40.062s with FX55 San Diego FINALLY a half-decent score for the competition.

Way to go bro!

bruce seem to be crazy.

My utmost respect and appreciation

GOGO austria! We are #2!

lol

My utmost respect and appreciation

 

I have a surprise for you! Guess what:p

 

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=928504

Edited December 5, 200915 yr by knopflerbruce

I used today wprime version 2.00

I forgot to look at what version is demanded.

Is this ok, or my result will be ignored?

I will make time tomorrow for another session, and I just to know if I'll need to get 1.5 version..

 

Thanks

I used today wprime version 2.00

I forgot to look at what version is demanded.

Is this ok, or my result will be ignored?

I will make time tomorrow for another session, and I just to know if I'll need to get 1.5 version..

 

Thanks

 

You need v1.55.

awesome result knut

No problemo, I'll be back tomorrow with other results, better ones hopefully

I have a surprise for you! Guess what:p

 

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=928504

 

 

 

You have my deepest respect for that bro. Now, if you can push that baby and Wprime it with 4xxx MHz, then you will be member of a very select club

People of the world! May I ask a question to gurus of overclocking? I guess I just not informed about some majic secret. But how is that possible, that some old Celeron overclocked to 3,3 Ghz show a DOUBLE faster result in WPrime32 than Pentium4 550 with a native 3,4 and even with enabled HT? And even overclocked P4 to 4,1 Ghz is like 70% slower. Or that program like only two specific architectures/designs- Sempron and Celeron? Than it should be said so in the limitations.

Again, I am deeply sorry to disturb you from your world records beating with my foolish questions:) But I thought I have the fastest single core processor, which even used socket 775...but it turned out that P-3,4 is the slowest...

Edited December 16, 200915 yr by krestic

Please link us to the results you are speaking about.

Please link us to the results you are speaking about.

I have even better example here http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=928584 Celeron 420 at 3,5Ghz shows 44,690 sec

and here http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=928020 Celeron 352 at 7610mhz shows 47,800

And here is me http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=929321 with P4 550@ 4016 with 1minute 9sec with HT enabled. Without HT it was 1minute 20sec.

And my result as well as other P4s are always slower than any Celeron or Sempron at almost any speeds.

P.S: looks like mobile celeron at 2,4Ghz without HT equals my P4 at 4Ghz with HT in wPrime http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=927694

Edited December 16, 200915 yr by krestic

That is very simple. The first Celeron is a CONROE based Celeron, while blind's celeron is Cedar Mill and yours is a Prescott. Conroe brought a huge performance impprovement when it was released, so this is very easy to understand.

Thanks a lot for explanation. But will it be faster than P4 in real life? Cells still have very small cache, don't they?

I just didnt realize that there are single-core Celerons on core architecture. .

...mmm...I mean I thought that they are all dual-core since Conroe

Browsing Intel website reveals that Celerons E3xxx are dual core and used Core architecture. And 4xx are singlecore with only 35W TDP, however it doesnt say on what architecture it based even in datasheet.

Anyway, that pretty much explauns why it so much faster in some specific applications. But it shoeldn't be that fast in real life multimedia applications, as I see it. Or is it?