# Black Hole V2



## Virssagòn

Black Hole V2


*By SmileMan & Spirit*

Hey guys,
here is the next version of Black hole!
It will be stable for both companies: Intel and AMD.

It's a multithreaded and singlethreaded benchmark, so we can see how good your cpu is per core and how well when it uses all of it's cores!

*Some Information:*

*Multithreaded*
- 3 passes and one warming up round
- 1st pass: calculating with floating point maths, this is 8threaded
- 2nd pass: integer maths, 8threaded
- 3rd pass: Xtreme pass, 32threaded (integer maths)

*Singlethreaded*
- 2 passes
- 1st pass: integer maths
- 2nd pass: floating point maths

*64x BIT ONLY!*

The tests will last at least 3 minutes to run the 2.
It can be unresponsible for a while, just let it do his thing then.
All other programs must be closed for best results.
The results you can post here.
I'll post the scores in one ranking table.
You must run the 2 tests for getting the final score!

The higher the scores, the better!

*Installing the benchmark:*

Not really difficult:
just download the zip file from *here*
extract the exe
And run the 2 tests 

*Preview:*








*Scores:*













*AWARDS OF BLACK HOLE V2! (sorry that you had to wait)*

*Here is an overview of all the tests from Black Hole v2:*









*The top 10 and their grandpa:*










*Winners of the top 10 award:*

*1. KasperL - 3930K @ 4.3
2. Yachu - 2600K @ 4.5
3. Jiniix - 2600K @ 4.8
4. LaquerHead - 3700K @ 4.9
5. SmileMan - 2600K @ 4.7
6. Wolfeking - 2600K @ 4.7
7. Tech Savvy - 2550K @ 4.5
8. Jiniix - 2500K @ 4.8
9. salvage-this - 3570K @ 4.7
10. SmileMan - 3700 @ stock*

congratz!!









*The 3rd place go to!*

*Jiniix - i7 2600K @ 4.8 - 1,210 pts*










*On the second place!*

*Yachu - i7 2600K @ 4.5 - 1,254 pts*










*And the winner is!!!*

*KasperL - i7 3930K @ 4.3, 1,323 pts*










*At our last place!*

*Spirit - Athlon 64 3700+*










*The best Intel in this bench!*

*KasperL - 3930K @ 4.2*










*The AMD winner is!*

*StrangleHold - FX-8150 @ 4.5*











*Then we have our guy with his high oc!*

*LaquerHead - 3770K @ 4.9*












*And the tester with most balls is!*

*Jiniix*









*Thank you all for testing and congrtz with your awards!!!!*


*Smile & Spirit*


----------



## Virssagòn

Here are my scores!


----------



## KasperL

Oh. When i get home i'll test it, and get that first place again :-D


----------



## Virssagòn

My other pc 
there is much difference because this benchmark is much more sensitive then the previous!


----------



## Virssagòn

KasperL said:


> Oh. When i get home i'll test it, and get that first place again :-D



who knows 
maybe the six core got beaten in the singlethreaded 

You saw the awards? You have some of them!


----------



## Virssagòn

an other score from a stock i7 3770.

http://www.computerforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5250&stc=1&d=1345462432


----------



## wolfeking

I will do a run at 4.7 or 4.7 when I get home. I like these scores though. They make sense. Much more believable too.


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> I will do a run at 4.7 or 4.7 when I get home. I like these scores though. They make sense. Much more believable too.



yeah, the previous scores are less sensitive. So we can see the difference much better!


----------



## wolfeking

Thanks for that, because the last ones did not make much sense.   It is still  helping to have more ram even though it never used 2GB before?


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> Thanks for that, because the last ones did not make much sense.   It is still  helping to have more ram even though it never used 2GB before?



I think the speed helps in multithreaded like before.
You can test it


----------



## wolfeking

Well I want to know basically what is going on.  Because it may be a okay benchmark written in a language that is not ment for benchmarks, but it makes no sense that 16GB is better than 8GB when 8GB is not being maxxed.


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> Well I want to know basically what is going on.  Because it may be a okay benchmark written in a language that is not ment for benchmarks, but it makes no sense that 16GB is better than 8GB when 8GB is not being maxxed.



Yeh, I know. But the speed made sense too I think.

BTW: you got the award from best tester in previous version! (with bigfella and spirit, for some reason you all tested very much )


----------



## wolfeking

so. I am not doing it for a award. Its pointless to have awards. 

and we were running different speeds. you were on 1600 yes? and i was on 1866, but you score better at same clocks.  So it makes no sense that it was speed as I should have owned you at that speed.


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> so. I am not doing it for a award. Its pointless to have awards.
> 
> and we were running different speeds. you were on 1600 yes? and i was on 1866, but you score better at same clocks.  So it makes no sense that it was speed as I should have owned you at that speed.



Yeah, my oc was with the buspeed at 103. So my clockspeed was something like 4.735 or something and my ram speed was also a bit improved.
But it can be that the ram increases it with his quantity, I can't explain why. I already searched for answers...


----------



## wolfeking

103 busspeed should have been 1620 ram clocks. And that suggestion is false in every way. RAM will be the same speed no matter how much RAM you have. a 1600 MHz 4GB dimm is always slower than a 2133 1GB dimm.


----------



## Virssagòn

Current scores:


----------



## wolfeking

yay. I will break 1200! lol. I hope at 4.5 or 4.7 or 4.9 I will. I will try for stable with AC blowing right into it to see. only 4 more hours!


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> yay. I will break 1200! lol. I hope at 4.5 or 4.7 or 4.9 I will. I will try for stable with AC blowing right into it to see. only 4 more hours!



we'll see!


----------



## salvage-this




----------



## Darren




----------



## wolfeking

I would try to run at 4.9, but I don't want to blow something up. Its like 120*F in here and its running danger hot as is.


----------



## Laquer Head

Best I could get before I had to go out..

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6307/screen1kcm.jpg


----------



## StrangleHold

On mine, the multi keeps all 8 cores at 100%. Seems to be fine.

The single thread, one core jumps between 70 and 100%. Three other cores run between 3 and 10%, then randomly one of the other three will jump up to 70 to 100% then just drop back off to  between 3 and 10%. Seems the single threaded one need alittle work.


----------



## wolfeking

noticed it too. They still have not figured out how to lock it to one core. It would perform much better if they could lock cores, or have it ported to C++ so that they could lock the core usage.


----------



## StrangleHold

wolfeking said:


> noticed it too. They still have not figured out how to lock it to one core. It would perform much better if they could lock cores, or have it ported to C++ so that they could lock the core usage.


 
Yeah, the single threaded one should use one core. If its using more then one and at that using another three at different % rates. Cant really be called a single threaded.


----------



## wolfeking

true. Even back when they had the 4 thread and 8thread version it would jump cores like that and performed much better when you locked the processor to 4 threads.  But I agree, it is not using one thread so it can not be called single threaded.


----------



## StrangleHold

Yeah the other 4 threaded one on mine used 6 cores. 4 of them like this one hit 70 to 100% and the other 2 was around 30 to 60 %.

Edit
Might be best just to have a full multi threaded one. If it runs all cores 100%, it would be a better way of knowing the true differences between architectures no matter how many cores you have. If you have a single threaded benchmark and it uses more then one core. You cant really tell if the difference between architectures is real or not.


----------



## claptonman

During the first test, at the end, the cores were jumping all over the place. And on the 2nd test, my 2nd core was at 100%, and other cores jumping around. About halfway through, it switched to the 3rd core 100%, with no other activity on the other cores.


----------



## spirit

i5 2500K @ 4.3GHz






Smile, if you can send me over the Visual Studio files again, can I please correct some of your English?


----------



## KasperL

Where do i check the awards Smileman?


----------



## StrangleHold

I think this one needs some work. I got almost double what claptonman got clocked 100mhz less with just 2 more cores/8120 clocked 100mhz slower vs. 6100. Plus I dont see how spirit 2500 beat wolfeking 2600.


----------



## KasperL

Hello again Smile. I tested your program again. Here are the scores.


