[grafxmonkey]

Dual Opteron 280 2.4GHZ
4 Cores
2GB RAM
0: 52: 56
124.93
XP64

Dual Opteron 246 2.0GHZ
2 Cores
2GB RAM
1: 53: 59
58.03
XP64

I don't remember the exact benchmark, but I have a dual Xeon 3.2GHZ(533) HT that ran slightly faster than the Opteron 246's. I'll see if I can run that one again as soon as I have time.

[Calico Jack]

It´s strange that I got different result yesterday
.. doesn´t matter.. todays result was 2min. faster

Here it is:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 2.67 GHz
Cores: 2
Ram 2GT
OS: XP64
Time: 01:12:21
Bench: 91.40

..not bad
_______________________________________________________________

edit:

second try:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 2.67 GHz
Cores: 2
Ram 2GT
OS: XP64
Time: 01:11:58
Bench: 91.88

Same settings but the result just gets better

[tom]

It´s strange that I got different result yesterday
.. doesn´t matter.. todays result was 2min. faster

Avoid running any resident software allocating CPU while running tests and it's better not using the computer while benchmarking.

[adamwade]

Here's my updated test with V1.1:

Machine: Dell Precission 490
Processors: Dual 5150 2.66ghz
Cores: 4
OS: XP pro 32bit
RAM: 4GB
Benchmark: 166.58
Time: 39min 42 seconds

[jdp]

Machine: Macpro
Processors: Dual 5150 2.66ghz
Cores: 4
OS: XP pro x64
RAM: 3GB
Benchmark: 167.07
Time: 39min 36 seconds

[beppeg]

Update

@jdp: thanx for the xp64 test, I'm waiting for the parallels test

P.S. core 2 duo rocks

[jdp]

parallels test is running...
[edit: beppe, there's a typo in the update, unfortunately it's not osx 10.4! ]
[*2nd edit: erased*]

[jdp]

Machine: Macpro
Processors: Dual 5150 2.66ghz
Cores: 2 (*)
OS: win 2000 SP4 under parallels
RAM: 3GB
Benchmark: 43.10
Time: 2h 33m 12s

(*) all parallels settings are default excluding RAM size which is set to the maximum of 1.5Ghz (default 256Mb). Those settings are to prevent instability issues to the whole system including Guest OS. I am pretty sure one can go higher with that, but I won't stress the machine anytime soon...

as far as I know parallels is not able to emulate a 64bit environment at the moment.

[beppeg]

Little update

parallels test is running...
[edit: beppe, there's a typo in the update, unfortunately it's not osx 10.4! ]

sorry, too much grappa
thanx for the parallels test

[johanruben]

Hi!

Rendered on one of my four Core 2 Duo E6400 2.13 ghz @ 2.8 ghz.

Os: WinXP Pro 32bit

Cores: 2

Ram: 2 Gb

Bench: 89.47

Time: 1h13m55s

Regards Johan.

[deadalvs]

Toshiba M400 12" laptop on XP32
2 x 1.83 GHz core duo (2 cores)
2 GB Ram
Time: 6939 s (1:55:39h = 116m)
Benchmark: 57.18

* * *

deadalvs

[Chris Heier]

New benchmark. Just upgraded my Opteron processors to 285's.

CPU: Dual Opteron 285 @ 2.6GHz
Cores: 4
Ram: 4 GB
OS: XP64
Time: 00:47:55
Bench: 138.01

[deadalvs]

New benchmark. Just upgraded my Opteron processors to 285's.

CPU: Dual Opteron 285 @ 2.6GHz
Cores: 4
Ram: 4 GB
OS: XP64
Time: 00:47:55
Bench: 138.01

umm... Chris... do You know what a quad socket dualcore 885 would cost at the moment? did the prices drop enough to see this as a reasonable option ?

* * *

deadalvs

[Chris Heier]

Not sure. Last I checked, the motherboard alone for that type of setup was over $1000.

From what I can find on Pricewatch, the 885 goes for around $1700 a chip.

You could always check with Boxx Technologies as to how much their Apex systems are going for. They have both 4 and 8 socket models of the Apex. 8 socket being the Tyan K8QW board with the M4881 attachment allowing for 4 additional sockets.

[beppeg]

Updated, thanx for the new tests