Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   Hardware Overclocking and Case Modding (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f10/)
-   -   PowerToTheUsers' MSI Overclocking Contest Submission (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f10/powertotheusers-msi-overclocking-contest-submission-43908/)

PowerToTheUsers 5th May 2008 21:27

PowerToTheUsers' MSI Overclocking Contest Submission
 
After my previous Week of Overclock, about which I reported in http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f39/my-woc-43750/, it's time for another week of overclock. As this week is the week of the MSI-contest too, I will do some more SuperPi and 3DMark03-benchmarking, which wasn't planned before.

In short some information about my previous results:
I'm probably not the most extreme overclocker of our team, but as you can see in my HWBot-profile at http://www.hwbot.org/user.do?userId=7155, I benched with a lot of different hardware, especially Xeon- and Opteron-CPU's. Overclocking those server-oriented CPU's is quite different from overclocking other CPU's as there are very little enthusiast-boards for theses CPU's. For socket 1207 Opterons, there is the Asus L1N64-SLi-board, and for socket 771-Xeons you can use the Skulltrail-board.


30 cores on 13 CPUs of different kinds.

Besides the 300 hardware-points, I scored a lot of global points with an IBM 16-core server. For some time I had the first place in wPrime 1024m and the third place in wPrime 32m, but now I dropped to the 2nd and 7th place. But still worth over 100 points.

My current HWBot-signature.

Because of the HWBoints scored with different hardware, I still managed to get a top-3 position in our team, a 72nd place worldwide. But hopefully I can improve this during this Week of Overclock.|D

jmke 5th May 2008 21:42

TOP 100 WorldWide is quite an achievement, will definitely earn you some points:)

PowerToTheUsers 5th May 2008 21:55

The first result of this week:

Starring...

4 iRAMs with each 4GB: superfast harddisks

I already knew that 1 iRAM gave a nice boost in PCMark, but what with more iRAMs in RAID0? And why are most top-results with only 3 iRAMs, not with 4, 5, or even more?

The only way to find out which setup gave the best result, is to bench, bench and bench again.

The setup:
  • Asus Striker II Formula mainboard with 780i-chipset (sorry MSI ;))
  • Intel Core2Quad Extreme QX9650
  • 2x1GB Crucial Ballistix Tracer PC2-8500
  • OCZ 8800GTX (sorry MSI ;))
  • 500GB Samsung sata2-disk

To test only the influence of the iRAM-setup, I ran the CPU and GPU on stock speed. The results:
  • With the sataII disk: 9342 Marks
  • 1 iRAM, no RAID: 13110 Marks
  • 2 iRAMs in RAID0: 14237 Marks
  • 3 iRAMs in RAID 0: 14492 Marks
  • 4 iRAMs in RAID 0: 14581 Marks
  • 3 iRAMs in RAID 0 and the windows swapfile on the 4th iRAM: 14507 Marks
  • 4 iRAMs in RAID 5: 13670 Marks
Conclusions:
* Putting the swapfile on iRAM doesn't make a difference. I will check out if other benchmarks benefit more from the swapfile on iRAM.
* The "HDD - XP Startup" and "HDD - General usage" tests benefit most, "Multithreaded test 3: HDD Virus Scan" too, but to a lesser extent. I was surprised "File Decryption", "File Encryption" and "File Compression" weren't influenced by the use of iRAM(s), despite what the name suggests.
* Use RAID 0 (striping), as it's designed for maximum speed.
* Using 1 iRAM gives a very nice boost, and each extra iRAM gives another bonus. But the differences get smaller. Going from one iRAM to 2 gave 1127 more marks, but going from 3 to 4 gives another 89 Marks extra.

I compared my results with K|ngp|n's top-result, and for most tests my score was around half of his score, and the total Marks was also the half. Only the "Transparent Windows" was about 1/15th of his result! He got 15.567 windows/sec, I only managed to get about 1075 windows/s... What's the trick?

I tried to submit every result, but the ORB was down for some time, and when it is online, I get a message "Project submission failed. System information in the submitted project was corrupted." Any ideas? The only result I submitted succesfull was the 4iRAM-RAID5-result: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=1525792 What's the trick?

Massman 5th May 2008 22:02

Use Windows Vista with the Aero theme enabled for the PCMark05 benchmark, it's all in the transparent windows ;)

PowerToTheUsers 6th May 2008 18:34

Today, I worked further on PCMark05. First I tried installing the benchmark-suite on the 3 iRAM-setup, maybe shorter load-times would bring more Marks. This test turned out to make no difference. Every bench has a few Marks more or less, and this result fell in those ranges. Furthermore there was no test of the suite which had a remarkable gain.

