RPS benchmarks

pinhodecarlos · 2014-01-03, 08:54

Just for interest. Post your bench!!!

i7 3630QM at 3.2 GHz "28 watts with core temp software" with HT on (can't turn HT off on this laptop)
AVX FFT length 200K, Pass1=640, Pass2=320 on both instances
1.158 ms k=5 n=3801694
1.164 ms k=5 n=3812730

pinhodecarlos · 2014-01-04, 12:05

Paul's 4770K at 3.9 GHz, HT off.

0.975 ms k=5 n=4100030 AVX FFT length 224K
0.977 ms k=5 n=4200010 AVX FFT length 224K
1.050 ms k=5 n=4300000 AVX FFT length 240K
1.042 ms k=5 n=4400024 AVX FFT length 240K

Edit: Paul, correct me if I am wrong. Thank you.

diep · 2014-01-06, 14:28

benchmarks only useful with all cores busy and then divide it by number of cores you run for total throughput.

At the oldie Xeon machines here it takes pretty long for 1 test, yet each box i can run 8 cores meanwhile total box consumption 170 watt. Built those machines a few years ago for total peanuts, like 200 euro each.

Chip inside L5420 has SSSE so not AVX.

All those new i7's, they have fast AVX, yet only 4 real cores. Where is the big progress in crunching there?

the L5420 or something i run here at 2.5Ghz, they were produced

http://ark.intel.com/nl/products/339...z-1333-MHz-FSB

So januari 2008.

If we calculate then derived truth from Moore's Law each 18 months doubling in speed, then now januari 2014 we should have a new chip available that's:

6 years == 72 months => 72 / 18 = 4 doublings => 2^4 = 16 times faster than the chips i got.

Only gpu's seem to speed up, though also goes slower now than a few years ago for progress there.

pinhodecarlos · 2014-01-06, 15:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by diep

benchmarks only useful with all cores busy and then divide it by number of cores you run for total throughput.

At the oldie Xeon machines here it takes pretty long for 1 test, yet each box i can run 8 cores meanwhile total box consumption 170 watt. Built those machines a few years ago for total peanuts, like 200 euro each.

Chip inside L5420 has SSSE so not AVX.

All those new i7's, they have fast AVX, yet only 4 real cores. Where is the big progress in crunching there?

the L5420 or something i run here at 2.5Ghz, they were produced

http://ark.intel.com/nl/products/339...z-1333-MHz-FSB

So januari 2008.

If we calculate then derived truth from Moore's Law each 18 months doubling in speed, then now januari 2014 we should have a new chip available that's:

6 years == 72 months => 72 / 18 = 4 doublings => 2^4 = 16 times faster than the chips i got.

Only gpu's seem to speed up, though also goes slower now than a few years ago for progress there.

You didn't answer the thread question.

diep · 2014-01-06, 15:41

You didn't write a questionmark :)

pinhodecarlos · 2014-01-06, 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by diep

You didn't write a questionmark :)

Post your k=69 LLR iteration speed of your machines.

paulunderwood · 2014-01-06, 16:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinhodecarlos

Paul's 4770K at 3.9 GHz, HT off.

0.975 ms k=5 n=4100030 AVX FFT length 224K
0.977 ms k=5 n=4200010 AVX FFT length 224K
1.050 ms k=5 n=4300000 AVX FFT length 240K
1.042 ms k=5 n=4400024 AVX FFT length 240K

Edit: Paul, correct me if I am wrong. Thank you.

Note that this is with all 4 cores loaded and with 2400MHz RAM.

diep · 2014-01-06, 16:12

I only have completiontime for all iterations.
LLR graphical shows iteration times
CLLR64 is considerable faster however. It is textmode.
Just prints result in lresults.txt

Machine was only actively used at 8 cores by CLLR64 when it printed result of the prime find here.

Which is pretty much average time of the n's around it that it tested.

69*2^2649939-1 is prime! Time : 5925.793 seconds.

So if i use calculator that makes iteration time 5925793 /2649939 = 2.2362 ms

Really great for 2.5Ghz @ 8 cores Xeon from 2008.

pinhodecarlos · 2014-05-04, 10:11

Anyone here with some benches on AMD Opteron 6300 series? Does AVX works as on the Intel processors?

pepi37 · 2014-05-04, 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinhodecarlos

Anyone here with some benches on AMD Opteron 6300 series? Does AVX works as on the Intel processors?

I think, until now there is no successful implementation of AVX on AMD ( or you can read it as there is no increased speed using AVX on any AMD chips)

pinhodecarlos · 2014-05-04, 11:39

I was in doubt because it is much cheaper to buy an AMD server with 4 processors than one from Intel. Thank you.

2014-01-03, 08:54	#1
pinhodecarlos "Carlos Pinho" Oct 2011 Milton Keynes, UK 1010001000011₂ Posts	RPS benchmarks Just for interest. Post your bench!!! i7 3630QM at 3.2 GHz "28 watts with core temp software" with HT on (can't turn HT off on this laptop) AVX FFT length 200K, Pass1=640, Pass2=320 on both instances 1.158 ms k=5 n=3801694 1.164 ms k=5 n=3812730

2014-01-04, 12:05	#2
pinhodecarlos "Carlos Pinho" Oct 2011 Milton Keynes, UK 3·7·13·19 Posts	Paul's 4770K at 3.9 GHz, HT off. 0.975 ms k=5 n=4100030 AVX FFT length 224K 0.977 ms k=5 n=4200010 AVX FFT length 224K 1.050 ms k=5 n=4300000 AVX FFT length 240K 1.042 ms k=5 n=4400024 AVX FFT length 240K Edit: Paul, correct me if I am wrong. Thank you. Last fiddled with by pinhodecarlos on 2014-01-04 at 12:06

2014-01-06, 15:41	#5
diep Sep 2006 The Netherlands 807₁₀ Posts	You didn't write a questionmark :) Last fiddled with by diep on 2014-01-06 at 15:41

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Benchmarks	MurrayInfoSys	Information & Answers	3	2011-04-14 17:10
LLR benchmarks	Oddball	No Prime Left Behind	11	2010-08-06 21:39
benchmarks	Unregistered	Information & Answers	15	2009-08-18 16:44
Benchmarks for i7 965	lavalamp	Hardware	21	2009-01-06 04:32
Benchmarks	Vandy	Hardware	6	2002-10-28 13:45

2014-01-06, 14:28	#3
diep Sep 2006 The Netherlands 3·269 Posts	benchmarks only useful with all cores busy and then divide it by number of cores you run for total throughput. At the oldie Xeon machines here it takes pretty long for 1 test, yet each box i can run 8 cores meanwhile total box consumption 170 watt. Built those machines a few years ago for total peanuts, like 200 euro each. Chip inside L5420 has SSSE so not AVX. All those new i7's, they have fast AVX, yet only 4 real cores. Where is the big progress in crunching there? the L5420 or something i run here at 2.5Ghz, they were produced http://ark.intel.com/nl/products/339...z-1333-MHz-FSB So januari 2008. If we calculate then derived truth from Moore's Law each 18 months doubling in speed, then now januari 2014 we should have a new chip available that's: 6 years == 72 months => 72 / 18 = 4 doublings => 2^4 = 16 times faster than the chips i got. Only gpu's seem to speed up, though also goes slower now than a few years ago for progress there.

2014-01-06, 16:12	#8
diep Sep 2006 The Netherlands 3×269 Posts	I only have completiontime for all iterations. LLR graphical shows iteration times CLLR64 is considerable faster however. It is textmode. Just prints result in lresults.txt Machine was only actively used at 8 cores by CLLR64 when it printed result of the prime find here. Which is pretty much average time of the n's around it that it tested. 69*2^2649939-1 is prime! Time : 5925.793 seconds. So if i use calculator that makes iteration time 5925793 /2649939 = 2.2362 ms Really great for 2.5Ghz @ 8 cores Xeon from 2008.

2014-05-04, 10:11	#9
pinhodecarlos "Carlos Pinho" Oct 2011 Milton Keynes, UK 3·7·13·19 Posts	Anyone here with some benches on AMD Opteron 6300 series? Does AVX works as on the Intel processors?

2014-05-04, 11:39	#11
pinhodecarlos "Carlos Pinho" Oct 2011 Milton Keynes, UK 3×7×13×19 Posts	I was in doubt because it is much cheaper to buy an AMD server with 4 processors than one from Intel. Thank you.