NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Acer Notebook Forums › Acer Notebook Benchmarks › Ferrari 4000...post your benchmarks!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ferrari 4000...post your benchmarks!! - Page 3

post #41 of 116
7/16/05 at 6:18am
Burminator: please read the next line that I write, instead of quoting a line out of a context. A lot of sites have made the comparison that I did:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1738299,00.asp

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2297&p=2

And the rest of you please read the benchmarks.

http://www.hardware.no/artikkel/16993/4 (in norwegian compare 6512WD and TM8100 that are 1.6GHz P-M's with 6600GO and RM X700, respectively )

http://world.altavista.com/babelfish...gi-video.shtml

The last one is a test of a number of cards. If you had read this test, kevineugenius, the performance of the F4000 would have been no surprise to you (it has the X700 without GDDR3!). Generally the 6600 and X700 are neck-a-neck, but the 6600gt scores better than x700 pro in most test, while the x700 scores better than the 6600 in many tests.

Gotta get back to writing on my thesis. Happy reading guys.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 116
7/16/05 at 7:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombatten
Burminator: please read the next line that I write, instead of quoting a line out of a context. A lot of sites have made the comparison that I did:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1738299,00.asp
They in fact compared frequencies of the SAME architectures:

Quote:
Immediately, we see that the GeForce 6600GT has a large advantage in clock speed. At the very high-end, ATI's cards have a large clock speed advantage over nVidia's, and the cards generally perform quite close to one another. Knowing this, and knowing that the X700 Pro is at a serious clock speed disadvantage here, we expect to see ATI come up short in most of the benchmarks.
This, btw, somewhat contradicts your statement:

Quote:
However, if you change the GDDR3 to DDR, then the better pr. MHz performance of the X700 starts to have an impact.
as, according to extremetech, ATI has worst per mhz perfomance, at least for high end cards.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 116
7/16/05 at 7:08am
sorry, but
anyone has idea of the superpi scores? do you want the screen, because I think you don't consider me as serious
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 116
7/16/05 at 8:50am
I think you're right, burminator - but I begin to fail to see the differences in our arguments - are we really disagreeing? You win - I get peace.

WLF46WLF - we trust you - we simply don't understand what you're trying to say. Are you sure that we're running the same version of superpi?

"Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard"
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 116
7/16/05 at 9:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombatten
I think you're right, burminator - but I begin to fail to see the differences in our arguments - are we really disagreeing? You win - I get peace.

WLF46WLF - we trust you - we simply don't understand what you're trying to say. Are you sure that we're running the same version of superpi?
the version doesn't matter I think. superpi-->38s
superpi 1.4 mod -->37,800 s
10s difference and we have the same ML-37! I'd like to understand why there is this difference
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 116
7/16/05 at 9:06am
here the screen

Reply
Reply
post #47 of 116
7/16/05 at 10:00am
It's a hoax! The checksum is incorrect!



my F4005WLMi superpi result - please check it



BTW: I don't understand why people use the "clear-type". IMHO that makes things MORE unclear - and the edges of fonts get to be all sorts of colors.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 116
7/16/05 at 10:10am

2wombatten

It's neither about being right or wrong nor on agreeing or disagreeing, I just didn't like that some people would make wrong conclusions after reading that statement.

2techn9ne

Dude, you promised to underclock and benchmark...
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 116
7/16/05 at 10:31am
I don't see how what I wrote could be misunderstood. But I know that even when you think you have phrased your sentence so that the essence is clear, there will still be some people who get the wrong message. Maybe it's because I think in Danish and translate to English before I write it that the message gets crumbled.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 116
7/16/05 at 10:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombatten
It's a hoax! The checksum is incorrect!



my F4005WLMi superpi result - please check it



BTW: I don't understand why people use the "clear-type". IMHO that makes things MORE unclear - and the edges of fonts get to be all sorts of colors.

what does it mean? that these scores are not true?
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 116
7/16/05 at 10:50am
now I'm trying to verify that the person that has the ferrari is a serious person and the score is true.
that's so strange.. but I have an idea to buy this notebook, so I want to know its real potential.
what about your ram? what model?
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 116
7/16/05 at 1:26pm
here it is: new test after he has converted fyle system to NTFS and after he has close all the background application:



and here the validation. you can validate it yourself if you want.



now, what can you say about this??
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 116
7/16/05 at 5:27pm
Still think it's a hoax, because the 1st one you showed me definately was. If you look at this superpi compilation then you need at least 2340MHz AMD64 to get down to 36 seconds.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...p/t-36835.html

I think this guy has an overclocked desktop system, a ferrari4000 and a paint program to copy'n'paste the screenshot you gave me. On the 1st one he just forgot to copy the checksum. I don't think any ram upgrade will give such an improvement on the F4000. My CPU-z window looks exactly like his.

