What's your benchmark?
Comments
-
SteveF said:
But I was surprised that after upgrading that I found the actual closing of Program Guides and collections to still be "quite slow."
I haven't checked that. I doesn't seem to be 'delayed' from casual observation.
I just ran comparison Passage Guides on the old and new machines (see: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/32881.aspx ) and noticed a huge improvement in the generation of the tested PG.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Mark A. Smith said:
I doesn't seem to be 'delayed' from casual observation.
I was able to speed up the passage guide opening and closing by taking DAve Hooton's advice -ie. to close the ".com" sections in the passage guide.
Closing collections is still slow.
Regards, SteveF
0 -
Hey Mark - you just asked me to do a Novabench and post it in this forum. Here it is! Thanks! Dan
NovaBench Score: 839
5/31/2011 9:18:45 PM
Microsoft Windows 7 Professional
Intel Core i72720QM 2.20GHz @ 2192 MHz
Graphics Card: NVIDIA Quadro 1000M
16272 MB System RAM (Score: 231)
- RAM Speed: 10829 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 545)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 202669024
- Integer Operations/Second: 524425672
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 734799
Graphics Tests (Score: 32)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 110
Hardware Tests (Score: 31)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 281 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 111 MB/sIMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Dan,
Compare your specifics with mine posted on this same page above you.
Your RAM score is higher, but RAM speed is slightly slower.
Your CPU test score is surprisingly slower than mine. All the individual scores are lower. And I have a slower processor (2.0 GHZ).
Your graphics score is much slower. Try running the program again forcing the use of the graphics card. It should be much higher when you do that.
Your hardware score is also lower than mine by a good bit. Your write speed is about the same which is probably all that counts.
Overall graphics is testing low because you are using the on-board graphics during this test. The CPU scores are puzzling.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Newish Dell Outlet XPS L702X Quad Core i7 laptop after uninstalling Anti-Virus Software:
NovaBench
Score: 906 (using default Intel HD Graphics)6/1/2011 12:02:01 AM
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit with Service Pack 1)
Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHz
Graphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family8107 MB System RAM (Score:
195)
- RAM Speed: 11901 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 635)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204093328
- Integer
Operations/Second: 657884064
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 917545
Graphics Tests (Score: 29)
- 3D Frames Per
Second: 100
Hardware Tests (Score: 47)
- Primary
Partition Capacity: 582 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 127 MB/sNovaBench Score: 976 (using NVidia Geforce GT 550M GPU and beta 275.27 video drivers)6/1/2011 1:02:28 AM
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit with Service Pack 1)
Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHz
Graphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family8107 MB System RAM (Score: 195)
- RAM Speed: 12052 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 635)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204078288
- Integer Operations/Second: 657236272
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 920089
Graphics Tests (Score: 98)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 308
Hardware Tests (Score: 48)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 582 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 131 MB/sAfter installing Avast Anti-Virus Software (Free), NovaBench Score decreased 4 points:
NovaBench Score: 972 (using NVidia Geforce GT 550M GPU and beta 275.27 video drivers)6/1/2011 1:41:09 AM
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit with Service Pack 1)
Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHz
Graphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family8107 MB System RAM (Score: 195)
- RAM Speed: 11972 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 632) -- down 3 points
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204060280
- Integer Operations/Second: 654584080
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 908925
Graphics Tests (Score: 98)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 307
Hardware Tests (Score: 47) -- down 1 point
- Primary Partition Capacity: 582 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 126 MB/sMark Smith said:Dan,
Compare your specifics with mine posted on this same page above you.
Your RAM score is higher, but RAM speed is slightly slower.
Your CPU test score is surprisingly slower than mine. All the individual scores are lower. And I have a slower processor (2.0 GHZ).
Your graphics score is much slower. Try running the program again forcing the use of the graphics card. It should be much higher when you do that.
Your hardware score is also lower than mine by a good bit. Your write speed is about the same which is probably all that counts.
