Non-intel benchmarks on Conroe vs AMD's AM2 FX62

[The little lost angel]

...at 60Hz, I know. However the "normal" display was 15" when I
bought my P75 in 1994. I was running 1024x768 on that. (went to
19" 1280x1024 in '00 and 2x19"s in '04).

That's you, Keith, do we need to remind you that you do not represent
the average user? Or are you resigning yourself to mass anonymity?
pP

I don't "see" it. Fonts are much crisper with higher resolutions.
I'm certainly not young (35 and have no trouble with high
resolutions (and usually *tiny* fonts). My pictures more often
than not spill over a 1024x768 screen. I think the reason most
people run with the default resolution is that they haven't a clue
how to change it (like 60Hz) and haven't tried anything else.

I've helped some of them changed and shortly after they DEMANDED that
I make their screens BIGGER like it used to be....

My 20" Dell was $380. My vintage 15" cost more than $200 in 1994
dollars. This stuff is getting cheap!

Unfortunately not that cheap around here. Plus gamers are more likely
to shell out the extra cash for the latest graphic card than just 10%
(off hand!) more screen area.

At 17", 1024x768 is OK, but 600x800?

Well, the original debate was about who still use 1024x768 no? Those
who crap on cheap crt will still be happy with 1024x768 pP

Not me of course, I don't really play games and like lots of room to
work with esp on Photoshop.

 

[Yousuf Khan]

Yep, immeasurable stupidity, and that's for the company that is headed
now by a professional marketeer... But if Conroe will result even in
a miniscule shift of the market share in favor of INTC (quite a
possibility, especially in gaming desktops) the anal...ysts will
trumpet it as the greatest turnaround story ever. That will move the
market at least until quarterly results of K8L sales and market share
are in. The anal...ysts can't tell benchmarking from binge drinking,
but market share shift is something they understand.

You give analysts way too much credit ... I doubt they understand
marketshare shifts either.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Robert Redelmeier]

Your eyes are still young; presbyopia usually kicks in right around 40.

No, we do ages in hex around here

Presbyopia doesn't kick in at any age. What happens
is people start to lose their ability to accommodate
(near focus). Then myopia becomes adaptive!

-- Robert

 

[Jan Panteltje]

The funny thing is, I've found libmozjs.so it's in the same folder as
firefox which is /home/myusername/firefox but firefox won't run 1.5 it
still starts 1.07 which is in /usr/lib somewhere

In an old system I have problems like that with some other program.
The way the PC searched the path was:
/bin /usr/bin /usr/local/bin

There was an old version in /usr/bin/ and that was always found first,
an not the newly installed one in /usr/local/bin/
Solution (in my case) was to delete the old one in /usr/bin.
Actually renamed it i ncase I needed it again.

I just looked at the 'firefox' executable in my directory,
and it is a script (rather short), and it calls 'run-mozilla.sh',
it is documented in that script in plain text, looks fist in
the current dir, quote:
'# Use run-mozilla.sh in the current dir if it exists
# If not, then start resolving symlinks until we find run-mozilla.sh
'

So it is possible you have a 'firefox' executable elsewhere first in the path.
or even a run-mozilla.sh...

Do programs on Linux only run if I stuff them in /usr/lib?

No they will actually run anywhere, but the ywill often look for libraries in
a specific place (line /lib /usr/lib /usr/local/lib )

To make sure you start the RIGHT firefox, specify the full pathfilename.
/home/myusername/firefox/firefox

I would run 'updatedb' (takes a while), and then check for where the older
version of firefox hides... 'locate run-mozilla.sh',
and the rename that directory, to force the new one to look further.

Personally, I still think Linux file organisation is wholly unnatural.
I would had stuck user programs in /user/prog(rams) not /lib(rary)

There is some standarisation, user executables go in /usr/local/bin/
libraries in /usr/local/lib/, but anyone can violate that rule.

 

[Keith]

Yeah, the name Mozilla was not allowed for the Mozilla suite after Firefox
went live and Mozilla incorporated (or something like that) so they
adopted the name the project had during development: Seamonkey... so it's
basically the further development on the old Mozilla suite. IOW a Netscape
Navigator/E-mail that works.

Thanks. It seems markedly faster. There are a few things I miss
(icons on the toolbar, for one). Exporting my bookmarks from
Firefox into Seamonkey was simple enough. I'll have to put it on
my other systems.

I tried Opera once - I guess I missed the religious experience it was
supposed to bring.

;-)

 

[Keith]

That's you, Keith, do we need to remind you that you do not represent
the average user?

Not average, to be sure. I do think that most like to see what
they've bought. They can't "see" a 10% (likely even 50%) processor
improvement.

Or are you resigning yourself to mass anonymity? pP

I certainly hope so. That's always been my goal in life.

I've helped some of them changed and shortly after they DEMANDED that
I make their screens BIGGER like it used to be....