The next thing I tested was an Ageia PhysX-card. This 128MB PPU (Physics Processing Unit) made no difference either. In the first run, the result of "Physics and 3D" was the highest I reached in the previous days, but in the second run it was one of the lowest scores. Just some general fluctuations, but in the end no extra advantage.

When trying to submit the results, I still get the same error message:
Quote:

System information in the submitted result was corrupted.
Any help with that?

Next tests will be SuperPi, PiFast and wPrime with the program files and/or the swapfile on the sata-drive or on iRAM.

Pardons 6th May 2008 18:43

Impressive contribution Johan :)

PowerToTheUsers 7th May 2008 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerToTheUsers (Post 169272)
Next tests will be SuperPi, PiFast and wPrime with the program files and/or the swapfile on the sata-drive or on iRAM.

And indeed, there is a difference. I tested everything on stockspeed (QX9650@3GHz) and with only a slightly optimized OS.

In SuperPi (1M and 32M), the best results were reached where the program files and the windows swapfile were on the iRAM. In SuperPi 1M it made an average difference of 0.063 second: 15.547 with everything on the C-drive, 15.484 with everything on iRAM. In SuperPi 32M the result was 17m45.781 with everything on the C-drive and 17m43.843 with everything on iRAM: so an improvement of almost 2 seconds. I also noticed the halfway-results (one thing on C, the other on iRAM) had even worse results. It seems SuperPi likes to be run on the same drive as the swapfile, and best on iRAM.

In PiFast the results were different: on the C-drive the result was 32.43, on iRAM it was 32.44. Not a big difference, but here the halfway-results were slower too: 32.46 and 32.50 with the program on C and the swapfile on iRAM and the other way around.

The last benchmark was wPrime. Here the result was comparable to the results of PiFast: everything on the C-drive gave the fastest result, next was the full-iRAM result, and the mixed iRAM/C-drive results were the slowest.

Conclusion:
* Use a swapfile and the superpi-files on iRAM for SuperPi benches.
* Use a regular setup (program files and swapfile on C) for PiFast and wPrime

jmke 7th May 2008 12:30

I like you analytical approach to OC :D

PowerToTheUsers 7th May 2008 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Massman (Post 169214)
Use Windows Vista with the Aero theme enabled for the PCMark05 benchmark, it's all in the transparent windows ;)

I installed Vista (Home Premium with SP1) and now the PCMark-score is 15628, so about 1000 Marks higher. Indeed the "Transparent Windows"-test scor is much higher now, but all other scores are about 5% lower :(

After I ran the februari08-patch, I could submit a result, but after the next run it failed again... I really need to get that problem sorted out :mad:

jmke 7th May 2008 15:58

Rollback?

PowerToTheUsers 7th May 2008 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmke (Post 169296)
Rollback?

Rollback what?
In XP I had trouble submitting too, and both the XP and Vista were fresh installs. Both with and without the patch I have the submitting-problem. I downloaded PCM05 again, installed it again, didn't solve it...

I had the same troubles on my Opteron-on-L1N64 sli runs too. That was a dirty XP. The only common thing is that I use my iRAMs.

jmke 7th May 2008 17:15

rollback of the patch? ;)
but since you have it with/without, nothing much to suggest :/

PowerToTheUsers 9th May 2008 12:47

It's friday and the end of this MSI-contest is getting closer. Benching PCMark05 is fun, but it isn't part of the contest, so it's time to move over to 3DMark03 and SuperPi 1M.

For the moment, my best result in SuperPi 1M is this 11.250 with the QX9650 @ 4117MHz.
This board (Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6) has quite a lot of Vdroop, and I could only find solder-mods now. The result above is with 1.4Vcore set in the BIOS, rising FSB with setFSB and changing quite a few of RAM-timings with MemSet. It's still aircooled, with a Zalman 9700NT screwed on the backplate of a Thermalright Ultra 120 eXtreme because of the heatsinks on the back of the mainboard.

3DMark03 with an 8800GTX will follow :)

piotke 9th May 2008 14:37

You will notice that up to 1.6 Volt you can "finetune" vcore? Once going higher the steps to select vcore are getting bigger, and vcore drops are getting lower.

