Next Generation Emulation banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
7,407 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Humus got a dual core A64 3800+, so naturally added multithreading to his only CPU bottlenecked benchmark, metaballs. As a test, I ran the demo on my P4 w/ HT, and noticed quite a nice difference.. yes, HT helps with such computations when applications are coded for multi-threading, as much as *some* people would like to believe otherwise. :p

BTW, in this demo, raw FPU computation is faster than SSE or 3DNow, as apparently VC2005 has a new "fast" FPU option.

http://humus.ca/
 

· NextGenerationGaymulation
Joined
·
2,934 Posts
I get 158, with my P3.0 with 2 threads, I guess you don't gain much by buying a lot of proccesors :p , as long as memory/cache doesn't get faster.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
6,403 Posts
I tried it on my Athlon XP/Radeon 9500 Pro machine and here's my results:

FPU: 76-77 FPS
SSE: 74-76 FPS
3DNow: 77-79 FPS

I tried overclocking the card and setting the demo to fullscreen (1600x1200) and it ran exactly the same speed :p. I didn't think it would be that CPU dependant.
 

· PCSX2 Coder
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
3dnow: 108-115fps
SSE: 98-101fps

putting threads on seems to knock about 2-5fps off each, this is on an A64 3400+ clawhammer and a radeon 9800 XT
 

· NextGenerationGaymulation
Joined
·
2,934 Posts
3dnow: 108-115fps
SSE: 98-101fps

putting threads on seems to knock about 2-5fps off each, this is on an A64 3400+ clawhammer and a radeon 9800 XT
That's a little unexpected I guess it doesn't stand a chance against a P3.0 GHZ, beaten by 40 fps :D
 

· PCSX2 Coder
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
ChankastRules said:
That's a little unexpected I guess it doesn't stand a chance against a P3.0 GHZ, beaten by 40 fps :D
you have to also remember the microsoft vc compiler seems to favour intel processors as well, so that makes another problem for AMD processors :p
 

· PCSX2 Coder
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
james.miller said:
a 3400+ claw should certainly be doing better than that, judging by the speed of my cpu
well your FSB is MUCH higher than mine, so you have more memory bandwidth. im only running on a 200mhz bus, and yours is 260, so you will get better performance than me i imagine. not to mention you have a venice core :)
 

· Mr. Stupendous
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
my ram is only at 208, and the venice core make virtually diddly squat difference, except for sse3 which i will concede. Its about 13-15 fps though, not 40.

now stock for a 3400+ is 11x200 i believe, or 2200mhz. only 100mhz slower than mine lol
 

· PCSX2 Coder
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
james.miller said:
my ram is only at 208, and the venice core make virtually diddly squat difference, except for sse3 which i will concede. Its about 13-15 fps though, not 40.

now stock for a 3400+ is 11x200 i believe, or 2200mhz. only 100mhz slower than mine lol
yes but yours is also 939 + dual channel memory, something which the 754 lacked in considerably :)
 

· War Games coder
Joined
·
1,927 Posts
Hmm... well, I'll go ahead and post mine. I get 42-43 using anywhere between 2-4 threads and 3DNow (my best mode). The Using just one thread, I get a flat 38.

Changing res doesn't affect it any (1600x1200 runs just the same as 640x480). Not sure why my scores are so much lower than anyone else's, but I have a genuine dual-CPU system (Athlon MP 2000+). Honestly, games in the future won't likely be using the CPU for graphics processing (probably), but they will be depending heavily on many other things (multi-threaded event handlers and such).
 

· PCSX2 Coder
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
just ran this on my new Opteron 146 2.0ghz @ 2.57Ghz, got 143-148fps :D not too shabby really.

its cool cos SSE3 works on this, and its roughly the same on 3dnow and SSE3
 

· PCSX2 Coder
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
n_w95482 said:
When and why did you get an Opteron? :p

My Athlon 64 parts came in on Monday, perhaps I'll throw it back together today and test the program on it.
because there are a bunch of opterons going round atm which are capable of doing FX-57 speeds.

on overclockers.co.uk forums, one guy has got the chip up[ from 2ghz to 3ghz, its insane, but either way it runs better than the 3400+ A64 ive got and it was only £117 for this chip :p i mean its San Diego core, and apparently it is the FX-57 at lower clocks, the specs/core certainly seem the same
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
6,403 Posts
Never heard about that but it's certainly a nice thing :p. The highest I've gotten my San Diego to with it being stable was 2.64 GHz but it runs pretty hot there so I've lowered it to 2.5 for now. I think my next upgrade will be an X2 4200+ or 4400+. Those chips should like this program :p.
 

· PCSX2 Coder
Joined
·
11,343 Posts
n_w95482 said:
Never heard about that but it's certainly a nice thing :p. The highest I've gotten my San Diego to with it being stable was 2.64 GHz but it runs pretty hot there so I've lowered it to 2.5 for now. I think my next upgrade will be an X2 4200+ or 4400+. Those chips should like this program :p.
yep mine runs warm, but check this out, got it to 2.9 now :)

CPU Bench My Opteron Vs FX-57
Multimedia Bench Opteron Vs FX-57
 

· War Games coder
Joined
·
1,927 Posts
Yes, but more importantly, how many threads? Or was this not an Athlon 64 X2?
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top