| |||||||
|
NP Gav! Did a comparison between a Q6600 and an i7 920 here: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/charts/index.php?pid=69,73&tid=7 Shows the i7 920 as having completed the "TMPGEnc 4.0 Xpress MPEG-2 DVD .VOB to DivX Conversion High Quality" benchmark in 0 seconds. Is this an error or was the 920 never included in such a benchmark, so it shows as 0 seconds?
__________________ |
| ||||
| Quote:
|
| |||||||
|
The only thing I have to say is...GOOD work again! You folks are really working hard to get the best features of all review sites all under one roof. The best thing is it's all done "In-house" and really professional...you guys rule!!!!!!
__________________ Main rig:Q9550 C1@3.8GHz/ ASUS P5Q Pro /4 Gigs GSkill PC8000CL5D-4GBPQ/ Xigmatek S1283 "DK"/ eVGA GTX260 Core 216 55nm SC /Antec TP3 650W/Antec 300/WD 250G(OCZ Vertex 120GB ordered)/Audigy 2ZS (20 000 3dm06) Laptop: Hp DV6-1264CA / Dual-core Ultra ZM-82 (2.2GHz) "undervolted"/ 4 Gigs DDR2-800 / Radeon HD 4650 1GB GDDR3/ Seagate 500 GB 7200 rpm HDD/Win7 HP 64 bit (5800 3dm06) |
| ||||||
|
i would like to leave a comment. YOU GUYS ROCK.
__________________ vista 64 on these rigs Q9450 @ 3.5Ghz | E8400 @ 4.2Ghz 8gb Muskin Redline. | 2gb Kingston Hyperx ________________________________|_________________ ______________ EVGA 780i FTW ----\--||___||--/---- EVGA 780i SLI Antec TP Quatro 1000W \ :==^==: / Antec TP Quatro 850W. Nvidia 9800 GX2 X 2 SLI \|--o--|/ Nvidia 8800 GTS X 2 SLI 1X 500GB Western Digital. \_____/ 3X 150GB WD RAPTOR RAID-0 |
| ||||
|
Should get the appropriate folks out here to take a bow... I know a few of our reviewers have been working night and day to not only get the benchmarking done, but then to get all of the info entered into the database. Great job guys!!!!!
__________________ Gigabyte P35-DQ6 / Q6600 / 2X2 Gig Mushkin PC2 8500 Ascents / Corsair TX750W PSU / Sparkle GTX275 Plus / CoolerMaster Cosmos S / MCP655 WC Pump / MCR320 Rad / 6X Yate Loons / PA120.1 / 2X Scythe Ultra Kaze / Swiftech Apogee GTZ WB / Dell Ultrasharp 2209WA MSI 790FX-GD70 / AM3 955be / 2X2 Gig OCZ PC3 12800 / PC P&C 750W Silencer / 4X EVGA 9800 GT / MCR220-QP-Res / DD DDCPX-Pro / Apogee GT / Swiftech MCW30 / Highspeed PC Tech Station / Samsung 931BF / BenQ Q9T4 |
| ||||||
|
More of an observation that a bug, but I've noticed that some processors seems to be slightly off of their official clock speeds. Such as the i7 965 shows 3.19GHz instead of the official 3.2GHz, 2.39GHz for the Q6600/E6600 instead of 2.4GHz. Also, I noticed two of certain processors (like the 4000+, 4400+, 4800+, 5200+) without any way to differentiate the two versions (same box art, even though the old s939 ones had different art). Not that the performance was really different, but just something to note. Oh, and the E4300 still does have a result for the virus scan. Another observation, more a stylistic issue, I noticed that some values are reported to two decimal places (x264 HD benchmark for one) except when there's a zero in the second decimal place. Personally, I think it'd look better with a uniform two decimal placed, so x.y0 instead of x.y (and possibly x in the number is x.00, but that doesn't seem to have cropped up in the charts I looked at). Also, when selecting every CPU, I can sometimes block out part of the HWC watermark on the bottom chart. But I'm not sure which cases this happens in yet. PSU efficienty test's about text is missing an explanation (but I'm sure you know about that one already). Also, what do the CL1 and CL2 show there (or will that be explained)? Also, I'm not sure if the hot system results are showing properly, because they look the same to me. EDIT: Forgot the most important part: Good work! Last edited by DaleF; March 25, 2009 at 08:13 PM. Reason: Forgot to add something... |
| ||||
|
Excellent points Dale - The reason for the clock frequency discrepencies is due to the fact that those numbers are determined by multiplying internal clock speed via multiplier, which we physically input into the database instead of the "advertised speed". It is set to round up, but in cases such as the Core i7 965, 133X24 = 3192 or 3.19 Unfortunately, setting it to round up at any number over an 0 digit would result in other numbers being thrown off. And technically 3.19, or 2.39 (266X9) is the true clock speed of those CPU's. We will look into a better method if possible though - For the AMD CPU's that appear the same, those are actually from when AMD switched from 90nm to 65nm. It can be hard to see as the "nm" is the very last thing in the title. It is something we will look into - maybe try and make it more obvious :) Top notch for going through it all - much appreciated. |
| |||||||
|
Excellent work you guys. I have only looked at it for a brief period of time but so far I really like what I see.
__________________ Zalman GS1000 SE - Gigabyte EP45-UD3P - Corsair HX620W - Intel Q6600 @3.2GHz - Corsair H50 - 4GB (2x2GB) Mushkin HP2-6400 @ 800Mhz 5-4-4-12 eVGA 8800GT w/Akimbo cooler @700/1728/1000 - Samsung SyncMaster 2253BW - Dell 1907FP - Windows7 64bit Ultimate |
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Hardware Canucks Performance Charts Unveiled | Gav | Site Announcements | 0 | March 25, 2009 05:06 PM |
| Hardware Canucks Hardware Charts Unveiled | FiXT | Hardware Canucks Performance Charts | 0 | March 25, 2009 02:36 PM |
| Soups loop questions thread. | Supergrover | Water Cooling | 6 | November 8, 2008 07:14 AM |
| Crysis Warhead Hardware Performance Review Comments Thread | FiXT | Gaming | 25 | October 12, 2008 10:17 PM |
| RivaTuner,couple of quick questions.....Hardware Monitoring | Canadianguy | Video Cards | 2 | December 8, 2007 07:00 PM |