the internet anymore!



For all I know, I can say my E6300 at stock 1.86 only takes 1 second to calculate it. You need proof. Not that I don't believe you but hell... it's the interwebz.


----------



## Masterfulks

Ok here it is...


----------



## KevinKevin




----------



## Geoff

I need to find where I left off, which is going to be the biggest issue.

Anyways, here's mine:


----------



## Bob Jeffery

KevinKevin said:


>



Is that the new 65nm AMD 6000 x2? Make sure you aren't doing anything in the background because I can do it in 31 seconds.


----------



## Ramodkk

Kinda weird that the top two have same processor at same frequency and got exactly same score...


----------



## mep916

ramodkk said:


> Kinda weird that the top two have same processor at same frequency and got exactly same score...


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

just a noob said:


> thats not very extreme at all, not where he comes from anyway  average overclock for an e8600 over there is probably close to 5.7ghz(benchmarked at least)



that's right, this is nothing to applaud for. it was just a quick run on air to test the potentials. this specific batch is good on air, but a real clocker on ln2/cascade/dice. this specific chip already tested for over 6.2ghz, but i dont have any ln2 right now. and how'd you know i was from XS? you must be looking at user names here and over there


----------



## mep916

WhiteFireDragon said:


> and how'd you know i was from XS?



http://www.computerforum.com/129901-anyone-here-xtremesystems-xs.html


----------



## Geoff

ramodkk said:


> Kinda weird that the top two have same processor at same frequency and got exactly same score...


I think so to...  maybe one just copied the screenshot from the other?  Which one should I remove?


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

ramodkk said:


> Kinda weird that the top two have same processor at same frequency and got exactly same score...



i think i might be able to duplicate those numbers too. just gotta figure out the memory timing and dividers 



mep916 said:


> http://www.computerforum.com/129901-anyone-here-xtremesystems-xs.html



wow you still remember that one specific thread?


----------



## just a noob

i think mep is also over there at xs


----------



## wiwazevedo

i used the link on the first page and its not giving me any decimals...


----------



## Mitch?

wiwazevedo said:


> i used the link on the first page and its not giving me any decimals...



just google ' super pi 1.5 mod '


----------



## CdnAudiophile

Woot! fastest Quad Core score!! here is my results @4ghz


----------



## Shane

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Woot! fastest Quad Core score!! here is my results @4ghz



damn thats fast! very nice


----------



## Mitch?

I'll be getting my 7750 soon 
We'll see how the new architecture helps out in Super Pi


----------



## El DJ

29.688 seconds.
AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ @ 3009





WOOT 2ND AMD!


----------



## Mitch?

you'll be the 3rd or 4th (my 5000, my 5400, and one more ahead of me) 
4th if he keeps the 5000+'s score when my 5400 goes on.
5th soon, when i get my 7750


----------



## El DJ

Mr. Johanssen said:


> you'll be the 3rd or 4th (my 5000, my 5400, and one more ahead of me)
> 4th if he keeps the 5000+'s score when my 5400 goes on.
> 5th soon, when i get my 7750


Ah, didn't read the post right.
Well, I did alot better than I thought I would, from about 38 seconds stock, so now it's time for me to aim for that number 1 AMD spot. =P


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

it's amazing how efficient clock for clock the i7's are. anyways, i did some mild tuning in BIOS but instead of trying to lower the vcore, i kept vcore the same and raised the clocks instead. *9.702s*


----------



## ThatGuy16

Nice, those E0s are nice clockers. What cooling were you on?


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

ran it on air. water loop is not complete yet, and no ln2 for some extreme numbers


----------



## ThatGuy16

"Burn baby burn..!"


----------



## Shane

dont like that voltage WhiteFireDragon  whast your load temps?


----------



## CdnAudiophile

WhiteFireDragon said:


> it's amazing how efficient clock for clock the i7's are. anyways, i did some mild tuning in BIOS but instead of trying to lower the vcore, i kept vcore the same and raised the clocks instead. *9.702s*



Great score man. Could you run one at 4000mhz exact is possible. I am curious my self to see the difference between the q6600, q9550, and the 920 i7.  What kind of cooling do you have?.


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

Nevakonaza said:


> dont like that voltage WhiteFireDragon  whast your load temps?



there's a big difference between short session benches and 24/7. i have a different chip that i run 24/7, and this e8600 is only for benching, but i did run it at 4.0ghz at 1.25v for 2 hours with orthos. load calibration was enabled, so there's hardly any vdrop.

this is one of the coolest (temp) chips i've played with, loading at only 45C at that voltage.



THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Great score man. Could you run one at 4000mhz exact is possible. I am curious my self to see the difference between the q6600, q9550, and the 920 i7.  What kind of cooling do you have?.



i didn't take the screen shot, but when i bench it again, i'll do that for you. and just to let you know, 4000mhz will bench differently with spi because it will depend on the chip, cache, fsb, memory timing and frequency. for example, you'll get a faster score if you ran 4000mhz with 7 x 571mhz, 2:3 divider, and relatively low timing as opposed to 10x400mhz, 1:1, and loose timings. my guess is that generally, i7 > q9550 > q6600 with the same clocks in SPi

like i mentioned earlier, i ran my e8600 on an air cooler


----------



## FairDoos

1 Minuite 2 seconds HAHAHA I was expecting that..

Haha hold on.. I just re-done the test and got 48 Seconds on 1M Setting? This makes no sense? xD


----------



## CdnAudiophile

WhiteFireDragon said:


> there's a big difference between short session benches and 24/7. i have a different chip that i run 24/7, and this e8600 is only for benching, but i did run it at 4.0ghz at 1.25v for 2 hours with orthos. load calibration was enabled, so there's hardly any vdrop.
> 
> this is one of the coolest (temp) chips i've played with, loading at only 45C at that voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> i didn't take the screen shot, but when i bench it again, i'll do that for you. and just to let you know, 4000mhz will bench differently with spi because it will depend on the chip, cache, fsb, memory timing and frequency. for example, you'll get a faster score if you ran 4000mhz with 7 x 571mhz, 2:3 divider, and relatively low timing as opposed to 10x400mhz, 1:1, and loose timings. my guess is that generally, i7 > q9550 > q6600 with the same clocks in SPi
> 
> like i mentioned earlier, i ran my e8600 on an air cooler



 Thanks man. I just did a little more oc'ing. Here are the results:






9.532


----------



## f.i.t.h

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Thanks man. I just did a little more oc'ing. Here are the results:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9.532



NICE!


11.485     @    4104MHz


----------



## soloman

very good all..


----------



## Mitch?




----------



## Bob Jeffery

Wow you beat me by 5 seconds! That's awesome! Especially since your only have 100mhz over me! Congrats to amd for making a good lower end processor


----------



## Mitch?

Bob Jeffery said:


> Wow you beat me by 5 seconds! That's awesome! Especially since your only have 100mhz over me! Congrats to amd for making a good lower end processor



I just put it at 3.2ghz first - i haven't pushed it as far as i can yet 

EDIT:
Seems to be stable at 3300mhz!! Here's the pic. *cough* #1 AMD


----------



## mikesrex

Gigabyte EX58-UD3R
i7-920
on air with a TRUE


----------



## WeatherMan




----------



## mikesrex

haven't really had a chance to extensively OC this setup, but here is 210X21 superpi


----------



## CdnAudiophile

Mr. Johanssen said:


> I just put it at 3.2ghz first - i haven't pushed it as far as i can yet
> 
> EDIT:
> Seems to be stable at 3300mhz!! Here's the pic. *cough* #1 AMD



Congrats man, great score. 

Omega would it be possible to have the scores updated, thanks.

Edit: Didn't see above post. That's awesome man now, I have to do some more OC'ing now . Whats you your ram timings at?


----------



## mikesrex

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Congrats man, great score.
> 
> Omega would it be possible to have the scores updated, thanks.
> 
> Edit: Didn't see above post. That's awesome man now, I have to do some more OC'ing now . Whats you your ram timings at?



I have some of the cheap G.Skill 3x1GB DDR3 1600 running 9-9-9-24.  For 99 shipped (and 199 for the motherboard) I figured I would give a budget setup a try.  It runs 4GHz no problems without turbo at 200x20, but the vcore has to be jacked up a lot once I start overclocking more than 4 GHz.  It's crazy.


----------



## f.i.t.h

I'll PM Omega a updated list, when he updates it, if you're still not on the list, PM me, I'll add you to the list for the next update.


----------



## just a noob

mikesrex said:


> I have some of the cheap G.Skill 3x1GB DDR3 1600 running 9-9-9-24.  For 99 shipped (and 199 for the motherboard) I figured I would give a budget setup a try.  It runs 4GHz no problems without turbo at 200x20, but the vcore has to be jacked up a lot once I start overclocking more than 4 GHz.  It's crazy.



try running the multi a little bit lower or higher(19 or 21) and after 1.6 volts you just can't get enough voltage to the cores for some strange reason(the electricity just dissapates) oh, and i think if you can get to 4.8/4.9ghz thats a world record for 920


----------



## mikesrex

just a noob said:


> try running the multi a little bit lower or higher(19 or 21) and after 1.6 volts you just can't get enough voltage to the cores for some strange reason(the electricity just dissapates) oh, and i think if you can get to 4.8/4.9ghz thats a world record for 920



my fastest superpi is done with the multiplier at 20 (but with turbo on to give a 21X multi on single-threaded programs).  I may try the 19x multi and try for faster than 210 bus speed.  I still haven't actually tuned many of the settings that I have on auto yet.  I'm thinking if I can get to 4.6-4.8 GHz I can run 8 sec superpi 1M with this setup.  Regardless of what it does, it is already faster than I need in a computer, so I'm happy with it.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

I am goign to try once I get home to get 217 x 21 for 4557. 217 is the highest I have been able to hit on my Qpi so I will give it a shot. Also I was thinking mabye disabling HT to see if it would help.


----------



## just a noob

disabling ht will definatly give you an extra 200-300mhz easy


----------



## SSMUFF

Well my work computer got 54 seconds.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

9.282s


----------



## mikesrex

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> 9.282s



nice!

I was using a windows install from an older computer with my first runs.  I did a fresh install and noticed that my computer was more stable, and even better superpi would run about a tenth faster.

I tried to go 215 and it is approaching the 9 second barrier.  I will try to go higher on monday.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

mikesrex said:


> nice!
> 
> I was using a windows install from an older computer with my first runs.  I did a fresh install and noticed that my computer was more stable, and even better superpi would run about a tenth faster.
> 
> I tried to go 215 and it is approaching the 9 second barrier.  I will try to go higher on monday.



Congrats man, you won't see anymore scores from me unless I up the voltage and I really don't want to do that. Good luck in the quest for sub 9`s. The processor is an amazing OC`r. My chip runs amazing cool, but takes more voltage than other 920`s, so I guess I might sell this chip and get another and go from there. Again congrats.


----------



## mikesrex

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Congrats man, you won't see anymore scores from me unless I up the voltage and I really don't want to do that. Good luck in the quest for sub 9`s. The processor is an amazing OC`r. My chip runs amazing cool, but takes more voltage than other 920`s, so I guess I might sell this chip and get another and go from there. Again congrats.



much thanks,

what do you run yours at daily?  so far I think I am going to leave mine at 200x20 with turbo turned off (hyperthreading on of course)

it seems to run like a champ, idling in the high 20's/low 30's and gets into the low 60's when doing some serious crunching.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

mikesrex said:


> much thanks,
> 
> what do you run yours at daily?  so far I think I am going to leave mine at 200x20 with turbo turned off (hyperthreading on of course)
> 
> it seems to run like a champ, idling in the high 20's/low 30's and gets into the low 60's when doing some serious crunching.



You have an awesome chip and you seem to be able to OC very well.

I run mine as well at 200x 20 @ 1.47 volts. My temps are about the same as yours.

What do you think the max voltage is  that would be safe for single runs?


----------



## mikesrex

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> You have an awesome chip and you seem to be able to OC very well.
> 
> I run mine as well at 200x 20 @ 1.47 volts. My temps are about the same as yours.
> 
> What do you think the max voltage is  that would be safe for single runs?



I had the vcore as high as 1.64 for the 215x21 runs

I have it set to 1.375 for 200x20 use


----------



## just a noob

1.9 volts can be safe for a single run, assuming you use something like a single stage/cascade/ln2, otherwise i would say 1.7 would be the cut off limit for liquid cooling


----------



## CdnAudiophile

just a noob said:


> 1.9 volts can be safe for a single run, assuming you use something like a single stage/cascade/ln2, otherwise i would say 1.7 would be the cut off limit for liquid cooling



lol what about air


----------



## CdnAudiophile

mikesrex said:


> I had the vcore as high as 1.64 for the 215x21 runs
> 
> I have it set to 1.375 for 200x20 use



Maybe I will see what I can get for 1.65 volts. 

I wish I had a chip like yours. I also have a friend that has a "golden chip" and he does 3.2ghz on 1.21 volts


----------



## just a noob

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> lol what about air



whats your ambient temperature?


----------



## CdnAudiophile

just a noob said:


> whats your ambient temperature?



Room temperature is about 22c. At 4.4ghz it idels at about 36ish, load 72ish, thats with 1.625 volts


----------



## Hyde01

Here's my Studio =] I figure this is alright being it's a laptop


----------



## just a noob

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Room temperature is about 22c. At 4.4ghz it idels at about 36ish, load 72ish, thats with 1.625 volts



try a single run a 1.7 volts then, i wouldn't have it that high much longer than 15 minutes tops, and if you have it at 1.625 volts 24/7 thats not good, i wouldn't expect it to survive much past next year :S


----------



## SSMUFF

I got an embarrassing 1 min 24 seconds for my home computer.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

just a noob said:


> try a single run a 1.7 volts then, i wouldn't have it that high much longer than 15 minutes tops, and if you have it at 1.625 volts 24/7 thats not good, i wouldn't expect it to survive much past next year :S



I wouldn't expect that I would get a year out of it at that volts. Thanks for the help, I do not run anything higher than 1.47 for my everyday OC.


----------



## ada///M

15.194 for a Q6600 at 3384.  I got a 48.312 on this computer


----------



## Chuck_Fu

1 min and 3.672.  on a Celeron M 1.4GHz its my moms old laptop.


----------



## SSMUFF

Well with my very small overclock I got down to 1m 17secs.  WOOT


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

mikesrex and THERMAL-REACTOR, good job on getting high i7 clocks on air. try to disable 6 cores and leave 2 to run spi, and set the priority to highest. you should get a little higher clocks at the same voltages.


----------



## WeatherMan

I know quite a few guys on XS that have been running duallies @ 1.6v 24/7 for over a year now.

But they are on water.

I needed 1.62v to get to 4GHz on my Q6600


----------



## shenry

I took this a while ago while I was benching my PC a little.


----------



## MIK3daG33K

This is with my e4500 @ 3.4 GHZ


----------



## jevery

Still learning.  (E8500 @ 4465)


----------



## wilson

Well it's a start.


----------



## zer0_c00l

AMD  never good at pi  #1 for AMD


----------



## Fear_Of_Dreams

I was going to post my laptops super pi time but its been booting up for the past 15 minutes 

Oh finally here we go!

A challenge for all to beat!




Sony Vaio PCG-F490 with 256MB of SDRAM!  Its a powerful beast i gotta say....


----------



## WeatherMan

I recon I could get 12.5s under XP 64 & Getting some ram that doesnt suck @ 900MHz


----------



## Kornowski

1.7v  Surely that isn't 24/7?



> Intel Q6600 @ 3.4GHz 1.425v



What's with the sad face? lol


----------



## WeatherMan

LOL no that's not 24/7. It was 1.66v @ BIOS for around a 2m run.

The sad face is cos I have a bad core on my CPU. Need's 1.42v for 3.4GHz, and 1.54v for 3.6GHz. 

I'm stuck @ 3.4 because of core 0 that Fails @ OC. 

I can run these high clocks, but the day I get stable above 3.4 is the day hell freezes over. I'm thinking about sticking it on ebay


----------



## Kornowski

Mine needs 1.42 for 3.4Ghz, I couldn't get it stable at 3.6Ghz either, Core 2 would fail, I think.


----------



## WeatherMan

Yeah the new G0's suck big time


----------



## Gareth

I decided to install Windows XP to get some number crunching done, and to compare Vista against XP. Running at 3.2GHz on stock cooler


----------



## Dazzeerr




----------



## Aastii

What is super-pi?


----------



## Mitch?

Aastii said:


> What is super-pi?




http://www.softpedia.com/get/Others/Home-Education/Super-PI.shtml
It's basically a program used to calculate pi to whatever amount of digits you choose (for this competition we're using 1M.)  Faster the cpu, faster the time, and Intel architecture is greatly favored.


----------



## memory

Here you go.


----------



## markallen

I am up to 6th place.And the quickest Quad core so far to post a time.


----------



## Domain_Man

Hi guys, excellent thread! Here's my Super PI 1M score: 11.024s at 4.302 Ghz using an Intel Quad Core Q9550 

Here's my screenshot:


----------



## markallen

Domain_Man said:


> Hi guys, excellent thread! Here's my Super PI 1M score: 11.024s at 4.302 Ghz using an Intel Quad Core Q9550
> 
> Here's my screenshot:



What do you have your core voltage set on in the bios?


----------



## Domain_Man

markallen said:


> What do you have your core voltage set on in the bios?



Hi Mark. I had it on 1.42v


----------



## marsbars162

AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ @ 3.2GHz


----------



## DirtyD86

11s - E8400 @ 4.0ghz


----------



## Shane

Not bad


----------



## bebopin64




----------



## jevery

Now aren't you curious where you fall in that 10s range?


----------



## bebopin64

jevery said:


> Now aren't you curious where you fall in that 10s range?



I like it better whan it just says 10s


----------



## jevery

bebopin64 said:


> I like it better whan it just says 10s



Still good for a quad though.  Near as I can tell 10.9 is good for #7.  Thermal Reactor and Mikesrex somehow got their 920s down in the low 9s so I imagine you could go a lot further if you cared to push it harder.


----------



## bebopin64

mine seems to have hit a wall.  i cant get past 190 bclk


----------



## Shane

Knocked off 1 second from my other run at 3.2Ghz  

Slightly over 3.3Ghz






The scoreboard seriusly needs updating hehe.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

bebopin64 said:


> I like it better whan it just says 10s



Give it a slight more voltage and Turn Turbo on for the multiplier. You will be able to use the 21x 190 for a result of 3990mhz.


----------



## bebopin64

still couldnt get under 10s .  i wish i could turn off speed step and keep on turbo.


----------



## yhahh

My new record under 24/7 clocks and voltages.






I'll soon try to push up voltages and frequences to make a new record for my computer ^^ but I'll not change my 24/7 settings, I don't wanna run over 1.4v


----------



## Geoff

Scores updated, thanks fith!


----------



## MIK3daG33K

Why am I not on the list? I posted my screeny. http://www.computerforum.com/87599-post-your-superpi-score-79.html. 17 sec with a E4500 is a good run imo.


----------



## Geoff

MIK3daG33K said:


> Why am I not on the list? I posted my screeny. http://www.computerforum.com/87599-post-your-superpi-score-79.html. 17 sec with a E4500 is a good run imo.


Was it posted after 1/16/09?


----------



## MIK3daG33K

[-0MEGA-];1200091 said:
			
		

> Was it posted after 1/16/09?



Yes. 1-25-09. I posted a link there so you could see it. http://www.computerforum.com/87599-post-your-superpi-score-79.html


----------



## bebopin64

[-0MEGA-];1200040 said:
			
		

> Scores updated, thanks fith!



you left me out


----------



## Intel_man

Nice job OMEGA. Just a note, it's @ 1860, not 2400 in any way.


----------



## Shane

Guys mine has not been updated....im running at 3.3Ghz and now get 15 seconds


----------



## jevery

They were updated to scores submitted by 1/16, no later.  Our scores will be listed later.


----------



## bebopin64

why?


----------



## Geoff

Sorry, I haven't had time to update it and f.i.t.h. sent me a PM back in January with the updated scores, so no one has updated it since then.


----------



## Geoff

Updated.

Thanks bebopin64!


----------



## markallen

This is my very latest score.Looks like you'll be updating again...


----------



## Domain_Man

And mine too! 

Thanks Omega!


----------



## yhahh

Nice !
New record for me. I'll try higher later but I think I'll not do much better than it.


----------



## Gooberman

Here's my first time


----------



## Geoff

Scores have been updated.

Everyone take note, the rules have been changed as well as the layout, refer to the first post on page one for the new rules.  If I forgot to update/post your score, please post it again as now I will be doing the updating myself.


----------



## Mitch?

Way to keep on it Geoff, it takes alot of work! If you ever need a break I could keep track, just give me a message on here or steam or msn or facebook or wherever


----------



## Geoff

Mr. Johanssen said:


> Way to keep on it Geoff, it takes alot of work! If you ever need a break I could keep track, just give me a message on here or steam or msn or facebook or wherever


haha, thanks for the offer.  I am now recording the page number where I leave off so it's much easier for me to keep track.


----------



## bomberboysk

12.948 -- bomberboysk (Q9450 @ 3700)

^^You can remove that one as i have a score with the same rig higher up in the list.


----------



## Cleric7x9

sigh, i guess i can confidently say that intel CPUs are much much more powerful than anything AMD has to offer


----------



## CdnAudiophile

Omega w/e you update the list next time could you correct Mikes and my score, you can find the post here : http://www.computerforum.com/87599-post-your-superpi-score-20.html#post1164101  Thanks man


----------



## Geoff

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Omega w/e you update the list next time could you correct Mikes and my score, you can find the post here : http://www.computerforum.com/87599-post-your-superpi-score-20.html#post1164101  Thanks man


I didn't see any screenshot from you on that page...


----------



## Bodaggit23

How are you able to tell the fractions of the seconds?


----------



## bomberboysk

Bodaggit23 said:


> How are you able to tell the fractions of the seconds?



Go to the first page, there is a link to superpi mod that measures to the millisecond


----------



## CdnAudiophile

[-0MEGA-];1223096 said:
			
		

> I didn't see any screenshot from you on that page...


Thats' weird, well my quickest time is 9.282s If you need me too I could repost, thanks man


----------



## Bodaggit23

I tried both files, from both links, and it only displays whole seconds.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

Bodaggit23 said:


> I tried both files, from both links, and it only displays whole seconds.


 Try this link man: http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/366/


----------



## Bodaggit23

Yeah, that's better. The links in the original post do not find that file.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Intel i7 920 @ 3.43Ghz 
What a horrible screenie...


----------



## Intel_man




----------



## Bodaggit23

[-0MEGA-];682291 said:
			
		

> (Updated: 4/7/09)


I don't see my score on the list, or Intel man's. We both
posted last night.

Maybe we posted after the update.


----------



## Geoff

Bodaggit23 said:


> I don't see my score on the list, or Intel man's. We both
> posted last night.
> 
> Maybe we posted after the update.


Yeah, you posted after I updated it.  And thanks for the heads up on the link, I'll fix that.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

9.282


----------



## bomberboysk

You can remove this result: 12.948 -- bomberboysk (Q9450 @ 3700)

As my same rig i have clocked higher now, and already have a result in the 11.xxx seconds


----------



## Kesava




----------



## DirtyD86

E8400 @ 4.0 (speedstep was kicked in during this screen)


----------



## Geoff

DirtyD86 said:


> E8400 @ 4.0 (speedstep was kicked in during this screen)


Gotcha.  I need to take the screenshot the instant SuperPi finishes, otherwise the CPU will downclock itself.


----------



## DirtyD86

[-0MEGA-];1224344 said:
			
		

> Gotcha.  I need to take the screenshot the instant SuperPi finishes, otherwise the CPU will downclock itself.



what does it matter 

stock multiplier is 9, basic math will show my real clock speed


----------



## Geoff

DirtyD86 said:


> what does it matter
> 
> stock multiplier is 9, basic math will show my real clock speed


I was simply making a comment, if you re-read my post you'll see that I'm not asking you to take it again.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Does the front page of this thread ever get updated?


----------



## just a noob

Bodaggit23 said:


> Does the front page of this thread ever get updated?



he has a life which complicates things


----------



## Bodaggit23

just a noob said:


> he has a life which complicates things



Implying that I don't? Why post at all for comments like this?

The OP has posted several times since I posted my score so
I asked an honest question.


----------



## Geoff

Calm down, it's only been 3 days.  You'll be glad to hear that I just updated it though.


----------



## Intel_man

Intel_man said:


>





			
				[-0MEGA-];1225238 said:
			
		

> Calm down, it's only been 3 days.  You'll be glad to hear that I just updated it though.




You missed mine.


----------



## just a noob

Bodaggit23 said:


> Implying that I don't? Why post at all for comments like this?
> 
> The OP has posted several times since I posted my score so
> I asked an honest question.



no, i'm just saying he has other things to do, that are most likely higher up on the line, than say updating a thread on the internet


----------



## Geoff

Intel_man said:


> You missed mine.


