![]() | |
| Home Page | Mark Forums Read | Today's Posts | My Replies | Classifieds | Reviews | Photo Gallery | Web Links | Share Files | Advertise With Us | Ad List |
| |||||||
| Coding Post your Coding for opensource projects here. |
| This forum is sponsored by: |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#25
| |||
| |||
| Results with original code: (TEST 1) Death Adder's Speed Test. Please don't touch anything or do anything with the machine until this is done! Time for int test: 1.822000 Time for float test: 2.023000 Time for double test: 2.043000 Results with mathmatic statements commented out, but printf statements left in place: (TEST 2) Death Adder's Speed Test. Please don't touch anything or do anything with the machine until this is done! Time for int test: 1.722000 Time for float test: 1.732000 Time for double test: 1.723000 Results when printf's are taken out of the wrong spot, and put somewhere where they are useful, also integrated the use of the computing variable each time, making it impossible for the compiler to optimize it out: (TEST 3) Death Adder's Speed Test. Please don't touch anything or do anything with the machine until this is done! Time for int test: 0.080000 Time for float test: 0.250000 Time for double test: 0.240000 no optimization flags where used when compiling. As you can tell, the benchmark you all ran was basically showing you how fast printf() can parse a blank string, and realize the variable it got was bogus. If you add up the numbers from TEST 2 and TEST 3, you get TEST1, which is both. TEST2 shows how much power printf takes by itself, and TEST3 shows the real results of mathematic processing of the CPU. Unfortunalty, the results are useless. No offense to the original programmer, not trying to be mean or anything, but when I saw it, i had to test it as it didn't make much sense to me. Ross |
| Sponsored Links |
|
#26
| |||
| |||
| Processors Information ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Processor 1 (ID = 0) Number of cores 1 Number of threads 1 (max 1) Name Intel Celeron 330 Codename Prescott Specification Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.66GHz Package Socket 775 LGA (platform ID = 4h) CPUID F.4.1 Extended CPUID F.4 Core Stepping E0 Technology 90 nm Core Speed 3065.9 MHz (20.0 x 153.3 MHz) Rated Bus speed 613.2 MHz Stock frequency 2666 MHz Instructions sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3 L1 Data cache 16 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size Trace cache 12 Kuops, 8-way set associative L2 cache 256 KBytes, 4-way set associative, 64-byte line size FID/VID Control no ***********End CPU-Z INFO*********** Output: .671 .610 .656 |
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |