----------------------------------- BenLi Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:12 pm Super PI ----------------------------------- There's a benchmark called Super PI, I ran it for 2M digits of pi to calculate, the result came back like 17 seconds. My computer runs at 667 mhz with 256 mb of ram... I looked at the scores of others (that are all machines over 1.5 Ghz) and none of them are under a minute. I'm just wondering whats going on? Oh and i was going to upload the screen shot, but my upload quota ran out ----------------------------------- md Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:29 pm ----------------------------------- Definitely seems wrong to me... Here's what superpi gives me (P4 @ 2.8, Gentoo Linux) ----------------------------------- TheFerret Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:47 pm ----------------------------------- Something defiently does seem wrong since me duel core amd x2 @ 2.2 GHz takes 98.625s to complete it... So, I think you ran yours wrong or misintereped the results... ----------------------------------- md Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:59 pm ----------------------------------- Something better for calculating pi that I found and modified a wee bit get from $ zbip2 -d calc_pi.c.bz2 compile with $ gcc calc_pi.c -o pi.exec -lgmp -lm rum with $ ./pi.exec mine: ----------------------------------- timmytheturtle Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:20 pm ----------------------------------- For anyone trying to use md's program, make sure you have the GNU Multiple Precisionchris@melchior:~$ ./pi.exec 8000000 digits=8000000, #terms=564109, depth=21 sieve ................................................... total time = 119.660s ----------------------------------- War_Caymore Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:36 pm ----------------------------------- can someone make a link for the super PI benchmark program, i wish to try it out on my computr so see how it performs. anyone wanna take a guess how long a P4 2.93Ghz 512 DDR RAM will perform? ----------------------------------- Clayton Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:06 pm ----------------------------------- why don't you google it? This is what I got with "superPI Benchmark"... click [url=http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=superPI+Benchmark&btnG=Google+Search&meta=]here ----------------------------------- md Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:11 pm ----------------------------------- SuperPI itself is actually not a very good program at all; it's only popular because so many stupid people use it. But you people can use superpi all you want... my posted app can calculate pi faster; so my computer must be faster ;) ----------------------------------- BenLi Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:40 pm ----------------------------------- yeah i see, I only counted the "initial value found thing" i didn't wait around to see what does after. My computer ended up being around 9 minutes...haha. But to what someone said, it doesn't matter if you're dual core. The application isn't. And md, it doesn't matter if its not efficient. The point is that its standarized, so you can conpare different configurations. However, calculating pi is probably not a comprehensive evaluation of your computer at all Just curious, which benchmarks do you guys use (if any)? ----------------------------------- cool dude Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:51 pm ----------------------------------- My laptop took 2 minutes and a few seconds to calculate 2M although i had a bunch of open applications running. Wow i wish i had TheFerret's computer lol. 1.36 seconds. nice! Edit: Forgot to mention my laptop specs. 2.8 GHz, Pentium 4, 512 MB RAM. ----------------------------------- rdrake Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:49 pm ----------------------------------- One minute, twenty-one seconds here. Running on an Intel Centrino Duo T2500@2.00 GHz with 1 GB RAM. ----------------------------------- War_Caymore Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:08 pm ----------------------------------- 1m 55s running a 2.93Ghz P4 with 512 of DDR RAM. not bad :wink: ----------------------------------- Andy Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:47 pm ----------------------------------- But to what someone said, it doesn't matter if you're dual core. The application isn't. err, incase you havent noticed, your system runs more than 1 program at a time. dual core systems will give you a noticeable increase in performance by pipelining tasks queues to the two cpus. ----------------------------------- md Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:05 pm ----------------------------------- But to what someone said, it doesn't matter if you're dual core. The application isn't. err, incase you havent noticed, your system runs more than 1 program at a time. dual core systems will give you a noticeable increase in performance by pipelining tasks queues to the two cpus. Yes, that speeds up the execution of programs in general; but it cannot speed one particular app up in particular if it's not multi-threaded. The best it could do is run the app as if it were getting 100% CPU time. So, faster? Yes. As past as a multi-threaded version on a dual-core? Probably not. ----------------------------------- Silent Avenger Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:17 pm ----------------------------------- I've ran all of them (16K to 32M) on my computer which is running a Pentium D (dual core) at 3.6 Ghz with 4 GB RAM. I was also running some programs at the same time so it's not completely accurate but I guess it's close enough. Oh yeah I was too lazy to cut out the window so I just took a screen shot of my whole desktop. ----------------------------------- [Gandalf] Tue Dec 05, 2006 8:05 pm ----------------------------------- Blargh! My uber-gaming computer got 2 million in 1 minute and 27 seconds. Damn you rdrake, damn yooooouuu! :( ----------------------------------- Andy Wed Dec 06, 2006 5:42 pm ----------------------------------- 4gb of ram on windows xp? what a waste... ----------------------------------- Silent Avenger Wed Dec 06, 2006 6:30 pm ----------------------------------- Actually Andy it is of use in many ways when doing media editing such as recording home videos on to the PC. With 4GB I can record a continuous 3.5 hours of video from a camera and with Media Center I can rewind live TV back 2.5 hours and re watch a movie if I wanted too and one other thing I can do a lot of multi tasking. So in some ways 4GB of ram isn't a waste on a Windows XP computer. ----------------------------------- Andy Wed Dec 06, 2006 6:32 pm ----------------------------------- check your system resources. i doubt all 4gb get consumed. xp has horrible memory management. if it were osx, or vista, i'd agree with you ----------------------------------- Silent Avenger Wed Dec 06, 2006 7:06 pm ----------------------------------- I have the Alienware Dock and it has a system monitor on it and the highest the Ram indicator has gotten to is 92% so if I do my calculations right is about 3.68 GB of ram but I've never seen it higher so I guess I lose about half a gig of total ram. I'm also thinking of upgrading to Vista which I'm sure my system can handle (except for the video card).