----------



## spirit

StrangleHold said:


> I think this one needs some work. I got almost double what claptonman got clocked 100mhz less with just 2 more cores/8120 clocked 100mhz slower vs. 6100. Plus I dont see how spirit 2500 beat wolfeking 2600.



I've beaten a 3930K now too, and the 3930K was overclocked.

Going to run it again and see how I do. Seems odd my 2500K is beating a 2600K and especially a 3930K!


----------



## spirit

Seems a bit more believable, but I ran it once and got like 630 points but that was whilst playing music and doing other stuff, so I left the computer and ran it again and got this.






4.3GHz by the way, I leave SpeedStep on.


----------



## FuryRosewood

Stock everything, just turned high preformance windows settings to keep the multi at max.


----------



## spirit

How come my 2500K is beating a 3820?


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> How come my 2500K is beating a 3820?



because yours is overclocked...
Man, all that questions.
The singlethreaded is much better at yours, but not the multithreaded!


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> i5 2500k @ 4.3ghz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> smile, if you can send me over the visual studio files again, can i please correct some of your english?



wtf?


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> because yours is overclocked...
> Man, all that questions.
> The singlethreaded is much better at yours, but not the multithreaded!


Thought so, but I reckon a 3820 should still be faster? Maybe not...



SmileMan said:


> wtf?


Yeah I know I scored high and I noticed some grammar and spelling errors which I want to correct for you.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Thought so, but I reckon a 3820 should still be faster? Maybe not...



yeah, I've to work on the singlethreaded. But I'm not gonna delete that test, because only multithreaded will not give real scores from the cpu.


----------



## spirit

Yeah when I scored 1,350 with my 2500K and saw that people with overclocked 2600Ks and 3930Ks were scoring hundreds of points lower than me, that's when I realised "hmmm... that can't be right" lol.


----------



## Virssagòn

I think the scores are believable, if you see to these:
(only the phenom got problems like before with the multithreaded)
I let that WOW score i5 off it


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:
			
		

> I let that WOW score i5 off it


Disappointment, I wanted to win something.  

Joking it was obviously some sort of fluke, there's no way it was faster than an OC'ed 3930K!


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Disappointment, I wanted to win something.
> 
> Joking it was obviously some sort of fluke, there's no way it was faster than an OC'ed 3930K!



Now it's a win to get above the 1400


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> Now it's a win to get above the 1400



Gonna try this on a Xeon now.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Gonna try this on a Xeon now.



A good xeon? I want to see that, and I gonna try this on the amd from my dad. (and fix the thread problem)


----------



## spirit

The Xeon in my server at home, not sure which Xeon it is, the server is about a year old though.


----------



## Virssagòn

Fixed it!!!!!
Gonna update it now, then we can test how much difference it gives .
Now I'm happy man xD.

Edit:
screenshot:








I didn't see much difference until now, but it's fixed .


----------



## spirit

Awesome - sorry I haven't been on Skype, still kind of half asleep. :/


----------



## Virssagòn

SmileMan said:


> just download the zip file from *here*



The download is updated!!! Get tested your system 

edit:
I had 2 Points difference, not really worth to update my score . But maybe it had more impact on the amd's...


----------



## spirit




----------



## spirit

Smile asked me to test this on the QUUADDD, so here it is:


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Smile asked me to test this on the QUUADDD, so here it is:



Nice score!


----------



## spirit

Haha yeah so most people's scores should be 400+ unless you're an idiot and try to run this on an Athlong 64 3700+ *hint hint*.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Haha yeah so most people's scores should be 400+ unless you're an idiot and try to run this on an Athlong 64 3700+ *hint hint*.



I got an athlon X2 3700+


----------



## spirit

Yeah I'm the idiot with the 3700+.  Gonna put a 64-bit OS on it sometime and try it.

May be able to try this on the Xeon too.


----------



## Virssagòn

My scores @ 4.7ghz!







I didn't see any difference between the locked singlethreaded and the singlethreaded which jumps from one thread to the other.
I'm waiting for your tests to be sure there is no difference!

(this score was with the fixed singlethreaded)


----------



## Darren

Yeah I made it into last place!  Kind of amusing since overall I still have a pretty good processor, just all of yours are crazy. I'll download the new one and try again. And btw my name has an H in it. You just had Denter.


----------



## spirit

Denther said:


> Yeah I made it into last place!  Kind of amusing since overall I still have a pretty good processor, just all of yours are crazy. I'll download the new one and try again. And btw my name has an H in it. You just had Denter.



Do you think you'll get beaten by the almighty QUUUADDD again?


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Do you think you'll get beaten by the almighty QUUUADDD again?



He is...
But he scores bad for some reason, alianmenace has the same cpu but scores much higher! (saw it in previous thread)


----------



## Virssagòn

Denther said:


> Yeah I made it into last place!  Kind of amusing since overall I still have a pretty good processor, just all of yours are crazy. I'll download the new one and try again. And btw my name has an H in it. You just had Denter.



OW, btw...
I forgot your scores and gave the award of slowest to spirit. Gonna correct that in a minute .
You can find the awards in the previous thread from the v1.1


----------



## spirit

RAM bottleneck? Didn't the other guy have 2GBs more than Denther?


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> RAM bottleneck? Didn't the other guy have 2GBs more than Denther?



yeh


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> OW, btw...
> I forgot your scores and gave the award of slowest to spirit. Gonna correct that in a minute .
> You can find the awards in the previous thread from the v1.1



 That's my award, you ain't taking it away from me. I succeeded at losing!


----------



## Darren

I just ran again with new version and got 302. I'm done with this Bench. Never seems to work for me.


----------



## Virssagòn

Denther said:


> I just ran again with new version and got 302. I'm done with this Bench. Never seems to work for me.



Haha, just don't give up the mood! there are alot of other benches that can say your cpu is fairly good.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> That's my award, you ain't taking it away from me. I succeeded at losing!



Haha, I'll place your name with denthers name xD


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> Haha, just don't give up the mood! there are alot of other benches that can say your cpu is fairly good.



Hahaha lol. 

Denther, I'm really not sure why this isn't working for you - anybody else out there got a Phenom II X4 which Black Hole can be tested on? I know a few members have 'em.


----------



## Darren

My CPU is fine. Just the Benchmark doesn't like me or Phenom II architecture. 

Also of note the bench while sitting open but not running was making me lag a lot in a game. I didn't remember it was on but turned it off and it's better now.


----------



## spirit

Hang on you didn't try to run the benchmark whilst gaming did you?


----------



## Darren

spirit said:


> Hang on you didn't try to run the benchmark whilst gaming did you?



-.-

I'm not Dragonuv. 

I just left it on while I was trying to play something and it cut my FPS in less than half. Just sitting there even.


----------



## StrangleHold

Do you know if this benchmark is heavily dependent on L3 cache? Was thinking that if it was, AMD would do better if you bumped up its hypertransport bus. The L3 runs at the same speed as the HT runs.


----------



## Virssagòn

StrangleHold said:


> Do you know if this benchmark is heavily dependent on L3 cache? Was thinking that if it was, AMD would do better if you bumped up its hypertransport bus. The L3 runs at the same speed as the HT runs.



L1, L2 and L3 cache are working together to get the best performance. The benchmark is dependent on all 3. The hypertransport bus used by AMD and will provide more bandwidt and let the operations between eachother go faster.
It will depend on all that I think...

Strangehold, we still didn't see your scores. I think the singlethreaded is fixed, now everything is ok.


----------



## StrangleHold

Will throw up a few at different clock speeds tonite when I get home from work.


----------



## mx344

ima test right now


----------



## Virssagòn

StrangleHold said:


> Will throw up a few at different clock speeds tonite when I get home from work.





			
				mx344 said:
			
		

> ima test right now



thanks!


----------



## mx344

960Tx6  @ 3.7 1.44v
4 gigs ram


----------



## spirit

Pretty good!


----------



## mx344

this bench seems more accurate, as I was beating some i5's last time, as much as I love my 960T, its not that good aha.

