I do appreciate all you input but, we're veering off the subject. The bottom
line is the benchmark rating I was getting before ,whether or not it is using
four threads, was about 4 times as high as now.
So the quad core doesn't live up to the bells and whistles. All I know is it
worked VERY good and now it doesn't.
Could someone please give me a clue as to the cause.
--
Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1 heatsink, 4gb
Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor X, Nvidia
8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
"Colin Barnhorst" wrote:
> If you are quoting a KB that cites 3.12GB as a limit be aware that the
> author cites that number as an example only. The actual range I have seen
> is 2.0GB to 3.5GB. It depends on what the BIOS has set aside for device
> buffering, like video cards. It depends on the hardware on the system.
>
> "Power Obsessed" <> wrote in message
> news:37B438CC-D9FC-4C5F-976B-...
> > Atcually I would be limited to 3.12ghz (I have it overclocked). That still
> > doesn't address the problem. According to past benchmark tests the results
> > from CPU testing blew away all baselines that come with the software.
> > (passmark). Single core and dual.
> > The majority of the time the task manager shows three if not four of the
> > processors being utilized by whatever processes are running.
> > --
> > Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1 heatsink, 4gb
> > Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor X, Nvidia
> > 8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
> >
> >
> > "John Barnes" wrote:
> >
> >> You are limited to 2.4ghz for single thread execution, which almost all
> >> programs not designed for a supercomputer are. Single core processors
> >> got
> >> over 4ghz which is 80% faster. If you are multi-tasking quad cores are
> >> great and some of windows functions will run on the other cores making
> >> the
> >> overall performance of a single thread program faster since it doesn't
> >> have
> >> to multiplex the functions like the on single cores. Read Charlies
> >> article.
> >>
> >> "Power Obsessed" <> wrote in message
> >> news:CE40E4D5-939D-4D05-BEFE-...
> >> > Passmark I have used this many times in the past and the results for my
> >> > CPU
> >> > were about 3 or four times as much. the overall score for my system was
> >> > 1660
> >> > now its 850.
> >> > --
> >> > Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1 heatsink, 4gb
> >> > Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor X,
> >> > Nvidia
> >> > 8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Carlos" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >> What benchmarking program you are running?
> >> >>
> >> >> You might also want to read this excellent article from MVP Charlie
> >> >> Russel,
> >> >> "The Multi-Core Fallacy", here:
> >> >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/arc...e-fallacy.aspx
> >> >>
> >> >> Carlos
> >> >>
> >> >> "Power Obsessed" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > The last benchmark I ran was about a third of the normal level as
> >> >> > far
> >> >> > as
> >> >> > performance. I checked the task manager and all for cores ARE being
> >> >> > utilized.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The first thought was faulty benchmark results and/or software. The
> >> >> > thing
> >> >> > that really concerned me was while looking at the task manager
> >> >> > performance
> >> >> > results all four cores spiked a 100%. They didn't stay there but,
> >> >> > thats
> >> >> > outside the norm.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I have rarely seen the levels rise above 50% so this coupled with
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > benchmark has me concerned.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Anyone have any idea what is going on with this thing?
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Asus P5W DH , Q6600 Quad core 2.4ghz @3.12, thermalake V1 heatsink,
> >> >> > 4gb
> >> >> > Crucial ballistix 800mhz , 16gb Mtron 6000 SSD, 150gb Raptor X,
> >> >> > Nvidia
> >> >> > 8800gt , 700 watt OCZ GameXStream power s , XP Pro X64
> >>
> >>
>
Similar Threads