Sorry, I'm at work and the firewall probably blocked it.  When I update it from home I'll include yours.  If you could post it again that would be easier for me. 



just a noob said:


> no, i'm just saying he has other things to do, that are most likely higher up on the line, than say updating a thread on the internet


Thanks, haha.  It's not that I don't want to update it, I like waiting a few days so I'm not updating it every day.  I'd rather take 5-10 minutes a week and update it all at once.


----------



## ScOuT




----------



## Intel_man

[-0MEGA-];1225311 said:
			
		

> Sorry, I'm at work and the firewall probably blocked it.  When I update it from home I'll include yours.  If you could post it again that would be easier for me.
> 
> 
> Thanks, haha.  It's not that I don't want to update it, I like waiting a few days so I'm not updating it every day.  I'd rather take 5-10 minutes a week and update it all at once.



It's um... 31.251 @ 1866

Link:

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd212/mclaren_mercedes_f1/SuperPI.png


----------



## Geoff

Intel_man said:


> It's um... 31.251 @ 1866
> 
> Link:
> 
> http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd212/mclaren_mercedes_f1/SuperPI.png



Ok, updated.


----------



## mikesrex

mikesrex said:


> nice!
> 
> I was using a windows install from an older computer with my first runs.  I did a fresh install and noticed that my computer was more stable, and even better superpi would run about a tenth faster.
> 
> I tried to go 215 and it is approaching the 9 second barrier.  I will try to go higher on monday.



bump for updates


----------



## DirtyD86

mikesrex said:


> bump for updates



taking the crown i see.... congrats


----------



## Bodaggit23

I was just wondering if the front page got updated. 

Now I know. I understand everyone has a life other than
these forums, me included.


----------



## Geoff

Bodaggit23, I have the date the front page was last updated posted in the first post.


----------



## Bodaggit23

I see that, thanks.

And thanks for the interesting thread.


----------



## just a noob

wonder how the core i7 xeon's overclock(i'm thinking about a 2.23ghz model lol) oh, there's also a dual core i7 out(1.8ghz)


----------



## dark666apoc

lol i was using normal super pi jsut used mod version got 24.6 something


----------



## mikesrex

DirtyD86 said:


> taking the crown i see.... congrats



haha well it wasn't updated with the 9.015 when he did it today.  

I think I am done with the 920 on air though.  I couldn't get it to run 8's on air with the budget build, so maybe I will have to go with something else down the road.  In all seriousness, though, even the stock clock i7 is overkill for what most use their computers for.


----------



## Bodaggit23

mikesrex said:


> even the stock clock i7 is overkill for what most use their computers for.


Yeah, but it's nice to know you have it in case you ever need it. =D


----------



## Mitch?

Catchin' up to ya Mikesrex! 
Would boot at 3500, but didn't make died opening CpuZ 

It's 23.930 seconds, in case you don't want to bother with the link (didn't resize from 1680x1050)
AMD Phenom 7750 BE
17x200mhz @ 1.488v.


----------



## tuxify

Once I reinstall and OC I'll do the test.


----------



## jkrause6

*i did a little better*

http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/allpartitionsandparts/superpi4.jpg


----------



## jkrause6

*here's my best amd clock*

http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/allpartitionsandparts/amdpi.jpg


----------



## Mitch?

jkrause6, you'll have to provide more than that, like, verification purposes of sorts.


----------



## Geoff

Mitch? said:


> jkrause6, you'll have to provide more than that, like, verification purposes of sorts.


Agreed, for all we know that was someone elses screenshot that you uploaded.


----------



## mikesrex

[-0MEGA-];1228838 said:
			
		

> Agreed, for all we know that was someone elses screenshot that you uploaded.



when are you going to update the scores to the most current?  Last update you didn't catch my 9.015 run.  I need someone to beat me so I'm motivated to go into the 8's hehe.


----------



## DirtyD86

mikesrex said:


> when are you going to update the scores to the most current?  Last update you didn't catch my 9.015 run.  I need someone to beat me so I'm motivated to go into the 8's hehe.



send me 600 dollars for a new i7 build and ill be more than happy to put some pressure on you


----------



## Geoff

mikesrex said:


> when are you going to update the scores to the most current?  Last update you didn't catch my 9.015 run.  I need someone to beat me so I'm motivated to go into the 8's hehe.


And where is that?  Did you post a screenshot?  Besides, it was updated not that long ago.


----------



## lovely?

my latest. should be about 18'th i think. im gonna try for 4.3ghz and come back in a few min.


----------



## lovely?

*EDIT AGAIN*

my final entry. the chip's at its limit, during loading and the test i was spraying dust remover into the heatsink to keep it cooled below 64C lol






w00t 11'th place


----------



## Mitch?

lovely? said:


> *EDIT AGAIN*
> 
> my final entry. the chip's at its limit, during loading and the test i was spraying dust remover into the heatsink to keep it cooled below 64C lol
> 
> w00t 11'th place



I got my brothers e8500 to 4.6ghz, benching with a big can of compressed air upside down so the  liquid would keep temps under 60c haha


----------



## mikesrex

[-0MEGA-];1229145 said:
			
		

> And where is that?  Did you post a screenshot?  Besides, it was updated not that long ago.


http://www.computerforum.com/1225509-post861.html

I even quoted it.  Is the pic showing up for you?


----------



## Intel_man

[-0MEGA-];1229145 said:
			
		

> And where is that?  Did you post a screenshot?  Besides, it was updated not that long ago.



I can vouch for his screenshots. it's what he said it is.


----------



## lovely?

Mitch? said:


> I got my brothers e8500 to 4.6ghz, benching with a big can of compressed air upside down so the  liquid would keep temps under 60c haha



lol if i was too afraid of what the liquid would do to turn the can upside down


----------



## zer0_c00l




----------



## Shane

What happned to my score on the results page?

Its dissapeared 

~15 seconds (Page 82)


----------



## jkrause6

*trying to validate scores*

trying to validate scores.  

they are post 872 and 873 or your super pi thread.

here are some pics of my system

http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/allpartitionsandparts/i7cpu1.jpg

http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/allpartitionsandparts/i7cpu2.jpg

http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/allpartitionsandparts/i7cpuz.jpg

http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/allpartitionsandparts/i7topfans.jpg



my i7 and phemon side by side

http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/allpartitionsandparts/i7twins.jpg



here's my monitor... 

http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/allpartitionsandparts/i7monitor.jpg



anything else you need?


----------



## Geoff

mikesrex said:


> http://www.computerforum.com/1225509-post861.html
> 
> I even quoted it.  Is the pic showing up for you?


Yup, I'll include it when I update it shortly.



jkrause6 said:


> anything else you need?


I got your E-Mail to, I'll include your scores as well.


----------



## mikesrex

[-0MEGA-];1229698 said:
			
		

> Yup, I'll include it when I update it shortly.



btw I have an ASUS mobo and some new G.Skill RAM coming in next week, so maybe I can get the i7920 into the 8's on air.  I have a Vapochill but haven't really had time to mess with it much.


----------



## just a noob

you better mod the vapochill(unless it already is), i don't think stock that they can hold much over a Q6600. i do know one simple to to do is have it regassed by somebody with either r404a, or r507a(one works with the compressor, the other one doesn't)


----------



## mikesrex

just a noob said:


> you better mod the vapochill(unless it already is), i don't think stock that they can hold much over a Q6600. i do know one simple to to do is have it regassed by somebody with either r404a, or r507a(one works with the compressor, the other one doesn't)



ah I see, I'll have to look into it. I traded an E8400, E1200, P35-DS3R, and an 8600GTS for the Vapochill a while back, but haven't really messed with it much.


----------



## josephe

this is my pc.....


----------



## Gooberman

I scored 45 sec  didn't make it (Posted it awhile ago)


----------



## Bodaggit23

thandakid said:


> Mine
> c2d 2.0 ghz laptop



*That's BS*. Full screenshot.

No way a 2.0Ghz Core 2 Duo will crunch 1M that fast.

My i7 920 stock @ 2.66Ghz will only do it in 17 seconds...


----------



## thandakid

LOL
I got c2d 25 secs


----------



## Mitch?

thandakid said:


> LOL
> I got c2d 25 secs



that seems perfectly reasonable to me.


----------



## Bodaggit23

thandakid said:


> LOL
> I got c2d 25 secs



How do you erase your posts?

Posted a picture that showed 14 seconds...

You see I quoted him right? How's it possible for
me to call BS before he posted his score?

I saw this earlier today, when he resurrected some dead
threads, and people quoted him replying, but if you look 
up, his posts are gone...Wtf!


----------



## Mitch?

Bodaggit23 said:


> How do you erase your posts?
> 
> Posted a picture that showed 14 seconds...
> 
> You see I quoted him right? How's it possible for
> me to call BS before he posted his score?
> 
> I saw this earlier today, when he resurrected some dead
> threads, and people quoted him replying, but if you look
> up, his posts are gone...Wtf!



I do remember him posting earlier, didn't recall the score, and checked back to no avail. you CAN indeed delete posts though. i believe you bodaggit. 25 seconds sounds right though, 14 is crap. he's just akid. he'll learn not to lie eventually.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Mitch? said:


> I do remember him posting earlier, didn't recall the score, and checked back to no avail. you CAN indeed delete posts though. i believe you bodaggit. 25 seconds sounds right though, 14 is crap. he's just akid. he'll learn not to lie eventually.



How do you delete your posts?

EDIT: Nevermind, I figured it out.

Every forum I've been on, post deleting
was only allowed by mods.


----------



## Shane

Whens the next update due for this thread?


----------



## thandakid

Well you edit your post there is a delete option and then one box you have to check man bodaggit 922 posts uffffff...... no delete till now


----------



## mikesrex

Bodaggit23 said:


> *That's BS*. Full screenshot.
> 
> No way a 2.0Ghz Core 2 Duo will crunch 1M that fast.
> 
> My i7 920 stock @ 2.66Ghz will only do it in 17 seconds...



I just run my i7-920 at stock clock to get a superpi 1M result of 14.9 seconds.  I wonder why yours does 17.


----------



## Mitch?




----------



## Bodaggit23

mikesrex said:


> I just run my i7-920 at stock clock to get a superpi 1M result of 14.9 seconds.  I wonder why yours does 17.


Not sure either. I'll check it again if I ever unclock it. I could be mistaken.


----------



## Ramodkk

mikesrex said:


> I just run my i7-920 at stock clock to get a superpi 1M result of 14.9 seconds.  I wonder why yours does 17.



Even if they're the same CPU, they're not going to perform the same. 15 seconds to 17 seconds is a reasonable gap, even for identical CPU's.


----------



## gamerman4

I did it for each core


----------



## Bodaggit23

mikesrex said:


> I just run my i7-920 at stock clock to get a superpi 1M result of 14.9 seconds.  I wonder why yours does 17.



The only thing I can come up with is that I used an older version of SuperPi
the very first time I ran it.

The first time I ran it stock, I got this:
http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t113/Motovader72/Stock.jpg

I just ran it again at stock and got this:
http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t113/Motovader72/Stock2.jpg


----------



## Geoff

Sorry guys, I'll be updating it shortly.


----------



## Aastii

I am still in the process of overclocking, but i don't want to go much further without getting an after market heatsink, so expect another one a little further down the line 

I know it is hard to make out, but i am running an E6750 at 3.1GHz (stock is 2.66GHz)


----------



## markallen

Aastii said:


> I am still in the process of overclocking, but i don't want to go much further without getting an after market heatsink, so expect another one a little further down the line
> 
> I know it is hard to make out, but i am running an E6750 at 3.1GHz (stock is 2.66GHz)



I ran my E6750 @ 3.8 ghz with a stock heatsink and fan.


----------



## Hugh9191

*Mine*

This is for the rig in my sig. Never tried overclocking it.






No where near the top but it's not bad.


----------



## Aastii

markallen said:


> I ran my E6750 @ 3.8 ghz with a stock heatsink and fan.



I am considering getting it higher, but i am now at 50 degrees idle, but, this is confusing me, even when gaming it doesn't raise any higher 

If i stress test though it gets to 75 degrees which is a little worrying


----------



## bubblescivic

[-0MEGA-];1236762 said:
			
		

> Sorry guys, I'll be updating it shortly.



it's been a while since mike posted his 9.015

seems like you would update it by now


----------



## Geoff

Scores updated. 

There were a few people who posted scores, but not with the SuperPi Mod program.  If you want your score added please use that.


----------



## Candy

markallen said:


> I ran my E6750 @ 3.8 ghz with a stock heatsink and fan.



Can you tell me what settings that was at? As in what voltages, and did you have to overclock your memory?
Also did you stress test? I can't get mine past about 5 min on Prime95 at 3.6, so I'm obviously doing something wrong.


----------



## Aastii

Candy said:


> Can you tell me what settings that was at? As in what voltages, and did you have to overclock your memory?
> Also did you stress test? I can't get mine past about 5 min on Prime95 at 3.6, so I'm obviously doing something wrong.



you are not necessarily doing anything wrong, every chip is different, you may not be able to push yours as far as he has without losing stability or without whacking voltages up more than he has to

Here is my result with super pi mod though, pissed at how close to sub 16 i was 






[/URL] 

[/IMG]


----------



## Geoff

Scores Updated.


----------



## MIK3daG33K

Damn! I just missed the update. CPU 3.4 Ghz


----------



## Geoffrey70




----------



## Gooberman

yeah, I'm last on score board


----------



## zer0_c00l

update new AMD TOP SCORE


----------



## bomberboysk

zer0_c00l said:


> update new AMD TOP SCORE



Nice, those phenom II's clock well dont they, how far above stock voltage do you havwe to go to get those kinda clocks on there? Also, what kinda temps you getting?


----------



## newjacksm

Stock AMD Phenom II 940BE... I will need to venture into the overclocking world once I get enough money to get a better heatsink for this sucker...

I am running at 46c at idle...


----------



## zer0_c00l

I WAS RUNNING 1.55V temps idle 32.33c load 40ish  and ya they clock very good im very happy ive hit 4ghz on same voltage just not stable


----------



## yhahh

Hi!
Long time I don't come here. I had issues with my OS; yesterday I've got a XP pro and I find that my scores on superPi are better now. 
@ 4.4GHz : 10.857sec with Win Vista. 10.672sec Win XP last night.
Then I wanted to try higher and I got 4.5GHz! with a new record ^^






back to the top10 :good:


----------



## Geoff

Some good scores here!  I'll update them shortly.


----------



## barney.stinson




----------



## mikesrex

My buddy Matticus used my E8500, cooled by a TRUE with 72 deg F ambient temp on a gigabyte board with some G.Skill 2GBHZ:


----------



## bomberboysk

mikesrex said:


> My buddy Matticus used my E8500, cooled by a TRUE with 72 deg F ambient temp on a gigabyte board with some G.Skill 2GBHZ:



This makes me wanna take my quad down to two cores and see how high i can go...XD Nothin to do tomorrow... might just do that.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Wicked overclock.

Impressive temps.


----------



## Geoff

Scores updated.


----------



## barney.stinson

[-0MEGA-];1262117 said:
			
		

> Scores updated.


Dude mine is not there i got 14 secs


----------



## Bodaggit23

barney.stinson said:


> Dude mine is not there i got 14 secs



You're using the old version.



			
				[-0MEGA-];682291 said:
			
		

> All tests must be run using SuperPi Mod.


----------



## Gooberman

3 seconds faster w/ out overclocking!


----------



## Geoff

barney.stinson said:


> Dude mine is not there i got 14 secs





Bodaggit23 said:


> You're using the old version.


If you read the first post, you will see that you NEED to use SuperPi MOD because it gives you fractions of a second as well.


----------



## barney.stinson

>



Lowest i7 score XD


----------



## Bodaggit23

barney.stinson said:


> Lowest i7 score XD


That's about right for stock.


----------



## Aastii

aaah when i get my new CPU cooler i will do a huge oc just for benchmark and try to get my time a little higher up the list


----------



## Mitch?

zer0_c00l said:


> update new AMD TOP SCORE



MOTHERLOOKER!
I'm going to oc now


----------



## zer0_c00l

its a 720 pi off then


----------



## Mitch?

zer0_c00l said:


> its a 720 pi off then



i have a higher clock though.
supergay.
maybe it's windows 7??


----------



## mep916

Mitch? said:


> i have a higher clock though.
> supergay.
> maybe it's windows 7??



You're not off by much. Maybe re run with the same clocks and disable some of the crap running in the background.


----------



## Mitch?

mep916 said:


> You're not off by much. Maybe re run with the same clocks and disable some of the crap running in the background.



When I ran mine i had everything disabled in msconfig, all that started was what i started.  I got it at 4ghz and i think the stability hurt my time, it was worse than 3939mhz.


----------



## Mitch?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Anyways. Windows 7 provided me some juicy results. Exciting! After 3 hours of overclocking 





The 4ghz wasn't stable enough for super pi, but i backed it off to 3978 and *drumroll*




17.862 seconds !!!  
ImageShack took the screenshots from the 1680x1050.bmp to an 800x500.png, but they're still readable 
Excitement aside, it's time to be mature.
WHAT NOW ZERO_COOL?!?! UH HUH! WHAT NOW!!?


----------



## zer0_c00l

it's time to be mature.
WHAT NOW ZERO_COOL?!?! UH HUH! WHAT NOW!!?    [/QUOTE]

i beat you


----------



## zer0_c00l

Like taking Candy from a Baby!  Mitch?  lets be adults here        





     NEW and Once again top AMD Score !!!!!!


----------



## mikesrex

yall have fun while it lasts.  soon I'll have an AMD 955 to play with hehe.


----------



## zer0_c00l

mikesrex said:


> yall have fun while it lasts.  soon I'll have an AMD 955 to play with hehe.



i will be glad to have some REAL compettion


----------



## Mitch?

zer0_c00l said:


> i will be glad to have some REAL compettion



That's so gay that yours is faster at lower clocks lol.

You know what's worse?
I installed Windows 7, and then went to Vista, and it said my Vista key wasn't legit anymore?  And the only key I can find is my Vista Home Premium key (I was on ultimate)


----------



## zer0_c00l

is it x64 if so not much is differnt  just bells and whistles


----------



## Mitch?

zer0_c00l said:


> is it x64 if so not much is differnt  just bells and whistles



I honestly don't remember if it's i386 or x64 lol.

They even said my Windows 7 key was invalid. On the trial Windows 7.  
Retyped the same key they gave me and they accepted it? ha


----------



## zer0_c00l

i believe i was on windows 7 when i hit 17.9 windows vista x64 on 17.5 with all the whistles turned off


----------



## ScottALot

Wait, can someone explain, What is SUPERPI?


----------



## WeatherMan

A super pie is a baked super dish which is usually made of a super pastry dough shell that covers or completely contains a super filling of various super sweet or super savoury super ingredients.


----------



## just a noob

Bootup05 said:


> A super pie is a baked super dish which is usually made of a super pastry dough shell that covers or completely contains a super filling of various super sweet or super savoury super ingredients.



close, but it needs to be cooked in a super oven as well  anyway, its just a program that counts the digits of pi to a certain number(1000, to 32 million i think)


----------



## bomberboysk

just a noob said:


> close, but it needs to be cooked in a super oven as well  anyway, its just a program that counts the digits of pi to a certain number(1000, to 32 million i think)



Superpie= pizza Superpi=program But yeah, it does 1k - 32M... We should make people post 32M scores, cuz anyone can run 1M, but you almost gotta be stable to run a 32m....


----------



## Gooberman

My comp would take like an entire day to reach 32 mil


----------



## gigantojim

Here is mine, I`am not putting it up any higher than that until I get a decent cpu cooler.

Jim


----------



## Matticus

mikesrex said:


> My buddy Matticus used my E8500, cooled by a TRUE with 72 deg F ambient temp on a gigabyte board with some G.Skill 2GBHZ:



I figured I should go ahead and register here considering you posted this. 

BTW - This is my 2nd post on a computer forum


----------



## zer0_c00l

gigantojim said:


> Here is mine, I`am not putting it up any higher than that until I get a decent cpu cooler.
> 
> Jim



jim get that cooler man! break that 955  and DDR2 in


----------



## Matticus

ScottALot said:


> Wait, can someone explain, What is SUPERPI?



A single threaded app that calculates up to 32 million digits of pi. The standard is 1 million digits. 

Some people race cars, some people race computers . . . . some of us do both


----------



## gigantojim

zer0_c00l said:


> jim get that cooler man! break that 955  and DDR2 in



Yeah I know, trouble is once I get a cpu cooler I`ll want a new case and some 1066 memory for my crappy am2+ board Chris, lmao.


----------



## Aastii

Alright, i thought as i now have my new heatsink i would redo it just to see my temperatures and this happened (bear in mind this is the exact same OC as last time  )



 



a quarter of a second less time?


----------



## just a noob

tried to oc my e5200 the first day i had my setup:






 i still need to mess around with the settings some more


----------



## jevery

Finally got a sub 11 time.






Q9650 @ 4338
(Omega, Please delete my 12th place standing, Matticus has taken that processor to a whole new level)


----------



## Matticus

Got a new record for myself  Vcore was not set that high in the bios . . . .


----------



## mikesrex

heck Matt I may have to take the i7 into the 8's on air soon if you keep this up.  you are almost at 5 GHz on air!


----------



## just a noob

i seem to have hit a fsb wall, barely boots into windows at 344 fsb, but manages at 340 =\


----------



## yhahh

just a noob said:


> http://i595.photobucket.com/albums/tt39/just_a_noob/pi45.jpg
> 
> i seem to have hit a fsb wall, barely boots into windows at 344 fsb, but manages at 340 =\



It's a pity =/
Very nice overclock anyway :good:

@ Matticus : I just stay    in front of your overclock!! 5GHz!! What cooling system did you use?


----------



## Machin3




----------



## linkin

I can't post screenshots, buy my Pentium 4 2.66ghz got a time of  1 minute 17 seconds...shows how horrible NetBurst is!


----------



## Gooberman

Gooberman said:


> 3 seconds faster w/ out overclocking!



will mine ever be updated  I don't want it to be 45 seconds  42 is much better


----------



## Nodz86

16.973s on an Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 2.83GHz


----------



## PatPheFox

ys it take so long if my cpu is this high?

its kinda hard to read, my cpu is a dual-core @ 2.8


----------



## Springy182

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=606507

Quite the improvement from stock at about 16.7s


----------



## Geoff

Scores Updated.


----------



## voyagerfan99

Here are the results from my new Latitude E6500. I'll run it on my desktop later.

Not as good as "Darkserge" but I did beat "newjacksm"






EDIT:

Here is my desktop: (I beat "Fear of Dreams" score)






I'm curious to see how my netbook will do. I'll do that and my old Latitude tomorrow.


----------



## Russian777

Hey can someone tell me what my results mean? are they good or bad?


----------



## yhahh

Your score is not bad but you can hit easily 3GHz with your CPU.


----------



## MouSe

Here ya go!


----------



## voyagerfan99

MouSe said:


> Here ya go!



That's a nice one there!


----------



## MouSe

voyagerfan99 said:


> That's a nice one there!



I wonder how much better I could get it if I upped my OC to 4GHz?


----------



## Bodaggit23

Russian777 said:


> Hey can someone tell me what my results mean? are they good or bad?



That's exactly the time you should get with a stock i7 920.


----------



## ThatGuy16

My new best








If i didn't have to lower the permormance level on the ram to get higher FSB, it would be much better for 4.8ghz. Not sure if its the ram or board holding that back. 



highest clock i got was 4.824Ghz

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=614668


----------



## Gooberman

Damn! that's really good


----------



## yhahh

Damnnnn!! You're lucky...
The highest clock I've got with my E8400 was 4.6GHz, with a highest Vcore than you. And I didn't manage to get it stable. (I was scared of raising again and again the Vcore. I'm not Intel sponsored ^^)






The highest stable clock I've got is 4.5GHz. My E8400 needs a lot of volts.






There's no justice!!


----------



## Gooberman

Highest I've gotten was 2 Ghz because i have a crapy Compaq ;0 which won't let me OC


----------



## just a noob

my chip is wierd, it holds 3.7ghz stable at a little bit more than stock voltage~1.288V, but then i can't get it to boot at anything past 340 fsb no matter how much voltage i ram up its ass, tried 1.8, but it was still a no go


----------



## shoehorned

just a noob said:


> my chip is wierd, it holds 3.7ghz stable at a little bit more than stock voltage~1.288V, but then i can't get it to boot at anything past 340 fsb no matter how much voltage i ram up its ass, tried 1.8, but it was still a no go



Consider yourself lucky. Many people with low end wolfdales have fsb wall at 333 and can't even get 1mhz higher.


----------



## mep916

Very nice clocks thatguy. 



ThatGuy16 said:


> If i didn't have to lower the permormance level on the ram to get higher FSB, it would be much better for 4.8ghz. Not sure if its the ram or board holding that back.



Still not enough though, is it?


----------



## Ramodkk

Damn Corey, that's awesome


----------



## ThatGuy16

Thanks!



mep916 said:


> Still not enough though, is it?



haha nope, maybe I'll go for 4.9Ghz tomorrow.


