havli wrote:

It seems dual CPU board is somewhat slower... or maybe windows NT.
My best score is 8m 4s with PPro 200/512 @ 233 MHz + win XP.
http://hwbot.org/submission/2409055_havli_sup … 8min_4sec_437ms

XP use to be faster than Windows 9x when it comes to SuperPi so it could wery well be faster than NT 4.0 awell but who knows, perhaps dual boards are slower.

Skyscraper wrote:

The same Pentium Pro system yet again but with more memory (do not improve the performance in SuperPi) and 35 MHz extra core spe […]
Show full quote

The same Pentium Pro system yet again but with more memory (do not improve the performance in SuperPi) and 35 MHz extra core speed.

I see that I wrote 240MHz in the description as that is what the BIOS reports but the speed should be 245 MHz if the FSB actually is 70 MHz.

hello
considering my celeron300a oc 450 scores around 4:50, i would say that your ppro performance is fine.

I did run SuperPi 1M yet again with the Dual Pentium Pro system, this time in Wndows 2000 SP4.

NT5 is indeed a little bit faster than NT4 when it comes to SuperPi. The ability to set memory timings would help but Intel... perhaps there is a modded BIOS somewhere?

I upgraded one of the 3 Pentium III boxes I recently bought to a PIII 1400-S and did some benching in Windows XP.

SuperPi 1M

AIDA64 Queen

p3 650 @ 866
512MB pc133 (default timings)
asus cubx-e

stock was a little over 3m, so that's, fine, the board is very easy to play with, well, apart from the ide controllers (specially the promise 100 corrupting my windows all the time);

Just for some spice, here's my Dell Venue 11 Pro Tablet, with a Bay Trail Atom Z3770 and 2GB DDR3. I'd say 37 seconds is not bad for 4 watts.

My Retro machine is a Slot 1 PIII 500 on a 440BX running Windows 98SE. I don't have a mouse for it, so it ran the test with my main machine connected to it over VNC.

I also tested my Phenom II X6 1090T on a ASUS ROG Crosshair 2 with 4 MB DDR2 and Windows 10 Preview. Result was 20.063 secs. One of the faster times for a 1090T that I've seen.

My socket 370 system, specs as my signature but with a VIA C3 866mhz EZRA CPU, 133mhz x 6.5. It's staggeringly slow!!! 13 m 51.696s, think the BIOS may have an issue with it mind you, as it is reported as a Pentium II 866mhz. Saying that, VIA CPU's are dreadful at superpi!! My C7 cpu was terrible at it as well!!

🤣 this brings me back some memories, I remember when my father bought a cheap laptop from PC CHIPS called "desknote" with external battery back in 2002 or so, it had a VIA C3 Samuel (I think) 733MHz, super pi took 17 min 🤣

so I think yours is performing perfectly!

yeah, IIRC, the C3 had a half speed FPU.

underjack wrote:

yeah, IIRC, the C3 had a half speed FPU.

there is a newer "nehemiah" core of C3 which had full speed fpu, yet superpi time is only around ~10% faster than previous cores, so its not the real reason of being so slow.
C3-1.0(ezra core): ~10min
C3-1.0A(nehemiah core): ~9min
pentium3-1.0(coppermine core): ~2:15
🤣

via c3-233(66*3.5, samuel1 core), 440bx board, pc66 sdram. times at 46:40.
i believe that an amd486-133 is faster than that. 🤣

SPBHM wrote:

🤣 this brings me back some memories, I remember when my father bought a cheap laptop from PC CHIPS called "desknote" with external battery back in 2002 or so, it had a VIA C3 Samuel (I think) 733MHz, super pi took 17 min 🤣

so I think yours is performing perfectly!

gotta love web archives,
I even see a shortcut to the quake files on my old Tbred 2600+ 🤣 so I probably took it in 2003, and yes, quake 1 performed poorly on it, I think

but I guess I lied about the time it took!

underjack wrote:

Just for some spice, here's my Dell Venue 11 Pro Tablet, with a Bay Trail Atom Z3770 and 2GB DDR3. I'd say 37 seconds is not bad for 4 watts.

superpi.png

I enjoy seeing some vastly different hardware performing the same, and I also happen to find one of my Winchester OC tests back in 2005,

I enjoy seeing some vastly different hardware performing the same, and I also happen to find one of my Winchester OC tests back in 2005,

Hey, I've got a Socket 754 3000+ of some variety in my closet. That was, oh, three CPU's ago.

underjack wrote:

I enjoy seeing some vastly different hardware performing the same, and I also happen to find one of my Winchester OC tests back in 2005,

Hey, I've got a Socket 754 3000+ of some variety in my closet. That was, oh, three CPU's ago.

I've sold this one in 2005 🤣
this one was the first 90nm revision Winchester and I wanted the Venice model (SSE3 and higher OC...)
I would love to still have that PC, it was running with a rather nice nforce 4 motherboard and 6600GT from EVGA... but at the time I always used for a while and sold most of my hardware.... only a few screenshots left...

Here is a memory bandwidth starved Intel i845 system with a Willamette P4 1.9@2375 MHz and PC133 memory running at 166 MHz. Its slower than the Tualatin system some posts above.

SuperPi 1M. This is not very fast.

AIDA64 Queen. This is just terrible.

The Willamette was slow, the Northwood Celeron is slower 😀

SuperPi 1M, Celeron 2600, Asus P4B i845, 512MB PC133 CL2-2-2-6

A Northwood P4 isnt as dependant on high memory bandwidth and performs OK using the same motherboard.

AIDA64 Queen with the Celeron.

AIDA64 Queen with the Northwood P4. No better than the Celeron clock for clock.

Here is a P4 Willamette 2.0 @ 2340 with DDR312 memory.

Here is the same Asus P4B533-E i845E chipset motherboard running a Gallatin...

My new Digital Venturis 466 Socket 3 system with a Pentium Overdrive 83 MHz.

The POD is very fast compared to 486 CPUs when it comes to SuperPi eventhough this system lacks L2 cache.

POD 83 @83MHz, SIS 471 no L2 cache, 68MB (4+32+32) memory with unknown timings: 55m 13s

For comparison my Intel DX4@120 MHz with 256KB cache and tight timings running on a Asus PVI-486SP3: 1h 41m 27s

Both of these scores looks kinda slow. My best superPI 1M on 486-class HW is 37 min, 47s. AMD 5x86-P75 @ 160 MHz + Abit AB-PB4 + 64MB EDO, win NT 4.0.
http://hwbot.org/submission/2341999_havli_sup … min_47sec_761ms

Maybe there is some kind of a bottleneck in your system?

havli wrote:

Both of these scores looks kinda slow. My best superPI 1M on 486-class HW is 37 min, 47s. AMD 5x86-P75 @ 160 MHz + Abit AB-PB4 + 64MB EDO, win NT 4.0.
http://hwbot.org/submission/2341999_havli_sup … min_47sec_761ms

Maybe there is some kind of a bottleneck in your system?

When it comes to the POD the main reason is of course the lack of L2 cache and (probably) slow timings but also the OS.

When it comes to the DX4 I think the OS is the main reason. Windows NT4 is much faster when it comes to SuperPi. The AMD 5x86 CPUs 33% extra clockspeed should explain most of the rest of the difference.

There is also the possibility that the VIA chipset with its better EDO support is faster than the SiS ones in SuperPi but anyhow the Asus board had all timings maxed out except for some memory refresh setting which I later found improved the performance ~1%.