Overall graphics is testing low because you are using the on-board graphics during this test. The CPU scores are puzzling.
Concur CPU scores are puzzling; wonder about anti-virus on-demand scanning ?
To improve my graphics score, used NVidia control panel to change graphics default for NovaBench program (3D frame rate tripled).
By the way, some web pages influenced my free Anti-Virus choice => http://free.antivirusware.com/ , http://www.freeanti-virussoftware.net/ , and http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/collection/5928/2011_free_av.html
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
I find the scores of the new Sandy Bridge systems quite intersting, I am running an older quad-core system (Q8400) that I have overclocked by about 20% and it scores in the same range as the newer systems. Knowing what I know about the new systems I am inclined to question the validity of Novabench scores in determining a systems true capabilities.
0 -
Hi Mark - Well, I ran four tests based on your speculation and here is the results. Must be something else! NEW LAPTOP, RIGHT?
1) baseline before changes (bios set to direct graphics processor to optimus)
Score = 837
RAM = 231, CPU = 545, GRAPICS = 31, Hardware 30
2) score with bios set to discrete only
Score = 838
RAM = 231, CPU = 545, GRAPICS = 32, Hardware 30
3) score with bios set to discrete only AND intel turbo boost turned on
Score = 838
RAM = 231, CPU = 545, GRAPICS = 32, Hardware 30
4) score with bios set to discrete only AND intel turbo boost turned on AND ESET Anitvirus turned off
Score = 837
RAM = 231, CPU = 544, GRAPICS = 32, Hardware 30
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Michael Childs said:
Lots of interesting scores. What can we take from this - other than Nova score envy?
Is there any agreement on what Nova score it takes to run Logos 4 effectively? Or what system requirements are needed? Any suggestions for someone looking to buy a new laptop?
I would be interested in people's thoughts on this.
Both of my laptops (a 4-year old Dell Inspiron 1520 and a HP mini 110 netbook which is pretty new but is an older model) run Logos 4 admirably well I think. I certainly don't have amazing NovaBench scores, but I think there are optimizations you can make. (Particularly in the realm of RAM/memory and hard drive - I upgraded my Dell to a 7200-RPM drive with a good amount of cache and the difference was night and day.) I've always operated on a budget of $500 or less for computers (I usually build my own desktops) and have yet to surpass the performance of my Dell.
My Dell laptop:
6/1/2011 5:56:30 AM
Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
Intel Pentium
DualT2370 1.73GHz @ 1729 MHz
Graphics Card: Mobile Intel(R) 965 Express
Chipset Family
3062 MB System RAM (Score: 87)
- RAM
Speed: 2013 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 176)
- Floating
Point Operations/Second: 46805060
- Integer Operations/Second: 99523692
-
MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 561801
Graphics Tests (Score:
4)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 18
Hardware Tests (Score:
20)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 298 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 43
MB/sMy HP netbook:
6/1/2011 6:04:13 AM
Microsoft Windows 7 Starter
Intel Atom N455 1.66GHz @ 1666 MHz
Graphics Card: Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator 3150
2036 MB System RAM (Score: 98)
- RAM Speed: 2096 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 61)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 17736512
- Integer Operations/Second: 28083282
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 219031
Graphics Tests (Score: 1)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 3
Hardware Tests (Score: 7)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 133 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 14 MB/s0 -
NovaBench Score: 976 (using NVidia Geforce GT 550M GPU and beta 275.27 video drivers)
6/1/2011 1:02:28 AM
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit with Service Pack 1)
Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHz
Graphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family8107 MB System RAM (Score: 195)
- RAM Speed: 12052 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 635)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204078288
- Integer Operations/Second: 657236272
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 920089
Graphics Tests (Score: 98)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 308
Hardware Tests (Score: 48)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 582 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 131 MB/sPartitioned 640 GB hard drive into F: (Fast - 40 GB), C: (WIndows 7 - 208 GB), M: (Medium - 192 GB), and S: (Slow - 156 GB), then moved Windows 7 Page File to S: drive. Disabled Tablet PC Input and Windows Media Player Network Sharing service, then ran NovaBench:
NovaBench Score: 960 (using NVidia Geforce GT 550M GPU and 275.33 video drivers)
6/3/2011 5:52:15 AM
Microsoft Windows 7 Enterprise (clean install without Microsoft updates and anti-virus software)
Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHz
Graphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family8107 MB System RAM (Score: 196) -- Up 1 point
- RAM Speed: 12141 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 638) -- Up 3 points
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204072448
- Integer Operations/Second: 664646152
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 922295
Graphics Tests (Score: 97) -- Down 1 point
- 3D Frames Per Second: 305
Hardware Tests (Score: 29) -- Down 19 points (faster transfer, but smaller C: capacity)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 208 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 138 MB/sPlan to custom install Logos 4 on my F: drive, which should keep fastest transfer rate for Logos as other files are placed on C:, M:, or S: drives.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
NovaBench Score: 4422011-06-03 07:51:06 -0600
Mac OS X 10.6.7 <----------- Mac, not PC
Intel Core 2 Duo @ 3060 MHz
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT
8192 MB System RAM (Score: 151)
- RAM Speed: 2983 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 240)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 60570168
- Integer Operations/Second: 123200024
- MD5 Hashes Calculated/Second: 894073
Graphics Tests (Score: 27)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 64
Hardware Tests (Score: 24)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 465 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 42 MB/sI think the funny thing here is that your score goes UP if you have a bigger HD, if the tech stays the same, the larger the HD, the poorer the performance by definition (physics still plays a part with winchester HDs!).
0 -
Here is my Lenovo W52. This does not show the result with the NIVIDA Quadro M1000 with 2 Gig of DDR3.
0 -
Frank Fenby said:
Here is my Lenovo W52. This does not show the result with the NIVIDA Quadro M1000 with 2 Gig of DDR3.
Appears desktop 1st Generation Quad Core i7 CPU bit faster than mobile 2nd Generation Quad Core i7 for Floating Point and MD5, but slower for Integer:
NovaBench Score: 1457
Mac OS X 10.6.7
Intel Core i7 @ 2930 MHz
Graphics Card: ATI Radeon HD 5750
8192 MB System RAM (Score: 163)
- RAM Speed: 5532 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 716)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 287423392
- Integer Operations/Second: 582650688
- MD5 Hashes Calculated/Second: 1058452
Graphics Tests (Score: 546)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 1027
Hardware Tests (Score: 32)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 298 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 111 MB/sAlso notice iMac RAM Speed is slower (bit less than half as fast).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
No idea if this is good or not...two year old Toshiba Satellite A505
Verified NovaBench Score: 355
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium
Intel Core2 Duo T6600 2.20GHz running at 2200 MHz
Mobile Intel 4 Series Express Chipset Family GPU
3964 MB System RAM (Score: 107)
- RAM Speed: 3003 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 210)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 50570694
- Integer Operations/Second: 124692734
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 707135
Graphics Tests (Score: 14)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 52
Hardware Tests (Score: 24)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 454 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 43 MB/s0 -
John Sheeley said:
No idea if this is good or not...two year old Toshiba Satellite A505
To compare, could like at page 5 of this thread => http://community.logos.com/forums/t/24555.aspx?PageIndex=5 that has a chart showing NovaBench score range for Logos users (noticed several with similar score).
Mike S. said:- Drive Write Speed: 42 MB/s
John Sheeley said:- Drive Write Speed: 43 MB/s
Observation about Disk Write Speed: one upgrade option is faster hard drive (7200 RPM or faster) or Solid State Disk (SSD).
Mac sales offers Do It Yourself Upgrade kits => http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/hard-drives/2.5-Notebook/SATA/DIY/ (potentially usable for Windows too)
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Partitioned 640 GB hard drive into F: (Fast - 40 GB), C: (WIndows 7 - 208 GB), M: (Medium - 192 GB), and S: (Slow - 156 GB), then moved Windows 7 Page File to S: drive.
&
Plan to custom install Logos 4 on my F: drive, which should keep fastest transfer rate for Logos as other files are placed on C:, M:, or S: drives.
KS4J,
Could you please explain how partitioning a single hard drive results in fast, medium, and slow partitions? Is partitioning a means to put performance critical apps on the fastest part (nearest the outer edge) of the disk?
Thanks in advance . . . Scott
0 -
I'm not he... But: yes.Scott S said:Could you please explain how partitioning a single hard drive results in fast, medium, and slow partitions? Is partitioning a means to put performance critical apps on the fastest part (nearest the outer edge) of the disk?
Assuming concentric circle partitions the outside partition will be turning faster and have faster access speeds.
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
Thomas Black said:
Assuming concentric circle partitions the outside partition will be turning faster and have faster access speeds.
If I wish to do this -- how do I know which of the (new) partitions is on the outside and is therefor the fastest?
Regards, SteveF
0 -
Old desktop
NovaBench
Score: 631Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate
AMD Phenom II X4 840T @ 2900 MHz
Graphics
Card: ATI Radeon HD 4600 Series
6144 MB System RAM (Score:
132)
- RAM Speed: 2712 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score:
363)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 103338132
- Integer
Operations/Second: 346710280
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second:
644211
Graphics Tests (Score: 84)
- 3D Frames Per
Second: 268
Hardware Tests (Score: 52)
- Primary
Partition Capacity: 918 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 100 MB/sNew desktop
NovaBench
Score: 884Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate
AMD Phenom II X6 1045T @ 2700 MHz
Graphics
Card: ATI Radeon HD 5570
8192 MB System RAM (Score:
154)
- RAM Speed: 3572 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score:
511)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 154399206
- Integer
Operations/Second: 508264512
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second:
817896
Graphics Tests (Score: 164)
- 3D Frames Per
Second: 493
Hardware Tests (Score: 55)
- Primary
Partition Capacity: 919 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 109 MB/s0 -
Scott S said:
Could you please explain how partitioning a single hard drive results in fast, medium, and slow partitions? Is partitioning a means to put performance critical apps on the fastest part (nearest the outer edge) of the disk?
Partitioning can help data transfer speeds for physical disk platters. Whole hard spins at same rate, but surface area of a concentric circle varies with placement. A partition by the outer edge has faster transfer speeds (since more data can be transferred before needing to move disk read/write heads).
Wikipedia article => http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk_drive#Data_transfer_rate includes: "rate depends on the track location, so it will be higher for data on
the outer tracks (where there are more data sectors) and lower toward
the inner tracks (where there are fewer data sectors)"Solid State Disk (SSD) controllers should spread read and write usage evenly (partitioning should have no effect for SSD data transfer rate: no disk heads to move).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
SteveF said:
If I wish to do this -- how do I know which of the (new) partitions is on the outside and is therefor the fastest?
Partitioning is from inside to outside, or left to right in most partition views. Outside is traditionally regarded as slowest even though it will have faster transfer speeds because there are more sectors on a cylinder!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
Outside is traditionally regarded as slowest even though it will have faster transfer speeds
Dave, I understand why the outer part of the disk has a faster transfer rate, but why then is it "traditionally regarded as slowest"?
Thanks in advance . . . Scott
0 -
Partitioning can help data transfer speeds for physical disk platters.
KS4J, Thanks for the additional information. A few further questions:
1. What partition did you put Logos on?
2. What's your ballpark estimate of the percentage improvement gained by partitioning?
3. Does a partitioning scheme like yours require a clean install?
Thanks again . . . Scott
0 -
Scott S said:
Dave, I understand why the outer part of the disk has a faster transfer rate, but why then is it "traditionally regarded as slowest"?
Certain products give you an estimate of the speed of partitions where they can cache data and the outer (HD) partitions were always slower. The last time I did this was 2 -3 years ago, but I've never noticed a significant difference because a lot depends on the type of data access; random being the one most typical of an average desktop computer as opposed to sequential (reading large files). Then there is the effect of HD caching and Windows' own disk caching, especially W7.
I think it best to ignore any perception of difference based on placement of partitions on modern large capacity HD's in an OS like W7 where you have 4 GB or more of memory.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Scott S said:
3. Does a partitioning scheme like yours require a clean install?
You need Partitioning software, some of which is free, because it preserves your data (moving it around as necessary). It is usually done outside of the OS by rebooting the computer and then (when finished) rebooting back to the OS.
NB. Leave the start of the OS partition where it is i.e. just make it smaller to get space for the new partition.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Keep in mind that if on your single Hard Drive that you have partitions which contain your OS and other programs which you may have open, that the HD head is being moved ever so frequently to the other partition(s) which contain these files. Also if you have background tasks running (e.g. antivirus scans, defragmentation) that this too will be moving the HD head to these partition(s).
So partitioning your HD to speed up Logos can really backfire on you. You would be much better off installing a 2nd HD and only putting Logos on it, that way the HD heads would be dedicated to Logos and your original HD is free to perform whatever it needs to service your OS and other programs.
0 -
steve clark said:
So partitioning your HD to speed up Logos can really backfire on you. You would be much better off installing a 2nd HD and only putting Logos on it,
I've done that with small HD's and the difference is not noticeable (+ ensuring secondary drives do not go into idle mode). It also may not be practicable with laptop computers.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
It also may not be practicable with laptop computers.
True
Back in the early days of CD writers and later in the early days of DVD writers, i ran into throughput issues which slowed the writing of data to these devices. My final approach back then was to add a 2nd HD controller which connected to dedicated HDs. This proved the fastest mechanism back then. Many things came into play here: bandwidth of the controller's spicket to the HD (secondary drives on the same controller had to share BW), the speed at which the HD can move date to/from the platters, the amount of cache inside the HDs & how they were utilized with the HDs design, and how the OS's drive routines were optimized to move data.
0 -
steve clark said:
Back in the early days of CD writers and later in the early days of DVD writers, i ran into throughput issues which slowed the writing of data to these devices. My final approach back then was to add a 2nd HD controller which connected to dedicated HDs.
Parallel (PATA) drives and interfaces meant you were wise to segregate CD's/DVD's and HD's. I was amazed how many builders (and some manufacturers) put them on the same cable/controller just to save an extra piece of ribbon (or improve cooling within the case).
The small HD's I mentioned above were Serial (SATA) drives, when you had to tell Windows XP (during installation) to look at a floppy drive to get the controller software!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Scott S said:
Partitioning can help data transfer speeds for physical disk platters.
KS4J, Thanks for the additional information. A few further questions:
1. What partition did you put Logos on?
2. What's your ballpark estimate of the percentage improvement gained by partitioning?
3. Does a partitioning scheme like yours require a clean install?
Thanks again . . . Scott
1. Custom installed Logos 4 on my F:\ (fast) partition.
2. Initially up to 7 % faster since Logos 4 was installed in fastest area of hard disk; Windows and other programs were installed in C: drive (2nd partition). Web article shows disk zones with transfer speed changes => http://www.dewassoc.com/kbase/hard_drives/hard_disk_sector_structures.htm
Note: as Logos library grows (e.g. Perseus collections), all new Logos resources and indexes are in fastest 5 % of hard disk (avoids performance degradation since my Logos 4 is not affected by C:\ drive usage).
3. Yes, Windows deeply embeds disk partition number during installation (essentially unchangeable after installation). Hence partitioned drive (using linux System Rescue CD), then installed Windows 7 into C:\ drive (2nd partition), followed by device driver installations and many Windows 7 updates before formatting and changing drive letters assigned to those partitions (personally like drive letter to reflect relative transfer speed: F = Fast, M = Medium, and S = Slow).
By the way, found an older Windows discussion with similar disk partition placement for gaming => http://hardforum.com/archive/index.php/t-1041663.html (partitioning starts from outer edge of disk). Also found an informative discussion on Tom's Hardware => http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/244654-32-hard-drive-size-limitation#t1737770
Note: OCZ Technology forum has a page with many optional Windows 7 tweak ideas => http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?63273-*-Windows-7-Ultimate-Tweaks-amp-Utilities-*
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
The last time I did this was 2 -3 years ago, but I've never noticed a significant difference because a lot depends on the type of data access; random being the one most typical of an average desktop computer as opposed to sequential (reading large files).
Dave, thanks for the advice and sharing what you found when trying different partition schemes. . . Scott
0 -
KS4J, Thanks for the ideas to think about and the links. Those linked pages address questions I've had for years. . . . Scott
0 -
Scott S said:
KS4J, Thanks for the ideas to think about and the links. Those linked pages address questions I've had for years. . . . Scott
Likewise Thanks [8-|] After learning more about Windows 7 paging file usage, relocated paging file from my S (Slow) partition to my F (Fast) partition, which is noticeably faster. Also downloaded free RAMDisk software and configured a 640 MB R: RAM Disk for temporary file use by my Windows 7 standard user (with file and folder compression). After changing user environment variables (TEMP and TMP), Logos 4 searches are now writing temporary files to RAM instead of disk.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
After changing user environment variables (TEMP and TMP)
I have forgotten where to do this. Can someone enlighten me?
0 -
Frank Fenby said:
I have forgotten where to do this. Can someone enlighten me?
http://searchsystemschannel.techtarget.com/feature/Setting-Windows-7-environment-variables
0 -
0 -
NovaBench
Score: 1767
12/8/2011 10:25:54 AM
Microsoft Windows 7
Ultimate
Intel Core i7 960 3.20GHz @ 4199 MHz
Graphics Card: AMD Radeon HD
6900 Series
12287 MB System RAM (Score: 216)
- RAM
Speed: 11272 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 815)
- Floating
Point Operations/Second: 211420032
- Integer Operations/Second:
958124496
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 1289271
Graphics
Tests (Score: 716)
- 3D Frames Per Second:
1909
Hardware Tests (Score: 20)
- Primary Partition
Capacity: 56 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 235 MB/s0 -
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
I dunno what the "Windows Live Display Driver GPU" is all about... I do use Windows Live Mesh, but the graphics card is an NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX... might be that I need to turn off Mesh and rerun the test.
EDIT: This result is from my 4 year old Dell XPS 720
"I read dead people..."
0 -
Specs for my notebook in signature below
"I read dead people..."
0 -
Warning... humor follows... just can't resist, for all of us with obsolete systems...
Grace & Peace,
Bill
MSI GF63 8RD, I-7 8850H, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 2TB HDD, NVIDIA GTX 1050Max
iPhone 12 Pro Max 512Gb
iPad 9th Gen iOS 15.6, 256GB0 -
BillS said:
Warning... humor follows... just can't resist, for all of us with obsolete systems...
Humor noticed in CPU description since Intel used Pentium instead of 586 for 5th generation CPU so an Intel 386 Pentium is a humorous combination of 3rd and 5th generation x86 names.