----------



## shoehorned

Take one sick and you should have better luck at the high clocks.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

So guys I borrowed my friends Corsair ram and did some more testing with tighter timings. I was super surprised at the results:






With the ram running at 1890mhz, I was able to set the timing to an incredible 6-6-6-20. My friend has a D0 he just bought so I will be doing some swapping around and see if I can get lower.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Nice, that CPU will be a thermal reactor before long. lol. I can hear it now.. "burn baby burn..." 



shoehorned said:


> Take one sick and you should have better luck at the high clocks.



yeah, that would probably help too. :good:


----------



## Ramodkk

Go Corey, you can't let that reactor beat you!


----------



## ThatGuy16

Ramomar said:


> Go Corey, you can't let that reactor beat you!



Lol! i don't think i can beat the i7 score 


...


----------



## susik89

I got a day off tomorrow so I decided to OC a little even though I don't like my heatsink. I got to 3.6 at 1.15 vcore, and temps went over 70 degrees under load so that was it for me. 

EDIT: Got it to 3.8


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

matticus congrats on the highest 775 chip and thermalreactor congrats on the first sub 9 sec scores!

once i get better cooling, i'll get back up there . i have a high leakage e8600 and i can't do much with it on air. i also have a i7 920 D0 but no mobo yet to completely switch over to i7 platform


----------



## Gooberman

WhiteFireDragon said:


> matticus congrats on the highest 775 chip and thermalreactor congrats on the first sub 9 sec scores!
> 
> once i get better cooling, i'll get back up there . i have a high leakage e8600 and i can't do much with it on air. i also have a i7 920 D0 but no mobo yet to completely switch over to i7 platform



You mean sub 8  damn  that's like x5 better then mine^^


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

Gooberman said:


> You mean sub 8  damn  that's like x5 better then mine^^



sub 8 means less than 8 sec, means it's 7.xxx seconds. this is getting into the extreme benching territory, so that might a while for anyone on here to achieve. so sub 9 sec is pretty hardcore for now lol

edit: 1000th post of this thread


----------



## Gooberman

Oh  my bad


----------



## CdnAudiophile

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> So guys I borrowed my friends Corsair ram and did some more testing with tighter timings. I was super surprised at the results:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With the ram running at 1890mhz, I was able to set the timing to an incredible 6-6-6-20. My friend has a D0 he just bought so I will be doing some swapping around and see if I can get lower.



bump for update please.


----------



## pokeman89

Mine is best 










I'm building a new PC, but it's a $150 budget so no i7 for me  Using an Intel E5300, hopefully I can get under 15s then.


----------



## Aastii

bloody hell thatguy, what cooler are you using there 

I am cleaning out my system, dfragging, then i will restart, get a high stable OC, open the doorsr so the living room gets freezeing, and post a higher clocked one  (if it is faster ofcouse)


----------



## Respital

Now is it me or do i have the highest score for a stock clock?


----------



## susik89

Apparently no one updates this anymore so I'm gonna go ahead and post again, just so I can brag about my 4ghz score ^^


----------



## Aastii

right i am pissed off right here, i managed to get a higher OC than before stable (3.5GHz at the moment i am on) and  it is colder than my normal speed of 3.2GHz and than my last try at 3.4GHz, and superpi keeps freezing on me if i do any more than 256k test 

I amanged to get one test in but it hung to create the data files so the extra second and a bit that took up made it marginally slower than my previous one, so i could be sat on a good second or so less than my previous

Ideas anyone please?

I am on Vista Ultimate

here is my CPUz



 



=EDIT=

Managed to get one run in, but with stuff running in the background taking up my valuable resources, it is still slower than my previous though, at 15.621 (i will wait to see if i can get it working fully before i post a screenshot)


----------



## The_Other_One

I must say I'm pretty impressed with mom's laptop...  To be a Celeron, the performance is pretty decent.  The laptop certainly seems more peppy than my grandparents dual core Turion.


----------



## Aastii

bloody hell that is good for a celeron, especailly one at such a low clock. nice one


----------



## The_Other_One

And while I'm at it 



Aastii said:


> bloody hell that is good for a celeron, especailly one at such a low clock. nice one



I know!  I never would have guessed that Celeron would have been that quick.

And one more post.  Another test from my i7, now overclocked to 3.3GHz.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Aastii said:


> bloody hell thatguy, what cooler are you using there
> 
> I am cleaning out my system, dfragging, then i will restart, get a high stable OC, open the doorsr so the living room gets freezeing, and post a higher clocked one  (if it is faster ofcouse)



Me?

I'm water cooled... lol.


----------



## Geoff

ThatGuy16 said:


> Me?
> 
> I'm water cooled... lol.



With my parts, lol


----------



## ThatGuy16

[-0MEGA-];1322428 said:
			
		

> With my parts, lol



Your _old_ parts lol :good:


----------



## CdnAudiophile

I went through all the post and I compiled and updated list:

SuperPi Ranks:
Updated 09/28 2009​
Fastest CPU's:
Intel: 8.954 - Core i7 920 @ 4410MHz (THERMAL-REACTOR)
AMD: 17.534 - X3 720 @ 3940MHz (zer0_c00l)


Top Three:
1.) 8.954 -- THERMAL-REACTOR (i7 920 @ 4405) 
2.) 9.015 -- mikesrex (i7 920 @ 4410)
3.) 9.375 -- Matticus (E8500 @ 4968)



Top 10:
4.) 9.702 -- WhiteFireDragon (E8600 @ 4826)
5.) 9.951 -- ThatGuy16 (E8400 @ 4806)
6.) 9.968 -- bubblescivic (E8400 @ 4680)
7.) 9.968 -- mikesrex (E8400 @ 4680)
8.) 10.202 -- susik89 (i7 920 @ 3998)
9.) 10.280 -- tidyboy21 (E8500 @ 4599)
10.) 10.307 -- jkrause6 (i7 920 @ 4045)

Top 20:
11.) 10.390 -- bebopin64 (i7 920 @ 4031)
12.) 10.390 -- yhahh (E8400 @ 4500)
13.) 10.824 -- lovely? (E8400 @ 4410)
14.) 10.888 -- markallen (Q9550 @ 4378)
15.) 10.953 -- vix (E8400 @ 4260)
16.) 10.982 -- jevery (Q9650 @ 4338)
17.) 11.024 -- Domain Man (Q9550 @ 4302)
18.) 11.311 -- MouSe (i7 920 @ 3675)
19.) 11.375 -- F.i.T.H (E8400 @ 4203)
20.) 11.384 -- [-0MEGA-] (Q9550 @ 4100)


11.466 -- houseofbugs (E8400 @ 4050)
11.625 -- DirtyD86 (E8400 @ 4000)
11.731 -- zer0_c00l (E8400 @ 4005)
11.734 -- Springy182 (Q9550 @ 4016)
11.832 -- bigrich0086 (Q9450 @ 3600) -pending validation
11.887 -- bomberboysk (Q9450 @ 3996)
11.953 -- MosIncredible (E8400 @ 3915)
11.965 -- XDRoX (E7200 @ 4380)
12.049 -- [-0MEGA-] (E8400 @ 4000)
12.330 -- Bodaggit23 (i7 920 @ 3430)
12.339 -- wilson (E8500 @ 3800)
12.540 -- The_Other_One (i7 920 @ 3320)
12.796 -- littlenlnga (E6750 @ 4024)
12.844 -- shenry (E8400 @ 3726)
12.859 -- Cleric7x9 (E8400 @ 3600)
12.906 -- Nexolus (Q6600 @ 3960)
13.172 -- Bootup05 (Q660 @ 4005)
13.276 -- tidyboy21 (E6600 @ 3906)
13.315 -- markallen (E6750 @ 3880)
13.516 -- just_a_noob (E5200 @ 4248)
14.187 -- MatrixEvo (Q6600 @ 3600)
14.640 -- Rusian777 (i7 920 @ 2800)
14.750 -- Ambushed (E6550 @ 3484)
14.926 -- Midnight_fox1 (Q6600 @ 3600)
15.078 -- Gareth (Q9450 @ 3181)
15.148 -- funkysnair (Q6600 @ 3600)
15.172 -- Casie (E6600 @ 3380)
15.756 -- Aastii (E6750 @ 3400)
15.985 -- Vipernitrox (E6420 @ 3300)
16.203 -- TFT (E6750 @ 3200)
16.229 -- Bootup05 (Q6600 @ 3400)
16.250 -- Bl00dFox (E6600 @ 3243)
16.359 -- skidude (Q9550 @ 2980)
16.375 -- Jet (E4500 @ 3500)
16.724 -- Kesava (Q6600 @ 3401)
16.879 -- MIK3daG33K (E4500 @ 3400)
16.895 -- Garethman!! (Q9450 @ 2840)
16.973 -- Nodz86 (Q9550 @ 2830)
17.125 -- Dazzeerr (Q6600 @ 2997)
17.282 -- Respital (E6850 @ 3000)
17.319 -- [-0MEGA-] (E6400 @ 3400)
17.457 -- gamerman4 (Q6600 @ 3000)
17.534 -- zer0_c00l (X2 720 @ 3940)
17.862 -- Mitch? (X3 720 @ 3978)
18.304 -- Bootup05 (E6400 @ 3440)
18.533 -- Hyde01 (T9300 @ 2493)
19.312 -- WhiteFireDragon (E2180 @ 3200)
19.564 -- gigantojim (X4 955 @ 3612)
19.610 -- newguy5 (E6750 @ 2670)
20.265 -- ScOuT (Q9300 @ 2737)
20.484 -- fade2green514 (E6300 @ 2709)
20.592 -- ramodkk (E2160 @ 3000)
22.311 -- Kornowski (Q6600 @ 2405)
22.579 -- Darkserge (E2220 @ 2753)
23.016 -- voyagerfan99 (T8300 @ 1596)
23.608 -- newjacksm (X4 940 @ 3000)
24.628 -- dark666apoc (X4 9850 @ 3250)
24.672 -- Mr. Johanssen (Phenom 7750 @ 3300)
25.329 -- ThatGuy16 (X2 5600+ @ 3439)
29.688 -- El DJ (X2 5200+ @ 3009)
31.188 -- PatPheFox (X4 9600 @ 2812)
31.251 -- Intel_man (E6300 @ 1866)
35.750 -- Darkserge (P4 @ 3910)
36.614 -- The_Other_One (M 540 @ 1862)
37.797 -- Fear Of Dreams (X2 BE-2400 @ 2422)
42.032 -- voyagerfan99 (X2 3800+ @ 2200)
42.323 -- Gooberman (X2 3800+ @ 2009MHz)
1m 01.985 -- pokemon89 (P4 @ 2394)
1m 33.610 -- The_Other_One (Atom @ 997)


----------



## Geoff

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> I went through all the post and I compiled and updated list:


You messed up my font, color, and size


----------



## voyagerfan99

[-0MEGA-];1327635 said:
			
		

> You messed up my font, color, and size



But I'm finally on the list 

I'm going to have to do it again after I get my 2.5Ghz 4800+ and overclock it


----------



## bigrich0086

11.832 @ 3.6GHz


----------



## CdnAudiophile

[-0MEGA-];1327635 said:
			
		

> You messed up my font, color, and size



lol my bad, I copied it over without it in color and had to redo each one. I'll remember for next time! lol


----------



## linkin

My old Pentium 4 score is in here somewhere.
Here's the score for my current setup:


----------



## aviation_man

Here's mine. Not OC'ed


----------



## Aastii

bigrich0086 said:


> 11.832 @ 3.6GHz



you don't have screenshots, it didn't happen  

While we are on about screenshots, I have the super pi time of when i oc'ed to 3.6 (when i managed to get 1 run in without super pi crashing), can i just post that with my processor currently OCed at 3.4, because i don't want to go through getting it stable to be able to print screen and post and that, the evidence is there after all


----------



## CdnAudiophile

linkin93- could you please state what the actually speed during the test was. In that screenshot, speedstep has turned on and underclocked your CPU.

aviation_man- Please download this new version Super PI 1.5 and run the test again. The new one gives a more accurate time allowing me to place you on the list.

bigrich0086- If you could post some screen shots please, I can then validate your score. If you haven't in a week the score comes off the list.


----------



## aviation_man

My b... lol I was wondering why mine didn't show milsecs..


----------



## CdnAudiophile

SuperPi Ranks:
Updated 09/28 2009​
Fastest CPU's:
Intel: 8.954 - Core i7 920 @ 4410MHz (THERMAL-REACTOR)
AMD: 17.534 - X3 720 @ 3940MHz (zer0_c00l)


Top Three:
1.) 8.954 -- THERMAL-REACTOR (i7 920 @ 4405) 
2.) 9.015 -- mikesrex (i7 920 @ 4410)
3.) 9.375 -- Matticus (E8500 @ 4968)



Top 10:
4.) 9.702 -- WhiteFireDragon (E8600 @ 4826)
5.) 9.951 -- ThatGuy16 (E8400 @ 4806)
6.) 9.968 -- bubblescivic (E8400 @ 4680)
7.) 9.968 -- mikesrex (E8400 @ 4680)
8.) 10.202 -- susik89 (i7 920 @ 3998)
9.) 10.280 -- tidyboy21 (E8500 @ 4599)
10.) 10.307 -- jkrause6 (i7 920 @ 4045)

Top 20:
11.) 10.390 -- bebopin64 (i7 920 @ 4031)
12.) 10.390 -- yhahh (E8400 @ 4500)
13.) 10.824 -- lovely? (E8400 @ 4410)
14.) 10.888 -- markallen (Q9550 @ 4378)
15.) 10.953 -- vix (E8400 @ 4260)
16.) 10.982 -- jevery (Q9650 @ 4338)
17.) 11.024 -- Domain Man (Q9550 @ 4302)
18.) 11.311 -- MouSe (i7 920 @ 3675)
19.) 11.375 -- F.i.T.H (E8400 @ 4203)
20.) 11.384 -- [-0MEGA-] (Q9550 @ 4100)


11.466 -- houseofbugs (E8400 @ 4050)
11.625 -- DirtyD86 (E8400 @ 4000)
11.731 -- zer0_c00l (E8400 @ 4005)
11.734 -- Springy182 (Q9550 @ 4016)
11.832 -- bigrich0086 (Q9450 @ 3600) -pending validation
11.887 -- bomberboysk (Q9450 @ 3996)
11.953 -- MosIncredible (E8400 @ 3915)
11.965 -- XDRoX (E7200 @ 4380)
12.049 -- [-0MEGA-] (E8400 @ 4000)
12.330 -- Bodaggit23 (i7 920 @ 3430)
12.339 -- wilson (E8500 @ 3800)
12.540 -- The_Other_One (i7 920 @ 3320)
12.796 -- littlenlnga (E6750 @ 4024)
12.844 -- shenry (E8400 @ 3726)
12.859 -- Cleric7x9 (E8400 @ 3600)
12.906 -- Nexolus (Q6600 @ 3960)
13.172 -- Bootup05 (Q660 @ 4005)
13.276 -- tidyboy21 (E6600 @ 3906)
13.315 -- markallen (E6750 @ 3880)
13.516 -- just_a_noob (E5200 @ 4248)
14.187 -- MatrixEvo (Q6600 @ 3600)
14.640 -- Rusian777 (i7 920 @ 2800)
14.750 -- Ambushed (E6550 @ 3484)
14.926 -- Midnight_fox1 (Q6600 @ 3600)
15.078 -- Gareth (Q9450 @ 3181)
15.148 -- funkysnair (Q6600 @ 3600)
15.172 -- Casie (E6600 @ 3380)
15.385 -- Aastii (E6750 @ 3500)
15.985 -- Vipernitrox (E6420 @ 3300)
16.203 -- TFT (E6750 @ 3200)
16.229 -- Bootup05 (Q6600 @ 3400)
16.250 -- Bl00dFox (E6600 @ 3243)
16.359 -- skidude (Q9550 @ 2980)
16.375 -- Jet (E4500 @ 3500)
16.724 -- Kesava (Q6600 @ 3401)
16.879 -- MIK3daG33K (E4500 @ 3400)
16.895 -- Garethman!! (Q9450 @ 2840)
16.973 -- Nodz86 (Q9550 @ 2830)
17.125 -- Dazzeerr (Q6600 @ 2997)
17.282 -- Respital (E6850 @ 3000)
17.319 -- [-0MEGA-] (E6400 @ 3400)
17.457 -- gamerman4 (Q6600 @ 3000)
17.534 -- zer0_c00l (X2 720 @ 3940)
17.862 -- Mitch? (X3 720 @ 3978)
18.304 -- Bootup05 (E6400 @ 3440)
18.533 -- Hyde01 (T9300 @ 2493)
19.312 -- WhiteFireDragon (E2180 @ 3200)
19.564 -- gigantojim (X4 955 @ 3612)
19.610 -- newguy5 (E6750 @ 2670)
20.265 -- ScOuT (Q9300 @ 2737)
20.484 -- fade2green514 (E6300 @ 2709)
20.592 -- ramodkk (E2160 @ 3000)
22.311 -- Kornowski (Q6600 @ 2405)
22.579 -- Darkserge (E2220 @ 2753)
23.016 -- voyagerfan99 (T8300 @ 1596)
23.608 -- newjacksm (X4 940 @ 3000)
24.628 -- dark666apoc (X4 9850 @ 3250)
24.672 -- Mr. Johanssen (Phenom 7750 @ 3300)
25.329 -- ThatGuy16 (X2 5600+ @ 3439)
29.688 -- El DJ (X2 5200+ @ 3009)
31.181 -- aviation_man (x4 9950 @ 2611)
31.188 -- PatPheFox (X4 9600 @ 2812)
31.251 -- Intel_man (E6300 @ 1866)
35.750 -- Darkserge (P4 @ 3910)
36.614 -- The_Other_One (M 540 @ 1862)
37.797 -- Fear Of Dreams (X2 BE-2400 @ 2422)
42.032 -- voyagerfan99 (X2 3800+ @ 2200)
42.323 -- Gooberman (X2 3800+ @ 2009MHz)
1m 01.985 -- pokemon89 (P4 @ 2394)
1m 33.610 -- The_Other_One (Atom @ 997)


----------



## Aastii

The CPU shows 3.2, that is the current OC i have, in reality when i got that score i was on 3.5, but asi  said in a previous post, don't really want to have to OC, get it stable and try to run again, super pi is a bitch when overclocked past 3.4, it doesn't like working on my system for some strange reason


----------



## CdnAudiophile

updated


----------



## bigrich0086

Heres the pictures. I had to run it again and this was the score i got with no processes running at all.


----------



## Vipernitrox

after getting my new cm atcs 840
old cpu decent oc but prolly not stable (didn't test it)


----------



## The_Other_One

Yay I'm last   If you want to be specific, it's an Atom N280.  Actually that Acer's getting replaced due to a flaw with the keyboard...  And that "M 540" is a Celeron.

Hmm...and now with this list, I'm tempted to push this processor a bit more.  I've yet to try anything above 3.3GHz 

BTW...  I wish I still had some slower computers, but my slowest is a 386SX/25MHz.  I could see about running superpi on there sometime :3


----------



## Glliw

Here's mine:






23.282s w/ AMD Phenom II x4 940BE at 3000mhz


----------



## bigrich0086

Glliw said:


> Here's mine:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 23.282s w/ AMD Phenom II x4 940BE at 3000mhz



OC that beast if you have aftermarket cooling. And get that score down to about 18secs.


----------



## Glliw

Yeah, stock cooler.  I've thought about it though.


----------



## linkin

Speedstep is showing 1200mhz in my pic because superpi  finished using the CPU. It clocked up to 2.2ghz when calculating. My score is valid.


----------



## kkpudge7

Heres mine, didn't take too much work to get her up to 4.3Ghz. I'm gonna try getting it up to 4.5Ghz later on and see if I can get close to that 8s barrier


----------



## CdnAudiophile

SuperPi Ranks:
Updated 09/30 2009​
Fastest CPU's:
Intel: 8.954 - Core i7 920 @ 4410MHz (THERMAL-REACTOR)
AMD: 17.534 - X3 720 @ 3940MHz (zer0_c00l)


Top Three:
1.) 8.954 -- THERMAL-REACTOR (i7 920 @ 4410) 
2.) 9.015 -- mikesrex (i7 920 @ 4410)
3.) 9.375 -- Matticus (E8500 @ 4968)



Top 10:
4.) 9.594 -- kkpudge7 (i7 920 @ 4305)
5.) 9.702 -- WhiteFireDragon (E8600 @ 4826)
6.) 9.951 -- ThatGuy16 (E8400 @ 4806)
7.) 9.968 -- bubblescivic (E8400 @ 4680)
8.) 9.968 -- mikesrex (E8400 @ 4680)
9.) 10.202 -- susik89 (i7 920 @ 3998)
10.) 10.280 -- tidyboy21 (E8500 @ 4599)


Top 20:
11.) 10.307 -- jkrause6 (i7 920 @ 4045) 
12.) 10.390 -- bebopin64 (i7 920 @ 4031)
13.) 10.390 -- yhahh (E8400 @ 4500)
14.) 10.824 -- lovely? (E8400 @ 4410)
15.) 10.888 -- markallen (Q9550 @ 4378)
16.) 10.953 -- vix (E8400 @ 4260)
17.) 10.982 -- jevery (Q9650 @ 4338)
18.) 11.000 -- bigrich0086 (Q9450 @ 3600)
19.) 11.024 -- Domain Man (Q9550 @ 4302)
20.) 11.311 -- MouSe (i7 920 @ 3675))


11.375 -- F.i.T.H (E8400 @ 4203)
11.384 -- [-0MEGA-] (Q9550 @ 4100
11.466 -- houseofbugs (E8400 @ 4050)
11.625 -- DirtyD86 (E8400 @ 4000)
11.731 -- zer0_c00l (E8400 @ 4005)
11.734 -- Springy182 (Q9550 @ 4016)
11.887 -- bomberboysk (Q9450 @ 3996)
11.953 -- MosIncredible (E8400 @ 3915)
11.965 -- XDRoX (E7200 @ 4380)
12.049 -- [-0MEGA-] (E8400 @ 4000)
12.330 -- Bodaggit23 (i7 920 @ 3430)
12.339 -- wilson (E8500 @ 3800)
12.540 -- The_Other_One (i7 920 @ 3320)
12.796 -- littlenlnga (E6750 @ 4024)
12.844 -- shenry (E8400 @ 3726)
12.859 -- Cleric7x9 (E8400 @ 3600)
12.906 -- Nexolus (Q6600 @ 3960)
13.172 -- Bootup05 (Q660 @ 4005)
13.276 -- tidyboy21 (E6600 @ 3906)
13.315 -- markallen (E6750 @ 3880)
13.369 -- Vipernitrox (Q6700 @ 3902)
13.516 -- just_a_noob (E5200 @ 4248)
14.187 -- MatrixEvo (Q6600 @ 3600)
14.640 -- Rusian777 (i7 920 @ 2800)
14.750 -- Ambushed (E6550 @ 3484)
14.926 -- Midnight_fox1 (Q6600 @ 3600)
15.078 -- Gareth (Q9450 @ 3181)
15.148 -- funkysnair (Q6600 @ 3600)
15.172 -- Casie (E6600 @ 3380)
15.385 -- Aastii (E6750 @ 3500)
15.985 -- Vipernitrox (E6420 @ 3300)
16.203 -- TFT (E6750 @ 3200)
16.229 -- Bootup05 (Q6600 @ 3400)
16.250 -- Bl00dFox (E6600 @ 3243)
16.359 -- skidude (Q9550 @ 2980)
16.375 -- Jet (E4500 @ 3500)
16.724 -- Kesava (Q6600 @ 3401)
16.879 -- MIK3daG33K (E4500 @ 3400)
16.895 -- Garethman!! (Q9450 @ 2840)
16.973 -- Nodz86 (Q9550 @ 2830)
17.125 -- Dazzeerr (Q6600 @ 2997)
17.282 -- Respital (E6850 @ 3000)
17.319 -- [-0MEGA-] (E6400 @ 3400)
17.457 -- gamerman4 (Q6600 @ 3000)
17.534 -- zer0_c00l (X2 720 @ 3940)
17.598 -- ScOuT (Q9300 @ 3000)
17.862 -- Mitch? (X3 720 @ 3978)
18.304 -- Bootup05 (E6400 @ 3440)
18.533 -- Hyde01 (T9300 @ 2493)
19.312 -- WhiteFireDragon (E2180 @ 3200)
19.564 -- gigantojim (X4 955 @ 3612)
19.610 -- newguy5 (E6750 @ 2670)
20.484 -- fade2green514 (E6300 @ 2709)
20.592 -- ramodkk (E2160 @ 3000)
22.311 -- Kornowski (Q6600 @ 2405)
22.579 -- Darkserge (E2220 @ 2753)
23.016 -- voyagerfan99 (T8300 @ 1596)
23.282 -- Glliw (x4 940BE @ 3000)
23.608 -- newjacksm (X4 940 @ 3000)
24.628 -- dark666apoc (X4 9850 @ 3250)
24.672 -- Mr. Johanssen (Phenom 7750 @ 3300)
25.329 -- ThatGuy16 (X2 5600+ @ 3439)
29.688 -- El DJ (X2 5200+ @ 3009)
31.181 -- aviation_man (x4 9950 @ 2611)
31.188 -- PatPheFox (X4 9600 @ 2812)
31.246 -- linkin93 (E4500 @ 2200)
31.251 -- Intel_man (E6300 @ 1866)
35.750 -- Darkserge (P4 @ 3910)
36.614 -- The_Other_One (M 540 @ 1862)
37.797 -- Fear Of Dreams (X2 BE-2400 @ 2422)
42.032 -- voyagerfan99 (X2 3800+ @ 2200)
42.323 -- Gooberman (X2 3800+ @ 2009MHz)
1m 01.985 -- pokemon89 (P4 @ 2394)
1m 33.610 -- The_Other_One (Atom N280 @ 997)


----------



## linkin

Woot i'm on the list.
I'll post my new score up when all my new gear gets here and after i OC my E4500 hopefully to 3ghz or higher... hoping for 2.8ghz at least even and maybe up to 3.2ghz

EDIT: Guys, i'm having trouble with superpi. it works once and then whenever i calculate any number of pi digits it hangs.


----------



## ScOuT

Got an updated score...cranked up the cpu a little.


----------



## linkin

That's quick. Almost 2x better than my E4500.... I can't wait to overclock that thing.

Do you guys think an 11x multi or 10x multi is better? I hear that core 2 duo's like higher fsb due to bandwidth or something, so that means a 10x/9x multi right? I'm hoping to go for 3ghz. I've already written down some increments to start with...


----------



## G25r8cer

Gosh I cant wait until my PII rig is done. This coming up Tuesday im getting the rest of the parts!!!


----------



## aviation_man

I can't wait to get my aftermarket heat sink so I can OC this bad boy!  I'm also sort've waiting for my warranty to expire on it...


----------



## CdnAudiophile

updated


----------



## dark666apoc

so.. no body has tried this in a 550? COME ON NOW lolol


----------



## Geoff

Scores updated.

THERMAL-REACTOR, I appreciate you trying to help but if you could at least keep the formatting, fonts, and sizes the same then I would be able to use them.


----------



## just a noob

wonder if 5ghz is attainable with my i7(at under 1.5v)


----------



## kkpudge7

> wonder if 5ghz is attainable with my i7(at under 1.5v)



just a noob, I have seen it done before...but it is going to take some phase or ln2 cooling solutions. Picture is from ross over at OCF.


----------



## just a noob

if it's only going to take 230 mhz for the qpi link or whatever it's called(i'm new to the whole lga 1366 terminology lol) my classified should be able to do it, i'll just wait until the middle of winter, then open a window, should be -20*C in the room easy lol


----------



## Bodaggit23

kkpudge7 said:


> just a noob, I have seen it done before...but it is going to take some phase or ln2 cooling solutions. Picture is from ross over at OCF.



Holy [email protected]

That's an 860 though. justanoob has a 920.

I've never seen a socket 1366 i7 get that high....

Respect the 1156.


----------



## kkpudge7

I have seen several 920's get past the 5Ghz barrier. One as high as 5.6Ghz, but you need liquid nitrogen or phase cooling, as you would need a Vcore upwards of 1.55v or more. Ive seen many 920's bench stable (not prime) at 4.5Ghz on air. Which is where I want to get mine


----------



## AcetheGamer

here's mine

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/6571/superpiu.png


----------



## linkin

Here is my updated score:


----------



## G25r8cer

Will update later 

Gonna finally be doing some OC'ing

Edit: sorry had the wrong version of SuperPi


----------



## Kornowski

Not too bad I guess;


----------



## aviation_man

Since people are updating theirs, I'll do mine. Raised the FSB by 200Mhz


----------



## just a noob

Kornowski said:


> Not too bad I guess;



haha, you got beaten by my e5200, granted that it was almost 1ghz higher in terms of clock speed


----------



## G25r8cer

First time OC'ing so be easy on me






Cant find FSB : DRAM in bios. Ram is running at 863mhz. Thats too high, right? Any pointers guys?


----------



## Kornowski

just a noob said:


> haha, you got beaten by my e5200, granted that it was almost 1ghz higher in terms of clock speed



Shut it you!


----------



## just a noob

Kornowski said:


> Shut it you!



don't worry, i'll completely crush you when my ram gets here


----------



## lovely?

Kornowski said:


> Not too bad I guess;



no. its not bad at all. just 100mhz faster, .2v higher, and 2 seconds slower  just playin bud!


----------



## Kornowski

just a noob said:


> don't worry, i'll completely crush you when my ram gets here



All talk no walk, lol.



lovely? said:


> no. its not bad at all. just 100mhz faster, .2v higher, and 2 seconds slower  just playin bud!



Haha! Nice score man. How you liking the i5?


----------



## just a noob

hmm, it appears that i have(or at least had) a q6700 at 3.9ghz  and here i thought i had an e5200


----------



## ScottALot

Says 19 Sec.

AMD Phenom II X4 955 Running at 3.636GHz


----------



## linkin

Here's mine again.






I think that's pretty good for this processor. at 2.2ghz i got 31 seconds


----------



## G25r8cer

^^ Now your just spammin


----------



## lovely?

Kornowski said:


> All talk no walk, lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Haha! Nice score man. How you liking the i5?



its actually really really good. im surprised at the increase in processing capacity, and for stock clocks and voltages, 3.4ghz is very nice all things considered. i can't wait to get some real cooling on here and get back into the top ten 1m times


----------



## just a noob

i'll be able to mess with it some more when i get home from school


----------



## linkin

just a noob said:


> snip
> 
> i'll be able to mess with it some more when i get home from school



That's a geat time! Most i7's ive seen get around 8 seconds... yours gets 11?


----------



## just a noob

linkin93 said:


> That's a geat time! Most i7's ive seen get around 8 seconds... yours gets 11?



because mine is only at 3.5ghz, most so far are like 4.4ghz+


----------



## just a noob

new score


----------



## linkin

somehow managed to shave a few hundredths of a second off.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

So guys, I got some good results with this new 920. The highest I have hit so far is 4720mhz. I need to borrow my friends ram again and try for even faster but this will do for now:


----------



## just a noob

what batch number is it anyway?


----------



## CdnAudiophile

It is batch #3851A368


----------



## Shane

4.7Ghz  wow nice one!


----------



## CdnAudiophile

Nevakonaza said:


> 4.7Ghz  wow nice one!



Thanks man, this CPU has alot more in it too. My ram was running at 2000mhz with 10-10-10-24 timings. I will borrow my friend's Corsair GT 2000mhz ram again and see how much tightening the timings will give me.


----------



## Shane

Heres mine,Just overclocked my system again to 3.2ghz due to my resetting the bios  

I was gonna go back to 3.4 but there realy wasnt any diffrence,not in benchmarks anyway...and it lowered temps a little.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

With your temps that low man you could go much higher. What is the max that you have hit?


----------



## aviation_man

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Thanks man, this CPU has alot more in it too. My ram was running at 2000mhz with 10-10-10-24 timings. I will borrow my friend's Corsair GT 2000mhz ram again and see how much tightening the timings will give me.



Forgive me if I've asked you this previously, but did you say you had the V8 for a HSF?


----------



## CdnAudiophile

I use the Thermalright IFX-14 Cooler. When I purchased my system in december there were no 1366 coolers on the market. I have a friend that works in a machine shop and had him make me a custom bracket. I do not have it lapped but due to the custom bracket it is sort of pressure modded. Here is a comparison test with the TRUE and the CM V8 against the IFX-14 It's on a Q6600 but you can see how it could be a very good cooler for i7.


----------



## Shane

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> With your temps that low man you could go much higher. What is the max that you have hit?



i have not realy tried anything over 3.4ghz... its what i got it stable...i cant realy get it to 3.5,for some reason core 3 and 4 dissapears when i go over 3.4 

i think its my motherboard.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

Nevakonaza said:


> i have not realy tried anything over 3.4ghz... its what i got it stable...i cant realy get it to 3.5,for some reason core 3 and 4 dissapears when i go over 3.4
> 
> i think its my motherboard.



That's weird, you have the latest bios? I wonder if there are others with the same problem. How long have you had the board?


----------



## Shane

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> That's weird, you have the latest bios? I wonder if there are others with the same problem. How long have you had the board?



Yup latest Bios i updated it not so long back....ive had this board...quite some time,maybe 2-2.5 years ,i originally had a Core 2 Duo E6300 1.86ghz (Conroe)on it,and that i couldnt get to OC past 2.8Ghz no matter how much voltage increases...obviusly i didnt push it too far though.

Im just thinking that,becasue its a budget motherboard ive realy hit the top of what its capable of


----------



## Vipernitrox

the q66xx aren't that good at oc'ing. They're very hot for starters. I've had mine at 3.9 tops (wc) but that wasn't stable. I'd oc it more if i have the time but i dont really feel the urge yet it's fast enough as it is.


----------



## lovely?

I've been able to reach 4.36ghz with my 750, but i can't seem to push the BCLK any higher than 218mhz. i've messed with all kinds of voltage settings and tried what other people have done around the net, but nothing seems to work. have any hints? or a template to work off of?


----------



## Gareth

Q9450 at 3.20GHz


----------



## linkin

^^ Cool. but where is the SuperPi?


----------



## Gareth

Its there, 14.976 seconds, in the top image =)


----------



## Shane

Nice Gareth!

Im courius...if i somehow change my overclock to try and get a Higher FSB would i get better Superpi results and overall better overclock?

Im currently at 3.2 now,But im sure i could get better.


----------



## linkin

Oh, my bad. i was at my dads place where we are using mcdonalds free wifi from across the road! (horribly slow from that distance) and i couldn't see the top image. nice time.


----------



## Voltt




----------



## dark666apoc

lolol i almost shit myself

you ran 16 k you're suppose to run the 1mb iteration


----------



## voyagerfan99

dark666apoc said:


> lolol i almost shit myself
> 
> you ran 16 k you're suppose to run the 1mb iteration



Yeah I was gonna say.......


----------



## Gareth

I wonder how long it will be until we get CPUs that can do 1mb in 0 seconds? lol


----------



## voyagerfan99

Gareth said:


> I wonder how long it will be until we get CPUs that can do 1mb in 0 seconds? lol



I dunno. The new CPU's are only a few seconds away


----------



## jhonrox

Here's mine:
27 seconds on an Athlon II X2 250 @ 3GHz (stock settings - I know, its rubbish!!)


----------



## G25r8cer

^^ Thats not rubbish!


----------



## jhonrox

g25racer said:


> ^^ Thats not rubbish!



Well .. I've seen screenshots of a couple of others (Intels) at around 3GHz and most of them were between 18-25s!!


----------



## Aastii

jhonrox said:


> Well .. I've seen screenshots of a couple of others (Intels) at around 3GHz and most of them were between 18-25s!!



intel do much much better than AMD on these.

In real world use my CPU and yours are about on parr (mine has double L2 cache of yours though) and I am on intel C2D and when at 3.2 (what it is now) it beats yours by a good 10 seconds, if i knocked it down to 3.0 so they are the same it would still be atleast 8 seconds faster, just because it is intel.

For an AMD chip on superpi that isn't a time to be ashamed of


----------



## dark666apoc

amd just falls WAY behind on super-pi im personally getting a new board before i get to overclocking my 620 core to see if i can get back to the top of the list xD(with my line of processors atleast haha) but right now at 2.8 (as far as i can go on this board) my best time is only about 26


----------



## Bodaggit23

[Hijack]

Look at all the i7 scores in the list on the first post!

Why are none of you (i7) people folding??? [/Hijack]


----------



## Antic

I got to 2.1GHz without raising the voltage.


----------



## Jet

My first run under 9 seconds...sadly not quite enough to take first, but another day after more optimization!

EDIT: That's a great run Thermal! I can't quite reach it--this is my only run under 9 seconds!


----------



## aviation_man

Bodaggit23 said:


> [Hijack]
> 
> Look at all the i7 scores in the list on the first post!
> 
> Why are none of you (i7) people folding??? [/Hijack]



+1 for Mr. Bodaggit23.

I'd like to know the answer to that question as well!  

(We have one trustworthy folder with an i7, Jet


----------



## CdnAudiophile

Jet said:


> My first run under 9 seconds...sadly not quite enough to take first, but another day after more optimization!
> 
> EDIT: That's a great run Thermal! I can't quite reach it--this is my only run under 9 seconds!



Awesome run. Looks like you got a great chip too only needing 1.44v for 4.5ghz, nice stuff man!


----------



## Jet

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Awesome run. Looks like you got a great chip too only needing 1.44v for 4.5ghz, nice stuff man!



Heh! It's barely there. One more bump in frequency, and it crashes--so it's SuperPi stable, but not much else. 

I'm pretty much at a wall right there--I can't get past it with even higher voltages (ie, 1.5V, etc.). Looks like you have some nice temps there--which cooler is that?


----------



## CdnAudiophile

My cooler is a Thermal Right IFX-14. It does extremely well. I noticed you didn't have HT on, was heat an issue? Maybe a higher cfm fan on your rad would be beneficial.


----------



## Jet

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> My cooler is a Thermal Right IFX-14. It does extremely well. I noticed you didn't have HT on, was heat an issue? Maybe a higher cfm fan on your rad would be beneficial.



Heat's not an issue for SuperPi--and I didn't need HT for SuperPi either, so I just cut it out in my attempt to get sub-9 second times. For 24/7 usage, I have it on--at 4Ghz/1.3V, I'm running around 70C on all the cores. I did a fairly bad job mounting it, and used the stock TIM because I didn't have any alcohol to take it off, so that might be another aspect of it.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

Have you found the max bclk your board can do? Use a low multi and just keep increasing the qpi until it crashes. It will allow you to see how high you could push your board. Maybe play around with your ram. You can have a maximum of .5v difference between your QPI voltage and your Dram. If you have your QPI at 1.35 you could go all the way up 1.85v on your ram (this is the max I would do) Ram has a great affect on the speed. The 8.954 run of mine was @ only 4410 but the ram was at 1877 with 6-6-6-20 timings (friends Corsair Dominator GT ram). My 8.7s run was @ 4.7gh with ram at 2022 but with 10-10-10-24 timings because I was using my Patriot ram. You can see how with even all the extra CPU and ram speed the time is only .2s faster because my rams timings are loose. I just learnt recently about being able to go up to 1.85v on the ram so I was only working with the stock 1.65v at the time. I will defiantly do some more tuning soon especially if I go with water.


----------



## Jet

It looks like I'm hitting a wall with my motherboard right around 216BLK--the Uncore frequency doesn't like going above 3.8, so I lowered my memory and Uncore, and I am a bit past there. Then, I'm thinking that the QPI is limiting--apparently people hit a wall around 4Ghz QPI--I max at around 218BLK.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

So when even lowering your ram the max is 218 your saying? 218 on an Asrock board is phenominal man. That's very impressive. Have you checked around to see what other Asrock owners are getting? Most i7 guys don't hit your speeds. 

The max this board has done is 230. I have seen some classified owners in the 240 range but that is super rare (only 2 I have seen). Too bad these didn't have unlocked multi's as I think we both could hit in the 5.0ghz+ range.


----------



## The Chad

Wasn't on this computer, was on my old one


----------



## Jet

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> So when even lowering your ram the max is 218 your saying? 218 on an Asrock board is phenominal man. That's very impressive. Have you checked around to see what other Asrock owners are getting? Most i7 guys don't hit your speeds.
> 
> The max this board has done is 230. I have seen some classified owners in the 240 range but that is super rare (only 2 I have seen). Too bad these didn't have unlocked multi's as I think we both could hit in the 5.0ghz+ range.



Yep--218 is max at the voltages I'm running right now...I'm not sure how much I can increase them for short runs without messing things up. Hey, I only paid $125 shipped for it, so I'm not complaining, though I wouldn't mind getting a bit higher! Now, just to get a 3.8-4.2 super stable for bigadv, and we're set!


----------



## Intel_man

TurboBoost only goes up to 2.8 GHz during the runs.


----------



## jibachabili

i think wPrime is a better software……
superpi only support one core,doesnt it ?


----------



## Intel_man

jibachabili said:


> i think wPrime is a better software……
> superpi only support one core,doesnt it ?



Well there IS the multicore superpi, but that's in the other thread.


----------



## Sam_VDC

My SuperPI 1M

187 BCLK *21 = 3927MHz TURBO BOOST enabled


----------



## Bodaggit23

Sam_VDC said:


> My SuperPI 1M



Very nice! You're in the top 5!

BUMP for an update.


----------



## Jet

nice...I have the top spot now, by a whopping .001 seconds . Screen to come.


----------



## linkin

hmmmm.... i should do superpi on my newly overclocked pentium


----------



## linkin

okay so here is my superpi:


----------



## Gooberman

NOES you can't beat my 42 seconds, you can't... =[


----------



## linkin

my old score already has  check the first page


----------



## Gooberman

Noes


----------



## linkin

yesses


----------



## Jet




----------



## linkin

got to 4ghz, haven't done any prime95 yet.











EDIT: 4ghz not prime95 stable... guess i'll stick to 3.8ghz


----------



## Shane

what was your temps like linkin93 

Jet, 4.5Ghz thats awesome man!


----------



## linkin

temps were still 22c idle  and they still are. i just get higher load temps (55c max with prime95, on a hot day)


----------



## NCspecV81

i7 920






Phenom II 965


----------



## Shane

linkin93 said:


> temps were still 22c idle  and they still are. i just get higher load temps (55c max with prime95, on a hot day)



Wow thats good,Whats your cooler?

45nm is realy good though,they all seem to run very cool...immagine what 32nm core i5s are like


----------



## The Chad

Check this out:

http://www.news24.com/Content/SciTe...5653a/11-01-2010-06-06/PC_wiz_claims_Pi_crown



> A French software engineer said on Friday he was claiming a world record for calculating Pi, the constant that has fascinated mathematicians for millennia.


----------



## Jet

NCspecV81 said:


> i7 920
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phenom II 965



Nice! Got me beat for sure .


----------



## linkin

Nevakonaza said:


> Wow thats good,Whats your cooler?
> 
> 45nm is realy good though,they all seem to run very cool...immagine what 32nm core i5s are like



Zalman CNPS7000Al-Cu:


----------



## Sam_VDC

Jet said:


> Nice! Got me beat for sure .



You must be on LN2 or DICE with that much voltage on i7.
Top ranking now for sure.


----------



## gimmigzgy

Here's Mine


----------



## Bodaggit23

NCspecV81 said:


> i7 920
> Phenom II 965



Any schmo off the street can come in a brag...

This thread should be limited to members with over 100 posts...


----------



## The Chad




----------



## Bodaggit23

The Chad said:


> [/QUOTE]
> 
> How'd you beat me with a lower clock? :eek:


----------



## The Chad

Bodaggit23 said:


> How'd you beat me with a lower clock?



Only bya little bit! 

 What were your clocks?

Not sure why actually, maybe I had less backround things going? I've noticed that that adds a little bit.


----------



## Vipernitrox

less crap in background, faster memory, tighter timings on memory. Could be lots of stuff


----------



## Bodaggit23

I'm pretty sure my extra 7 cores were taking care of any stray processes while the calculations were being done...

CPU was at 3.43Ghz
My RAM is Cas 8
Vista x64 (39 running processes)

I tried to find my screenshot, but it's buried. 

Nice job though!


----------



## Jet

Bodaggit--are you running a 20X multi or a 21X? If you're running 21X, he'll have slightly faster BCLK, QPI, etc. As well, he has Windows 7 to your Vista.


----------



## Vipernitrox

last time i checked i7 was still quad core  But your prolly referring to threads.
doesn't superpi run on some linux systems? If you really want top performance and squeeze out the last possible millisec. Why not compile your own (very slim) linux distro. Or just strip down an existing one (like dsl)


----------



## Bodaggit23

Vipernitrox said:


> last time i checked i7 was still quad core  But your prolly referring to threads.



Thanks for your amazing input. Yes, excuse me for my horrible choice of words.

I'll get right on that distro as soon as I get off work. 

I don't remember what my multi is at, but it's probably 21 since Turbo is enabled,
along with hyperthreading, which maybe a factor also?

So you think Win 7 is a factor, even though I had only 39 processes? How many 
processes does your Win 7 have atm?


----------



## Vipernitrox

it's not all about processes. I've got 57 right now. including avatar (game) in the background. Only running 8% off cpu load.

Just minor things can impact superpi. If you run it more than once you'll get different results. We're talking about milli seconds here. They're just... short . Anything that could possible use cpu load can slow down superpi. If you really want it perfect. Create a bootable superpi or something like that. It'll probably be doable to create a damn small linux bootable with superpi integrated on cd/image.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Vipernitrox said:


> create a damn small linux bootable with superpi integrated on cd/image



You're way over my head, with creating a bootable linux superpi thingy.

Anyway, I just notice he has a D0 chip. Mines a C0. 

.35 seconds better at lower frequency. Nice. :good:


----------



## Vipernitrox

superpi is available on linux but i doubt omega will allow it here. Also they seem to have an advantage over windows. Just saw some guy reporting 8 sec improvement. What you could give a try is to strip down windows xp to the limit. You can use nlite to strip almost anything out of it. Just leave usb drivers so you can put on and take files of the os.


----------



## poke349

Problem is that SuperPi isn't speed consistent between Windows and Linux.
Especially if you're gonna compile it yourself.

The only reason why you use SuperPi is because it's a set standard so that everyone has the same speed program.


If you're gonna give up program consistency, then you might as well run one of about a billion other programs that are faster and can go sub-one-second for 1M Pi without effort...


----------



## Jet

Bodaggit23 said:


> I don't remember what my multi is at, but it's probably 21 since Turbo is enabled,
> along with hyperthreading, which maybe a factor also?



Since he's running a lower multiplier, he'd have a faster BCLK. Who knows how much difference that would make on a 1M calculation, but you never know.


----------



## Bodaggit23

I'll give it another go when I get my RAM back.


----------



## NCspecV81

Sam_VDC said:


> You must be on LN2 or DICE with that much voltage on i7.




actually, no dice or ln2 on those.


----------



## Bodaggit23

NCspecV81 said:


> actually, no dice or ln2 on those.



Really? What do you put in that pot then? 

Thanks for coming to our little forum and showing us your big boy rig.


----------



## NCspecV81

Bodaggit23 said:


> Really? What do you put in that pot then?
> 
> Thanks for coming to our little forum and showing us your big boy rig.




??? you got a chip on your shoulder or something? 

Trust me, 5.1ghz superpi on a phenom II isn't an ln2 run. Only if you way undershoot your potential. 

Both of those runs were on phase, not maxed out. 

Now, we both like computers. Can't we get along?


----------



## meticadpa

Bodaggit23 said:


> Really? What do you put in that pot then?
> 
> Thanks for coming to our little forum and showing us your big boy rig.



Wait, so you don't want him to post his times/scores because they're good?

What kind of place is this... Admiration is given for things like this on most forums; not jealousy like here.

That's pretty out-of-order, in my opinion.

I'll upload my time later, E8500 at ~4.5GHz, as long as you don't think they're too good to post...


----------



## Geoff

meticadpa said:


> Wait, so you don't want him to post his times/scores because they're good?
> 
> What kind of place is this... Admiration is given for things like this on most forums; not jealousy like here.
> 
> That's pretty out-of-order, in my opinion.
> 
> I'll upload my time later, E8500 at ~4.5GHz, as long as you don't think they're too good to post...


What he is upset about is that members like him and you join, post incredibly good scores that the average joe here won't be able to beat, and then leaves again and never comes back.


----------



## meticadpa

[-0MEGA-];1399064 said:
			
		

> What he is upset about is that members like him and you join, post incredibly good scores that the average joe here won't be able to beat, and then leaves again and never comes back.



You mean jealous of hardware, then?

Spec's a hardcore enthusiast, whereas I'm a more casual user... anyone with a half decent, non-AMD setup (something 775 Dual core or 1156 or 1366) should be able to attain scores close to mine, if not outscore me.

Computers are no things worthy of jealousy/hatred about... I know Spec fairly well, and I'm aware of his ridiculous hardware, but I'm not jealous, more appreciative that he's got the funds/desire to buy the stuff, yet not be a jerk about it.


----------



## mep916

Bodaggit23 said:


> Thanks for coming to our little forum and showing us your big boy rig.



No need to have an attitude. NVSpec is welcome to post his score, just as anyone else. Geoff, when you have time, can you please update the rankings? 

We should welcome this guy to the forum, not harass him.


----------



## meticadpa

mep916 said:


> No need to have an attitude. NVSpec is welcome to post his score, just as anyone else. Geoff, when you have time, can you please update the rankings?
> 
> We should welcome this guy to the forum, not harass him.



This guy knows how to be a forum member.


----------



## Bodaggit23

I'm not jealous, nor do I mean to harass, but [-0MEGA-] stated my sentiment exactly.

I'd love to have more uber overclockers hang out here, 
but It just doesn't seem like these are those guys. 

This is what, 4 guys now from overclock recently? 
The first two stating that we're basically retards compared to them. 

Time will tell if they're here to hang or just to brag. 

Apologies if I've offended anyone.


----------



## mep916

Bodaggit23 said:


> I'm not jealous, nor do I mean to harass, but [-0MEGA-] stated my sentiment exactly.