If I shut down all non-essential windows processes in task manager, and set the superpi program to "realtime" priority, then the shortes 1M time I can get is still >46 seconds.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 116
7/16/05 at 9:34pm
I dont know, but here a turion 1.6MHz has a 50 score in superpi 1M! and his ferrari is in stock new here in Italy.. and I don't think he lies! he've done also a 3dmark05, and he has a score of 2350! I think he could lie either in this, bue he don't
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 116
7/16/05 at 9:41pm
I must admit that I have seen one other report of an 1.6GHz turion completing superpi 1M in 51 s.
Okay, tell me again, did he upgrade the ram or overclock the cpu? Can u get a screenshot of the memory tabsheet on CPU-Z from him?
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 116
7/16/05 at 9:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombatten
I must admit that I have seen one other report of an 1.6GHz turion completing superpi 1M in 51 s.
Okay, tell me again, did he upgrade the ram or overclock the cpu?
no, I'm sure he didn't! he has taken his ferrari a couple of days ago! the first test, he has many application in background I think. the second he converts the file system from FAT32 to NTFS; then he has made the test closing all background application.. and there the scores! that sounds so strange, but he has no motivations to lie!
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 116
7/16/05 at 9:49pm
and here the screen of cpu-z.
as I did tell you the ram are infineon model, not so bad I think!

CPUz:





Reply
Reply
post #58 of 116
7/16/05 at 9:55pm
WLF46WLF: Please end this meaningless argument with wombatten, it's of no use anyway.

Please spend your time on more interesting things like asking your friend to run some of these benchmarks:

CPU:
- ScienceMark 2.0 (MolDyn, Primordia, Cipher & Blas (SGEMM))
- SiSoft Sandra 2005 (CPU Arithmetic & CPU Multi-Media)
- Prime95 24.13 (Benchmark 1024K & 2048K FFT)
- Super PI Mod 1.4 (4M)
- Pifast (10M Hexus Pifast Challenge September 2004 Edition)
- PCMark04
- PCMark05

Memory:
- ScienceMark 2.0 (Memory bandwidth & latency)
- SiSoft Sandra 2005 (RAM bandwidth)

Gaming:
- 3DMark01
- 3DMark03
- 3DMark05
- Aquamark3
- Unreal Tournament 2004 (botmatch)
- FarCry (FarCry Benchmarking Utility)
- Doom3 (Timedemo1)
- Half-Life 2 (E3 Techdemo5)

Rendering:
- RealStorm Benchmark 2004 (default settings)
- KribiBench 1.1 (Jetshadow realistic)
- Cinebench 2003 (Rendering)
- Pov-Ray 3.7 (Chess2.pov)

Hard drive:
- HD Tach 3
- SiSoft Sandra 2005 (File System benchmark)

Multitasking:
- WorldBench 5.0

Battery life:
- Battery Eater Pro 2.6 (Classic mode)
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 116
7/17/05 at 3:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by snorre
WLF46WLF: Please end this meaningless argument with wombatten, it's of no use anyway.

Please spend your time on more interesting things like asking your friend to run some of these benchmarks:

CPU:
- ScienceMark 2.0 (MolDyn, Primordia, Cipher & Blas (SGEMM))
- SiSoft Sandra 2005 (CPU Arithmetic & CPU Multi-Media)
- Prime95 24.13 (Benchmark 1024K & 2048K FFT)
- Super PI Mod 1.4 (4M)
- Pifast (10M Hexus Pifast Challenge September 2004 Edition)
- PCMark04
- PCMark05

Memory:
- ScienceMark 2.0 (Memory bandwidth & latency)
- SiSoft Sandra 2005 (RAM bandwidth)

Gaming:
- 3DMark01
- 3DMark03
- 3DMark05
- Aquamark3
- Unreal Tournament 2004 (botmatch)
- FarCry (FarCry Benchmarking Utility)
- Doom3 (Timedemo1)
- Half-Life 2 (E3 Techdemo5)

Rendering:
- RealStorm Benchmark 2004 (default settings)
- KribiBench 1.1 (Jetshadow realistic)
- Cinebench 2003 (Rendering)
- Pov-Ray 3.7 (Chess2.pov)

Hard drive:
- HD Tach 3
- SiSoft Sandra 2005 (File System benchmark)

Multitasking:
- WorldBench 5.0

Battery life:
- Battery Eater Pro 2.6 (Classic mode)
Hi Snorre, I don't know if you remember me! I'm the italian guy that did buy corsair ram, like yours, for his ferrari, but they didn't work properly! ;_;

anyway, I've suggested my friend your bench, even if he already took some of these test, like

superpi 4M:



3dmark05:



pcmark05:



waiting for others benchmark
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 116
7/17/05 at 9:35pm
the infineon RAM has the same timings of my nanya ram... same speed... same size... a different brand should not make a 10 second difference...
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Acer Notebook Benchmarks
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Acer Notebook Forums › Acer Notebook Benchmarks › Ferrari 4000...post your benchmarks!!