farmpuma wrote: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?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.
farmpuma wrote: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...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.
farmpuma wrote:Not too sure if PC Probe is a CPU hogger, I would turn it off. FahMon 2.3.4? Not the latest (188.8.131.52)? I think the numbers are different between versions too.The only other things running are Asus PC Probe II, FahMon 2.3.4, and windows explorer.
farmpuma wrote: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.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?