I understand. However, everyone in the top rankings is a regularly (or semi-regular) active member, so I don't see a trend in hit and run type posts in this thread. It's best to give an individual the benefit of the doubt before flaming. 



Bodaggit23 said:


> This is what, 4 guys now from overclock recently?
> The first two stating that we're basically retards compared to them.



We had an issue with a few and they won't be back. 



Bodaggit23 said:


> Time will tell if they're here to hang or just to brag.



Probably both, which is fine.  So long as it's done respectfully and in good fun. Nothing wrong with a little competition.


----------



## El Gappo

You guys don't like subzero times huh! I'll stick to air cooling for now  














Hello btw


----------



## meticadpa

I'm an overclock.net member (same username), and I actually signed up here because NCspec linked me to one of his posts here.

And I think that this forum is a bit more... basic compared to OCN, but I don't think you're "retards", that's a bit harsh.


----------



## mep916

meticadpa said:


> And I think that this forum is a bit more... basic compared to OCN, but I don't think you're "retards", that's a bit harsh.



I banned all the retards. 

The content at CF is a reflection of the user base. Everyone is here to contribute what they know and to learn. If you guys from OCN are here to help with that, that is awesome.


----------



## meticadpa

mep916 said:


> I banned all the retards.
> 
> The content at CF is a reflection of the user base. Everyone is here to contribute what they know and to learn. If you guys from OCN are here to help with that, that is awesome.



I'll do what I can.

However, there's a distinct lack of activity in the PSU Section here... I'm not happy. That's my favourite section!


----------



## Bodaggit23

meticadpa said:


> I'll do what I can.
> 
> However, there's a distinct lack of activity in the PSU Section here... I'm not happy. That's my favourite section!



We do have a few less members than you guys.


----------



## Respital

meticadpa said:


> I'll do what I can.
> 
> However, there's a distinct lack of activity in the PSU Section here... I'm not happy. That's my favourite section!



Start contributing then.


----------



## meticadpa

Bodaggit23 said:


> We do have a few less members than you guys.



That's very true, yeah.

OCN is quite busy.



Respital said:


> Start contributing then.



I only really answer questions though; I don't have anything to contribute, unless I made a guide of some sort.


----------



## El Gappo

Does the op get updated much?


----------



## mep916

El Gappo said:


> Does the op get updated much?



Usually when there's a new top score, it gets updated fairly quickly.

I've also deleted a few more posts in this thread. It's just the internet fellas. Really, try to get along.


----------



## El Gappo

OK  I'll get to work on taking spec down tomorrow  
Thanks for the clean up, it was getting ridiculous.


----------



## NCspecV81

I'm not associated with any forums. If anything, I'm from NC and that's how I roll.


Gappo - won't happen =o)~


----------



## El Gappo

GAME ON  You can't use those elpida sticks tho  it's just not fair.


----------



## just a noob

you guys can have the superpi score, just stay away from my 3dmark score


----------



## El Gappo

just a noob said:


> you guys can have the superpi score, just stay away from my 3dmark score



Oh dear, you shouldn't of told him that  3dbenching doesn't interest me that much tbh.


----------



## just a noob

i don't think my record can stand much longer, it was using a pair of gtx 285's, and i was limited to around 4.5ghz for the run(3dmark just crashed to desktop when i got to 4.6ghz) and my ram won't do much over 1800mhz


----------



## NCspecV81

there are 3d ones? link!?  3D is where it's at!


----------



## just a noob

NCspecV81 said:


> there are 3d ones? link!?  3D is where it's at!



NEVAR it's mine


----------



## NCspecV81

found it. =o)~


----------



## Bodaggit23

I'd like to submit a new score please.


----------



## El Gappo

Bodaggit23 said:


> I'd like to submit a new score please.



Do you have the worlds worst C0 or are you trying to kill it with pie and volts? seriously why 1.5 volts?

Also PI is single threaded, disable ht.


----------



## Bodaggit23

El Gappo said:


> Do you have the worlds worst C0 or are you trying to kill it with pie and volts? seriously why 1.5 volts?
> 
> Also PI is single threaded, disable ht.



I respond better to constructive criticism than negative digs.

I thought I had a decent batch C0, but I could be wrong. This is as high as I've ever had it.

Thanks for suggesting turning off HT, and can I drop my voltage until unstable and then up it?

EDIT: Disabling HT dropped my multi and I scored 10.5...


----------



## El Gappo

Bodaggit23 said:


> I respond better to constructive criticism than negative digs.
> 
> I thought I had a decent batch C0, but I could be wrong. This is as high as I've ever had it.
> 
> Thanks for suggesting turning off HT, and can I drop my voltage until unstable and then up it?
> 
> EDIT: Disabling HT dropped my multi and I scored 10.5...



Yup you can. I think there is something else that you are doing wrong if it needs that much voltage for 4.2 when your temps arn't even bad, show me a screenshot of the spd mem and mobo tabs in cpu'z and list the voltages your using and I'll take a look.


----------



## Sam_VDC

@Bodaggit23
Your score will be improved with Turboboost on.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Sam_VDC said:


> @Bodaggit23
> Your score will be improved with Turboboost on.


 :good:



El Gappo said:


> Yup you can. I think there is something else that you are doing wrong if it
> needs that much voltage for 4.2 when your temps arn't even bad, show
> me a screenshot of the spd mem and mobo tabs in cpu'z and list the
> voltages your using and I'll take a look.



You're right, my chip "need" that much...
New CPU tab...






Other requested:


----------



## El Gappo

You can try using the X19 multi, it is usually more stable, and raise up the blck  
When you crash out what happens? lock up, bsod? 
Also the QPI should be much lower you don't need it that high, around 2400Mhz will do just fine.


----------



## Bodaggit23

El Gappo said:


> You can try using the X19 multi, it is usually more stable, and raise up the blck
> When you crash out what happens? lock up, bsod?
> Also the QPI should be much lower you don't need it that high, around 2400Mhz will do just fine.



So, CPU Clock Ratio to 19x?

I get BSOD.

How do I change the QPI specifically?


----------



## El Gappo

Yup, its worth a try  What bsod of death code? 
There is a qpi multiplier in your bios, just try and set the target speed around 2.4ghz. You may also want to lower your ram and nb multi's as well since raising the base clock will effect most other speeds.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Raise the BLCK?


----------



## NCspecV81

raise the PCIE frequency. If you can use the 21x use the 21x b/c you will eventually get a higher clock with it. Just don't use the 20x, it blows.


----------



## El Gappo

Bodaggit23 said:


> Raise the BLCK?



Are you trying to be funny or do you do all of your overclocking within windows?  BLCK is the base clock. 220 (blck) X19 (cpu multi) = 4.18ghz (cpu clock speed) for example. I'm sure you can find some video's or guides on this. I'd link to a good one but its in the bench team section 

Forgot about pci clock for a second, tah spec.


----------



## Jet

NCspecV81 said:


> raise the PCIE frequency. If you can use the 21x use the 21x b/c you will eventually get a higher clock with it. Just don't use the 20x, it blows.



I've raised my PCIE up to 104--is that high enough, or does it need more?


----------



## Bodaggit23

I'm not being funny, nor am I overclocking within Windows.

I have no BCLK in my BIOS settings. 

I just don't know exactly which settings you're referring to, in my BIOS.


----------



## NCspecV81

is your board the e758? If so you do have quite a few overclocking options. It may read as FSB or Bclk or Base clock. I can't remember. I had the board at one time, but I don't remember the breakdown of the bios.


What happened to the standings??? =o\


----------



## Bodaggit23

NCspecV81 said:


> is your board the e758? If so you do have quite a few overclocking options. It may read as FSB or Bclk or Base clock. I can't remember. I had the board at one time, but I don't remember the breakdown of the bios.



Yes, that's my board.

After further research, my BIOS shows BCLK as "CPU Host Frequency", which is also the "QPI".


----------



## The Chad

Bodaggit23 said:


> I'd like to submit a new score please.



No! Damn thought I was going to beat you 

I'm not ready yet to change voltages and things so i'll just be sticking to my 3.4.

Well done though


----------



## Bodaggit23

The Chad said:


> No! Damn thought I was going to beat you
> 
> I'm not ready yet to change voltages and things so i'll just be sticking to my 3.4.
> 
> Well done though



Thanks. Would have been Top 10...


----------



## bomberboysk

NCspecV81 said:


> ??? you got a chip on your shoulder or something?
> 
> Trust me, 5.1ghz superpi on a phenom II isn't an ln2 run. Only if you way undershoot your potential.
> 
> Both of those runs were on phase, not maxed out.
> 
> Now, we both like computers. Can't we get along?



Probably would have been best to specify that at the beginning you were running a change phase or cascade setup, because the way you put it many members probably assumed it was an air bench. Who made the unit were you running those benches with?


----------



## linkin

[-0MEGA-];682291 said:
			
		

> **Removed*
> 
> I will re-add the contributing threads I posted if Computer Forum stops continuing in it's downward cycle.  This forum is slowly dying, the long-term helpful members have left/banned, and now this is full with trolls, spammers, and complete idiots.  It's been great, and sorry to do this for those few useful members here.*





Sorry you feel that way.


----------



## TFT

linkin93 said:


> Sorry you feel that way.



Don't feel sorry for him, the kid took away the ball so the rest can't play, how childish.


----------



## spynoodle

TFT said:


> Don't feel sorry for him, the kid took away the ball so the rest can't play, how childish.


+1. I feel quite offended by his lack of support for the awesomeness of Computer Forum!


----------



## linkin

Now that i read it again, it was very selfish...

but life goes on. people will make new threads and new stickies and guides.


----------



## Aastii

linkin93 said:


> Now that i read it again, it was very selfish...
> 
> but life goes on. people will make new threads and new stickies and guides.



oi!! give me a quote on that


----------



## Jet

If I have some time this afternoon, I might get around to compiling the stats.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Jet said:


> If I have some time this afternoon, I might get around to compiling the stats.



I thought someone did that once already? 

It may have gotten deleted I guess, as I looked but couldn't find it.


----------



## spynoodle

I nominate Bodaggit as new leader-person!


----------



## CdnAudiophile

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> SuperPi Ranks:
> Updated 09/30 2009​
> Fastest CPU's:
> Intel: 8.954 - Core i7 920 @ 4410MHz (THERMAL-REACTOR)
> AMD: 17.534 - X3 720 @ 3940MHz (zer0_c00l)
> 
> 
> Top Three:
> 1.) 8.954 -- THERMAL-REACTOR (i7 920 @ 4410)
> 2.) 9.015 -- mikesrex (i7 920 @ 4410)
> 3.) 9.375 -- Matticus (E8500 @ 4968)
> 
> 
> 
> Top 10:
> 4.) 9.594 -- kkpudge7 (i7 920 @ 4305)
> 5.) 9.702 -- WhiteFireDragon (E8600 @ 4826)
> 6.) 9.951 -- ThatGuy16 (E8400 @ 4806)
> 7.) 9.968 -- bubblescivic (E8400 @ 4680)
> 8.) 9.968 -- mikesrex (E8400 @ 4680)
> 9.) 10.202 -- susik89 (i7 920 @ 3998)
> 10.) 10.280 -- tidyboy21 (E8500 @ 4599)
> 
> 
> Top 20:
> 11.) 10.307 -- jkrause6 (i7 920 @ 4045)
> 12.) 10.390 -- bebopin64 (i7 920 @ 4031)
> 13.) 10.390 -- yhahh (E8400 @ 4500)
> 14.) 10.824 -- lovely? (E8400 @ 4410)
> 15.) 10.888 -- markallen (Q9550 @ 4378)
> 16.) 10.953 -- vix (E8400 @ 4260)
> 17.) 10.982 -- jevery (Q9650 @ 4338)
> 18.) 11.000 -- bigrich0086 (Q9450 @ 3600)
> 19.) 11.024 -- Domain Man (Q9550 @ 4302)
> 20.) 11.311 -- MouSe (i7 920 @ 3675))
> 
> 
> 11.375 -- F.i.T.H (E8400 @ 4203)
> 11.384 -- [-0MEGA-] (Q9550 @ 4100
> 11.466 -- houseofbugs (E8400 @ 4050)
> 11.625 -- DirtyD86 (E8400 @ 4000)
> 11.731 -- zer0_c00l (E8400 @ 4005)
> 11.734 -- Springy182 (Q9550 @ 4016)
> 11.887 -- bomberboysk (Q9450 @ 3996)
> 11.953 -- MosIncredible (E8400 @ 3915)
> 11.965 -- XDRoX (E7200 @ 4380)
> 12.049 -- [-0MEGA-] (E8400 @ 4000)
> 12.330 -- Bodaggit23 (i7 920 @ 3430)
> 12.339 -- wilson (E8500 @ 3800)
> 12.540 -- The_Other_One (i7 920 @ 3320)
> 12.796 -- littlenlnga (E6750 @ 4024)
> 12.844 -- shenry (E8400 @ 3726)
> 12.859 -- Cleric7x9 (E8400 @ 3600)
> 12.906 -- Nexolus (Q6600 @ 3960)
> 13.172 -- Bootup05 (Q660 @ 4005)
> 13.276 -- tidyboy21 (E6600 @ 3906)
> 13.315 -- markallen (E6750 @ 3880)
> 13.369 -- Vipernitrox (Q6700 @ 3902)
> 13.516 -- just_a_noob (E5200 @ 4248)
> 14.187 -- MatrixEvo (Q6600 @ 3600)
> 14.640 -- Rusian777 (i7 920 @ 2800)
> 14.750 -- Ambushed (E6550 @ 3484)
> 14.926 -- Midnight_fox1 (Q6600 @ 3600)
> 15.078 -- Gareth (Q9450 @ 3181)
> 15.148 -- funkysnair (Q6600 @ 3600)
> 15.172 -- Casie (E6600 @ 3380)
> 15.385 -- Aastii (E6750 @ 3500)
> 15.985 -- Vipernitrox (E6420 @ 3300)
> 16.203 -- TFT (E6750 @ 3200)
> 16.229 -- Bootup05 (Q6600 @ 3400)
> 16.250 -- Bl00dFox (E6600 @ 3243)
> 16.359 -- skidude (Q9550 @ 2980)
> 16.375 -- Jet (E4500 @ 3500)
> 16.724 -- Kesava (Q6600 @ 3401)
> 16.879 -- MIK3daG33K (E4500 @ 3400)
> 16.895 -- Garethman!! (Q9450 @ 2840)
> 16.973 -- Nodz86 (Q9550 @ 2830)
> 17.125 -- Dazzeerr (Q6600 @ 2997)
> 17.282 -- Respital (E6850 @ 3000)
> 17.319 -- [-0MEGA-] (E6400 @ 3400)
> 17.457 -- gamerman4 (Q6600 @ 3000)
> 17.534 -- zer0_c00l (X2 720 @ 3940)
> 17.598 -- ScOuT (Q9300 @ 3000)
> 17.862 -- Mitch? (X3 720 @ 3978)
> 18.304 -- Bootup05 (E6400 @ 3440)
> 18.533 -- Hyde01 (T9300 @ 2493)
> 19.312 -- WhiteFireDragon (E2180 @ 3200)
> 19.564 -- gigantojim (X4 955 @ 3612)
> 19.610 -- newguy5 (E6750 @ 2670)
> 20.484 -- fade2green514 (E6300 @ 2709)
> 20.592 -- ramodkk (E2160 @ 3000)
> 22.311 -- Kornowski (Q6600 @ 2405)
> 22.579 -- Darkserge (E2220 @ 2753)
> 23.016 -- voyagerfan99 (T8300 @ 1596)
> 23.282 -- Glliw (x4 940BE @ 3000)
> 23.608 -- newjacksm (X4 940 @ 3000)
> 24.628 -- dark666apoc (X4 9850 @ 3250)
> 24.672 -- Mr. Johanssen (Phenom 7750 @ 3300)
> 25.329 -- ThatGuy16 (X2 5600+ @ 3439)
> 29.688 -- El DJ (X2 5200+ @ 3009)
> 31.181 -- aviation_man (x4 9950 @ 2611)
> 31.188 -- PatPheFox (X4 9600 @ 2812)
> 31.246 -- linkin93 (E4500 @ 2200)
> 31.251 -- Intel_man (E6300 @ 1866)
> 35.750 -- Darkserge (P4 @ 3910)
> 36.614 -- The_Other_One (M 540 @ 1862)
> 37.797 -- Fear Of Dreams (X2 BE-2400 @ 2422)
> 42.032 -- voyagerfan99 (X2 3800+ @ 2200)
> 42.323 -- Gooberman (X2 3800+ @ 2009MHz)
> 1m 01.985 -- pokemon89 (P4 @ 2394)
> 1m 33.610 -- The_Other_One (Atom N280 @ 997)





Heres the list, it will need some updating. There is alot to go through.

Also may I suggest we start sorting them by cooling as well. Maybe something like Air-Water-Phase-Ln2.


----------



## Aastii

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> Heres the list, it will need some updating. There is alot to go through.
> 
> Also may I suggest we start sorting them by cooling as well. Maybe something like Air-Water-Phase-Ln2.



do you not think that would be a little confusing and, well, pointless? I mean it is for showing your benchmark, cooling doesn't matter really, it is the speeds you were able to get and how well you were able to number crunch and that


----------



## spynoodle

Aastii said:


> do you not think that would be a little confusing and, well, pointless? I mean it is for showing your benchmark, cooling doesn't matter really, it is the speeds you were able to get and how well you were able to number crunch and that


Although, on some Overclocking-record sites they sort out the cooling methods, to show what they had to go through to achieve that kind of overclock. That may not apply as much here, though.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

I really do not think it would be too much work to just ask the poster what cooling solution they are using.  You could even simplify and do Air/Water and Phase/Ln2. The only reason I suggest this is because most of us have modest setups and use air cooling. This way people can more accurately compare themselves then to the extreme cooling setups that are not used day to day.


----------



## bomberboysk

THERMAL-REACTOR said:


> I really do not think it would be too much work to just ask the poster what cooling solution they are using.  You could even simplify and do Air/Water and Phase/Ln2. The only reason I suggest this is because most of us have modest setups and use air cooling. This way people can more accurately compare themselves then to the extreme cooling setups that are not used day to day.


Or go a step further, create something with google docs that allows scores to be submitted with detailed info including cpu/memory brand/ timings/clocks/cooling/etc, as all those have an effect on superpi times.


----------



## mep916

Jet said:


> If I have some time this afternoon, I might get around to compiling the stats.



That's not necessary. We have a history of every single revision made in the OP. All I can say is that the admins are working on a solution and all this will be settled soon. I'm a fan of the google docs approach as well. It could be implemented in a number of ways.


----------



## CdnAudiophile

bomberboysk said:


> Or go a step further, create something with google docs that allows scores to be submitted with detailed info including cpu/memory brand/ timings/clocks/cooling/etc, as all those have an effect on superpi times.



I really like that idea because instead of it just being showoff what you got thread it could be a useful tool for finding out what setups work and do not work.


----------



## Jet

mep916 said:


> That's not necessary. We have a history of every single revision made in the OP. All I can say is that the admins are working on a solution and all this will be settled soon. I'm a fan of the google docs approach as well. It could be implemented in a number of ways.



No worries--I got the first page or two and then decided it was a waste of time .


----------



## Bodaggit23

spynoodle said:


> I nominate Bodaggit as new leader-person!





I think not. I have a problem holding my tongue sometimes = bad for leadership.


----------



## TFT

Bodaggit23 said:


> I think not. *I have a problem holding my tongue sometimes *= bad for leadership.



+1 




joke


----------



## funkysnair

+1


----------



## El Gappo

mep916 said:


> That's not necessary. We have a history of every single revision made in the OP. All I can say is that the admins are working on a solution and all this will be settled soon. I'm a fan of the google docs approach as well. It could be implemented in a number of ways.



That exactly why I was asking, was thinking of adapting one of my others purely for computer forums i.e http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0As2Tqq7H7KZFdFQ1aVkzZGJIXzhHR0ZzUWNyY2JGRFE&hl=en tabs for different number of cores and cooling etc
That's how I did it on ocn anyway http://www.overclock.net/amd-cpus/644047-amd-cpus-2d-benchmarks-thread.html if your curious, they are embedded there tho which helps, not sure how hard that would be to implement


----------



## Shane

so whats going to happen with this thread then?

I wanted to download that same version of Superpi that i originally tested on my system so time back and compare it to my new clock....but now i cant!...im not even on the list!

If the threads not put back up,someone should create a new one...or a mod take over the thread!

Hope it gets resolved soon


----------



## mep916

El Gappo said:


> That exactly why I was asking, was thinking of adapting one of my others purely for computer forums i.e http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0As2Tqq7H7KZFdFQ1aVkzZGJIXzhHR0ZzUWNyY2JGRFE&hl=en tabs for different number of cores and cooling etc
> That's how I did it on ocn anyway http://www.overclock.net/amd-cpus/644047-amd-cpus-2d-benchmarks-thread.html if your curious, they are embedded there tho which helps, not sure how hard that would be to implement



I've searched the interwebz a little... unless I'm mistaken, it looks as though you need to do some coding on the server side of the forum to embed a spreadsheet. I've no idea how they do it at OCN, but I don't see any type of vB plug in (installed on the server side) that allows you to copy/paste some code as a user and embed it in using bb code.


----------



## Geoff

Partially updated, I'll update/format the rest when I have some extra time.


----------



## Shane

Thanks Omega....il be uploading my latest soon


----------



## Bodaggit23

Sweet, thanks OMEGA. 

I'll be in the top 10. 

I like the new rule, btw...:good:


----------



## Geoff

Updated, and I changed the layout a bit.


----------



## linkin

Thanks omega, glad to see you here again


----------



## Shane

Heres my update Omega...

15.633 Sec







Looks like il remain in the same place on the board lol...but diffrent time.


----------



## Sam_VDC

I would like to submit my score. Thanks.

i5-750 21*190blck Turbo @ 4560MHz = 9.236s on air Cooler Master V8


----------



## Geoff

Sam_VDC said:


> I would like to submit my score. Thanks.
> 
> i5-750 21*190blck Turbo @ 4560MHz = 9.236s on air Cooler Master V8


That's a very good score, and thanks for sharing!  FYI though it's not going to be included in the results since you are still a fairly new member here.


----------



## Sam_VDC

[-0MEGA-];1402808 said:
			
		

> That's a very good score, and thanks for sharing!  FYI though it's not going to be included in the results since you are still a fairly new member here.



I had mine posted #1117 before the rules were changed which didn't get updated on the list. So I thought a resubmital would be alright......but no biggie


----------



## Gooberman

just get to 100 posts


----------



## Orbitron

Here's mine. Not the best but will OC more soon


----------



## El Gappo

I know the big baby wont let me post up my times but just to let you know I beat everyone with a SEMPRON


----------



## Geoff

El Gappo said:


> I know the big baby wont let me post up my times but just to let you know I beat everyone with a SEMPRON


Very nice!


----------



## Jet

sam_vdc said:


> i would like to submit my score. Thanks.
> 
> I5-750 21*190blck turbo @ 4560mhz = 9.236s on air cooler master v8



21*190 = 3990?


----------



## 87dtna

Turbo gives a multi of 24


----------



## NCspecV81

wow another 100 poster. It's almost laughable. Almost.


----------



## 87dtna

NCspecV81 said:


> wow another 100 poster. It's almost laughable. Almost.



Dude your attitude really sucks, rules are rules pal, if you don't like them then leave.  No one forced you to come here.


----------



## Bodaggit23

NCspecV81 said:


> wow another 100 poster. It's almost laughable. Almost.



Nice job spamming today. 

56 posts today. 

Just to get a score posted here...

That's what's laughable, my friend. Almost...


----------



## 87dtna

Bodaggit23 said:


> Nice job spamming today.
> 
> 56 posts today.
> 
> Just to get a score posted here...
> 
> That's what's laughable, my friend. Almost...



Exactly my thoughts, well said.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Reported. :good:


----------



## Gooberman

mep916 said:


> It's been settled and NC will have 100 posts tonight if he continues to crank them out. Then there's absolutely no reason why he he should be excluded from the list.



mep pretty much knew he was going to do that


----------



## Geoff

Bodaggit23 said:


> Nice job spamming today.
> 
> 56 posts today.
> 
> Just to get a score posted here...
> 
> That's what's laughable, my friend. Almost...



I noticed that too, most are simple few word answers as well.


----------



## Bodaggit23

Gooberman said:


> mep pretty much knew he was going to do that



Where is that quote from? Just curious.


----------



## mep916

Bodaggit23 said:


> Nice job spamming today.
> 
> 56 posts today.
> 
> Just to get a score posted here...
> 
> That's what's laughable, my friend. Almost...





			
				[-0MEGA-];1405392 said:
			
		

> I noticed that too, most are simple few word answers as well.



So, a member from 2007 posts his score. It's too high (or too low, in this case), the members here feel they cannot compete, so we add a post count requirement. He makes the the posts, now people complain that his posts aren't good enough... go so far as to accuse him of spamming. Now what do you want? Does each post have to be a three paragraph response for the scores to be considered? Or, Bodaggit, would you prefer that he only posts at your average, around 17-18 per day (LOL). Would that be okay? Should I delete his posts and make him start over? Then we can create a special committee that will approve each post? 

