# League Of Gamers FPU Benchmark program



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

ey guys here is a program i managed to make in my spare time, it is a Floating Point Calculation benchmark, i need people ready to test it to find out if it gives comparable results.

it operates on one core as default and you have to enable the other cores in task manager with set affinity.

im still working on the general layout and optimizing it, and will put dual core and quad core cpu selection for the benchmark.

Heres the forum link which leads to the benchmark  it explains it a bit more 

if your wondering its programmed in visualbasic.net using express 2008, 

if you want to help be a developer for the program just pm me or go on our forums 

http://forum.leagueofgamers.info/showthread.php?p=616#post616


Download Here

http://leagueofgamers.info/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=4&Itemid=37


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

oh and try 1000000 instead of 1000


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

anyone wanna test it


----------



## JrRacinFan (Dec 11, 2007)

I am working with it right now. Doesn't seem too bad.

EDIT: Any possible way to do a validate or a C & P to do a comparison? Are you adding a database to your forums with results?


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

what score u get i get around 5 seconds


----------



## JrRacinFan (Dec 11, 2007)

Around 9.2 but thats pretty obvious. You have twice a good proc as I do.


----------



## pt (Dec 11, 2007)

only using one core


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

yay it works for people


----------



## technicks (Dec 11, 2007)

I got about 3.9.

http://img.techpowerup.org/071211/Capture007.jpg


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

nice score techniks, guess it does show which cpu is better


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

o.o cant see nothing


----------



## technicks (Dec 11, 2007)

Where? lol


----------



## SpookyWillow (Dec 11, 2007)

heres mine on 1 core, x2 3800 @ 2.7 

edit,  couldn't get the image to work via tpu upload so had to host it myself :/


----------



## JrRacinFan (Dec 11, 2007)

Dang that image took a long time to load. Try using imageshack or photobucket....


----------



## SpookyWillow (Dec 11, 2007)

instant for me :/


----------



## pt (Dec 11, 2007)

instant for me aswell
ps: w1z is peeking


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

nice score spooky


----------



## Disparia (Dec 11, 2007)

Work box, P4D 3.4Ghz, 6.188 seconds.


----------



## JrRacinFan (Dec 11, 2007)

pt said:


> instant for me aswell
> ps: w1z is peeking



I figured out what was going on... I upped my DSL plan and they were working on fulfilling my order at the same time.

I do apologize Spooky, good time! Very quick.


----------



## SpookyWillow (Dec 11, 2007)

thanks and no problem


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

ok i optimized the code a little bit, also added a bit of flavour to it


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

so guys what you think of this new one, tell me what scores you getting and see if its any improvement


----------



## pt (Dec 11, 2007)

better score on both runs






you need to do a database for it, and some sort of validation


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

ya, ill sort a database out, and put on our site


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

ok guys you can use this as a stability test too , either set the iterations for 1,000,000 for about 5 seconds, 10,000,000 for 50 seconds, 100,000,000 for 500 seconds, etc
if you have multiple cores, just run the programs twice for dual cores and 4 for quads, and set affinities for all of them then run the test 
once you done this all of the core's should be up to 100% load


----------



## SpookyWillow (Dec 11, 2007)

ran the newer version and got this

4.250 seconds
time per 1000 iterations = .0043 secs

quite a bit of an improvement,  a clean reboot was also involved too


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

hehe


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

updated your score spooky, the benchmark page is up 
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=46729


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 11, 2007)

Like I said in your scorethread, I vote for making it multithreaded. Otherwise it's just another SuperPI or whatever single threaded bench. And since those are rather pointless nowadays it would be way more futureproof if it made use of the available processing power.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 11, 2007)

Let me try to be useful.

google found me http://www.devx.com/DevX/10MinuteSolution/20365/0/page/1

I believe your program does the same calculation over and over right? I'd say you can make an input field selecting the amount of threads. And jsut make that many threads, divide the iterations by this same number and have each thread do as many iterations as iterations/threads. At the end of each thread it could add +1 to some variable and when the variable is equal to the threads it's done. 
Doesn't sound too hard in vb6, I doubt it's much different in .net. 

Also I would increase the default amount of iterations or differences in time are gonna be really small.
I'm in no way a programmer or anything but I guess a basic example should be relatively easy to make. And then sample code can be replaced by your code.

