Processor GFlops Compilation

[Jack1n]

Its already summer here in israel so ambients are pretty high...

 

[Mephisto513]

Add Me

Mephisto513 | Intel | i7 3930k @ 4.6Ghz | 125.8433| 27.3572 | 64-bit | HT on

 

[Tylermon]

Add me

Average of 150.0000 Gflops

My Rig: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2yxjm
Intel I7 3930k 4.6ghz
Asus P9x79 Pro
32gb ram 1600mhz
gtx 780 overclocked memory and base clock.
1200W psu
win7 pro 64bit
H110 cpu fan

 

[Timmen]

Timmen | Intel | i5 3570k @ 4.6Ghz | 118.0145 | 25.6553 | 64-bit

 

[inthedark1980]

Add me

inthedark1980 | Intel | i7-2600k@4.8ghz | 103.3555 GFlops | 10x run at 145.64 seconds |


I think you will be as surprised as I was. I am running a i7-2600k@4.8ghz. Hyperthreading on, c-states on and only topping out around 80c. I am cooling my cpu with a h80 in push/pull and have 16gb Kingston Hyper-x Genesis 1600mhz. I noticed that the top 2600k in the chart was not even similar to my scores so I wanted to share

 

[_JP_]

Add me

_JP_ | AMD | A8 5600K @ 4GHz | 020.1946 | 005.0486 | 64-bit | 4GHz@1.25v; 1600MHz CL9

Is it me, or is the average a bit low?
Looking at other scores, I get the feeling I should be getting twice the GFlops. :\
Maybe it's just me. The chip works fine, stable and responsive...

EDIT: Then again, there's a 8350 in the previous page that averaged 30-odd GFlops...heh
That and I'm running 1600MHz RAM when these cores crave for more speed.

 

[Tylermon]

Add me

_JP_ | AMD | A8 5600K @ 4GHz | 020.1946 | 005.0486 | 64-bit | 4GHz@1.25v; 1600MHz CL9

Is it me, or is the average a bit low?
Looking at other scores, I get the feeling I should be getting twice the GFlops. :\
Maybe it's just me. The chip works fine, stable and responsive...

EDIT: Then again, there's a 8350 in the previous page that averaged 30-odd GFlops...heh
That and I'm running 1600MHz RAM when these cores crave for more speed.

It is hard to say. Builds can be different and create enough difference to make one cpu great on one system and terrible in another. Not only that, but not all cpu's are made equally, some get more gold some dont.
There is a 3930k in the list that got around 100 gflops at 5ghz. Mine got around 150 Gflops at 4.6ghz.

So really it is hard to say if your average is low or not.

Just make sure you keep it cool and system clean and up to date. Then at least you know it is the best it will be for you.

P.S AMD cpu's dont get as high Gflops. They have many small buckets of data they send rapidly while Intel uses a few dump trucks. Dump trucks get more/bigger Gflops


In other news, I would love if that list could be updated

My Rig: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2yxjm

 

[Frick]

Frick | Intel | Xeon E3 1220 @ 3.1 Ghz | 71.9593 | 21.2 | 64-bit |

 

[zoomer-fodder]

Add Me

zoomer-fodder | AMD | Phenom II X6 1605T @ 4.03Ghz | 077.9989 | 19.36417 | 64-bit | Full stable 24/7

http://pix.academ.org/img/2012/12/06/4fe8dcda06da585b88b2635f78dfc81d.png

UP

 

[xvi]

Add Me

xvi | Intel | Core 2 Duo T5670 1.8GHz | 10.159875 | 5.644375 | 64-bit | Dell Vostro 1510, Win 7

 

[TRWOV]

Add Me

TRWOV | Intel | Core 2 Extreme QX6800 @ 2.93Ghz | 024.1497 | 008.2422 | 64-bit | AGP rig

 

[TRWOV]

Is it me, or is the average a bit low?
Looking at other scores, I get the feeling I should be getting twice the GFlops. :\
Maybe it's just me. The chip works fine, stable and responsive...

EDIT: Then again, there's a 8350 in the previous page that averaged 30-odd GFlops...heh
That and I'm running 1600MHz RAM when these cores crave for more speed.

Download this patch for IBT: http://www.datafilehost.com/d/b6f1cf10

Remember to uncheck the "Use our download manager and get recommended downloads" box.

Copy the contents to the IBT folder. It'll overwrite Linpack with the correct one for Bulldozer CPUs

 

[nameiP]

Add me

 

[Tylermon]

Add me

View attachment 54309

Its a personal opinion that you dont need to raise your bus speeds. But I am fairly certain that voltage could be dropped(at least just a little). Have the same cpu and while not all cpu's are equal and I dont know your PSU/MOBO, I can get 4.6ghz at 1.364v What are your temps at? Must be HOT.

Also, what is your cooler?

P.S 4.5ghz has a significantly less power draw, much lower temps, and about the same performance. I'm currently using my 3930k at 4.5ghz with 1.355v.

My thermal paste is admittedly bad and I am getting much higher temps than I should be getting, but, there is about a 5-10 degree difference between 4.5ghz and 4.6ghz. with those voltages.

Best cpu I ever had, but the thing makes some heat.

 

[Steevo]

Strange, attached about 20 times.

Anyway, 225Mhz bus speed causes hard lock, 220 works perfect I have ran all other stress tests stable up to 226Mhz with no issues.

 

[nameiP]

Its a personal opinion that you dont need to raise your bus speeds. But I am fairly certain that voltage could be dropped(at least just a little). Have the same cpu and while not all cpu's are equal and I dont know your PSU/MOBO, I can get 4.6ghz at 1.364v What are your temps at? Must be HOT.

Also, what is your cooler?

P.S 4.5ghz has a significantly less power draw, much lower temps, and about the same performance. I'm currently using my 3930k at 4.5ghz with 1.355v.

My thermal paste is admittedly bad and I am getting much higher temps than I should be getting, but, there is about a 5-10 degree difference between 4.5ghz and 4.6ghz. with those voltages.

Best cpu I ever had, but the thing makes some heat.

My rig:

Intel I7 3930k with Noctua NH-D14
Asus Rampage IV Formula
16Gb GSkill Ripjaws kit @2133Mhz
750w Corsair CMPSU-750HX Pro series
Samsung 830 128Gb SSD + 3Tb Seagate HDD
All stuffed into an Antec three hundred two midi tower.

Idle temps are ~40, under load they hit the 64-69 region. After some further tweaking I've got the core volts down to 1.360 and all appears well...

 

[qiong]

Add me:
Qiong | Intel | i7 3770 @ 4.1Ghz | 090.638 | 022.107 | 64-bit | AVX
Windows 8.1 evaluation running intelburn Test:
intel i7-3770 @4.1 Ghz
2x 8GB Corsair XMS @1600Mhz
MSI Z77IA-E51

I have a non-commerical version intel Composer-XE 2013 which contains linpack benchmark test, and it gives the results( as compared with the standard test in intelburn test which uses 1024Mb of space, a matrix with size of 11200x11200 should give about 1004Mb of memory usage, the system is ubuntu 12.04):

Input data or print help ? Type [data]/help :

Number of equations to solve (problem size): 11200
Leading dimension of array: 11200
Number of trials to run: 10
Data alignment value (in Kbytes): 4
Current date/time: Fri Feb 7 22:22:27 2014

CPU frequency: 4.314 GHz
Number of CPUs: 1
Number of cores: 4
Number of threads: 8

Parameters are set to:

Number of tests: 1
Number of equations to solve (problem size) : 11200
Leading dimension of array : 11200
Number of trials to run : 10
Data alignment value (in Kbytes) : 4

Maximum memory requested that can be used=1003748096, at the size=11200

============= Timing linear equation system solver =================

Size LDA Align. Time(s) GFlops Residual Residual(norm)
11200 11200 4 8.714 107.5158 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.683 107.8989 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.634 108.5101 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.721 107.4247 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.660 108.1798 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.624 108.6382 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.639 108.4471 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.720 107.4349 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.772 106.8029 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02
11200 11200 4 8.608 108.8334 1.193862e-10 3.361740e-02

Performance Summary (GFlops)

Size LDA Align. Average Maximal
11200 11200 4 107.9686 108.8334

End of tests


I don't know why these two versions of linpack benchmark are different

 

[RadFX]

Been interested in this thread for a while now. Posting results now. I don't understand why the test completion time is low.. but I can't complain about the other results I guess. Core Voltage should be 1.428v.==========================================================================================

 

[nightriderjt]

Add me
Nightriderjt | AMD | AMD FX-8350 @ 4.5ghz | 076.803

For those who get low results in IBT with FX or Ax series. IBT initial release does not work right . There is an IBT patch for AMD cpus.
Also Linpack will report a failure on the program (not stability issue but a crash ) but is false positive on AMD cpus with the IBT patch. That has been reported at other forums as i can remember.

CPU : AMD FX8350 OC 4.5
Mainboard : Asrock 970 extreme 4 (cannot oc higher due to 4+1 vrm)
VGA: Saphire 5870 Vapor OC
RAM : 2x4gb Kingston 1600 Mhz (oc to 1866)
SSD : Samsung 840
HDD: 1x1TB WD, 1x500GB WD
Case : Akasa Freedom
Cooler : Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo (push pull)
Custom made heatsink on to VRMs (replaced the small original heatsink on the motherboard much bigger in height with attached 80mm fan blowing to the back)
Fans: 1x120 front,1x120 back,1x120 side,1x140 top,1x120 to the rear side of the motherboard)

 

[Athlonite]

Your Average score is 76.803 not 79.5129 (add all scores then divide by num runs = Avg score)

 

[nightriderjt]

Your Average score is 76.803 not 79.5129 (add all scores then divide by num runs = Avg score)

fixed

 

[eidairaman1]

fixed

Can you post full specs?

 

[nightriderjt]

Can you post full specs?

done

 

[Arjai]

Add Me
name | Processor Maker | CPU Model and Clock | Average GFlops | GFlops Per GHz | 64-bit or 32-bit | Notes
Arjai | Intel | i5 3317u 2394.29 | 28.1967 | 11.7766 | 64 bit | 4 logical cores

 

[chuck216]

Add Me

Chuck216 | AMD | AMD FX-8320 @3.5Ghz | 31.942925 | 9.12655 | 64 Bit |8 Physical Cores