Ill see if I can go a lil further with my clocks, not sure on that voltage, plus my 30$ mobo


----------



## Virssagòn

mx344 said:


> this bench seems more accurate, as I was beating some i5's last time, as much as I love my 960T, its not that good aha.
> 
> Ill see if I can go a lil further with my clocks, not sure on that voltage, plus my 30$ mobo



Yep, thats the thing amd is known for. The performance per core is not that good. But you got really good multithreaded scores! Maybe if you oc a bit more, you'll come in the top!


----------



## Virssagòn

Current scores:

(tested on all my pc's  and the score didn't change when locked to 1 core, also from spirit didn't. So all scores are up.)


----------



## Virssagòn

Going for the last place 
Here it is!


----------



## spirit

I'm going on holiday again for a few days tomorrow, but when I'm back on Tuesday I will get a 64-bit OS on the Athlon 64 3700+ box and get a score up. It will be slower than your X2 5000+, guaranteed.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> I'm going on holiday again for a few days tomorrow, but when I'm back on Tuesday I will get a 64-bit OS on the Athlon 64 3700+ box and get a score up. It will be slower than your X2 5000+, guaranteed.



really? 
I'm also on holiday until sunday evening tomorrow.


----------



## spirit

Well as your 5000+ is a dual-core and my 3700+ a single-core and this benchmark designed for multi-threaded CPUs, my 3700+ should completely fail.

Just gotta decide which OS to use, may use XPx64 as Vista and 7 on that machine is slooowww.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Well as your 5000+ is a dual-core and my 3700+ a single-core and this benchmark designed for multi-threaded CPUs, my 3700+ should completely fail.
> 
> Just gotta decide which OS to use, may use XPx64 as Vista and 7 on that machine is slooowww.



It's designed for both, you saw the multithreaded score of my cpu 
it was less then the singlethreaded while it's normally double from the singlethreaded xD


----------



## spirit

My multi-threaded score should be less, I'll be running it on a single-core CPU, it has no other threads or cores. It's one core, one thread - that's it.


----------



## Turbo10

My PC sucks


----------



## spirit

Turbo, you got a CORE. 2. QUUUAADD! Your PC rocks!!  

Sorry I'm the biggest Core 2 Quad fanboy in the world.

Besides, your Q6600 was quite a bit faster than my Q8300, and you can overclock your Q6600 if you get a decent cooler, whereas with a Q8300 I can't really.


----------



## Virssagòn

Turbo10 said:


> My PC sucks



Pretty good scores for a intel 2 quaaaad (I'm a friend of spirit, so I took over his quaaad virus ).
But why is your screen that ugly lol? :S


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Turbo, you got a CORE. 2. QUUUAADD! Your PC rocks!!
> 
> Sorry I'm the biggest Core 2 Quad fanboy in the world.
> 
> Besides, your Q6600 was quite a bit faster than my Q8300, and you can overclock your Q6600 if you get a decent cooler, whereas with a Q8300 I can't really.



He oc it to 3.4ghz


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> Pretty good scores for a intel 2 quaaaad (I'm a friend of spirit, so I took over his quaaad virus ).
> But why is your screen that ugly lol? :S



QUUADDD FTW.  

I think he has an alternative theme/skin installed for W7.

Opps didn't see he overclocked to 3.4, that's a gigahertz overclock, you probably wouldn't be able to do that with my Q8300 - Q8xxx weren't overclockers. Q6xxx and Q9xxx were.


----------



## Virssagòn

Update of the scores:
congtrz myself with last place :/


----------



## spirit

"Intel 2 Quad"? Don't you mean "Core 2 Quad"?  And "Denther", not "Denter".


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> "Intel 2 Quad"? Don't you mean "Core 2 Quad"?  And "Denther", not "Denter".



Lol, I'm not perfect ok?


----------



## Virssagòn

Yeah, I know I got the slowest cpu. Don't laugh with me


----------



## Turbo10

SmileMan said:


> Pretty good scores for a intel 2 quaaaad (I'm a friend of spirit, so I took over his quaaad virus ).
> But why is your screen that ugly lol? :S



Haha its a theme, its made it all messed up :S I have overclocked it Spirit! If i push it anymore itll melt haha, my case doesn't have the best cooling so my CPU gets hot pretty fast.


----------



## Virssagòn

The reason why you beat the oc fx6100 is because the performance per core.


----------



## FuryRosewood

I owned a 5000+ till i sold it to a friend last year, was a excellent cpu, upgraded to a 6000+ before buying the phenom ii 955, which i used for about 3 years, now im using the 3820, and probably buying a gtx680 off a friend for 480, they have 2 DCII GTX680s open box, and he is testing one for me right now


----------



## Jamebonds1

Heeerrreeee my iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii3


----------



## spirit

Jamebonds1 said:


> Heeerrreeee my iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii3



Good score! Doesn't really have a ring to it though.


----------



## Virssagòn

Current scores:


----------



## Jamebonds1

There will have a Award for fastest Dual Core class?  I'm just curious.


----------



## Virssagòn

Jamebonds1 said:


> There will have a Award for fastest Dual Core class?  I'm just curious.



If you want that 
And maybe also an award with fastest quad-core (without HT)


----------



## StrangleHold




----------



## Virssagòn

Good scores! Especially the multithreaded one!
I hope amd is working on the performance per core for the vishera!
I still put hope since the fx isn't that bad...


----------



## StrangleHold

Later on I will bump up the HT and then see if I can get a few more 100mhz. out of the CPU.

Edit. I've heard that Vishera suppost to be 10/15% faster then Trinity. Some core enhancements that Trinity doesnt have. I guess it varys with the extra L3 cache depending on what your running.


----------



## Perkomate

I'll get around to setting up for a good old bench later... Should be interesting to see what happens.


----------



## StrangleHold

I got two other systems, one with a Phenom 8750 and another one with a Phenom II 720. If I get time, might run it on them just to see what a tri core will do.


----------



## Virssagòn

So the vishera gonna score here ~890 in stock. That would be a nice improvement since the i7 3770 scores only a little more


----------



## FuryRosewood

I dont think it would get to 890 but thats me, currently with Speedstep on, and in balanced mode mine is around that...would probably be in the 750 range id be willing to bet. still then thats a sizable improvement, espically stock


----------



## Virssagòn

FuryRosewood said:


> I dont think it would get to 890 but thats me, currently with Speedstep on, and in balanced mode mine is around that...would probably be in the 750 range id be willing to bet. still then thats a sizable improvement, espically stock



If you are right, the new vishera gonna stay slower then an i5 2500k/3570k in overall...
I'm still putting hope in the performance per core, if that would score the same as an i5. Then I will say "amd, you got it!".


----------



## KasperL

Just to let Smileman and people know, if anyone here actually takes my first place, i will OC my CPU even more. I don't care if the thing blows up, i am keeping that first place! xD


----------



## Virssagòn

KasperL said:


> Just to let Smileman and people know, if anyone here actually takes my first place, i will OC my CPU even more. I don't care if the thing blows up, i am keeping that first place! xD



Yeah man, I gonna oc my i7 until 6ghz to pown you .
First getting a better mobo ;D


----------



## Jamebonds1

Guy.... There is no need suicide overclock


----------



## StrangleHold

SmileMan said:


> So the vishera gonna score here ~890 in stock. That would be a nice improvement since the i7 3770 scores only a little more


 
Dont know what really happen. Money probably. To start with after the FX Zambezi was suppost to be FX Komodo. From what I understand is was suppost to be up to 10 cores and L3 cache with a GPU using Steamroller cores and fit socket F2 so all CPUs would use one socket. Then it just disappeared. Then they decided to extend socket AM3+, came up with FX Vishera using a updated Trinity piledriver core.

After Vishera and Trinity pretty sure they will be one socket, what ever that will be (F3). A lowerend APU with no L3 and a upperend FX APU with L3 thats unlocked.


----------



## Perkomate

If you made a single core benchmark, you could shut off all cores except for one of them, run it at 6ghz and still keep relatively sane temperatures.


----------



## FuryRosewood

SmileMan said:


> If you are right, the new vishera gonna stay slower then an i5 2500k/3570k in overall...
> I'm still putting hope in the performance per core, if that would score the same as an i5. Then I will say "amd, you got it!".



just would be hard for them to jump 2 generations right now, may not be impossible, but if they figure out the IPC to maybe double what they have now, that would be acceptable performance. but as far as i see with amd their about two gens behind, if they get within one, that would be awesome. would even consider putting that in my lanparty rig, but currently thats going to be a phenom ii 955 with 16 gig ram and whatever gpu i settle on...selling the 460 soon.


----------



## Virssagòn

StrangleHold said:


> Dont know what really happen. Money probably. To start with after the FX Zambezi was suppost to be FX Komodo. From what I understand is was suppost to be up to 10 cores and L3 cache with a GPU using Steamroller cores and fit socket F2 so all CPUs would use one socket. Then it just disappeared. Then they decided to extend socket AM3+, came up with FX Vishera using a updated Trinity piledriver core.
> 
> After Vishera and Trinity pretty sure they will be one socket, what ever that will be (F3). A lowerend APU with no L3 and a upperend FX APU with L3 thats unlocked.



Amd didn't have enough money for that. And that would be dumb, they first need to fix their performance per core before they release the 10core...


----------



## wolfeking

Not really. They are (at least from what I see) pandering to the people that know nothing of computers. Those people (my mum included) see 8 core and automatically say it is better than 4. They don't research what is better as far as IPC is concerned.


----------



## FuryRosewood

AMD already has 12 core chips, but their opterons and as far as i can tell their not based on bulldozer


----------



## Jamebonds1

FuryRosewood said:


> AMD already has 12 core chips, but their opterons and as far as i can tell their not based on bulldozer



It is true AMD have 12 core but that is for workstation and sever system.  Not a gaming chip.


----------



## Virssagòn

Jamebonds1 said:


> It is true AMD have 12 core but that is for workstation and sever system.  Not a gaming chip.



I want to see that opteron in this bench 
somebody has one?


----------



## Virssagòn

Current scores:


----------



## wolfeking

SmileMan said:


> I want to see that opteron in this bench
> somebody has one?


I don't have one, but I would personally try one if possible. But I am only seeing them for 300+ USD so not a chance as the system to use it would be mondo expensive.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMD-OPTERON...70?pt=CPUs&hash=item4abb2e0972#ht_3215wt_1139


----------



## Jamebonds1

wolfeking said:


> I don't have one, but I would personally try one if possible. But I am only seeing them for 300+ USD so not a chance as the system to use it would be mondo expensive.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMD-OPTERON...70?pt=CPUs&hash=item4abb2e0972#ht_3215wt_1139





SmileMan said:


> Current scores:



Some motherboard can hold 4 CPU in one.


----------



## wolfeking

Jamebonds1 said:


> Some motherboard can hold 4 CPU in one.


And if you think about it, then you are still only overthreading it. The cores would still be slower than intel, but you won't get 48 thread out of intel without 4 6cores with HT on.


----------



## StrangleHold

FuryRosewood said:


> AMD already has 12 core chips, but their opterons and as far as i can tell their not based on bulldozer


 
AMD has Bullozer server chips, named Interlagos. Plus they have up to 16 cores.


----------



## FuryRosewood

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131643

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113036

and fill with as much ram as you want. c.c i am baffled at how many ram slots are on it.


----------



## Jamebonds1

wolfeking said:


> And if you think about it, then you are still only overthreading it. The cores would still be slower than intel, but you won't get 48 thread out of intel without 4 6cores with HT on.



Plus it requirement Windows 7 Pro for more than 24 Thread.


----------



## wolfeking

Jamebonds1 said:


> Plus it requirement Windows 7 Pro for more than 24 Thread.


So. Another reason to get ultimate!


----------



## FuryRosewood

If your going to be running server hardware...probably going to be using windows server no?


----------



## wolfeking

not really a reason to. I would just use it as a workstation, just like my Precision M90. No need to use server windows.


----------



## Jamebonds1

FuryRosewood said:


> If your going to be running server hardware...probably going to be using windows server no?



Windows server is not for general use or gaming.  It is for connection any network computer such as mini computer and computer that's connection to server's hard drive.  How server hard drive work.  First hard drive is installed server computer with OS server.  Second have windows 7 computer connection wired network.  Then you will see hard drive from server computer.  



wolfeking said:


> So. Another reason to get ultimate!



Yeah I already have Ultimate Windows 7


----------



## FuryRosewood

Then if your going to be gaming, you probably would just buy a regular cpu. The Opterons are not well suited to the task of games...


----------



## wolfeking

no, but they are great at number crunching and such. EEC ram helps that too. But that is still not a reason to spend an extra 600 or so on windows server. Pro or Ultimate would do just fine and still be able to use everything necessary to run it as a workstation.


----------



## Jamebonds1

wolfeking said:


> no, but they are great at number crunching and such. EEC ram helps that too. But that is still not a reason to spend an extra 600 or so on windows server. Pro or Ultimate would do just fine and still be able to use everything necessary to run it as a workstation.



I have seem server room before. It is biggest.  There is good reason why have RAID 10 with many hard drive for business.  In case if one of hard drive is fail, it is stealing base.


----------



## wolfeking

I'm sorry but you have lost me. We are not talking about a server farm with RAID 10. We are talking about 2 server chips, EEC RAM, and a motherboard.


----------



## Perkomate

Jamebonds1 said:


> it is stealing base.



dude what


----------



## wolfeking

I think he is saying that a server plays baseball. Maybe kickball? otherwise it makes no sense at all.


----------



## Jamebonds1

The stolen base is when player steal base by try to run from first base to second base without getting out.  When one of hard drive is fail while in RAID 10, the data is safe.  Like player is safe after stolen base.


----------



## wolfeking

Jamebonds1 said:


> I have seem server room before. It is *the* biggest.  There is good reason why have RAID 10 with many hard drive*s* for business *use*.  In case if one of *the* hard drive fail*s*, it is *safe like a ball player* stealing *a* base.


 Look at how that should have been worded now that we know what you are trying to do.


----------



## Virssagòn

Let's go back on topic guys


----------



## Virssagòn

I got a pentium 4 without HT . Could I install 64bit on it? Then I'll have the very very last place xD.

Edit: Gigabyte Member!


----------



## Perkomate

i've got an Intel Atom... 1.6ghz of netbook fury!

hang on, I also have a Toshiba laptop hanging around here, with like a penno 2. It can have  a maximum of...

wait for it....


320mb.


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> I got a pentium 4 without HT . Could I install 64bit on it? Then I'll have the very very last place xD.


Nope. Only P4 HTs were 64-bit, and not even all of them were.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Nope. Only P4 HTs were 64-bit, and not even all of them were.



sad... :'(
You gonna test it on your rigs? Did you have a good holiday ?


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> sad... :'(
> You gonna test it on your rigs? Did you have a good holiday ?



Still gotta get a 64-bit OS on the Athlon box and yes it was good thanks.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Still gotta get a 64-bit OS on the Athlon box and yes it was good thanks.



The xeon? Does it have 64 bit?


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> The xeon? Does it have 64 bit?



Well it has 16GB of RAM so I presume so...


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Well it has 16GB of RAM so I presume so...



Nice! And which one got you? 4-6 cores?


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> Nice! And which one got you? 4-6 cores?



Quad.


----------



## Virssagòn

Ht?


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> Ht?



Not sure. Not even sure if I can run it on the server because it doesn't have a monitor or anything and I'm not sure if Dad will let me.


----------



## Jamebonds1

SmileMan said:


> I got a pentium 4 without HT . Could I install 64bit on it? Then I'll have the very very last place xD.
> 
> Edit: Gigabyte Member!



Hahaha. I have Intel P4 for my laptop   I replace CPU in my laptop.


----------



## Jamebonds1

spirit said:


> Not sure. Not even sure if I can run it on the server because it doesn't have a monitor or anything and I'm not sure if Dad will let me.



Your dad have i7 3770K right?


----------



## spirit

Jamebonds1 said:


> Your dad have i7 3770K right?



i7 3770 with 32GB of RAM and a GA-Z77X-UD5H. His chip won't overclock though, it's not a 3770K.


