remotewizz Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 (edited) built it for a company this thing runs my pc in the dirt. link http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=JAG0FWM4BJWSNUCJ Edited March 25, 2007 by remotewizz Link to post Share on other sites
mramd Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 not bad for running stock Link to post Share on other sites
remotewizz Posted March 25, 2007 Author Share Posted March 25, 2007 (edited) built it for a company this thing runs my pc in the dirt. link http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=JAG0FWM4BJWSNUCJ Results from similar systems by pc pitstop -------------------------------------Clock MHZ-----CPU Score----Memory Score----Disk Score AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5200+ 2833------18157---------11198--------------128 AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 Dual Core------2800------17669---------10859----------------67 AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 Dual Core------2800------17322---------10857----------------63 AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4400+-2800------17677---------10806-----------------50 AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+-2800------17412---------10646-----------------57 AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4800+-2800------17718---------10935-----------------93 AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5200+-2800------17544---------10964-----------------58 AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5600+-2800------17583---------10893-----------------49 AMD Dual Core AMD Opteron 165---2800-------17598---------10841-----------------67 AMD Dual Core AMD Opteron 170---2800-------17792---------10876-----------------56 Intel Pentium D------------------------2800---------8660-----------6674-----------------46 Intel Xeon------------------------------2800---------9292-----------6273-----------------41 Hey you tell me what you like the 5200 or what? Edited March 25, 2007 by remotewizz Link to post Share on other sites
Lou Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 I still like my old one, not a whole lot of difference between the 939 and the AM2 it seems. 3000 on air. Link to post Share on other sites
remotewizz Posted March 25, 2007 Author Share Posted March 25, 2007 (edited) I still like my old one, not a whole lot of difference between the 939 and the AM2 it seems. You overclocked your pc to 47% I only overclocked at 10% Ido not wish to overclock then have to go through all that *#@^. if i did oc to 47% i would be over 3000 MHZ 3000 on air. Edited March 25, 2007 by remotewizz Link to post Share on other sites
charlesrose Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Very nice! Link to post Share on other sites
gun_victim7 Posted March 26, 2007 Share Posted March 26, 2007 Very nice! I got ya beat with my new Air cooled Pc. http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=DWX0FWUD3WWSP0CJ Oh yea. and i dont even have my Crossfire kit yet. Link to post Share on other sites
add=2distract Posted March 26, 2007 Share Posted March 26, 2007 (edited) let's see, there's the <> Opteron <> Duron <> Athlon <> Xeon <> Sempron <> and the Sempron is the lower end of the market, making the what, Athlon the best? I know that an AMD Sempron 3400+ is about the equivalent to a Athlon XP 3000+ one being about ~1995MHz (sempron) and the other ~2026MHz (Athlon) I've got the Sempron 3400+ up to ~2600MHz nominal speed before and it was fairly stable... So what the <> Athlon <> would be the Lexus of AMD processors right? It's obvious that its better one's a 3000+ and one's a 3400+ I was just wondering the order that they would be arranged (from least to greatest) off the subject though, there isn't a game that utilizes the core 2 yet? and even further off the subject, REMOTEWIZZ, I have "the official redhat LINUX user's guide," I know nothing about LINUX at all but I was wondering if I installed LINUX w/t SLACKWARE 3.0 would that be anywhere up to date? keep in mind that I know nothing about LINUX... Edited March 26, 2007 by add=2distract Link to post Share on other sites
remotewizz Posted March 26, 2007 Author Share Posted March 26, 2007 (edited) let's see, there's the <> Opteron <> Duron <> Athlon <> Xeon <> Sempron <> and the Sempron is the lower end of the market, making the what, Athlon the best? I know that an AMD Sempron 3400+ is about the equivalent to a Athlon XP 3000+ one being about ~1995MHz (sempron) and the other ~2026MHz (Athlon) I've got the Sempron 3400+ up to ~2600MHz nominal speed before and it was fairly stable... So what the <> Athlon <> would be the Lexus of AMD processors right? It's obvious that its better one's a 3000+ and one's a 3400+ I was just wondering the order that they would be arranged (from least to greatest) off the subject though, there isn't a game that utilizes the core 2 yet? and even further off the subject, REMOTEWIZZ, I have "the official redhat LINUX user's guide," I know nothing about LINUX at all but I was wondering if I installed LINUX w/t SLACKWARE 3.0 would that be anywhere up to date? keep in mind that I know nothing about LINUX... SLACKWARE 3.0 is the latest all though try to compile the traditional Hello, world program on Linux, the compiler can't find `iostream.h'. What's the deal?" You Obviously do have the Slackware 3.0 release. There's an error in the setup. It's easy to fix, though; log in as root, and make a symbolic link: ln -s /usr/lib/g++-include /usr/include/g++ ps good luck if you have the latest g++ and libg++ ready for download. pps ok I see no one will rest untill I see what this 5200+ will OC too I will do it and make a new post later untill then don't do anything i would do! lol later! Edited March 26, 2007 by remotewizz Link to post Share on other sites