Just update the threads with his scores already. 

We have more than a few members here that post one - two sentence responses on a regular basis. It's quite common on internet forums as both the writer and reader prefer to get to the point.



Gooberman said:


> mep pretty much knew he was going to do that



Yes, I noticed that and personally don't have a problem with it. They weren't shit contributions.


----------



## TFT

None of this would have happened if some members did not act in a childlike fashion. This is the Internet, he is a guy you don't know or have to have any dealings with.
He posts a bloody good score and is not allowed to post it, grow up children.
So what if it is unbeatable to most, so what if he never comes back again, it can be deleted as fast as it can be added.

That 100 post rule should never have been implemented when earlier it was hinted it would be added by a Mod if necessary. How one guy can force this issue is beyond me.


----------



## El Gappo

You know what's laughable? Omega banning new members from a thread because they know how to run spi, people not listening to these members to improve their own time and instead harassing them. Oh and don't forget the hissy fit, I literally lol'd at that.

Mep, I think we know what happens when any of us makes a 3 paragraph response, it is flamed beyond all recognition.


----------



## just a noob

seriously? can you guys quit your bitching and moaning? he got the 100 post requisite so his scores are now valid, what's so hard to understand about that?


----------



## El Gappo

just a noob said:


> seriously? can you guys quit your bitching and moaning? he got the 100 post requisite so his scores are now valid, what's so hard to understand about that?



Next stop, 1000 post requirement  and maybe a years membership...


----------



## just a noob

El Gappo said:


> Next stop, 1000 post requirement  and maybe a years membership...



well, he's already got the 1 year...


----------



## Bodaggit23

mep916 said:


> Bodaggit, would you prefer that he only posts at your average, around 17-18 per day (LOL).



Thanks for the jab, Mep, but considering there's 20 sections on this site, that's less than one post in each section per day. (LOL)

Forgive me for being an active member, contributing member.


----------



## NCspecV81

Can't a dude post? I did want to hit the 100 post mark just so I could post...However, my posts were not crap. I did make every attempt to "contribute" to those posts. I waited my 30 seconds and went on to the next post. It wasn't easy to invest that amount of time. 

Yet, I have over 100 and I still haven't posted scores...NOW WHAT?


----------



## Bodaggit23

NCspecV81 said:


> NOW WHAT?



"Invested" time. (LOL)

Maybe OMEGA isn't online? It's his thread so you need to wait for him to update the scores.


----------



## Gooberman

He did invest a few hours to get that 100 posts


----------



## Jet

Wow....seriously guys? People (you know who you are) stop being childish. I know it's hard not being the king of the hill and having control. The administration even compromised some by allowing the 100 post limit. And now you're still complaining? Please...some maturity here. If anyone should be complaining, it would be me--I would have had the 2nd place spot (and potentially the 1st if I tried some more), but I gave it up and am not complaining. 

If you really want to know, having the fastest SuperPi/3dmark score isn't going to make you satisfied. Getting x number of posts isn't going to satisfy you.


----------



## NCspecV81

Jet said:


> If you really want to know, having the fastest SuperPi/3dmark score isn't going to make you satisfied. Getting x number of posts isn't going to satisfy you.



It's fun getting there though. I don't even look at it at obtaining a certain score or time. I just like the high clocks and I get personal enjoyment from figuring out how to get that frequency to pass that just wouldn't an hour ago.


----------



## mep916

I'm sure OMEGA will update the scores soon. This should be settled by now, so I think it would be best for everyone to get back on topic, including myself, and continue posting and discussing scores.


----------



## Geoff

mep916 said:


> So, a member from 2007 posts his score. It's too high (or too low, in this case), the members here feel they cannot compete, so we add a post count requirement. He makes the the posts, now people complain that his posts aren't good enough... go so far as to accuse him of spamming. Now what do you want? Does each post have to be a three paragraph response for the scores to be considered? Or, Bodaggit, would you prefer that he only posts at your average, around 17-18 per day (LOL). Would that be okay? Should I delete his posts and make him start over? Then we can create a special committee that will approve each post?
> 
> Just update the threads with his scores already.
> 
> We have more than a few members here that post one - two sentence responses on a regular basis. It's quite common on internet forums as both the writer and reader prefer to get to the point.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I noticed that and personally don't have a problem with it. They weren't shit contributions.


As I said in the other thread, yes he joined in 2007 but he wasn't active until January of 2010.



El Gappo said:


> You know what's laughable? Omega banning new members from a thread because they know how to run spi, people not listening to these members to improve their own time and instead harassing them. Oh and don't forget the hissy fit, I literally lol'd at that.
> 
> Mep, I think we know what happens when any of us makes a 3 paragraph response, it is flamed beyond all recognition.


FYI, this was apj's idea and I agreed, so not sure why I am getting all the flack for this new rule.  The new rule was added simply to limit the number of new users posting a score and leaving.  If you don't plan to leave, then stay a few days and post, then submit your score and help others here.



El Gappo said:


> Next stop, 1000 post requirement  and maybe a years membership...


If you don't like it, then leave.  I've been a member of OCN for years, yet I have a couple posts as well, same as a certain someone here.



NCspecV81 said:


> Can't a dude post? I did want to hit the 100 post mark just so I could post...However, my posts were not crap. I did make every attempt to "contribute" to those posts. I waited my 30 seconds and went on to the next post. It wasn't easy to invest that amount of time.
> 
> Yet, I have over 100 and I still haven't posted scores...NOW WHAT?


Dude, unlike you I don't spend hours on this forum.  I will update the thread in a couple weeks, like I have been doing ever since I created this thread.  You've been around since 2007 so I assume you would know how things are done here.



mep916 said:


> I'm sure OMEGA will update the scores soon. This should be settled by now, so I think it would be best for everyone to get back on topic, including myself, and continue posting and discussing scores.


Yes, I never said I wasn't going to post the new scores.


----------



## The Chad

The Chad said:


>



Please put me in


----------



## 87dtna

^Nice overclock on such low voltage!


----------



## jasonn20

Guess I did htis right..


----------



## 87dtna

jasonn20 said:


> Guess I did htis right..



Yeah you did.  Very nice OC on the Phenom II on air, impressive.  What kind of temps were you seeing while running the test?  Is that stable enough to run 32m?


----------



## jasonn20

This is at 4.3ghz the problem is keeping temps down with air cooling... I'll run it and see 32M..


----------



## 87dtna

jasonn20 said:


> This is at 4.3ghz the problem is keeping temps down with air cooling... I'll run it and see 32M..



What kind of Vcore does it take for 4.2ghz?


----------



## jasonn20

87dtna said:


> What kind of Vcore does it take for 4.2ghz?



1.55vcore for 4.2ghz with a max temp 56C and 1.6vcore for 4.3ghz..  my psu is not liking this @1.6vcore though..  this program is onlt using 25% of my cpu is that right.. ?


----------



## 87dtna

jasonn20 said:


> 1.55vcore for 4.2ghz with a max temp 56C and 1.6vcore for 4.3ghz..  my psu is not liking this @1.6vcore though..  this program is onlt using 25% of my cpu is that right.. ?



Yeah it's only a single threaded app.  There's a multi threaded superPi too.


----------



## El Gappo

87dtna said:


> Yeah it's only a single threaded app.  There's a multi threaded superPi too.



Forget that rubbish... Wprime for all cores and spi for single


----------



## El Gappo

here you go pal


----------



## El Gappo

new one


----------



## 87dtna

Lets get an I3 on that list!


----------



## El Gappo

memory tab.


----------



## Laquer Head

Here's my i7 720QM laptop score!!


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> memory tab.



It's not required to post up the score.  But you inspired me to overclock further and try again LOL.

New record for me, beat my old I5 750's score on 9.690







EDIT- LOL I beat ''kkpudge7'' by .001 seconds


----------



## 87dtna

Put me down for 5th place in intel!  Suicide run!






Thats the best it will do, on air anyway.


----------



## NCspecV81

I'll be owning this thread when I get off work today. Thanks omega. You sweetie.


----------



## Gooberman

i'll be the owner of this thread once i get a job


----------



## 87dtna

NCspecV81 said:


> I'll be owning this thread when I get off work today. Thanks omega. You sweetie.



How about on AIR comparison's, you will loose huge.

Just because you are the only one on here running something other than air or water doesn't make you God you know.


----------



## Drenlin

I win.


----------



## NCspecV81

I'll loose huge huh? Maybe you meant to quote your gf perhaps??? However I got 5.036ghz out of an air cooled i7 975. I won't be losing anything.


----------



## meticadpa

NCspecV81 said:


> I'll loose huge huh? I think your gf would be jealous of that. However I got 5.036ghz out of an air cooled i7975. I won't be losing anything.



I can back this up...

Also, I'll see what I can do when I get Dry Ice... 

No one said anywhere in the thread that you can only use air or water cooling, so why should people be shunned for using other more extreme methods?


----------



## El Gappo

87dtna said:


> How about on AIR comparison's, you will loose huge.
> 
> Just because you are the only one on here running something other than air or water doesn't make you God you know.



Any one of my recent air super pi times, even ones on stock without any os tweaks whatsoever are about a second clear of the fastest guy on hear 




I don't think I will be loosing any time soon either  Apart from to that big cheater on ln2


----------



## mep916

NCspecV81 said:


> I'll be owning this thread when I get off work today. Thanks omega. You sweetie.





87dtna said:


> How about on AIR comparison's, you will loose huge.
> 
> Just because you are the only one on here running something other than air or water doesn't make you God you know.





NCspecV81 said:


> I'll loose huge huh? Maybe you meant to quote your gf perhaps??? However I got 5.036ghz out of an air cooled i7 975. I won't be losing anything.



From now on, I'm issuing infractions and possibly banning members that continue to argue, insult other members, act with poor sportsmanship, post sarcastic bullshit, etc... I'd really like everyone to get along and start using the forum as mature members. If you can't, you're gone. This has been going on for weeks and I'm sick of babysitting. 

I've been told that the scores will be updated soon.


----------



## 87dtna

NCspecV81 said:


> I'll loose huge huh? Maybe you meant to quote your gf perhaps??? However I got 5.036ghz out of an air cooled i7 975. I won't be losing anything.




 I meant on your Phenom II, I didn't know you had an I7.


----------



## mep916

87dtna said:


> Sounds to me like you just have too much money.
> 
> And I meant on your Phenom II, I didn't know you had an I7.



Read my previous post and stop arguing.


----------



## 87dtna

Yes after I saw your post I edited mine.


I'm planning on getting a DICE pot soon (guess I'll have to go caseless then ) so I'm hoping to crank this I3 real far.


----------



## mep916

87dtna said:


> Yes after I saw your post I edited mine.



Thanks.


----------



## 87dtna

You just replied too quick thats all....LOL


----------



## meticadpa

Spec had like 4.6 or 4.8GHz on the stock cooler for his 955.


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> Spec had like 4.6 or 4.8GHz on the stock cooler for his 955.



I won't believe that until I see proof.

And anyways, with SuperPi intel creams AMD clock for clock.


----------



## El Gappo

87dtna said:


> I won't believe that until I see proof.



All you are going to ever see is screenshots so w/e. It is clearly doable as here is my 965 on air http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=818625 with a lower vid 955 for example and living somewhere as cold as spec does I'm sure I could do the same.  I don't think the whole intel vs amd debacle has anything to do with anything in this thread and you are just flamebaiting. That is all :good:


----------



## 87dtna

Even if you could get 4.6 at 1.55 Vcore, on the stock cooler temps would hit 100c in about 30 seconds.  BS

Umm, the proof is in the pudding here...take a look at intel times and take a look at AMD's.  Just saying, with super PI it would take atleast 5ghz with AMD to match a comparable 4ghz intel CPU.


----------



## mep916

87dtna said:


> Even if you could get 4.6 at 1.55 Vcore, on the stock cooler temps would hit 100c in about 30 seconds.  BS



Infraction issued. Yes, I was serious. Enough flame baiting and meaningless arguments.


----------



## Orbitron

mep916 said:


> Infraction issued. Yes, I was serious. Enough flame baiting and meaningless arguments.


Wow seriously? If the guy had actually got a 955 to 4.6ghz on air, let alone a stock cooler, I believe he would be showing proof to anyone who would look. I would also like to see proof. If only I could get my 965 to those kinds of clocks.


----------



## mep916

Orbitron said:


> Wow seriously? If the guy had actually got a 955 to 4.6ghz on air, let alone a stock cooler, I believe he would be showing proof to anyone who would look. I would also like to see proof. If only I could get my 965 to those kinds of clocks.



Honestly, I could care less whether or not he achieved those clocks. My only interest is in ending the petty arguments in this and other threads. On several occasions, myself, apj101 and other moderators have politely asked for all this nonsense to stop, and clearly nobody is listening.


----------



## NCspecV81

stock cooler on a 955 PII -


----------



## mep916

NCspecV81 said:


> stock cooler on a 955 PII -



Now you're required to post a pic with your CF username on a piece of paper next to the HSF, with your monitor showing the CPUZ screenshot in plain view. I just added that rule.


----------



## Orbitron

Damn NCSpec. HOW?!?!?!? What are the temps like? Is it 24/7 stable?


----------



## El Gappo

Have a look around at some review etc. I believe some reviews show early review samples hitting around 4.7 on air. Here is a simple tdp calculation for anyone else feeling skeptical today.  p= tdp. V= voltage. F= frequency 
p=V2(cF) 
p/v2=cf 
(p/v2)/f=C

(125/1.822)/3.4=20.1782

Now enter the new values into the original. 
1.6^2(20.1782X4.612) = 238.23 TDP under full load. 

A cpu-z validation is done at idle so nothing is exactly going to disintegrate at these exaggerated setting  You don't get much more rock solid proof than that, but you've got an overclockers oath anyway. Me or spec lying about this would be like if Da Vinchi bought the Mona Lisa at a car boot sale 

FYI that calculation can be used for just about any component you need and comes in handy  Intel do tell porky pies about their tdp tho so if you are tuning a ss or something then room for error needs to be left. 


Anyway that's the last post with that attitude that I'm responding to thanks mep.


----------



## ganzey

El Gappo said:


> Have a look around at some review etc. I believe some reviews show early review samples hitting around 4.7 on air. Here is a simple tdp calculation for anyone else feeling skeptical today.  p= tdp. V= voltage. F= frequency
> p=V2(cF)
> p/v2=cf
> (p/v2)/f=C
> 
> (125/1.822)/3.4=20.1782
> 
> Now enter the new values into the original.
> 1.6^2(20.1782X4.612) = 238.23 TDP under full load.
> 
> A cpu-z validation is done at idle so nothing is exactly going to disintegrate at these exaggerated setting  *You don't get much more rock solid proof than that,* but you've got an overclockers oath anyway. Me or spec lying about this would be like if Da Vinchi bought the Mona Lisa at a car boot sale
> 
> FYI that calculation can be used for just about any component you need and comes in handy  Intel do tell porky pies about their tdp tho so if you are tuning a ss or something then room for error needs to be left.
> 
> 
> Anyway that's the last post with that attitude that I'm responding to thanks mep.



i guess a pic with you username written on a paper. i would like to see this (not being sarcastic, i am serious. so plz dont "infract" me mep) because my phenom II 940 runs at 35c with a CM V8 and as5. and the max temp of phenom chips is ~65c. once again-i am not trying to start an argument or flame, but if he posts proof, this whole thing will be over with.


----------



## NCspecV81

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=960311


----------



## mep916

ganzey said:


> i guess a pic with you username written on a paper. i would like to see this (not being sarcastic, i am serious. so plz dont "infract" me mep) because my phenom II 940 runs at 35c with a CM V8 and as5. and the max temp of phenom chips is ~65c. once again-i am not trying to start an argument or flame, but if he posts proof, this whole thing will be over with.



He showed proof, it is over with, now back on topic.


----------



## ganzey

NCspecV81 said:


> http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=960311


although there isnt any proof he is on stock cooling, i dont really care anymore, and i will take your word for it, its not worth an infraction

ANOTHER TOPIC: i have been trying to OC my PII 940 and i cant get past 3.6. what HT speed and northbridge voltage, etc do you have? i would really like to have someone who really knows AMD's to help me out

thanks


----------



## mep916

ganzey said:


> although there isnt any proof he is on stock cooling, i dont really care anymore, and i will take your word for it, its not worth an infraction.



Unbelievable. Dude he posted a pic of his air setup and why would he lie?


----------



## Laquer Head

mep916 said:


> Unbelievable. Dude he posted a pic of his air setup and why would he lie?



I can literally picture the disgust on your face right now!!

WOW!


----------



## ganzey

mep916 said:


> Unbelievable. Dude he posted a pic of his air setup and why would he lie?



oh, sorry. i did not see that. im at my grandparents house and dial up really sucks


----------



## Orbitron

mep916 said:


> Unbelievable. Dude he posted a pic of his air setup and why would he lie?


Anyone can post a picture with a stock cooler, doesn't prove that he got it to 4.6ghz. Anyone who has USED a stock AMD cooler will know, there is NO WAY a stock cooler will keep it under 65C at 3.8ghz, LET ALONE 4.6!


----------



## ganzey

Orbitron said:


> Anyone can post a picture with a stock cooler, doesn't prove that he got it to 4.6ghz. Anyone who has USED a stock AMD cooler will know, there is NO WAY a stock cooler will keep it under 65C at 3.8ghz, LET ALONE 4.6!



lets plz drop this and stop spamming up the superpi thread

/me posting in this thread


----------



## Jet

It's completely possible to get high overclocks with a CPU-z validation. All that the CPU-z validation means is that it didn't immediately lock up. Temperatures are meaningless with CPU-z validations--it's always going to be at idle, so they shouldn't be holding you back.


----------



## Orbitron

Here's another for me. OC'd a bit more.


----------



## ganzey

my pathetic score


----------



## Geoff

Scores updated.

@ganzey, you need to use the modded version.


----------



## ganzey

[-0MEGA-];1409109 said:
			
		

> Scores updated.
> 
> @ganzey, you need to use the modded version.



oh, didnt see that. i will repost in a minute


----------



## Drenlin

[-0MEGA- said:
			
		

> ]Scores updated.


w00t!

I wonder what other benchmarks I can take last place on?


----------



## ganzey

Drenlin said:


> w00t!
> 
> I wonder what other benchmarks I can take last place on?



not 3dmark, i think i have a pretty solid low score


----------



## lubo4444

ganzey said:


> not 3dmark, i think i have a pretty solid low score



+1.  I dont think you will beat ganzey.


----------



## Drenlin

ganzey said:


> not 3dmark, i think i have a pretty solid low score



I don't have the specs to run 3dmark...


----------



## MacBook

Drenlin said:


> I don't have the specs to run 3dmark...


I believe it will still let you run it, it just won't run some of the tests.


----------



## 87dtna

MacBook said:


> I believe it will still let you run it, it just won't run some of the tests.



No you have to have DX9 for it to run at all.  Same with vantage, won't run unless you have DX10.


----------



## 87dtna

lubo4444 said:


> +1.  I dont think you will beat ganzey.



I have a pentium 3 setup I might try it on LOL, that should be worse than an intel atom CPU I think.  IIRC the Atom is 1.6ghz, the P3 is 1ghz so thats even worse!


----------



## MacBook

87dtna said:


> No you have to have DX9 for it to run at all.  Same with vantage, won't run unless you have DX10.


Ah, I stand corrected.


----------



## El Gappo

Hmmm wonder why you updated my bad time when I posted a better one on the next post down, pretty pathetic brah.


----------



## lubo4444

87dtna said:


> I have a pentium 3 setup I might try it on LOL, that should be worse than an intel atom CPU I think.  IIRC the Atom is 1.6ghz, the P3 is 1ghz so thats even worse!



Try it lol!!!


----------



## ganzey

^^becasue you should delete the old one


----------



## 87dtna

My I3 isn't under the ''best scores for xxxxxxxx''

Gotta get my I7 860 in there too eventually, having too much fun with the I3 right now.


----------



## 87dtna

lubo4444 said:


> Try it lol!!!



Oh I just pulled it out and remembered I tore out the P3 and replaced it with a P4 1.8ghz (socket 478).  Damn.  I remember that socket 370 setup, it orignally came with a celeron 633mhz, now that would have been funny to bench.  Super Pi 1m would take like 5 minutes probably LOL.


----------



## MacBook

El Gappo said:


> Hmmm wonder why you updated my bad time when I posted a better one on the next post down, pretty pathetic brah.


I can't speak for the OP, but perhaps you should have edited/removed your original post so it didn't get mixed up?


----------



## G25r8cer

955be c2







Any advice on pushing this chip further? What could this hit?


----------



## 87dtna

You could probably hit 4ghz at around 1.50-1.55 Vcore.  Just try it and find out.


----------



## Drenlin

87dtna said:


> I have a pentium 3 setup I might try it on LOL, that should be worse than an intel atom CPU I think.  IIRC the Atom is 1.6ghz, the P3 is 1ghz so thats even worse!



My celeron is 2.8GHz and still got beat by an Atom...


----------



## 87dtna

Drenlin said:


> My celeron is 2.8GHz and still got beat by an Atom...



Haha, yeah like I said just imagine what the socket 370 celeron at 633mhz would have done!  Oh to still have that setup LOL.

I also last year built my mom a computer, she was running on a Pentium II (slot type) at 400mhz!!!!!!


----------



## Drenlin

I have a Slot 1 P3 533MHz system in my room right now. It was one of Gateway's top systems when it was built. XD


----------



## MacBook

We should have a competition to see who can get the lowest score, lol


----------



## El Gappo

I will win this one also


----------



## G25r8cer

^^ I dont think so 

I have a PII (slot type) 333mhz


----------



## El Gappo

I think so. I have the semprom that is in 1st place  I also know how to underclock aswell as over clock  Just tried it and it took 10 minutes to open up cpu-z so I'm going to wait till I have more time lol


----------



## lubo4444

El Gappo said:


> I think so. I have the semprom that is in 1st place  I also know how to underclock aswell as over clock  Just tried it and it took 10 minutes to open up cpu-z so I'm going to wait till I have more time lol



Lol people here are trying to get the highest score they can, and you people here are trying to get the lowest.  Lol that should be fun.


----------



## G25r8cer

G25r8cer said:


> 955be c2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any advice on pushing this chip further? What could this hit?



Omega: When do you update?


----------



## meticadpa

G25r8cer said:


> Omega: When do you update?



Usually when someone posts, unless they're... different.

By the way man, get a 32 bit operating system if you want to overclock the Phenom II more.


----------



## MacBook

G25r8cer said:


> Omega: When do you update?


He hasn't been active for a couple days now.



meticadpa said:


> By the way man, get a 32 bit operating system if you want to overclock the Phenom II more.


Have any proof of that?  It's not common knowledge around overclocking forums.


----------



## 87dtna

MacBook said:


> Have any proof of that?  It's not common knowledge around overclocking forums.



Actually it is


----------



## Gooberman

MacBook said:


> We should have a competition to see who can get the lowest score, lol



wait wouldn't it be highest score? xD


----------



## The Chad

Thanks for putting me in Omega


----------



## MacBook

87dtna said:


> Actually it is


Do you have any specific threads or articles?  I'm not saying you're wrong, I just never saw any on the forums I'm on.  Many people on OCN are still suggesting x64 if you plan on using over 4GB of RAM, and no one seems to mention that you can't overclock as high.


----------



## El Gappo

MacBook said:


> Do you have any specific threads or articles?  I'm not saying you're wrong, I just never saw any on the forums I'm on.  Many people on OCN are still suggesting x64 if you plan on using over 4GB of RAM, and no one seems to mention that you can't overclock as high.



"Many people on ocn" are idiot's that think more ram = more performance and posting useless replies = rep  http://tinyurl.com/ybhtsp2
 Try asking some good overclockers what os they are using and not just a few amd trolls on ocn you may get a realistic answer 
You can throw as much cooling as you want at it in a 64bit os and you will still struggle to top 4.2 


FYI spi is meant to be run as fast as the system can go without crashing, not at your stable settings.


----------



## G25r8cer

meticadpa said:


> Usually when someone posts, unless they're... different.
> 
> By the way man, get a 32 bit operating system if you want to overclock the Phenom II more.




I have Win7 32bit and 64bit in dual boot

I use my 64bit to OC as the OS is clean


----------



## El Gappo

Yourdoinitwrong


----------



## meticadpa

El Gappo said:


> Yourdoinitwrong



This.

A 64 bit operating system offers pretty much no performance increase over a 32 bit OS.

The only difference I can find is the amount of memory it can register.

I moved from a 64 bit OS (Vista) to XP Home for a while a few months ago on another rig, and I didn't notice any performance decrease or anything.

Also, you've got more incentive than anyone else to use a 32 bit OS. The 955 C3s are badass.


----------



## MacBook

meticadpa said:


> This.
> 
> A 64 bit operating system offers pretty much no performance increase over a 32 bit OS.
> 
> The only difference I can find is the amount of memory it can register.
> 
> I moved from a 64 bit OS (Vista) to XP Home for a while a few months ago on another rig, and I didn't notice any performance decrease or anything.
> 
> Also, you've got more incentive than anyone else to use a 32 bit OS. The 955 C3s are badass.


That is just an effect of Windows 64 bit OS's, check out here for details on actual improvements:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit


----------



## 87dtna

32bit OS will overclock a CPU better because it puts less stress on the CPU.  Modern CPU's are all 64 bit, so using a 32 bit OS doesn't utilize the entire bit range of the CPU.


----------



## G25r8cer

87dtna said:


> 32bit OS will overclock a CPU better because it puts less stress on the CPU.  Modern CPU's are all 64 bit, so using a 32 bit OS doesn't utilize the entire bit range of the CPU.



+1

Common Sense


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> 32bit OS will overclock a CPU better because it puts less stress on the CPU.



This does not speak true regarding all modern processors.  Phenom II's do favor better in a 32bit environment vs. a 64bit. However, the c3 revisions have been tweaked to reduce this effect. Although, it's still there, it does not speak true for intel processors. 

Intel processors favor well going from vista/win7 to xp. For example, i7's generally are faster within the xp environment clock per clock, whilst also being able to go slightly higher in frequency. I7's are identical in overclockability when compared within a 32bit os and a 64bit os. Conversely, AMD phenom II's don't take the hit in performance like intel's do going from xp to vista/win7.

Now that we have that sorted out, you can see the flaws in your relatively uninformed post.


----------



## MacBook

meticadpa said:


> Intel processors favor well going from vista/win7 to xp. For example, i7's generally are faster within the xp environment clock per clock, whilst also being able to go slightly higher in frequency. I7's are identical in overclockability when compared within a 32bit os and a 64bit os. Conversely, AMD phenom II's don't take the hit in performance like intel's do going from xp to vista/win7.


True, probably because Windows XP is far less CPU intensive then Vista/Windows 7, especially when you have all the special effects enabled.


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> Phenom II's do favor better in a 32bit environment vs. a 64bit.






meticadpa said:


> AMD phenom II's don't take the hit in performance like intel's do going from xp to vista/win7.






meticadpa said:


> Now that we have that sorted out, you can see the flaws in your relatively uninformed post.



I see a larger flaw in your post there buddy 


So whats your proof anyway?  Why are I7's the only CPU that will overclock equally?  What about the I5 750?  Same as an I7 860 but no HT.  

Yeah there's no flaws it what you said at all


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> I see a larger flaw in your post there buddy
> 
> 
> So whats your proof anyway?  Why are I7's the only CPU that will overclock equally?  What about the I5 750?  Same as an I7 860 but no HT.
> 
> Yeah there's no flaws it what you said at all



My proof? Maybe it be the THOUSANDS of benches between intel and amd platforms within xp, vista, and windows 7 that quantifies my statements. A simple 3dmark06 cpu test validates this statement all to hell. There's massive cpu performance loss with intel running this same test within windows 7 or vista. How about pi? Sure, this phenomenon is also true. PI's are best ran in xp with intels as vista and windows 7 does impact the speed. However, 32bit and 64bit do NOT. 

However, we aren't comparing overclocking ability between intel product derivatives or with ht enabled or disabled. We are talking about overclocking between 32bit and 64bit computing environments. There has been ZERO substantial effect going from 32bit to 64bit in overclocking ability. Again, if you want to maximize your cpu potential you will need to do your benching within xp on intel hardware. The only exceptions to this rule is if you are running more than two graphics cards or your benchmark requires vista or windows 7. 

Now on the AMD side, I don't think this needs much clarification as its undoubtedly inherent that they do lose ability in the differing bit entourages.  The c3 revisions were released to combat this issue, and from my experience from using them they have succeeded.  Unfortunately, there is still a slight loss in ability but it isn't totally crippled like some of the first newer c2 revisions. 

Again, my experience with literally thousands of benches and witness to other benches solidifies these facts. Quit trying to dispute everything I say b/c I'm the new guy here. Your generic statement is the most foul, asinine, and unrealistic generalization regarding cpu performance between operating systems and bitting environments that I've ever had the displeasure of reading.


----------



## 87dtna

All that blather trying to make yourself look smart and you didn't answer me at all LOL.


----------



## Mr.Corruption

87dtna said:


> All that blather trying to make yourself look smart and you didn't answer me at all LOL.



Wat? 


He made an informed post filled with facts and information and thats all you can respond with?


----------



## 87dtna

Mr.Corruption said:


> Wat?
> 
> 
> He made an informed post filled with facts and information and thats all you can respond with?



Are you being sarcastic? 

He mostly just repeated his first post, and really the only thing he keeps saying over and over again is about these ''thousands'' of benches he's seen.

There's so many contradictions in what he says I don't know where to start.

I'd still like to know WHY the I7 is the ''only intel CPU not affected'' by 64 bit.


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> Are you being sarcastic?
> 
> He mostly just repeated his first post, and really the only thing he keeps saying over and over again is about these ''thousands'' of benches he's seen.
> 
> There's so many contradictions in what he says I don't know where to start.
> 
> I'd still like to know WHY the I7 is the ''only intel CPU not affected'' by 64 bit.



How about with some proof since you are the one trying to prove it doesn't exist. This is going to be quite funny. Good luck searching. You're going to need it on this one.


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> How about with some proof since you are the one trying to prove it doesn't exist. This is going to be quite funny. Good luck searching. You're going to need it on this one.



Whaaat?  You are the one that entered this thread stating the opposite of what everyone else has thought.  It's you who needs to provide the proof.

Edit- and you STILL have not answered my question.


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> Whaaat?  You are the one that entered this thread stating the opposite of what everyone else has thought.  It's you who needs to provide the proof.
> 
> Edit- and you STILL have not answered my question.



A quick look on hwbot.org and it would rock your uninformed world.


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> A quick look on hwbot.org and it would rock your uninformed world.



Hmm well I don't see anywhere that it lists what OS they are running let alone 32 or 64 bit.


----------



## Aastii

meticadpa said:


> A quick look on hwbot.org and it would rock your uninformed world.



I don't really want to get involved in this rather pointless "discussion", but I am interested to know why i7's aren't affected...so why aren't they?


----------



## 87dtna

Aastii said:


> I don't really want to get involved in this rather pointless "discussion", but I am interested to know why i7's aren't affected...so why aren't they?



Didn't you read?  Because he's seen thousands of benches that prove it


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> A quick look on hwbot.org and it would rock your uninformed world.






hehe


----------



## meticadpa

How about a quick two for now? And given the subject lets make it superpi. 

I would say thats close enough to call even wouldn't you?

This is tiny xp and stripped.







Run of the mill retail windows 7


----------



## 87dtna

Just because you got 7 there doesn't mean it's 64 bit

And the CPU in question is the I7 remember?  Now that you've been asked atleast 3 or 4 times.


----------



## Mr.Corruption

And obviously now hes going to disagree again, even with proof against him.


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> Just because you got 7 there doesn't mean it's 64 bit



I think you are totally confused and need to reread. That or maybe try and get someone else to help you comprehend my previous posts.  Now you are trying to say that 32bit and 64bit effect clock per clock speed? Help me understand you. You aren't making a lick of sense.

Let me break this down into p's and q's for you lil' one. 

AMD:

- Frequency attainability (overclocking ability) IS effected by 32bit vs 64bit
- Clock per Clock performance IS NOT effected by 32bit vs 64bit
- Performance between XP and Windows 7 is negligible and pretty much nonexistent

Intel: 

- Frequency attainability (overclocking ability) IS NOT effected by 32bit vs 64bit
- Clock per Clock performance IS NOT effected by 32bit vs 64bit
- Performance between XP and Windows 7 IS significant with clock per clock performance


----------



## 87dtna

The only thing that makes it confusing is you contradicting yourself a million times.


----------



## linkin

87dtna said:


> Just because you got 7 there doesn't mean it's 64 bit
> 
> And the CPU in question is the I7 remember?  Now that you've been asked atleast 3 or 4 times.



Jesus you two are being childish. take it to a pm, please.


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> We are talking about overclocking between 32bit and 64bit computing environments.




^look familiar?


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> ^look familiar?



Exactly. Not clock per clock performance. Way to point it out for me. Now comprehend it next time.


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> Phenom II's do favor better in a 32bit environment vs. a 64bit. However, the c3 revisions have been tweaked to reduce this effect. Although, *it's still there*, it does not speak true for intel processors.




You know, I really think it's hilarious that you post up screen shots of the ''claimed'' windows 7 64 bit OS showing BETTER performance than the x86 XP after saying all this I just quoted up there about Phenom II's.  Put down another contradiction :good:


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> You know, I really think it's hilarious that you post up screen shots of the ''claimed'' windows 7 64 bit OS showing BETTER performance than the x86 XP after saying all this I just quoted up there about Phenom II's.  Put down another contradiction :good:



Those are both x86 operating systems. Not really sure where I "claimed" it was a 64bit OS. I wouldn't say its better performance. Just like I posted a page or two back. AMD does not get hit with a performance penalty like intels do upgrading to an OS beyond xp. As my two pictures reflect. They are within a given percentage to consider them equals. 

Now regarding 64bit vs 32bit. AMD's do get a frequency reduction after being deployed into 64bit. However, overclocking ability does not equal clock per clock performance. 1Mhz of cpu frequency is identical in performance regardless it being within 64 or 32bit.

I'll say it one more time for the people with your mindset.

overclocking ability =/= clock per clock performance. Shall I repeat for you again?


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> Let me break this down into p's and q's for you lil' one.
> 
> AMD:
> 
> - Frequency attainability (overclocking ability) IS effected by 32bit vs 64bit
> - Clock per Clock performance IS NOT effected by 32bit vs 64bit
> - Performance between XP and Windows 7 is negligible and pretty much nonexistent
> 
> Intel:
> 
> - Frequency attainability (overclocking ability) IS NOT effected by 32bit vs 64bit
> - Clock per Clock performance IS NOT effected by 32bit vs 64bit
> - Performance between XP and Windows 7 IS significant with clock per clock performance




Ohhh so now ALL intel is affected, not just the I7  

Contradiction analysis-  Positive


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> Ohhh so now ALL intel is affected, not just the I7
> 
> Contradiction analysis-  Positive



I've used a long range of Intel products. Granted I haven't had the pleasure of using anything below a conroe across xp, vista, and windows 7. However, given conroe and up. Yes my statements are true.


----------



## 87dtna

WHAT   THE     HELL


I'm gonna go talk to the wall now, it's giving me better results.  You answer ZERO questions asked by other people.  BYE


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> WHAT   THE     HELL
> 
> 
> I'm gonna go talk to the wall now, it's giving me better results.  You answer ZERO questions asked by other people.  BYE



Where's your proof since you soooooooooo want to prove my statements a fallacy? I fear its b/c you can't find any. Sad, but I knew it was coming. Too bad you didn't.


----------



## mep916

Stop arguing. Please keep this thread discussion limited to superpi scores, or relevant discussion regarding superpi.


----------



## Ihatethedukes

Aastii said:


> I don't really want to get involved in this rather pointless "discussion", but I am interested to know why i7's aren't affected...so why aren't they?



I don't really know why the i7's don't like 64bit and non-XP.  I'm thinking the OS part has to do with how aggressive Intel's thread prediction is.  If you guess right you process things faster, if you guess wrong you actually do it a little slower (you have to redo it).  My hypothesis is that the i7's thread prediction is wrong more often in vista and 7 than in XP (because of the way the code is handled which I have to treat as a black box because I've no idea).  My guess for the 64 bit performance is that AMD has mastered the x86-64 extensions better as they made it up in the first place while Intel borrowed it from them.



87dtna said:


> Didn't you read?  Because he's seen thousands of benches that prove it



You're a touch slow on the uptake with things today.  He didn't even ask that.  And Meti has some kind of proof, you have none.  I think most of us believe him at this point.


----------



## 2048Megabytes

I can see people are still posting there results using the old Super-Pi program.   Might I suggest we turn our attention to the following and go to this thread:

http://www.computerforum.com/163868-multi-threaded-super-pi-contest.html

Y-cruncher: Multi-Threaded Pi-Benchmark for Multi-Core Systems.  

This program is a lot better at measuring processor performance over the old Super-Pi program.


----------



## ganzey

2048Megabytes said:


> I can see people are still posting there results using the old Super-Pi program.   Might I suggest we turn our attention to the following and go to this thread:
> 
> http://www.computerforum.com/163868-multi-threaded-super-pi-contest.html
> 
> Y-cruncher: Multi-Threaded Pi-Benchmark for Multi-Core Systems.
> 
> This program is a lot better at measuring processor performance over the old Super-Pi program.



the only thing is ppl with only a sinlge or dual core with do a lot worse with the multithreaded version vs ppl with quads


----------



## 87dtna

Decided to break out the I7 860-


----------



## ganzey

^^dam, that puts u in first


----------



## 87dtna

Yup.


----------



## Shane

87dtna said:


> Decided to break out the I7 860-



WOW nice! whats it like to have 4.8Ghz of cpu power?

I thought 3.5 was fast


----------



## 87dtna

Well combined with 3 solid state disks in raid 0, everything is pretty much instantaneous LOL.


----------



## Shane

87dtna said:


> Well combined with 3 solid state disks in raid 0, everything is pretty much instantaneous LOL.



haha wow....how about we swap? :good:


----------



## 87dtna

Nah I think I'll keep mine


----------



## El Gappo

Oh wow that's a nice time  But you should of listened and used the correct os 





 Here is my air time  Hope you enjoyed 1st place.


ganzey said:


> ^^dam, that puts u in *SECOND*


Fixed for ya  because I'm a nice guy.


----------



## Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ

Ǫ̭̎ͨ̈͌̂ͥ̆h̷̤̹ͪ́ͧ ͍̘̘̲̯͖ͨ̎sͤ͏̦̖̭͙̳͎̻͜͢h̶̨͍͖̭͍̳̮̙̯̱̋i̷̴̲̳͙͓͓̐͒t̗̣̳̤͙̣͓̮̑ͧ̇̾ͫ́̂͜  I believe that puts you in first!


----------



## El Gappo

Yup, just wondering should I leave a sempron at the top of amd or an i7 at the top of intel hmmmm 





> # Only one result per-person, per-system will be recorded


 Might of known there would be another fun killing rule


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> Oh wow that's a nice time  But you should of listened and used the correct os
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is my air time  Hope you enjoyed 1st place.




Well according to him the I7 isn't affected in performance 32 vs 64 bit.

Nice time, and stop being such a cocky ass.  How about a hard drive bench?


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> Well according to him the I7 isn't affected in performance 32 vs 64 bit.
> 
> Nice time, and stop being such a cocky ass.  How about a hard drive bench?



You need better reading comprehension there hombre. 

*There is a performance hit being in Vista or Windows 7 REGARDLESS OF THE BIT ARCHITECTURE when using an Intel processor.* There is not a frequency attainability issue when migrating to and from 32bit to 64bit with an Intel processor.

Once more, frequency attainability has nothing to do with clock per clock performance. Intel's chips clock per clock performance is effected by using xp versus vista/windows 7, and not by it being 32bit or 64bit.  

Why are you failing so hard when trying to understand or are you not really trying to understand at all?


----------



## El Gappo

Again this isn't about 32 vs 64 bit like met has mentioned about 10 times its about the massive performance hit for 7/vista to xp. 

Hard drive benching is boring and takes absolutely no skill, just money on ssd's. Suppose I can crack out some i-ram to really embarrass you


----------



## Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ

I thought all this was common knowledge? Fail.


----------



## jasonn20

@EL_GAPPO

You using air on that sempron to get that score...  nice score btw...  I have got into the 15.9s after more tweeking but my psu just does not like it or I think i could push my 965 further..   give you some competition ey..


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> Hard drive benching is boring and takes absolutely no skill, just money on ssd's. Suppose I can crack out some i-ram to really embarrass you



I only spent $150


----------



## El Gappo

jasonn20 said:


> @EL_GAPPO
> 
> You using air on that sempron to get that score...  nice score btw...  I have got into the 15.9s after more tweeking but my psu just does not like it or I think i could push my 965 further..   give you some competition ey..



Not air no  That's on phase and really had to push to get under 15.4  Ive beat the time with a 965 on air before now but I had more fun getting the sempron up there.

Quick run on phase 





 Only id the 1 quick run  didn't optamize anything atall. 






 Same again but on air. 






 Acctually trying under phase






 Again not optimized because I was tweaking for wprime. 

Quick cpu-z 



And a little pifast in between runs 






Those cas5 timmings were the hardest thing to achieve, especially on a £20 set of value ram lol.


----------



## jasonn20

^ dang i like to overclock myself but the phase cooling kinda turns a guy into a junkie huh ..


----------



## El Gappo

Pretty much lol.


----------



## MacBook

2048Megabytes said:


> I can see people are still posting there results using the old Super-Pi program.   Might I suggest we turn our attention to the following and go to this thread:
> 
> http://www.computerforum.com/163868-multi-threaded-super-pi-contest.html
> 
> Y-cruncher: Multi-Threaded Pi-Benchmark for Multi-Core Systems.
> 
> This program is a lot better at measuring processor performance over the old Super-Pi program.


The purpose of this is to see how CPU architecture has improved, this way you can compare single, dual, and quad cores together.  With that other version you can only compare CPU's of the same number of cores.


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

ah wow been a while since i visited this thread. looks like i lost 1st place a looong time ago lol. my 775 will take it's last benching breath soon, then i'll be moving on to another socket to try 1M pi again.



El Gappo said:


> Oh wow that's a nice time  But you should of listened and used the correct os
> *snip*
> *Here is my air time*  Hope you enjoyed 1st place.



El Gappo, i don't believe you got that high on air. no way you could tame this thing with 1.6v on air. ln2? phase? congrats, first subzero i've seen on THIS forum


----------



## El Gappo

You will know about it when it's sub zero


----------



## 87dtna

WhiteFireDragon said:


> El Gappo, i don't believe you got that high on air. no way you could tame this thing with 1.6v on air. ln2? phase? congrats, first subzero i've seen on THIS forum




I don't see how it's impossible.  I've run my I5 750 and my I7 860 (HT off) up to 1.60 with a TRUE cpu cooler.  SuperPi is not very CPU intensive since it's single threaded.  My I7 is not prime stable at 4.8ghz/1.60 Vcore, but I got to run superpi at that frequency to get 8.699 seconds and the cpu only saw ~70c.


----------



## meticadpa

4.845GHz, RAM at 1020MHz, 5-5-5-15 (unoptimised timings, it was like 1.40 a.m.!) and in Windows 7.

I'll see what I can in XP later on, hopefully going sub 9 seconds. (I'll have higher clocks on both the RAM and CPU, and tighter timings.)


----------



## 87dtna

What CPU and at what voltage?  Nice times but I really think you have to have CPU-z up with it for it to get posted.


----------



## meticadpa

Sorry, I meant to post E8500. >.<

At about 1.37V.

I couldn't have CPU-Z up because I was in safe mode, when I should have been in diagnostic mode. 

Since I bought ME2 today D) I don't think I'll be overclocking much.


----------



## 87dtna

Nice OC at that voltage!

You mean MW2?


----------



## meticadpa

No, I mean Mass Effect 2... don't insult me with that Modern Warfare 2 crap. 

Yeah, it's a good overclock for the voltage, I guess. That's what it was after Vdroop/Vdrop roughly (my board has HORRIBLE Vdroop/Vdrop and I can't be arsed doing the pencil mod) so I've still got some room to play with.


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> No, I mean Mass Effect 2... don't insult me with that Modern Warfare 2 crap.
> 
> Yeah, it's a good overclock for the voltage, I guess. That's what it was after Vdroop/Vdrop roughly (my board has HORRIBLE Vdroop/Vdrop and I can't be arsed doing the pencil mod) so I've still got some room to play with.



LOL, sorry!

I just got my UD4P hooked up, sad to see my low end ASRock board go because of the no Vdroop option in the bios which worked awesome.  Now, with 1.30 set in the Bios, when I prime95 my I7 860 at 3.8ghz it gets down to 1.22 Vcore


----------



## meticadpa

Think that's bad? 

I set 1.4125V in the BIOS and it used to go down to 1.304V on load.


----------



## 87dtna

meticadpa said:


> Think that's bad?
> 
> I set 1.4125V in the BIOS and it used to go down to 1.304V on load.



WHOA!  OK yeah thats way worse.  Check one thing though, one time with my old 790i board and X3210 I was getting bad Vdroop like that, and turned out one of the 4 pin CPU connectors was not in the whole way.  I guess it's not an issue if you have a straight up 8 pin plug, but if you got 2 four pins like my PSU, worth a check.


----------



## meticadpa

Straight up 8 pin.

Yeah, my board is famed for having terrible vdroop. :\


----------



## 87dtna

What board is it?


----------



## meticadpa

ASUS Maximus Formula X38, crossflashed to the Rampage Formula 0803 BIOS.

Soon to have a DFI P45 T2RS for benching, though.


----------



## 87dtna

I like DFI boards, they always have tons of tweaking settings.


----------



## linkin

your boards have really bad vdroop! I thought drooping from 1.4v to 1.36v was bad as it is... we should all do the pencil mod.


----------



## meticadpa

Hope to break into the top 5 when I install XP.


----------



## lubo4444

meticadpa said:


> Hope to break into the top 5 when I install XP.



XP rules!!! I'm running it on my old PC although i can install Win7 on it but XP rules and i'm not planning on changing it.


----------



## meticadpa

XP rules for Intel CPUs.

AMD CPUs don't really see much benefit from going to XP from Vista, or vice versa, whereas Intel CPUs see a huge clock-for-clock performance loss in either 7 or Vista.


----------



## Theblackoutow

Stock clock i7 860.




I was wondering if the turbo mode helped me in this test?


----------



## El Gappo

Run it without and see......


----------



## Theblackoutow

I don't know how


----------



## El Gappo

Yes it help  Are those stock volts?


----------



## Theblackoutow

Yesir, running on stock cooler, so I won't OC for awhile.


----------



## meticadpa

You have C1E/SpeedStep enabled?


----------



## Theblackoutow

What would that be Metica?


----------



## meticadpa

They're power saving features in your BIOS.

Turn them off if you're going to try and overclock. They can cause problems with an overclock by dropping the voltage.


----------



## Theblackoutow

Oh, I'm not overclocking till I get a after market CPU cooler.


----------



## lubo4444

Theblackoutow that's a pretty good score.  Tell me what you get without the turbo please? I'm interested to see it.


----------



## Theblackoutow

I don't know a way as to disable automatic turbo.


----------



## bomberboysk

Might as well update my score:




11.796s, [email protected] 4000mhz, On water with my rs360 rad, bong cooler, GTZ, and mcp355 with res top.


----------



## 87dtna

Doesn't look like it's been updated for quite some time.  But here's my newest-


----------



## Michael

Here's the SuperPi on my new laptop:






16.635 @ 1M

-Michael


----------



## Shane

Michael said:


> Here's the SuperPi on my new laptop:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 16.635 @ 1M
> 
> -Michael



Nice Laptop!


Hows the GT 330,tried any games yet>?


----------



## ganzey

87dtna said:


> Doesn't look like it's been updated for quite some time.  But here's my newest-



ooo, you are now in the lead


----------



## Michael

Nevakonaza said:


> Nice Laptop!
> 
> 
> Hows the GT 330,tried any games yet>?



Thanks! No games, yet. I'm planning to pick up Left 4 Dead 2 today.. Hopefully things go well.

I did a 3DMark06 and the results were disappointing to say the least, I'm not entirely set on keeping this laptop yet.. but not sure where I'll find a better replacement for a similar price.


----------



## El Gappo

Was doing some tuning for a lcc today but I was getting board and stuck a fast run in on my stripped os with some conservative ram and nb clocks. Really need to reformat that install after today. Corrupt  





 Will be breaking 13 seconds once I've reformatted it on Wednesday


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

guess what's so surprising about this ? and no... it's not how high my clocks are or the superpi time, that's nothing special.


----------



## linkin

Wow, that's one fast E8700!


----------



## Shane

WhiteFireDragon said:


>



Whats the temps like on that thing?


----------



## Gareth

Pentium 166MHz!!


----------



## 87dtna

LOL, another candidate for the fail thread link??


----------



## Michael

Gareth said:


> Pentium 166MHz!!



I was like "Whoa! 50 seconds on a Pentium 166Mhz?!" Then I saw the '15m' to the left of that, lol


----------



## just a noob

WhiteFireDragon said:


> guess what's so surprising about this ? and no... it's not how high my clocks are or the superpi time, that's nothing special.



scooped one up off of ebay i see?


----------



## WhiteFireDragon

just a noob said:


> scooped one up off of ebay i see?



actually got it off a friend on XS. deciding if i should sell this rare chip or not


----------



## 87dtna

There's one for sale on overclockers.com right now, or is that yours?  LOL


Got my DICE pot the other day, went today to get some dry ice but the only place around here that I can get it just has a sign on the door that says ''closed until spring''.  WTF!
So, with a little creative thinking and some big balls I just used crushed ice and a little bit of water.  What can I say it got me an extra 100 mhz with less voltage!  After a couple runs, I was paying close attention to condensation build up and it was starting to run down so I shut it all down and dried everything up before something fried.