Did they try larger fonts? Did you change them back to 60Hz too?
Around here I see more people stuck at 60Hz. AaaK! My manager
used to have a monitor running at 60Hz in his office. Couldn't
stand being around there. Now that they're rolling out LCDs to the
engineers it's not so bad. ;-)

Unfortunately not that cheap around here. Plus gamers are more likely
to shell out the extra cash for the latest graphic card than just 10%
(off hand!) more screen area.

Prestige trumps common sense.

Well, the original debate was about who still use 1024x768 no? Those
who crap on cheap crt will still be happy with 1024x768 pP

Ok, who is still at 17"? ;-) My wife was kinda lost for a while
when I put the 20" in. She has a 17" LCD at work and the 20" was
overwhelming at first. In a month or so she'll probably be beating
on her boss to get a bigger screen. ;-)

Not me of course, I don't really play games and like lots of room to
work with esp on Photoshop.

Indeed. ...more dots!

 

[The little lost angel]

There was an old version in /usr/bin/ and that was always found first,
an not the newly installed one in /usr/local/bin/
Solution (in my case) was to delete the old one in /usr/bin.
Actually renamed it i ncase I needed it again.

I'm treating this more like a learning experience so please don't tell
me "you don't need to make firefox 1.5 work when 1.07 works just
fine!"

I mv the old firefox and cp the new firefox in... and now it says
we're missing libstdc++.5.so

tried to apt-get install libstdc++.5.so as well as through Synaptic.
But that crapped out with some error about "W: Couldn't stat source
package list http://security.ubuntu.com breezy-security/main Packages
(/var/lib/apt/lists/security.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_breezy-security_main_binary-i386_Packages)
- stat (2 No such file or directory)"

I suspect the Automatix I installed earlier to get mp3 functionality
broke it... however, whatever Automatix did broke sound totally, no
sound whatsoever. To rub salt in, Totem now tells me I don't have an
audio output.

Switching over to my "admin" user, I get the equivalent of windows
startup chime and all those clicks. Totem still doesn't support mp3
naturally. But I'm really glad you can't break Linux the same way one
user could do to Windows for everybody

The good news is Synaptic works here, I got the libstdc++.5 but kinda
worried to see that 6 is installed. but hey this is Linux so it
shouldn't break things to have two versions of C++ right?

Firefox 1.5.0.3 finally works, well at least the one site I tried did
and only if it's inside /usr/lib/mozilla-firefox. If I tried to do
something like /usr/lib/firefox1.07/run-mozilla.sh or firefox-bin,
they just won't work, firefox-bin gives an error about loading
libmozjs.so which makes me think it's still trying to load from
/usr/lib/mozilla-firefox instead of where itself is.

Using the firefox script naturally ends up running whatever is in
/usr/lib/mozilla-firefox no matter where I run it from. I'm not quite
feeling up to learning and fixing the shell script so I'll leave it
alone.

Next on the list would be getting sound/mp3/avi on Ubuntu 5.10, then
if that works, Apache, mySQL and PHP. Finally if I'm feeling up to it,
latest OpenOffice and maybe thunderbird for usenet.

Then I'll probably repeat it on FC or another distribution before
coming back to Ubuntu 6 (to be fair!) to see which one feels more
natural/easy at the end of this journey.

But I do feel like I'm getting somewhere this year, I've actually been
doing daily stuff on Linux instead of just staring at it and going
what now?

Thanks a lot for the advice and help!

 

[Jan Panteltje]

I mv the old firefox and cp the new firefox in... and now it says
we're missing libstdc++.5.so

Not to worry, there is no libstdc++.5.so on my system... and everything
works.

I suspect the Automatix I installed earlier to get mp3 functionality
broke it... however, whatever Automatix did broke sound totally, no
sound whatsoever. To rub salt in, Totem now tells me I don't have an
audio output.

My programs for mp3 are:
mpg123 (the player), a command line utility, best player.
lame (the mp3 encoder).
[x]mpgedit (the mpgeditor, a bit tricky to use, but it works), there
is both a command line and X version.

shouldn't break things to have two versions of C++ right?

Should be OK, I have 3 C compilers, gcc-2.95, gcc-3.3, and gcc-4.0
and use all of these (so if I release software I have at least tested on
those, prevents 1000 emails of long compile error listing.
The thing is I use scripts to switch (I use scripts for everything it seems).
More later.

Firefox 1.5.0.3 finally works, well at least the one site I tried did
and only if it's inside /usr/lib/mozilla-firefox.
Good!!


If I tried to do
something like /usr/lib/firefox1.07/run-mozilla.sh or firefox-bin,
they just won't work, firefox-bin gives an error about loading
libmozjs.so which makes me think it's still trying to load from
/usr/lib/mozilla-firefox instead of where itself is.

OK, those scripts, I will try to explain.
I put al my scripts in /usr/local/sbin/ but you could do this
in /usr/local/bin/ too:

cd /usr/local/bin/

Use some editor (I use joe) to create a text file 'my_firefox'.