----------



## tech savvy




----------



## spirit

3700+ @ stock, 1GB DDR @ 250MHz






Edit: took about 45 minutes or so to bench and I've just noticed the CMOS battery is obviously dying as it was not 11:34pm when I took that screenshot, more like about 9:00pm.


----------



## Jiniix

Sorry for the huge image, if you can tell me how to hide it or something, please do 
Anyway, it's the PC I use at LANs, running an i5-2500K @ 4.8GHz


----------



## StrangleHold

FuryRosewood said:


> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131643
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113036
> 
> and fill with as much ram as you want. c.c i am baffled at how many ram slots are on it.


 
They have quad channel memory controllers, so the boards have 8 slots for each CPU.


----------



## Virssagòn

Jiniix said:


> Sorry for the huge image, if you can tell me how to hide it or something, please do
> Anyway, it's the PC I use at LANs, running an i5-2500K @ 4.8GHz



There is something wrong in terms of the i5 2500k lol...
Try this bench again and post a more reliable score, sry.


----------



## Jiniix

SmileMan said:


> There is something wrong in terms of the i5 2500k lol...
> Try this bench again and post a more reliable score, sry.



I swear to god that I have not edited or manipulated the score in anyway.
I run this PC at 4.2GHz normally, but I thought I'd try and up the score (was ~750 @ 4.2GHz). 

Can I ask how it determines the score? Does it matter how "effecient" your Windows installation is? I design and install PCs for a living, and I know just about everything about optimizing your Windows. This install is only a few days fresh.

EDIT: Ran it again while downloading and installing Fraps, the score was 1050.

EDIT2: I restarted my PC and ran it again @ 4.8GHz. But I swear, I did nothing but run the bench and take a pic when it scored 1500.


----------



## Virssagòn

Jiniix said:


> I swear to god that I have not edited or manipulated the score in anyway.
> I run this PC at 4.2GHz normally, but I thought I'd try and up the score (was ~750 @ 4.2GHz).
> 
> Can I ask how it determines the score? Does it matter how "effecient" your Windows installation is? I design and install PCs for a living, and I know just about everything about optimizing your Windows. This install is only a few days fresh.
> 
> EDIT: Ran it again while downloading and installing Fraps, the score was 1050.
> 
> EDIT2: I restarted my PC and ran it again @ 4.8GHz. But I swear, I did nothing but run the bench and take a pic when it scored 1500.



Thats a more believable score, thanks for doing this! We had the same problem with an i5 2500k. I gonna try to fix this.
Could you post your score from 1050? Because the other i5 scores ~950 in 4.3ghz. So yours is normally that.


----------



## Jamebonds1

spirit said:


> i7 3770 with 32GB of RAM and a GA-Z77X-UD5H. His chip won't overclock though, it's not a 3770K.



Yeah.  that's true, it is not K-series.  Someone can overclocked non k-series but mine can't because it is only for K series.  Plus your dad's i7 do have HT since it is i7 series.  i7 is only that have 8 thread.

EDIT:  Err... It seem you got server computer right?


----------



## spirit

@Jiniix my 2500K scored 1,350 at 4.3GHz for some reason, but I ran it again and got about the same sort of score as you. Don't want to overclock it any further.

@Jamebonds1 you can't really overclock non-K chips. I do have a server, yes.


----------



## Jamebonds1

spirit said:


> @Jiniix my 2500K scored 1,350 at 4.3GHz for some reason, but I ran it again and got about the same sort of score as you. Don't want to overclock it any further.
> 
> @Jamebonds1 you can't really overclock non-K chips. I do have a server, yes.



I don't say mine did but ASrock say they can do that.  

What is specs of your server?  Xeon LGA 1155?


----------



## spirit

Jamebonds1 said:


> What is specs of your server?  Xeon LGA 1155?


Not sure. Xeon something or rather, 16GB RAM, 3x2TB HDDs. It was a cheap server.


----------



## Jamebonds1

spirit said:


> Not sure. Xeon something or rather, 16GB RAM, 3x2TB HDDs. It was a cheap server.



Hmm... CPUz can check it up for you maybe? Or can try type run as (opening by press Windows Logo+R) then type dxdiag.


----------



## spirit

Jamebonds1 said:


> Hmm... CPUz can check it up for you maybe?



It can but for various reasons that's easier said than done - the first problem is I don't have a monitor this server, and it lives downstairs and runs 24/7. 

I'm not sure if I can get a bench on it, sorry.


----------



## Jamebonds1

spirit said:


> It can but for various reasons that's easier said than done - the first problem is I don't have a monitor this server, and it lives downstairs and runs 24/7.
> 
> I'm not sure if I can get a bench on it, sorry.



It is okay.  You should make photo of your server in another thread "post picture of your PC"


----------



## spirit

Yeah have done. It's really not all that exciting to be honest. It does what it does very well though and we've not had a problem with it.


----------



## Virssagòn

jiniix, I thought you had an i7?


----------



## Virssagòn

Current scores!

congratz spirit with last place .


----------



## Jamebonds1

SmileMan said:


> jiniix, I thought you had an i7?



It is i5, I saw on CPUz


----------



## Virssagòn

Jamebonds1 said:


> It is i5, I saw on CPUz



Yep I know (saw it too :/)
But in his sig he says he has an i7 2600k @ 4.8ghz lol


----------



## Jiniix

SmileMan said:


> jiniix, I thought you had an i7?





Jamebonds1 said:


> It is i5, I saw on CPUz



I have _many_ computers! 
Right now I own:


Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 @ 3.2GHz
2x2GB Kingston ValueRAM 667MHz RAM (Don't remember clock, but obviously more because of FSB)
GA-G31M-S2L
AMD 5770 1GB
Corsair CX 430W
Fractal Design Core 1000


Intel Core i5-2500K @ 4.2GHz
2x4GB HyperX 1600MHz
ASRock Z75 Pro3
NVIDIA GTX 460 1GB
Silver Power SS-SP750M
CoolerMaster HAF912


Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3GHz
2x2GB Kingston ValueRAM 667MHz RAM (Same as other Core 2)
GA-G31M-S2L
AMD 6870 1GB Double Dissipation
CoolerMaster 600W Silent Pro Modular
CoolerMaster Elite 430


AMD Athlon X2 6400+ @ 3.8GHz
ASUS M3A32-MVP Deluxe
4x1GB 800MHz Hynix
2x AMD 5770 1GB CFX
Silver Power SS-SP750M
Fractal Design R3

Plus a few GA-G31M-S2L, 2GB RAM and E7200's with no name PSU and case.

And of course my signature which is my main PC.

I work professionally as a PC designer and assembler for both a company and in my spare time for people I know or people who knows people I know.

I virtually paid about $400 for all these systems in total, but I worked many hours 
I pay a tax, not sure if it exists anywhere except in Denmark, that allows me to buy PC parts and related through the company for personal use, in case I need it for work. I get everything PC related for 1/3 of the regular price and special discounts can be added to that.
The SS-SP750M is a 750W 80+ Silver modular PSU. In Denmark one of these cost $136 (We have high taxes on everything). There was a discount and I ended up being able to buy virtually as many as I wanted for $39 each.

I'm a computer enthusiast, that's for sure.

A few PCs I've assembled, giving you an idea that I'm not a scrub 
http://i815.photobucket.com/albums/zz71/Jiniix/DefineMini.jpg [email protected]&temps (I like this one a lot!)
http://i815.photobucket.com/albums/zz71/Jiniix/DefineR3AW1.jpg
http://i815.photobucket.com/albums/zz71/Jiniix/IMG_0159.jpg (A pure 24/7 calculating PC, rocking an [email protected] and a scrubby GPU )
http://i815.photobucket.com/albums/zz71/Jiniix/IMG_0093.jpg 

</Brag OFF>


----------



## Virssagòn

Nice!! I want you to test it on all your rigs!
myself, I'm working for a week now in a company that sells computers, hardware and assembles of hardware. I'm learning much now, it's very exciting too. I had to build a pc today with some very nice parts , I was like "****, if I do something wrong with these parts they blow my head off! ;p". But they found it fair enough so...