PowerToTheUsers 9th May 2008 15:35

As promised my 3DMark03-result so far:
46452 3DMarks, using an air-cooled, unmodded 8800GTX and an aircooled QX9650 @ 4GHz:

Later I had a slightly better score: 46571 marks, but I didn't make a screenshot of it, there's only the ORB-link: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=5833777.

I also improved my SuperPi 1M-score: With the QX9650 at 4.2GHz, I could squeeze out a time of 11.046s:

I hope to improve these results tonight, when it gets a bit colder again :rolleyes:

PowerToTheUsers 9th May 2008 15:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by piotke (Post 169415)
You will notice that up to 1.6 Volt you can "finetune" vcore? Once going higher the steps to select vcore are getting bigger, and vcore drops are getting lower.

But 1.6V is quite a lot for a 45nm-part... The highest I used up to now is 1.475V, but if the CPU stays cool enough, I'll rise the Vcore offcourse.

jmke 9th May 2008 15:40

48C in my veranda ;)

Pardons 9th May 2008 20:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerToTheUsers (Post 169417)
But 1.6V is quite a lot for a 45nm-part... The highest I used up to now is 1.475V, but if the CPU stays cool enough, I'll rise the Vcore offcourse.

45nm wil have no problem swallowing 1.65V on air. I can even say that at certain speeds cpu temp wil be lower due the more juice you give it.

PowerToTheUsers 9th May 2008 21:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pardons (Post 169432)
45nm wil have no problem swallowing 1.65V on air. I can even say that at certain speeds cpu temp wil be lower due the more juice you give it.

I'm now around 4.4GHz @ 1.55V ;)

PowerToTheUsers 9th May 2008 22:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerToTheUsers (Post 169437)
I'm now around 4.4GHz @ 1.55V ;)

4.5GHz @ 1.65V. Must... get... sub 10s |D

Massman 9th May 2008 22:50

What mainboard/bios?

PowerToTheUsers 9th May 2008 23:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Massman (Post 169443)
What mainboard/bios?

GA-X38-DQ6, Bios F9a.

PowerToTheUsers 9th May 2008 23:47

My final submission for this contest:

3DMark 03: 47296 Marks (8800GTX)
Videocard: 8800GTX @ 629MHz Core, 1000MHz RAM
CPU: Intel QX9650 @ 4.4GHz (1.55Vcore)
HWBot-link: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=733759
Compare-URL: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=5834121
Screenshot:
(http://www.hwbot.org/signature.img?i...54&thumb=false)

SuperPi 1M: 10.297s
CPU: Intel Core2Quad Extreme QX9650 @ 4.506GHz
HWBot-link: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=733761
Screenshot:

(http://www.hwbot.org/signature.img?i...55&thumb=false)

Perhaps not good enough for the first place as best (Belgian) overclocker, but at least I had a lot of fun, and maybe it gets me a new laptop :woot:

Massman 9th May 2008 23:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerToTheUsers (Post 169446)
GA-X38-DQ6, Bios F9a.

Use bios F2 and you'll be hitting 10s flat pretty fast :)

PowerToTheUsers 10th May 2008 00:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Massman (Post 169448)
Use bios F2 and you'll be hitting 10s flat pretty fast :)

F9a 2008/04/03
1. beta bios
2. update CPU ID

F8 2008/02/27
1. Enhance memory performance

F7 2008/01/02
1. ADD new version super I/O code.
2. Enhance system performance and overclock capability
3. Update CPU ID (Support Intel Yorkfield CPU)
4. Improve CPU compatibility

F6 2007/11/06
1. Add more voltage control items

F4 2007/09/19
1. Add more voltage control items

F3 2007/09/17
1. First Release


Errrr F2? :prod:

Massman 10th May 2008 10:26

Oops, F3 is the correct bios :)

jmke 10th May 2008 11:29

nah, MM has access to pre-release BIOS, just doesn't want to share:p

PowerToTheUsers 24th May 2008 11:59

Rip Qx9650 :(

It doesn't boot anymore on my X38-board and on my Striker II Formula, other CPUs are no problem. I guess the 1.7V was too much...

geoffrey 24th May 2008 12:06

Back to Intel, maybe you get better batch :p

PowerToTheUsers 24th May 2008 12:18

It's an ES I got off eBay, I don't think there's warranty on it...

Massman 24th May 2008 13:05

Only 1.7V?

Send it to me, I can retry :p


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:03.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO