|
|
#21
4th May 2007, 06:26
|
|||
|
|||
|
just got a new box in for a client so i thought i'd post up the cpumark score
Test 1 1050 Test 2 413 Test 3 8403 Final 7473.5 Its a quad xeon e5335 @ 2GHz, i'm tempted to take it home tbh. |
|
#22
4th May 2007, 06:36
|
|||
|
|||
|
another box we are 'setting' up for clients
Test 1 1096 Test 2 458 Test 3 8403 Final 7527 Its a dual xeon 3050 @ 2.13GHz, and it was still running exchange 07 in the background. |
|
#23
4th May 2007, 06:39
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Quote:
So that's 8Ghz of processing power? Interestingly its the same as the dual core (4Ghz ish) scores. My System: Hybr!d
|
|
#24
4th May 2007, 07:23
|
|||
|
|||
|
I was expecting a bigger score if i'm honest, but CPUMark seems to be more reliant on clock than cores. I'm not sure how it evaluates and produces the scores, as the super PI result was about 25 seconds on the quad and 33 on the dual for 1million digits.
|
|
#25
4th May 2007, 07:29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thats a good point, the software may not be designed for more than 2 cores.....
|
|
#26
4th May 2007, 16:00
|
|||
|
|||
|
This almost seems a bit inaccurate.
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 @ 3.2 GhZ 
|
|
#27
4th May 2007, 16:09
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thats a high result... is your PC overclocked?
Have you run the test again to confirm the score? |
|
#28
4th May 2007, 17:12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#29
4th May 2007, 17:17
|
|||
|
|||
|
That's probably about right.
The E6400 2.13/4.26 is 7500ish. So an E6400 @ 3.2/6.4 is 50% more CPU power. 4.26 + 50% = 6.39. 7500 + 50% = 11250. I really need to upgrade to what you have, you have 4x the power as me lol. What m/board and ram are you running? |
|
#30
4th May 2007, 17:26
|
|||
|
|||
|
On another thought it just shows how good these new intel chips are, overclocked 50%, thats mad.
|
