|Official| Smiles Benchmark 2.0 Ranking Thread! (new version :P)

Yeah something is seriously up with the AMD chips. I'll look into this and see what's up. You should be getting closer to 60-50 seconds with a 6100.

Tried installing the Bulldozer patch for Windows 7? It *may* make a difference, I'm not sure though.
 
I'm really not sure what the issue is then. I will have a look into it and see what is up and post back. Give me a couple of days though. :/
 
claptonman said:
...What?!
Click to expand...

Okay. I made misunderstand. Sorry guy but there have been rumor that first time the Bulldozer CPU come out that it is little slowest but improve over a years. I was member of other forum that they talk about it. The best way to solution problem is try installing AMD driver, I'm not sure.
 
Last edited:
I got a 101.74 on my FX-4100 @ stock clock 3.6Ghz.
A reboot would have helped considering everthing I have loaded up, but something is definitely not right with the test for AMD.
This particular chip tested above the average Passmark rating when I tested it after I got it and it's rating is higher than the Q8300.
 
Bulldozer was rushed out the door. Good design, poor execution. The next generation of Bulldozer, or even just Piledriver, should alleviate those issues. It will remain to be seen if they live up to Intel's offerings.

Here's my new run:

2500ksmiles2.png


Same specs as before. I should tighten up my RAM timings.
 
MyCattMaxx said:
This particular chip tested above the average Passmark rating when I tested it after I got it and it's rating is higher than the Q8300.
Click to expand...
Yes all the AMD chips here should be much faster than the Q8300. It's odd that now our app is playing up on the AMD chips, and annoying too. :/ We are working on it and trying to correct it, give us a couple of days!
 
MyCattMaxx said:
I got a 101.74 on my FX-4100 @ stock clock 3.6Ghz.
A reboot would have helped considering everthing I have loaded up, but something is definitely not right with the test for AMD.
This particular chip tested above the average Passmark rating when I tested it after I got it and it's rating is higher than the Q8300.
Click to expand...

Passmark might not be stable benchmark but it is odd. For one thing i can tell is Windows 7 does not recognizes that well. Here is link that might will be helpful.

http://www.techpowerup.com/158534/New-Windows-7-Bulldozer-Patches-Available..html

One question, how many thread in task manager on your computer?
 
I think I know what's up with the AMD chips. There's a bit of code which we added which I bet if we remove will give the AMD chips better scores. I'll remove it tomorrow and update.
 
vistakid10 said:
I think I know what's up with the AMD chips. There's a bit of code which we added which I bet if we remove will give the AMD chips better scores. I'll remove it tomorrow and update.
Click to expand...

Maybe make it Intel and AMD verison? Like if game is made for intel, not AMD. It would be slow on AMD.
 
i unlocked my 960t and at 3.4 or so ghz it pulled a 103, and when it was locked at 3.4 it was a 105, wtf?
 
Jamebonds1 said:
Maybe make it Intel and AMD verison? Like if game is made for intel, not AMD. It would be slow on AMD.
Click to expand...
It'd be better to have one version which works equally on both platforms because then we can compare the performance of various chips more fairly.

jonnyp11 said:
i unlocked my 960t and at 3.4 or so ghz it pulled a 103, and when it was locked at 3.4 it was a 105, wtf?
Click to expand...
Unlocking two extra cores isn't going to do a lot of difference as this is only really threaded for 4 cores. :/ Sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top