Perhaps I'm a bit oversimplifying though when I have some time on my hands I'm willing to figure this out, does sound interesting.


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

ya ill try enable the multi threading, will decrease the times from around 50-75%, depending on whether you have a quad core or dual


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 11, 2007)

craigwhiteside said:


> ya ill try enable the multi threading, will decrease the times from around 50-75%, depending on whether you have a quad core or dual



Please don't limit to quad. Allow endless or at least 16 or so. Or you'll end up recoding within 2 years.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Dec 11, 2007)

I got 2.9 seconds


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 11, 2007)

nice score  
(adds score)


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 12, 2007)

so guys what you think of it in general, like what would you rate it as, against similar fpu benchmarks, and you think it shows how fast a computer is compared to others?


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 12, 2007)

craigwhiteside said:


> so guys what you think of it in general, like what would you rate it as, against similar fpu benchmarks, and you think it shows how fast a computer is compared to others?



As long as it is single threaded my thoughts are the same as with SuperPI and the likes, it doesn't utilize the available processing power hence doesn't give a useful result. Besides, there is too little data to see how useful it will be. No clue what exactly it calculates. However I'll be following it, see what happens.


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 12, 2007)

It determines execution speed on an extremely floating point, intensive real-world
application, it  just checks  accuracy  on  an  algorithm  that  is exquisitely  sensitive  to  errors. 

the  performance of my program is far more  sensitive  to  changes  in  the efficiency  of the  trigonometric  library  routines than the average floating point program. 

the trigonometric functions (also called circular functions) are functions of an angle. They are important in the study of triangles and modeling periodic phenomena, among many other applications 

hope that clears it up 

Edit: I know it sounds a bit complicated but once you know the theory behind programming its pretty simple


----------



## spud107 (Dec 12, 2007)

might chuck in the 4000 san diego n try on that. . .


----------



## vega22 (Dec 12, 2007)

i get an error code, yadayadayada (0xc0000135) ????


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 12, 2007)

i guess you havnt installed the .net framework 

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...0B-F857-4A14-83F5-25634C3BF043&displaylang=en


----------



## vega22 (Dec 12, 2007)

crap, that might be it 

man their servers are slow, im getting it @ 204kps woohoo, its only going to take 2 days for 64mb 

thanks for letting me know whats wrong btw.


----------



## vega22 (Dec 12, 2007)

sorry bout the dp.

errm i cant realy see the text tho.

3.266 from 3.2ghz sound about right?


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 12, 2007)

ya, seems as though people with vista can see it properly with a transparent background :shadedshu


----------



## pt (Dec 12, 2007)

craigwhiteside said:


> ya, seems as though people with vista can see it properly with a transparent background :shadedshu



xp ftw


----------



## WOutZoR (Dec 12, 2007)

My score:





Ran the test a couple of times but this is the fastest time I got


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 12, 2007)

nice score WOutZoR


----------



## Fizban (Dec 14, 2007)

Intel Core Duo 2 Merom T7200  I seem to average right around the 5.45 second mark.


----------



## Fizban (Dec 14, 2007)

Set Affinity to 1 and with a single core I get right under 7 seconds.


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 14, 2007)

nice score for a laptop


----------



## Fizban (Dec 14, 2007)

Best score so far on the laptop:


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 14, 2007)

fiz, try to use thumbnails instead of inserting it directly into the forum please 

But nice score anyway


----------



## Fizban (Dec 14, 2007)

I changed it to a thumbnail immediately after I hit submit and saw how large it was heh.


----------



## Fizban (Dec 15, 2007)

I'm thinking the # of iterations needs to be a long or double, not an int because it won't let you do more than 2,147,483,648 iterations at the moment.


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 15, 2007)

i didnt both making it a long cos i didnt think people would go beyond the max number 

but ill add it nevertheless 

Dim iteration1 As Long


----------



## Fizban (Dec 15, 2007)

To ensure I stay the top laptop in this test....overclocked to 2.4 GHz and scored 4.352 seconds


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 15, 2007)

updated


----------



## snuif09 (Dec 19, 2007)

My score with sempron 3400+ AM2 at 2.4 GHZ


----------