----------



## Jiniix

I actually advised the company from buying an i7-3960X even though they insisted they wanted the best. I showed them some benchmarks picturing how bad the performance/price was on the 3960X compared to the 3930K. We're talking 3MB cache as the only difference.
That gave me a lot of credit, because they know I would've loved to use the 3960X


----------



## Virssagòn

Jiniix said:


> I actually advised the company from buying an i7-3960X even though they insisted they wanted the best. I showed them some benchmarks picturing how bad the performance/price was on the 3960X compared to the 3930K. We're talking 3MB cache as the only difference.
> That gave me a lot of credit, because they know I would've loved to use the 3960X



I could maybe run that one, because we always need to test everything before we deliver it. But I think the time is too short to run the bench while i'm working...


----------



## Jiniix

It's gonna take a while to bench all those PCs. The 3930K and 3570K I don't have, so I can't bench them. The others is gonna take a while, I'm at a LAN right now  And the Q6600 and the AMD 6400+ I lent to my brothers, but I can easily "borrow" them for bench


----------



## Virssagòn

Jiniix said:


> It's gonna take a while to bench all those PCs. The 3930K and 3570K I don't have, so I can't bench them. The others is gonna take a while, I'm at a LAN right now  And the Q6600 and the AMD 6400+ I lent to my brothers, but I can easily "borrow" them for bench



Nice!
Want to see how well your athlon performs against mine.
I'm running a minecraft server on the athlon with 25plugins and no ****ing lagg!?!
It was just a wonder lol


----------



## Jiniix

I'm running a Minecraft server on a GA-G31M-S2L, E7200 @ 2.99GHz with 4GB RAM


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> congratz spirit with last place .


Yes! Go Athlong!


----------



## Jiniix

Here's the PC in my signature


----------



## Virssagòn

Jiniix said:


> Here's the PC in my signature



You ditched the 1200! well done! But could you plz send a new image with only cpu-z, because it's showing your power saving clock ;P


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> But could you plz send a new image with only cpu-z, because it's showing your power saving clock ;P


Not all of us disable SpeedStep when overclocking.


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Not all of us disable SpeedStep when overclocking.



I do not too xD. I disable all the others, but not speedstep lol.
It's weird he can oc to 4.8ghz with a v-lx, I couldn't with my v-le lol...


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> I do not too xD. I disable all the others, but not speedstep lol.
> It's weird he can oc to 4.8ghz with a v-lx, I couldn't with my v-le lol...



Sometimes you get chips which overclock better than others.


----------



## Jiniix

I honestly think my chip OCs bad. I usually run it at around 4.2 or 4.4 GHz, because it needs ~1.45-1.5v to run at 4.8. It even needs 1.336v to run at 4.4, while my friend can run his i7-2600K @ 4.4 using only 1.28v


----------



## wolfeking

All chips OC different.  Mine is stable at 4.4 @ 1.250V and 4.8 @ 1.270V-1.300V. I think mine would OC a lot better if my board was any count at all. We shall see that in 31 days.


----------



## Jiniix

I'm switching the P8Z77-V LX with a Z77 Sabertooth soonish, the V LX was just a cheap temporary solution.
And I still think it's outstanding for the price


----------



## Virssagòn

Jiniix said:


> I honestly think my chip OCs bad. I usually run it at around 4.2 or 4.4 GHz, because it needs ~1.45-1.5v to run at 4.8. It even needs 1.336v to run at 4.4, while my friend can run his i7-2600K @ 4.4 using only 1.28v



ow, mine does run (got z68 and le though) 4.7 @ 1.365 max and now running 4.2ghz with 1.235 max. So I'm pretty happy, but I can'toc higher then 4.8ghz, even if I get my voltage @ 1.5


----------



## Jiniix

I have been considering changing the chip and testing the one I have from my old motherboard.
I have another i7-2600K packed away huddled up in a P8P67, but cba to remove D14 just to check if this chip OCs better


----------



## Virssagòn

Jiniix said:


> I have been considering changing the chip and testing the one I have from my old motherboard.
> I have another i7-2600K packed away huddled up in a P8P67, but cba to remove D14 just to check if this chip OCs better



Man, I wish my cooler was smaller . Now I've to raise the fans of my silver arrow because of my ram.
But I got a very good cooler, so I don't care about the size anymore


----------



## Virssagòn

some more tests to make table bigger?


----------



## StrangleHold

SmileMan said:


> Amd didn't have enough money for that. And that would be dumb, they first need to fix their performance per core before they release the 10core...


 
Its a long story. Some say the real reason Dirk Meyer was let go and it didnt have anything to do with mobile. Zambezi/Bulldozer was ready to be released on 45nm. about 6 months after the Phenom II release. Piledriver was suppost to be the first on 32nm. and then the updated Steamroller. The board wanted it released early on 45nm. because it would have gave them time to work out the bugs for the 32nm. Piledriver. Dirk Meyers stopped it, said the die would be to big on 45nm. and delayed it for 32nm. Then GF had problems with 32nm. at first and it was delayed again. It came out a year and half late with the same performance that it would have had on 45nm. So they ended up with a processor a year and half late/r and one generation behind. Bad rape for AMD at a time when they didnt need it, the board was pissed. If Bulldozer came out at 45nm. we would be looking at a updated Piledriver on 32nm. last year. We would be looking at the Steamroller release now instead of Piledriver. The reason Komodo was dropped and replaced by Vishera , AMD having to fix the Dirk Meyers blunder at 45nm and causing delays. A bad move for Dirk Meyers. Hector Ruiz was a idiot and Dirk Meyers was a good chip designer but not CEO material.


----------



## Virssagòn

Update Roadmap:





sorry that I've to change the app so many times.
But I want to make this version perfect, found some issues with the multithreaded.
It must be perfect before I release it as an official real benchmark.

Thnxs for your help and tests already!

The scores from multithreaded gonna be almost equal with single in the perfect version release.

Post your scores before 14 september, gonna give the awards then.


----------



## spirit

So where's the download link??


----------



## wolfeking

error ahoy!   You can never release a perfect version. Even a programmer that has been programming for 70 years can never get it perfect. Nature of the beast. Man is not perfect. Nothing we can do is ever perfect, and thus you will not release a perfect benchmark (especially if it is not in C# or C++ and a project you spent years on in a large calibrative  effort).


----------



## spirit

wolfeking said:


> error ahoy!   You can never release a perfect version. Even a programmer that has been programming for 70 years can never get it perfect. Nature of the beast. Man is not perfect. Nothing we can do is ever perfect, and thus you will not release a perfect benchmark (especially if it is not in C# or C++ and a project you spent years on in a large calibrative  effort).


Microsoft is a fine example of "never getting it perfect". Look at XP, still loads of updates for it almost 11 years on from release date.

Current benchmark seems to work fine though? Apart from if you have an overclocked 2500K, in which case just run it twice.


----------



## wolfeking

Even Linux can not be perfect. Every time you fix one thing someone goes out and pokes a new whole in it. Much more prevalent in windows than linux, but all systems are that way. Get it right today and it will be long wrong by tomorrow.


----------



## spirit

Yeah whenever I've installed Ubuntu there's always been about 80 or 90 updates to go and download and install.  Just like Windows.


----------



## wolfeking

even on release day there is a bunch. The update center is meant to keep it up to date quickly. Even with 100+ updates it has never been more than 5 minutes to update mine. Windows however, that is a 45 minute ordeal always at a minimum.


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> error ahoy!   You can never release a perfect version. Even a programmer that has been programming for 70 years can never get it perfect. Nature of the beast. Man is not perfect. Nothing we can do is ever perfect, and thus you will not release a perfect benchmark (especially if it is not in C# or C++ and a project you spent years on in a large calibrative  effort).



I'm not saying I gonna make this the perfect benchmark, I mean the perfect version of this benchmark....


----------



## Virssagòn

spirit said:


> Microsoft is a fine example of "never getting it perfect". Look at XP, still loads of updates for it almost 11 years on from release date.
> 
> Current benchmark seems to work fine though? Apart from if you have an overclocked 2500K, in which case just run it twice.



