Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    ludeboy12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Wheeling, WV
    Posts
    589

    Core i7 folding benchmarks??

    Anyone have any links that show comparisons between C2Q and Core i7 when it comes to folding?
    C2Q Rig.... C2Q Q6600 @ 3.6ghz | Abit IP35 Pro | 2 x 1gb G.Skill DDR2 PC6400 | eVGA 8800gts 320 x 2 | Silverstone TJ-09
    i7 Rig.... i7 920 @ 3.8ghz | eVGA x58 | 3 x 1gb G.Skill DDR3 1600 | eVGA 8800gts g92 x 2 | Caseless
    FAH Quad / GPU Farm....To be continued....
    My Folding Stats...

  2. #2
    Sith Lord drshivas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    1,516

  3. #3
    Is_907's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Keller, TX
    Posts
    908
    Looks like not having HT will be more useful for Folding... am I reading that graph correctly?
    I'm also curious to see some numbers on the i7's for Rosetta... in case someone has found them already...

    Castiel (Desktop Rig) - i7-3770; 16GB DDR3; 256GB Crucial M4 + 600GB RAID0 array; Asus GTX460 1GB.


    Folding User Stats

  4. #4
    Member tgxiii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Folding @ Eagle Rock, CA
    Posts
    337
    I'm not really understanding the article. On all the graphs for individual work units, the no-HT i7-965 Extreme leads in ppd and the one with HT is at 6th or 7th place. However, the last graph (for Total Project PPD) shows it ahead of all except the dual QX9775 and the non-HT is at 5th.

  5. #5
    Senior Fold-a-holic
    harlam357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    @Home... Folding@Home
    Posts
    8,024
    Wish they would have run some SMP numbers.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    ChasR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    7,368
    The techreport benchmark is all but useless without a1 and a2 core SMP WUs. You can figure it to be faster, but by how much on each type of SMP WU is a guess. Where it should trounce the current Qs is in running multiple SMP instances with the a1 core.

    All ppd from friends and family. Many thanks to HayesK for his support and congrats on being the #1 Folder on Team 32. Special thanks to ChrisC and ColinC


    Folding User Stats

  7. #7
    ludeboy12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Wheeling, WV
    Posts
    589
    Yea would be nice to see some clock for clock SMP comparisons.....
    C2Q Rig.... C2Q Q6600 @ 3.6ghz | Abit IP35 Pro | 2 x 1gb G.Skill DDR2 PC6400 | eVGA 8800gts 320 x 2 | Silverstone TJ-09
    i7 Rig.... i7 920 @ 3.8ghz | eVGA x58 | 3 x 1gb G.Skill DDR3 1600 | eVGA 8800gts g92 x 2 | Caseless
    FAH Quad / GPU Farm....To be continued....
    My Folding Stats...

  8. #8
    Super Shark Moderator
    LandShark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Deep Blue Sea (Maryland)
    Posts
    8,073
    Quote Originally Posted by ChasR View Post
    The techreport benchmark is all but useless without a1 and a2 core SMP WUs. You can figure it to be faster, but by how much on each type of SMP WU is a guess. Where it should trounce the current Qs is in running multiple SMP instances with the a1 core.
    exactly my thought! w/ HT, total of 8 cores, running 2x WinSMP client to fully use all cores. or if one has enough ram in the system, how 'bout 4x VMWare+LinuxSMP? or better yet, fill all those PCIe 16x w/ GPUs, then run SMP (Win or Linux, your choice) on the rest of the cores!!

    may be Stanford will lift the 4 cores hard coded soon...??
    ~~~ Currently Inactive Mode ~~~

    Got SOLD? MOVE your own thread!


    Folding User Stats
    How many GHz of Intel + Nvidia folding power? Dunno! Lost count!

    | F@H Vista Sidebar gadget | F@H Yahoo Widget | F@H iGoogle gadget |

    | My Heatware | My New HTPC 3.0: Server/Client setup + Better energy efficiency |

  9. #9
    Overclockers Team Content Editor
    Shelnutt2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    /home/
    Posts
    5,914
    Quote Originally Posted by LandShark View Post
    may be Stanford will lift the 4 cores hard coded soon...??
    I didn't realize they still had that with the v6 clients? I know a while ago they said if you asked and had just reason they would get you a client that had 8 or 16 threads if you proved you had the hardware. This was mostly talking about a cluster setup though.
    Build!.Borg!.Recruit!.Folding.for.Team.32!
    Gigabyte P35-DS3R, E6300, 2x512MB Team Group DDR2 667, EVGA 7800GT Heat

    Want to run the folding@home gpu client in linux?
    www.linuxfah.info

    Your teacher is a dumbass. The equation is exact. ~Frodo Baggins
    Damn....It's 12:00 AM and I thought my 805 would be a magic pumkin and turn into a conroe.........boy was I fooled:) ~Stilletto
    This is what I get for not only being a newb, but also disregarding instructions! ~ShadowPho
    I hate women... but im not gay lol. ~MrCrowley
    Love can fade but knowledge stays forever (unless you develop alzheimers). ~Constantinos

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    ChasR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    7,368
    I think 2 clients x 4 cores is going to be faster than 1 x 8. If I am not mistaken, the Linux 6.23 client isn't hardcoded to 4 threads. If you have 8 cores, -smp 8 will run one instance across 8 cores. 4 is still the minimum.

    All ppd from friends and family. Many thanks to HayesK for his support and congrats on being the #1 Folder on Team 32. Special thanks to ChrisC and ColinC


    Folding User Stats

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •