SSSmokin' Performance

I tried out a Dell 490 today with a Xeon 5160 3ghz processor and 2
gigs of RAM. It blew thru ship in a bottle in under 18 seconds with
SW2007 sp 3.1. That's about 3 times faster than the same computer
with a 5110 or 5060 processor and 4 gigs of ram, and a little better
than an AMD FX53 computer with 4 gigs of RAM. Just thought I'd share.

Meanwhile, I'm hoping that upgrading Dell 390 computers with E6700
processors and 4 gigs of RAM will put them in the same ballpark. Any
suggestions?

Thanks,

John Kimmel

 

John,

That isn't too bad and shows that Intel is finally catching up to AMD,
albeit three years later than the FX53. I believe there have been some
other postings down in that region, but not many. How does it do on
SPECaps and STAR2.1?

E6800 is closer.

I'm not sure I'd call it sssmokin yet. That is reserved for under 10
seconds on SOB, under 100 seconds on SPECapc and under 30 seconds for
STAR2.1.

TOP

 

<under 100 seconds on SPECapc>

Under 100 secs on the SPECapc benchmark would indeed be a smoking
system - esp considering that the fastest speed posted so far on the
SolidWorks discussion forum is 163 seconds (Precision 390 with X6800
CPU.)

I think you're confusing it with the part benchmark that Anna Wood has
made available. A couple of overclocked C2D systems have completed
that benchmark in under 100 secs.

 

No, I'm not confusing the 100 seconds with Anna's die block. I ran the
163 second time on Ship in a Bottle. I also ran the FX53 times. In the
real world modeling environment both machines are about even when it
comes to CPU bound events like rebuilding and drawings (.09 seconds
difference). Since the FX53 is three years old and the X6800 is brand
new I would come to the conclusion that X6800 is just holding it's
own and that 100 seconds composite score or 20 seconds CPU score on
SPECapc is SSSSSmokin. In my book the extra Ss require at least a
doubling of speed over what could be achieved three years ago. Also
there are other machines that have posted here that are faster than
the FX53. I think those kind of scores are achievable today, but not
with Intel.

TOP