Likewise learned Novabench minimum score is 60 (with a CPU clocked at 498 MHz, bit faster than humorous one):
Verified NovaBench Score: 60
Test run on November 20, 2011 at 18:35
Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition Intel Celeron running at 498 MHz
Intel 82810-DC100 Graphics Controller (Microsoft Corporation) GPU
255 MB System RAM (Score: 36)
- RAM Speed: 147 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 24)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 5934772
- Integer Operations/Second: 9741088
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 109887
Graphics Tests (Score: 0)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 0
Hardware Tests (Score: 0)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 37 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 0 MB/s
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
-
Verified NovaBench Score: 1245
Test run on February 25, 2012 at 13:29
Microsoft Windows 7 Professional
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T running at 3311 MHz
AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series GPU
16346 MB System RAM (Score: 195)
- RAM Speed: 3648 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 586)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 157625082
- Integer Operations/Second: 621638058
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 991637
Graphics Tests (Score: 445)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 1233
Hardware Tests (Score: 19)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 112 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 109 MB/sI built this for online gaming, but Logos runs like a BEAST!!!!
0 -
My latest build. It runs circles around my previous system (Core 2 Quad Q8400 with only 4 Gbyte if RAM and mechanical hard drives). If I upgrade the Graphics card it would boost performance even higher.
NovaBench Score: 1126
2/27/2012 10:20:28 PM
Microsoft Windows 7 Professional
Intel Core i52500K 3.30GHz @ 3336 MHz
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
8174 MB System RAM (Score: 214)
- RAM Speed: 15683 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 562)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 103834096
- Integer Operations/Second: 541999716
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 1522295
Graphics Tests (Score: 332)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 944
Hardware Tests (Score: 18)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 112 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 100 MB/s0 -
Yes it was worth it, but makes laptop use more frustrating (only draw back)NovaBench
Score: 2242
1/10/2012 6:30:57 PM
Microsoft Windows 7
Ultimate
Intel Core i7 X 990 3.47GHz @ 3468 MHz
Graphics Card: NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 580
24568 MB System RAM (Score: 247)
-
RAM Speed: 9152 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 970)
-
Floating Point Operations/Second: 313128564
- Integer Operations/Second:
1229478900
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 1141575
Graphics
Tests (Score: 997)
- 3D Frames Per Second:
2586
Hardware Tests (Score: 28)
- Primary Partition
Capacity: 137 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 194 MB/s0 -
I heard some good and bad things about Nova and with the exception of Addo for my drives, I shy away from these tools, since I have to play cleanup now and see where this thing put itself.
It did pick up a mid-range of my OS/Apps drive speed. which in and of itself concerns me, or perhaps it is set dynamically. It does not seem to pick up RAID, or perhaps I did something wrong (more likely). and the memory is way off. The memopry was way off but this could be due to Quad channel. however, I was tuned down to 1,300, no where near what it listed.. Also, did not pick up the CPU or the GPU speed.accurately.
Has anyone else used this with x79? Thanks and God Bless...
In Christ,
Dean Poulos
Snaps
Atto on the OS/Apps C:\ drive.
Atto on the Array.
Actual:
0 -
I just built my new system and remembered this thread, so I installed Novabench for the fun of it to see my new score. It has been a pain reloading everything, but I am finally up and running!
Disclaimer: I hate using messaging, texting, and email for real communication. If anything that I type to you seems like anything other than humble and respectful, then I have not done a good job typing my thoughts.
0 -
OK you got me. I downloaded it and ran it. Here are my results:
NovaBench Score: 1254
6/3/2015 11:03:59 AM Microsoft Windows 8.1
Intel Core i73770 3.40GHz @ 3401 MHz
Graphics Card: EPSON Projector Support Driver for NP
16337 MB System RAM (Score: 246)
- RAM Speed: 13737 MB/s
CPU Tests (Score: 809)
- Floating Point Operations/Second: 205983976
- Integer Operations/Second: 928262120
- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 1336770
Graphics Tests (Score: 137)
- 3D Frames Per Second: 418
Hardware Tests (Score: 62)
- Primary Partition Capacity: 916 GB
- Drive Write Speed: 142 MB/s0
