My experience seems to indicate that the A3's should give a marginal improvement to the faster A1/A2 WUs, so it remains to be seen. Were that result obtained from WinSMP as well? Using the same FahMon?farmpuma wrote:The Xeon 3210 is still a collection of parts waiting to be built. However, ages ago, I did briefly run the CPU in my son's mobo and IIRC it ran about 2,000 PPD on the fastest a1 WUs.
Now that makes a bit of sense. Dual core at 2.0GHz with 1200ppd vs my 2.8GHz (plus 45nm improvements) at ~1600ppd. I'm sure the quad core should do better, especially in the bonus department since the job should be finished earlier...farmpuma wrote:The numbers listed above are from my C2D E4400 (65 nm) using the online calculator link that Maph posted - http://www.linuxforge.net/bonuscalc2.php. I'm running WinSMP 6.29 on XP SP3, although I have not yet tried the drop-in binary update.
Not too sure if PC Probe is a CPU hogger, I would turn it off. FahMon 2.3.4? Not the latest (184.108.40.206)? I think the numbers are different between versions too.farmpuma wrote:The only other things running are Asus PC Probe II, FahMon 2.3.4, and windows explorer.
I think so, the formula may be more up-to-date (Harlam keeps updating), plus I have multiple finished WUs to average out so I have some confidence in the numbers.farmpuma wrote:Does HFM.net give you better numbers than the linked online calculator?
I am sensing that your measurements are not uniform, making it more difficult to compare numbers. May be we should all just settle on HFM.net and go from there?