2 things I gonna fix:

- if you test 2nd or 3th you'll always get better scores in the multithreaded (very unstable there, singlethreaded stays at his score)

- reduce the difference between multithreaded score and singlethreaded (the multi will still have higher scaled points, but it depends more on the cpu)

Also this new update will be official seen as benchmark, so the scores must be saying real scores.


----------



## wolfeking

SmileMan said:


> I'm not saying I gonna make this the perfect benchmark, I mean the perfect version of this benchmark....



And you are not reading. You can not make anything perfect. You are a human. You will screw it up. Question is by how much.  And it does not matter if you are trying to be the perfect version of this one, or perfect period.  Your use of the word perfect shows that you are not doing your best at this benchmark.


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> And you are not reading. You can not make anything perfect. You are a human. You will screw it up. Question is by how much.  And it does not matter if you are trying to be the perfect version of this one, or perfect period.  Your use of the word perfect shows that you are not doing your best at this benchmark.



Man, I'm working on it whole this week. Sorry, it won't be perfect, but almost all bugs will be fixed. When I work also the whole next week on it you can be sure I worked hard. Just hoping that I don't have to fix issues for some weeks.
Trying to make it real points, whats wrong with that?

hope you understand how I see this now.

grtz smile...


----------



## wolfeking

I'm not having an issue with your work, I am having an issue with your language. You could have said "much improved" over "perfect". There is no way to achieve perfection. You can always greatly improve something.


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:


> I'm not having an issue with your work, I am having an issue with your language. You could have said "much improved" over "perfect". There is no way to achieve perfection. You can always greatly improve something.



yeah, I corrected my mistake already in the previous post by saying it won't be perfect.


----------



## Laquer Head

I don't think he can even use "much improved"...


----------



## Virssagòn

Laquer Head said:


> I don't think he can even use "much improved"...



why...?
You can always improve something, so you mean it's almost perfect if you say that?
If you meant it the other way, you got it wrong.


----------



## StrangleHold

Its amazing how people can nit pick (to find insignificant details of something unsatisfactory, often unjustifiably) the crap out of something just for the sake of a argument. I understood what you meant.


----------



## wolfeking

Laquer Head said:


> I don't think he can even use "much improved"...


I concur with his response. why? We have yet to see the new release. Hard to say it is a fail before we even see it. 



SmileMan said:


> why...?
> You can always improve something, so you mean it's almost perfect if you say that?
> If you meant it the other way, you got it wrong.



No offense intended, and you are doing a great job with it as is, but your using the wrong tool to do this job. The programming language you choose (because it is what you know) is not suited for this kind of program. It is like using a spanner in place of an impact wrench. Sure it will do the job, but with lost of wasted effort in the process.    You are doing a great job with your spanner though.  
Also, it would be much easier to take the benchmark seriously if you would not keep changing the point scale with every release.  Look at the great benchmarks out there. Their points stay about the same with each new release.  
Another thing that may make it easier for everyone involved, from you and Jason, to the people benching, if you would set a stable release schedule and 
stick to it.  Once every three months might be good, or maybe take a page from Ubuntu and do a semiannual release.  Just support and patch the current version as needed, and only intro new features to new releases.  


StrangleHold said:


> Its amazing how people can nit pick (to find insignificant details of something unsatisfactory, often unjustifiably) the crap out of something just for the sake of a argument. I understood what you meant.



I am trying to help him get better at english dude. Something more people should do. This is because I am quite tired (and he did not do this, but using correct vocab can be important) of people that "Ain't got no ..."


----------



## Virssagòn

wolfeking said:
			
		

> Also, it would be much easier to take the benchmark seriously if you would not keep changing the point scale with every release.  Look at the great benchmarks out there. Their points stay about the same with each new release.



The points will be scaled as current version, but you must understand that all developpers have to start over the scoreboards if they change something IN the calculations.



			
				wolfeking said:
			
		

> Another thing that may make it easier for everyone involved, from you and Jason, to the people benching, if you would set a stable release schedule and
> stick to it.  Once every three months might be good, or maybe take a page from Ubuntu and do a semiannual release.  Just support and patch the current version as needed, and only intro new features to new releases.



Was planning to change the calculations twice a year. The most important updates will be announced too.



			
				wolfeking said:
			
		

> I am trying to help him get better at english dude. Something more people should do. This is because I am quite tired (and he did not do this, but using correct vocab can be important) of people that "Ain't got no ..."



About who are you talking now, I would want you to keep this conversation in pm from now on. Because it's becoming a mess right now.


----------



## wolfeking

you are whom I am talking about. The use of perfect about a program is just not proper vocab.   But I will stop then.


----------



## Yachu

here is my benchmark with an 2600k @ 4.5ghz and 1.35v


----------



## Virssagòn

Yachu said:


> here is my benchmark with an 2600k @ 4.5ghz and 1.35v



nice one!
you'll be placed in the scoreboard soon!

EDIT: where did your image go?


----------



## Yachu

SmileMan said:


> EDIT: where did your image go?



Resized it for posting


----------



## Virssagòn

Yachu said:


> Resized it for posting



thnks


----------



## StrangleHold

wolfeking said:


> I am trying to help him get better at english dude. Something more people should do. This is because I am quite tired (and he did not do this, but using correct vocab can be important) of people that "Ain't got no ..."


 
B/S I know what your doing and most of everybody else does. Even a noob knows there is no such thing as something being perfect. Its used as a expression/phrase. If you dont know that, which I know you do and which I think he does too. 

Then what your doing it just pointing out something as in your nip picking for the sake of a argument. Has nothing to do with (helping) him with english, unless your a noob and never heard of the word being used as I said above.


----------



## Virssagòn

StrangleHold said:


> B/S I know what your doing and most of everybody else does. Even a noob knows there is no such thing as something being perfect. Its used as a expression/phrase. If you dont know that, which I know you do and which I think he does too.
> 
> Then what your doing it just pointing out something as in your nip picking for the sake of a argument. Has nothing to do with (helping) him with english, unless your a noob and never heard of the word being used as I said above.



K man, this discussion has now his end.

plz back on topic...


----------



## byteninja2

Could you make the memory/ram show in GB, not MB? Who does a benchmark with 512 MB, you know? And even if some were crazy enough, just put 1/2 GB. Man, every time I see your benchmarks, you make me want to code. Maybe I will start soon.


----------



## spirit

The code we used to read the System Information only measures RAM in MB I'm afraid, you can't change it to read in GB I don't think.


----------



## byteninja2

Okay, well maybe next version you can look into other code? Maybe, I dont even know if their is another code.


----------



## spirit

There probably is another way of doing it but the truth is the code we currently have to find system information is easy, and any other alternatives would be long winded.


----------



## byteninja2

Ok. Maybe someday.


----------



## Virssagòn

Thanks for your recommendation, I'll have a look for it and update with the next version


----------



## otaku

My lastest benchmark


----------



## Jamebonds1

otaku said:


> My lastest benchmark
> 
> View attachment 5279



NIce!  Also you have to show your clockspeed from CPU.  Plus your RAM clockspeed.


----------



## otaku

Jamebonds1 said:


> NIce!  Also you have to show your clockspeed from CPU.  Plus your RAM clockspeed.



are you serious?


----------



## StrangleHold

otaku said:


> are you serious?


 
Looks like you did. 4.5ghz and 8gb. of DDR3 1600. Dont know why he said that.


----------



## otaku

StrangleHold said:


> Looks like you did. 4.5ghz and 8gb. of DDR3 1600. Dont know why he said that.



Yeah, you tell him for me =]


----------



## NyxCharon

spirit said:


> The code we used to read the System Information only measures RAM in MB I'm afraid, you can't change it to read in GB I don't think.



And you can't just divide that by 1024 why?


----------



## byteninja2

I would distrubute the Apps through sourceforge. They let you create a website, and even if you dont, they look much more formal, not so I uploaded this with a quick google and no time! You know?