remotewizz Posted March 26, 2007 Author Share Posted March 26, 2007 SLACKWARE 3.0 is the latest all though try to compile the traditional Hello, world program on Linux, the compiler can't find `iostream.h'. What's the deal?" You Obviously do have the Slackware 3.0 release. There's an error in the setup. It's easy to fix, though; log in as root, and make a symbolic link: ln -s /usr/lib/g++-include /usr/include/g++ ps good luck if you have the latest g++ and libg++ ready for download. pps ok I see no one will rest untill I see what this 5200+ will OC too I will do it and make a new post later untill then don't do anything i would do! lol later! ops back to the 1st question lol the list seems long so I wil start and end with the Athlon from best to last 64FX 4X4, 64FX AM2, 64 X2 AM2, 64 X2 939, 64 AM2, 64 939 Link to post Share on other sites
mramd Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 (edited) I got ya beat with my new Air cooled Pc. http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=DWX0FWUD3WWSP0CJ Oh yea. and i dont even have my Crossfire kit yet. that all u got http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=L660FW3L1JWSKHCJ little better http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=FHH0FW3L1JWSU7CJ my core 2 http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=P8EJFW30UCWSMECJ Edited March 27, 2007 by mramd Link to post Share on other sites
brandon Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 For a 3Ghz Core 2, that processor score is awful low gun victim. My Core 2 score: http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=HYPVFW6NPXWS0XCJ My old X2 score: http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=HYPVFW6NPXWS0XCJ Link to post Share on other sites
bigchrome Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 I'm tempted to bust out the X2 4200+ at 3.1ghz... You'll see it this weekend on DICE if you're lucky... 3.6ghz+ Link to post Share on other sites
mramd Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 ya i have a8n32-sli deluxe limited at 1.6 vcore temps and ram fine got any info on a volt mod ??? Link to post Share on other sites
gun_victim7 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=DWX0FWUD3WWSU0QJ My new rig beats yours Link to post Share on other sites
mramd Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 and who are u talkin about so far from what i seen u got beat bad lol by a e6300 and a amd lmao Link to post Share on other sites
flewpastu Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 well since we're dropping old scores i guess i can throw one in Pit Link Link to post Share on other sites
Lou Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Didn't know you could post em after they were a month old. Old Test. Link to post Share on other sites
MR HOOKS Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 http://www.pcpitstop.com/techexpress.asp?id=PQ9LFWSZUUWSBBQJ Link to post Share on other sites
WorkingClassHero Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 (edited) I can't understand why ppl buy/install dual core processors because there is no software out there that utilizes them. No games, nothing. The best thing to do for everyone without dual core is to wait until dual core becomes the norm, when games etc actually need dual core to run. By the time this day comes the Dual Core Cpu's will be a 1/4 of the price. .......or am i missing something. Edited April 1, 2007 by WorkingClassHero Link to post Share on other sites
MR HOOKS Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 (edited) I can't understand why ppl buy/install dual core processors because there is no software out there that utilizes them. No games, nothing. The best thing to do for everyone without dual core is to wait until dual core becomes the norm, when games etc actually need dual core to run. By the time this day comes the Dual Core Cpu's will be a 1/4 of the price. .......or am i missing something. Its fun to show off. Edited April 1, 2007 by MR HOOKS Link to post Share on other sites
brandon Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 (edited) I can't understand why ppl buy/install dual core processors because there is no software out there that utilizes them. No games, nothing. The best thing to do for everyone without dual core is to wait until dual core becomes the norm, when games etc actually need dual core to run. By the time this day comes the Dual Core Cpu's will be a 1/4 of the price. .......or am i missing something. I'm a small time programmer, and I also do 3d rendering on the side. Having an extra core free is great. I can be rendering with one core, and compile a program on the other. However, I bought the cheapest available at the time. However, I think buying super high end dual & quad core processors is a waste. People who buy those are usually the ones who brag about how high of a number they get in application X, and let all that power go to waste. A quote I find true: "It's funny how real life benchmarks are based on rendering fantasy games". Edited April 1, 2007 by brandon Link to post Share on other sites
flewpastu Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 Because we can Link to post Share on other sites
charlesrose Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 I can't understand why ppl buy/install dual core processors because there is no software out there that utilizes them. No games, nothing. The best thing to do for everyone without dual core is to wait until dual core becomes the norm, when games etc actually need dual core to run. By the time this day comes the Dual Core Cpu's will be a 1/4 of the price. .......or am i missing something. It's what the industry is selling nowadays! Link to post Share on other sites
WorkingClassHero Posted April 2, 2007 Share Posted April 2, 2007 It's what the industry is selling nowadays! That might be so. Just a pity all the latest PC's have all the up to date technology and nothing else. Link to post Share on other sites
.png.9d4b89b15b2cd5e65edd93a0e6823dce.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now