So you can call these results, ''water cooling''


----------



## linkin

wow that's fast.


----------



## 87dtna

Just wait until I get sub zero, then we'll be seeing fast!  I should be able to hit 6ghz without too much trouble.


----------



## voyagerfan99

Built an i7 920 for a customer the other day. Ran superpi and got about 14.601 at stock 2.66 speeds. Nice speedy processor


----------



## 87dtna

Still have not had time to get some DICE going on the I3 yet, but I did play with the E6750 to see what it could do on air.

Not bad IMO, but I need some better ram as this is just cheap crap ram that doesn't even have heatsinks-






The weird part is after 3.5ghz this CPU requires huge jumps in voltage to get it stable.  With 3.5ghz, 500x7, it's stable at 1.3625 Vcore.


----------



## knero




----------



## 87dtna

Dice run, can't seem to get the temp below -15.....and whats weird is it says -25 in the bios.  But there's no way I'm going to get to 6ghz because I've hit a base clock wall at 246.  I tried taking the multiplier down but still won't POST, so I guess 5.6 is all I can get out of it.


----------



## bomberboysk

87dtna said:


> Dice run, can't seem to get the temp below -15.....and whats weird is it says -25 in the bios.  But there's no way I'm going to get to 6ghz because I've hit a base clock wall at 246.  I tried taking the multiplier down but still won't POST, so I guess 5.6 is all I can get out of it.



What kinda solvent you running with the dice? Acetone?


----------



## 87dtna

Yes, acetone


----------



## bomberboysk

87dtna said:


> Yes, acetone



What kinda pot you got?


----------



## 87dtna

bomberboysk said:


> What kinda pot you got?



A custom one from Bartx, this one here-

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4235399&postcount=26


Mine looks exactly like that except it has a few more holes drilled than that.


Even if it's not ''great'', wouldn't it atleast get me to like -50c or something?  I hear most hit around -70c on DICE.


----------



## bomberboysk

87dtna said:


> A custom one from Bartx, this one here-
> 
> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4235399&postcount=26
> 
> 
> Mine looks exactly like that except it has a few more holes drilled than that.
> 
> 
> Even if it's not ''great'', wouldn't it atleast get me to like -50c or something?  I hear most hit around -70c on DICE.



Well, what TIM are you running? Most pastes other than ceramique become insulators at subzero temps. Also, are you running just chunks of dice or crushed? Crushed dice tends to work alot better.


----------



## 87dtna

bomberboysk said:


> Well, what TIM are you running? Most pastes other than ceramique become insulators at subzero temps. Also, are you running just chunks of dice or crushed? Crushed dice tends to work alot better.



Using ceramique, and the DICE was crushed to mostly powder and tiny pieces.  I filled the pot about 1/2 full of acetone, slowly put DICE in because it bubbled a ton at first, then added around 2-3 had fulls until it was bubbling around 1'' from the top of the pot.

I talked to another guy thats a guru for extreme cooling, and he says even with a crappy pot I should have been at -60c easy.


----------



## just a noob

do you have another thermometer? because i wouldn't go by what the computer says, -15 is probably all that system can display. you need a thermometer with a k-type probe or something


----------



## 87dtna

just a noob said:


> do you have another thermometer? because i wouldn't go by what the computer says, -15 is probably all that system can display. you need a thermometer with a k-type probe or something



Yeah thats what it's looking like.  I need to pick one up I guess.

Damn, I was hoping that I was doing 5.6ghz on -15c leaving plenty of room to go more!  LOL

I seemed to have hit a base clock wall though for some reason at 245.  I lowered the multi to 22, and still was not able to increase the BCLCK at all.  QPI and ram clocks are not holding me back, I made sure of that.  So I'm not sure.


----------



## just a noob

Time for a new chip


----------



## 87dtna

You think it's the chip and not the board?


----------



## just a noob

I dunno, have you tried jumping the bclock up? you could just have a bclock hole


----------



## 87dtna

just a noob said:


> I dunno, have you tried jumping the bclock up? you could just have a bclock hole



I thought about that, but not until after I was all done testing and took the DICE pot off   LOL


----------



## bomberboysk

just a noob said:


> do you have another thermometer? because i wouldn't go by what the computer says, -15 is probably all that system can display. you need a thermometer with a k-type probe or something



Yeah, and he may want some arctic silver thermal epoxy in order to epoxy the probe in. If there isnt already a hole in the pot for a thermal probe, you'll need to drill one with a 1/8" or so drill bit.

How well insulated was the pot/board?


----------



## El Gappo

Yeah you need one of these man http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=330410021634&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT That will do you up to -200 and I don't think you will find a cheaper one. Got to remember on die temp monitors are designed to work from 30C-100C not low or negative temps where they become very sporadic or just stop working. 

Nice results tho man. The giga should be good for 250-260 bclk, try a lower multi and see what happens or maybe look into hard modding it.

Got my new pot today btw


----------



## 87dtna

I'm not in the UK   LOL

You gonna beat me up now with your new pot?   I'm actually working on a deal for an I5 670, so watch out!


I did try 22 multi I said, still wouldn't go past 246 bclk...I tried lower ram and QPI settings to make sure it wasn't holding me back.  I increased the PCH and VTT, all that, no help.  The UD4P will also only let me go to 1.70 Vcore with the I3, not sure why because with the I7 860 it would go over 2v if I wanted to.  Must be because of 32nm.  But that wouldn't matter because I lowered the multi, so it's definitely a wall.  But as mentioned, it could have just been a bclk hole.


----------



## bomberboysk

87dtna said:


> I'm not in the UK   LOL
> 
> You gonna beat me up now with your new pot?   I'm actually working on a deal for an I5 670, so watch out!
> 
> 
> I did try 22 multi I said, still wouldn't go past 246 bclk...I tried lower ram and QPI settings to make sure it wasn't holding me back.  I increased the PCH and VTT, all that, no help.  The UD4P will also only let me go to 1.70 Vcore with the I3, not sure why because with the I7 860 it would go over 2v if I wanted to.  Must be because of 32nm.  But that wouldn't matter because I lowered the multi, so it's definitely a wall.  But as mentioned, it could have just been a bclk hole.



These are both cheapies, but should be fine for your needs:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Digital-Infrare...ultDomain_0?hash=item35a8207663#ht_4566wt_939
http://cgi.ebay.com/K-or-J-Type-The...ltDomain_0?hash=item4cee02dd27#ht_10347wt_939


----------



## 87dtna

Thanks, the first one there is the one I was looking at too


----------



## El Gappo

That seller is worldwide, same as the second one bomber posted. Steer clear of the infrared they are naf! 

Thinking about sorting myself out with a little intel setup atm so you better watch out LOL! Only an old commando setup but should be fun :good:

Got a tad further with a different ram kit 






Need a new board a a dewar for any more gains on that one. OH and that's in vista lol. I really should do it in xp but my installs always die! pisses me off.

Is [-0MEGA-] still about?


----------



## bomberboysk

El Gappo said:


> That seller is worldwide, same as the second one bomber posted. Steer clear of the infrared they are naf!
> 
> Thinking about sorting myself out with a little intel setup atm so you better watch out LOL! Only an old commando setup but should be fun :good:
> 
> Got a tad further with a different ram kit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need a new board a a dewar for any more gains on that one. OH and that's in vista lol. I really should do it in xp but my installs always die! pisses me off.
> 
> Is [-0MEGA-] still about?



NAF? I'm not sure i would trust one of those ebays for their infrared, for infrared i like my fluke. For K-type though, the ebay stuff is good enough for what we do.


----------



## 87dtna

naf?   You englanders... 

OK so not the infrared, so the second one linked to is OK?

Ahh, so what intel chip are you going with?  The I5 670 is the highest clocking intel chip there is right now, but if you are running LN2 you may be able to surpass me with a lesser chip.


----------



## bomberboysk

87dtna said:


> naf?   You englanders...
> 
> OK so not the infrared, so the second one linked to is OK?
> 
> Ahh, so what intel chip are you going with?  The I5 670 is the highest clocking intel chip there is right now, but if you are running LN2 you may be able to surpass me with a lesser chip.



Yeah, i wouldnt recommend trusting the infrared bit(but its got a K-type as well which is what you want for dice).


----------



## El Gappo

Naf is just rubbish.... just rubbish lol I'm sure the fluke one is brilliant, all their stuff is but it's not really ideal for this application ( would be cool checking NB and vrm temps like pew pew pew tho  ). Yeah I'm using one of those very same K/J type ones atm mounted on my cpu ihs. About to post a thread hang on.

I'm planning on working my way through a bunch of dual cores on the commando and a few celerons once I get some ln2 on the go. Right faf getting a hold of it here =o/

(faf=pain in the bum. Will have you speaking proper English in no time lol)


----------



## bomberboysk

El Gappo said:


> Naf is just rubbish.... just rubbish lol I'm sure the fluke one is brilliant, all their stuff is but it's not really ideal for this application ( would be cool checking NB and vrm temps like pew pew pew tho  ). Yeah I'm using one of those very same K/J type ones atm mounted on my cpu ihs. About to post a thread hang on.
> 
> I'm planning on working my way through a bunch of dual cores on the commando and a few celerons once I get some ln2 on the go. Right faf getting a hold of it here =o/
> 
> (faf=pain in the bum. Will have you speaking proper English in no time lol)



Thats gotta suck, ln2 isnt that hard to get around here, but its ~$1/liter and i'd need to buy a dewar(dice is alot cheaper to run with haha...speaking of dice i need to get a pot).


----------



## El Gappo

Working like a charm, very very sensitive.

Here is the 4.4kg nickle plated copper beast 









It's really heavy so just in case I can't top 87's times I can just throw it at him 

Just posted some athlon II benching fun http://www.computerforum.com/173177-el-gappo-testing-athlon-ii-255-x2-overclocking.html Strange thing about the cpu was it was made in the 27th week of 09 wayyy before the 255 was even announced  They either got released early in Taiwan or it's an es I don't know.


----------



## Ryeong

El_Gappo said:


> That seller is worldwide, same as the second one bomber posted. Steer clear of the infrared they are naf!
> 
> Thinking about sorting myself out with a little intel setup atm so you better watch out LOL! Only an old commando setup but should be fun
> 
> Got a tad further with a different ram kit



How can you get such a low result with 5Ghz!


----------



## bomberboysk

Ryeong said:


> How can you get such a low result with 5Ghz!



1. Quote Fail

2. He's running an AMD cpu, intel's run superpi a heck of alot faster.


----------



## Ryeong

bomberboysk said:


> 1. Quote Fail
> 
> 2. He's running an AMD cpu, intel's run superpi a heck of alot faster.



1.Reply to Quote before i re-edited the Quote fail!

2. Why? Is AMD worse or is it only the software that causes it?


----------



## El Gappo

Ryeong said:


> 1.Reply to Quote before i re-edited the Quote fail!
> 
> 2. Why? Is AMD worse or is it only the software that causes it?



I'm not sure if it's down to the compiler used or if fp calculation is amd's weak point ( well yeah it's a lot of that ) other benchmarks like wprime aren't quite as biased but again AMD lose on thread count half the time. Geekbench is a good one.


----------



## ganzey

Ryeong said:


> *1.Reply to Quote before i re-edited the Quote fail!*
> 
> 2. Why? Is AMD worse or is it only the software that causes it?



wouldnt that be your fault?


----------



## Ryeong

El Gappo said:


> I'm not sure if it's down to the compiler used or if fp calculation is amd's weak point ( well yeah it's a lot of that ) other benchmarks like wprime aren't quite as biased but again AMD lose on thread count half the time. Geekbench is a good one.



Hehe, i wonder how a C2D would score with those clocks. (considering that this software is not multi-threaded, i7 etc would be a waste)..

6.00 Ghz on C2D 8600! That would surely give a nice score 



ganzey said:


> wouldnt that be your fault?



It's double fail on my behalf.. cheers!


----------



## El Gappo

An 8600 at 6ghz would literally rip my time in half lol. ATM the 980x's are almost the quickest in this benchmark purely because of the unlocked multi and tweakability but even then they disable 4 cores to reach the higher clocks.  The I5 dual cores like 87tdna's are completely dominating!
Here is the world record list http://hwbot.org/rankings/benchmark/superpi/rankings Impressive eh!


----------



## ganzey

Ryeong said:


> Hehe, i wonder how a C2D would score with those clocks. (considering that this software is not multi-threaded, i7 etc would be a waste)..
> 
> 6.00 Ghz on C2D 8600! That would surely give a nice score





El Gappo said:


> An 8600 at 6ghz would literally rip my time in half lol. ATM the 980x's are almost the quickest in this benchmark purely because of the unlocked multi and tweakability but even then they disable 4 cores to reach the higher clocks.  The I5 dual cores like 87tdna's are completely dominating!
> Here is the world record list http://hwbot.org/rankings/benchmark/superpi/rankings Impressive eh!



yep


87dtna said:


> Dice run, can't seem to get the temp below -15.....and whats weird is it says -25 in the bios.  But there's no way I'm going to get to 6ghz because I've hit a base clock wall at 246.  I tried taking the multiplier down but still won't POST, so I guess 5.6 is all I can get out of it.


----------



## Ryeong

El Gappo said:


> An 8600 at 6ghz would literally rip my time in half lol. ATM the 980x's are almost the quickest in this benchmark purely because of the unlocked multi and tweakability but even then they disable 4 cores to reach the higher clocks.  The I5 dual cores like 87tdna's are completely dominating!
> Here is the world record list http://hwbot.org/rankings/benchmark/superpi/rankings Impressive eh!



5sec 944ms   	 Taiwan   Hicookie   	 Intel   Core i5 670  @7098MHz 

That's impressive indeed!


----------



## El Gappo

WOW grats on the sub 8 second run man! You need to get your ass a thermometer and some awesome ram like mine quick smart


----------



## PaulPool

01m 02.657s
Good for my pc? I put the calculator in there just for the geek points.


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> WOW grats on the sub 8 second run man! You need to get your ass a thermometer and some awesome ram like mine quick smart



Thanks!  I'm 401st place in hwbot now, I was 398th when I first submitted it.

http://hwbot.org/community/submission/981108_87dtna_superpi_core_i3_540_7sec_677ms


About my ram, it's suppose to run 9-9-9-27 1t at 2000mhz, and I have it set to cas9 in the bios but when I boot it boots cas10.  I don't know why.

I used to have some 1600 cas7 ram, but traded it.


----------



## Ryeong

PaulPool said:


> 01m 02.657s
> Good for my pc? I put the calculator in there just for the geek points.



57 sec lmao.. guess the real result was 1 min? you edited the last part lol..

Edit: Eye-fail!!! I didn't say the 01 min before the seconds.. fail! I though it went from 57sec to 02sec lol..


----------



## PaulPool

Ryeong said:


> 57 sec lmao.. guess the real result was 1 min? you edited the last part lol..
> 
> Edit: Eye-fail!!! I didn't say the 01 min before the seconds.. fail! I though it went from 57sec to 02sec lol..



Those shades ain't helping you, huh? haha ; )

So I'm guessing for my old emachines that isn't a good score then.


----------



## Ryeong

PaulPool said:


> Those shades ain't helping you, huh? haha ; )
> 
> So I'm guessing for my old emachines that isn't a good score then.



I've never even heard of that CPU


----------



## Gooberman

emachine = prebuilt computer


----------



## PaulPool

Gooberman said:


> emachine = prebuilt computer



Yeah you're right with that. And this one is at least 6 years old. I've done everything soft-ware wise to speed it up and make it as efficient as possible. 

It flies like a brick.


----------



## Drenlin

Well, considering that you did it twice as fast as my 6-year-old Dell, I'd say you're good. (your 62s vs my 135s)

Of course, I _was_ using a Northwood Celeron and SDRAM....but still.


----------



## Aastii

Where I am so far:






I know it is slower than my e6750 was (time, not cloks ) but that is top 10 AMD and so close to top 5 

I tried pushing further to 3.6, both on multiplyer and on raising fsb, but it won't stay stable at 3.6 without voltage higher than 1.512V, but if I go up higher (0.0125V increments) it won't boot. It will post, but not boot to windows 

=EDIT=

Using Turbo V I managed to do it  Still going further so maybe updates yet






That is completely stable and temps as very good, 23 idle, 39 stress testing


----------



## Ambushed

Watch this space ^^


----------



## spynoodle

This is my first attempt at SuperPi. Just decided to try it out, no OC, stock clocks:




Not bad, eh?


----------



## 87dtna

Not bad at all for 3ghz.


----------



## Glliw

Just decided to go through and do each amount.






32M took some time haha.


----------



## spynoodle

Glliw said:


> 32M took some time haha.


Yeah, tell me about it.  It took like, 20 minutes on mine for the full 24 loop.


----------



## El Gappo

IT'S OVER 9000000 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




IT'S UNDER 900000000000000
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





In b4 holy hell voltage batman! It's a C0 god dammit Robin!


----------



## 87dtna

LOL, yeah that is some nice voltage there!

What board are you using?


----------



## El Gappo

A very nice Dfi dk p45 t2rs +  The chip is just a dog :/ Finnaly got some half decent ram that will let me past 4.8 only to find the chip stops at 5.2


----------



## 87dtna

Yeah, you did good for for a C0 on SS.  Stick it to some DICE or LN2


----------



## just a noob

El Gappo said:


> IT'S OVER 9000000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IT'S UNDER 900000000000000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In b4 holy hell voltage batman! It's a C0 god dammit Robin!


It's not over 9000, it's exactly 9000, I am disappointment


----------



## El Gappo

JAN I got that same time at least 13 times yesterday lol, believe me I was more disappoint than you lol.


----------



## just a noob

El Gappo said:


> JAN I got that same time at least 13 times yesterday lol, believe me I was more disappoint than you lol.



I would have expected you could get at least one 9.001 lol


----------



## mihir

here is mine is it good or abnormal




Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## mihir

[-omega-] please update the scores


----------



## 87dtna

mihir said:


> [-omega-] please update the scores



Just in case he decides to update, I'll post mine again so it's not missed....


----------



## The Chad

Wow.... nice one 87dtna. Never seen a it been done in under 8 seconds.


----------



## Geoff

mihir said:


> [-omega-] please update the scores


I probably won't.


----------



## mihir

87dtna said:


> Just in case he decides to update, I'll post mine again so it's not missed....



wtf how is that possible didnt imagine i3 would be this what did you use to overclock it this much


----------



## Aastii

[-0MEGA-];1464515 said:
			
		

> I probably won't.



If someone was to say (And most probably not me ) compile all of the updated scores in the correct format and send them to you, would you copy+paste it over to the original thread?

If that happens, can whoever does it replace my e6750 score with my 720BE score, even though it is lower please


----------



## 87dtna

mihir said:


> wtf how is that possible didnt imagine i3 would be this what did you use to overclock it this much



Dry ice cooling.  I could have gone further with a different board, my UD4P has a base clock wall at 246.   But thats why I bought the I5 670, it has a much higher multplier.  I should easily be able to hit 6ghz on dry ice cooling.

That I3 540 was a really good clocker, I was hitting 4.9ghz on air, and 5.1ghz on chilled water cooling.


----------



## 87dtna

The Chad said:


> Wow.... nice one 87dtna. Never seen a it been done in under 8 seconds.



Thanks.....well now you have LOL.


Since Omega clearly has no interest in revising this, I'm thinking of starting a new thread for superPi myself and take on the updating.  I'll PM a mod to shut this thread down, and we'll start fresh.  No sense in having scores from years ago and non-active members/long gone rigs.  Thoughts?


----------



## Geoff

87dtna said:


> Thanks.....well now you have LOL.
> 
> 
> Since Omega clearly has no interest in revising this, I'm thinking of starting a new thread for superPi myself and take on the updating.  I'll PM a mod to shut this thread down, and we'll start fresh.  No sense in having scores from years ago and non-active members/long gone rigs.  Thoughts?


A mod is not going to shut this thread down simply because you ask them to.


----------



## 87dtna

[-0MEGA-];1464603 said:
			
		

> A mod is not going to shut this thread down simply because you ask them to.



Why not?  If it's for the same purpose.  You are clearly not interested in updating your thread, and I won't mind doing it.  Plus we'll start with fresh scores not ones from 2 years ago.  I would not carry over the current list.  There would be no point in keeping this thread going as it would distract from the new thread.  Without updates, this thread is completely pointless, it should not be allowed to stay open.


----------



## Aastii

87dtna said:


> Thanks.....well now you have LOL.
> 
> 
> Since Omega clearly has no interest in revising this, I'm thinking of starting a new thread for superPi myself and take on the updating.  I'll PM a mod to shut this thread down, and we'll start fresh.  No sense in having scores from years ago and non-active members/long gone rigs.  Thoughts?





87dtna said:


> Why not?  If it's for the same purpose.  You are clearly not interested in updating your thread, and I won't mind doing it.  Plus we'll start with fresh scores not ones from 2 years ago.  I would not carry over the current list.  There would be no point in keeping this thread going as it would distract from the new thread.  Without updates, this thread is completely pointless, it should not be allowed to stay open.



+1

Alot of other computer forums have threads like this, will make us look reeeeaaaal good a short time from now when they are all up to date with technology and all our scores are old technology. It is like having P4 and Athlon 64 CPUs up there, what is the point in even having the thread if OP doesn't care about it or update it?


----------



## mep916

If the OP is unwilling to update and manage this thread, then we'll likely import the all the scores into a new thread and allow a moderator to manage it.


----------



## 87dtna

mep916 said:


> If the OP is unwilling to update and manage this thread, then we'll likely import the all the scores into a new thread and allow a moderator to manage it.



We don't want the scores imported...we want new scores.


----------



## bomberboysk

87dtna said:


> We don't want the scores imported...we want new scores.


What he means is all the current scores plus whatever scores have not been updated.


----------



## mep916

87dtna said:


> we want new scores.



If we create a new thread, I think all the users that have posted in this thread should still receive credit for their scores. We'll discuss starting from scratch however. I assume that's what you're suggesting, that we start from scratch and eliminate all the scores in this thread.


----------



## 87dtna

bomberboysk said:


> What he means is all the current scores plus whatever scores have not been updated.






mep916 said:


> If we create a new thread, I think all the users that have posted in this thread should still receive credit for their scores. We'll discuss starting from scratch however. I assume that's what you're suggesting, that we start from scratch and eliminate all the scores in this thread.



I'd like to start from scratch for a few reasons.  First, some members are not even active anymore, so why should their scores remain?  And second, a lot of the scores are old hardware, and perhaps people have since gotten new rigs but not updated their score (and/or it was never updated in this thread).  Perhaps they lost interest and a new thread with fresh scores will re-kindle it.


----------



## Geoff

87dtna said:


> Why not?  If it's for the same purpose.  You are clearly not interested in updating your thread, and I won't mind doing it.  Plus we'll start with fresh scores not ones from 2 years ago.  I would not carry over the current list.  There would be no point in keeping this thread going as it would distract from the new thread.  Without updates, this thread is completely pointless, it should not be allowed to stay open.


I'm not saying that it wouldn't be a good idea, I'm simply saying that by you alone asking to close this thread and start a new one doesn't mean that this will be closed.

It's not against anyone, I just simply don't have time to keep these threads updated like I did when I created them.


----------



## 87dtna

Gotcha.


----------



## El Gappo

Can you not just change the owner of the thread? I see that done all the time on v-bulletin


----------



## 87dtna

Apparently...nothing is gonna get done.


----------



## 2048Megabytes

Super-Pi is really old software that doesn't really take advantage of multi-core processors.  I suggest we just let this thread die and move on to another program called Y-Cruncher.  There is more information about it here:

http://www.computerforum.com/163868-multi-threaded-super-pi-contest.html


----------



## Geoff

2048Megabytes said:


> Super-Pi is really old software that doesn't really take advantage of multi-core processors.  I suggest we just let this thread die and move on to another program called Y-Cruncher.  There is more information about it here:
> 
> http://www.computerforum.com/163868-multi-threaded-super-pi-contest.html


SuperPi lets you compare single, dual, and quad core processors equally and lets you see the true performance of the processor in relation to others.


----------



## El Gappo

There is and never will be a replacement for the epic sauce that is super pi


----------



## linkin

Also this version is still good for seeing how the architecture from one series of chips compares to another, it's not all about the number of cores you have


----------



## mep916

[-0MEGA-];1464794 said:
			
		

> It's not against anyone, I just simply don't have time to keep these threads updated like I did when I created them.



That's cool... totally understandable. 



87dtna said:


> Apparently...nothing is gonna get done.



There will be a new thread up soon. 



El Gappo said:


> There is and never will be a replacement for the epic sauce that is super pi


----------



## Geoff

mep916 said:


> That's cool... totally understandable.


HOW DARE YOU SIR! 

Stupid caps rule.


----------



## 87dtna

mep916 said:


> There will be a new thread up soon.


----------



## bomberboysk

Consider this thread finished, new threads will be up within a few days pending outcome of the poll. Geoff does not have the time to continue updating these threads and has agreed with the closing of this thread.


----------