----------



## byteninja2

And no, it is not a pirated copy of Win7. My copy is all jacked up, oh well, buying W8 soon. Oh, and a i3 cant be OC, so i3 2100 and 8 (2 4 gb sticks, 1600 MHZ, dual channel) GB of ram. But since I am such a liar: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2505920


----------



## jonnyp11

383

960t x4 @ 3.2ghz + 8gb 1333

would unlock or run at 3.8 but this bench takes so long i don't feel safe doing that, might do the 6 core or just 3.6 sometime


----------



## Virssagòn

byteninja2 said:


> I would distrubute the Apps through sourceforge. They let you create a website, and even if you dont, they look much more formal, not so I uploaded this with a quick google and no time! You know?



Nice, have to test that.


----------



## Yachu

here is the latests test at 4.9ghz with my 2600k


----------



## Virssagòn

Current scores:


----------



## otaku

Yachu said:


> here is the latests test at 4.9ghz with my 2600k



that is sick! , did you get a 7.9 processor score from Windows experience index?


----------



## Yachu

otaku said:


> that is sick! , did you get a 7.9 processor score from Windows experience index?



no just 7.8


----------



## Yachu

Max temp is at 75c with intelburntest but I feel like 1.42v, is too high I'll just downclock it back to 4.5ghz. I have a h100 cooler btw


----------



## Virssagòn

I can't oc higher then 4.8 with my mobo...


----------



## spirit

SmileMan said:


> I can't oc higher then 4.8 with my mobo...



I probably could with mine but I'd need a better cooler.


----------



## Virssagòn

I found out what's giving variable scores sometimes.
if the number of threads is higher then the cpu's threads it gets a switching score...


----------



## Yachu

SmileMan said:


> I can't oc higher then 4.8 with my mobo...



For 4.9 I think it barely made it at 1.42v. it would not run prime95 longer than 15 mins. I probably need like 1.45v to get it to stabilize but I don't want to fry my cpu yet. I also had to set it to manual voltage since with offset voltage it would not boot up.


----------



## Jamebonds1

Yachu said:


> For 4.9 I think it barely made it at 1.42v. it would not run prime95 longer than 15 mins. I probably need like 1.45v to get it to stabilize but I don't want to fry my cpu yet. I also had to set it to manual voltage since with offset voltage it would not boot up.



Also it would be blue screen of death for too much high voltage.


----------



## Virssagòn

Jamebonds1 said:


> Also it would be blue screen of death for too much high voltage.



That ble screen comes anytime I oc higher then 4.8ghz...
So I'm staying for sure at 4.7...


----------



## byteninja2

Yeah, now I have no regrets about going with a i3 over Q2Q!


----------



## spirit

byteninja2 said:


> Yeah, now I have no regrets about going with a i3 over Q2Q!



C2Q you mean?


----------



## byteninja2

spirit said:


> C2Q you mean?



Yeah, not sure why I said Q2Q.


----------



## spirit

Just a typo.


----------



## Virssagòn

*This is the last day before the awards! Tomorrow evening the winners get there medals! (Look other thread for more info about the different awards)*


----------



## spirit

I'm expecting to get the 'Slowest' award by the way.


----------



## FuryRosewood

I could have probably done a pretty decent job with my sister's pentium 4 but i dont know if that one supports 64 bit windows...dont think it does its a socket 478.


----------



## jonnyp11

spirit said:


> I'm expecting to get the 'Slowest' award by the way.



well anyone can get that, just set processor affinity of the program to core0 and dlownclock the computer to .5ghz or whatever you can somehow bear while running it.


----------



## FuryRosewood

i dunno, even at 500 mhz i bet it would be faster than a 1st gen pentium 4..


----------



## spirit

jonnyp11 said:


> well anyone can get that, just set processor affinity of the program to core0 and dlownclock the computer to .5ghz or whatever you can somehow bear while running it.



I ran it on an Athlon 64 3700+ @ stock, took 45 minutes. I reckon a newer processor underclocked would still be faster than my old Athlon.


----------



## Virssagòn

My athlon 64 X2 5000+ did it in 30...
Not enough to beat yours ;p


----------



## Virssagòn

jonnyp11 said:


> well anyone can get that, just set processor affinity of the program to core0 and dlownclock the computer to .5ghz or whatever you can somehow bear while running it.



the processor affinity will go automatically back to normal, I made the program use all cores at max and set the affinity in the program. (like I did with singlethreaded)


----------



## Virssagòn

I've been very busy this evening, the awards will be delayed until tomorrow... (If you want to test, now is the moment!)


----------



## Virssagòn

some information about the current scores:


----------



## spirit

I'll get the awards up tomorrow or Tuesday!


----------



## byteninja2

Still no rewards D: I am right behind a Oced 6100. Just wow.


----------



## spirit

Yeah sorry that's because I've been busy. School has taken a hit on me. I'll try and get them done tonight.


----------



## Virssagòn

byteninja2 said:


> Still no rewards D: I am right behind a Oced 6100. Just wow.



Yep, and with the next version you'll be above him. Because I gonna scale the multithreaded a bit lower. Your i3 is almost 50% better in singlethreaded.


----------



## TrainTrackHack

Ok so here goes mine... mind you, this was run in a virtual machine. Processor is running at stock 3.30GHz.


----------



## Virssagòn

You were right! It scores almost as much as an i7 3770 . The i7 is a bit faster though...


----------



## TrainTrackHack

Seems about right for extra 100MHz and running natively


----------



## Jamebonds1

hackapelite said:


> Seems about right for extra 100MHz and running natively



extra 100 MHz?  You mean BLCK?


----------



## spirit

Jamebonds1 said:


> extra 100 MHz?  You mean BLCK?



No, he means the 3770 is clocked higher than his E3-1230. The 3770 is clocked at 3.4GHz, the E3-1230 at 3.2GHz.


----------



## Jamebonds1

spirit said:


> No, he means the 3770 is clocked higher than his E3-1230. The 3770 is clocked at 3.4GHz, the E3-1230 at 3.2GHz.



Ah okay. I get.  I seem to miss his score.


----------



## Virssagòn

Jamebonds1 said:


> Ah okay. I get.  I seem to miss his score.



Not edited yet...


----------



## Virssagòn

*AWARDS OF BLACK HOLE V2! (sorry that you had to wait)*

*Here is an overview of all the tests from Black Hole v2:*









*The top 10 and their grandpa:*










*Winners of the top 10 award:*

*1. KasperL - 3930K @ 4.3
2. Yachu - 2600K @ 4.5
3. Jiniix - 2600K @ 4.8
4. LaquerHead - 3700K @ 4.9
5. SmileMan - 2600K @ 4.7
6. Wolfeking - 2600K @ 4.7
7. Tech Savvy - 2550K @ 4.5
8. Jiniix - 2500K @ 4.8
9. salvage-this - 3570K @ 4.7
10. SmileMan - 3700 @ stock*

congratz!!









*The 3rd place go to!*

*Jiniix - i7 2600K @ 4.8 - 1,210 pts*










*On the second place!*

*Yachu - i7 2600K @ 4.5 - 1,254 pts*










*And the winner is!!!*

*KasperL - i7 3930K @ 4.3, 1,323 pts*










*At our last place!*

*Spirit - Athlon 64 3700+*










*The best Intel in this bench!*

*KasperL - 3930K @ 4.2*










*The AMD winner is!*

*StrangleHold - FX-8150 @ 4.5*











*Then we have our guy with his high oc!*

*LaquerHead - 3770K @ 4.9*












*And the tester with most balls is!*

*Jiniix*









*Thank you all for testing and congrtz with your awards!!!!*


*Smile & Spirit*


----------



## spirit

Lol I came last again!


----------



## byteninja2

I was expecting a bottom 10


----------



## Virssagòn

byteninja2 said:


> I was expecting a bottom 10



Haha, next time I'll see what I can do for you ;d


----------



## spirit

byteninja2 said:


> I was expecting a bottom 10



Just look at the leaderboard.


----------



## Jamebonds1

Will have a new version out there?


----------



## Virssagòn

Jamebonds1 said:


> Will have a new version out there?



Yep, gonna release it today. It's fixed in variability. New design also (by photographer spirit).


----------



## Virssagòn

New version aviable:
http://www.computerforum.com/215772-black-hole-v3-benchmark.html


----------

