Would hyperthreading give you a better score? My instinct is that it wouldn't, but I don't know much about it.
Yeah I don't think so either. The idea behind hyperthreading is that you take two threads and mesh the instructions together in such a way that you make the processor more efficient.. when the actual instruction execution part of the core is stalled or not busy, the processor grabs instructions from the other thread it has assigned to it and executes them. Gives it something to do with its downtime.
But because a benchmark is basically testing the pure performance of the CPU I doubt there's much to be gained.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
I guess that would depend on how it's being measured and what's being multiplied and such.
One of the benefits of 64bit is memory addressing but a benchmark like this won't benefit from that I don't think.
But if you try to add or multiply numbers that are bigger than the 32 bit registers on a 32 bit processor I think it has to do some fancy juggling to get the result, whereas with a 64bit processor the result will fit in the registers.. so in that case rather than like 5 or 10 operations to get the result, you'd only need the one multiply.
But since the benchmark is testing relative processor speed and not specifically 64bit vs 32bit operations I would think the benchmark would focus on stuff that works best.
Or maybe there's a standard set of tests to test integer and floating performance.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
I wonder if our scores would be higher with the 64bit version... I don't really want to pay $20 for something like that though.
You'd just get more numbers. You'll just pay $20 for some arbitrary numbers that some guy picked out based on a 6 year old Mac. Synthetic benchtests are not often that meaningful. Fun for bragging rights though.
__________________ https://www.reddit.com/r/CalgaryFlames/
I’m always amazed these sportscasters and announcers can call the game with McDavid’s **** in their mouths all the time.
(Incidentally, I'm pretty sure this doesn't test your disks at all. Just processor, RAM, etc.)
I don't know what's going on. I thought we had the same processor? Mine is reporting more L1 and L2 cache than you and my numbers are all higher except my FPU performance is terrible. It's probably Windows and the fact that the free Windows benchmark is only 32-bit.
8 times the L1 cache, 4 times the L2 cache can't be right can it?