Enter in that file:

cd /home/myusername/firefox/firefox
../firefox

Save the file and exit the editor.
Now do:
chmod +x my_firefox


Now you have a new command on your system, anytime you type:
my_firefox
it will start up that one referenced in the script.

But I do feel like I'm getting somewhere this year, I've actually been
doing daily stuff on Linux instead of just staring at it and going
what now?

Thanks a lot for the advice and help!

You are welcome.

 

[The little lost angel]

Not average, to be sure. I do think that most like to see what
they've bought. They can't "see" a 10% (likely even 50%) processor
improvement.

But they sure can brag about that extra 5fps or 100 3dmarks

Did they try larger fonts? Did you change them back to 60Hz too?
Around here I see more people stuck at 60Hz. AaaK! My manager
used to have a monitor running at 60Hz in his office. Couldn't
stand being around there. Now that they're rolling out LCDs to the
engineers it's not so bad. ;-)

I upsized their fonts, they didn't like it one bit. Of course I am not
that evil to put them back on 60hz! They just didn't like the "size"

Prestige trumps common sense.

Very often with boys.

Ok, who is still at 17"? ;-) My wife was kinda lost for a while
when I put the 20" in. She has a 17" LCD at work and the 20" was
overwhelming at first. In a month or so she'll probably be beating
on her boss to get a bigger screen. ;-)

Most offices I visit are still on 17" or 15" LCD. Quite a few of my
relatives are still "happy" with their 17" and see no point in
spending money when it's working fine.

 

[George Macdonald]

That would be too long to wait for somebody already on the verge of
upgrading. 1~2 month or so is reasonable, 6 to 8 months isn't.

The point is that people are always "waiting".. for good reason or no. I
"need" a couple of computers for the office - I'm not waiting for
*anything* and certainly not for what *I* expect to see from Conroe. The
bottom line here is that while it *may* have somewhat superior performance
when it arrives for the intended use, I still expect mbrds to be more
expensive for that performance -- Bad Ass... oops Axe -- and right now P4
does *not* cut the mustard and Athlon64 does.

 

[George Macdonald]

I've been trying so many "new" things, I'm getting a headache
FF's problem is likely due to my inexperience with
paths/locations/shell scripts on Linux more than anything else.

1.07 works fine but I just like having the same 1.5 on both my Windws
and Linux environment. Fotunatey for me, Firefox has never given me
any trouble that wasn't the site's developer's issue (read: IE only
designs) so I'm not that keen on changing it.

I'm close to the point where I am losing trust in FF for on-line buying...
the acid test for me - have to look into whether Seamonkey can import FF
profiles now.<shrug>

 

[George Macdonald]

Thanks. It seems markedly faster. There are a few things I miss
(icons on the toolbar, for one). Exporting my bookmarks from
Firefox into Seamonkey was simple enough. I'll have to put it on
my other systems.

Yeah isn't that funny - Firefox was supposed to be "lean & mean" but
Seamonkey feels faster.

 

[nobody]

On your part.

Now we go personal. Don't you have any argument that is based more on
logic and less on emotions? Well, seems like you don't... Too bad...

So he almost certainly knows more about it than you do.

Yes sure it wasn't me to run the Intel stock into the ground. If I
managed my personal finances the way Otellini managed Intel, I'd be
bankrupt.

With respect,

NNN

 

[The little lost angel]

The point is that people are always "waiting".. for good reason or no. I
"need" a couple of computers for the office - I'm not waiting for
*anything* and certainly not for what *I* expect to see from Conroe. The
bottom line here is that while it *may* have somewhat superior performance
when it arrives for the intended use, I still expect mbrds to be more
expensive for that performance -- Bad Ass... oops Axe -- and right now P4
does *not* cut the mustard and Athlon64 does.

Well, I guess if you *NEED* it *NOW* then obviously waiting isn't an
option. But for those who are *planning* or *thinking* of upgrading
now, it shouldn't be a problem just holding out for a few weeks to see
what happens.

 

[The little lost angel]

No, you did it right. I would call these reasonably consistant,
195 ns +/-5%. since the system has overhead tasks and might
need to scrounge up RAM. To be more accurate, I should use RDTSC
after the pages have been filled.

On an IBM R50, Intel "Centrino" (should be i855GM/GME) Celeron-M 1.7
using Ubuntu 6.06B liveCD in CLI, I'm about 135~137ns, with some odd
readings that cluster around 145 or 165ns readings.

if i tried Jan's suggestion and did
nice -n -19 time ./a.out I get pretty much the same clustering of
results at 1.35~1.36 1.44-1.46 1.61-1.62

On an A64 2.25Ghz with HT at 750Mhz and ram locked at 266Mhz safe
timings on NF4 Ultra chipset, it's 100ns to 107ns.

Hope these figures would be useful for ya

 

[George Macdonald]

Well, I guess if you *NEED* it *NOW* then obviously waiting isn't an
option. But for those who are *planning* or *thinking* of upgrading
now, it shouldn't be a problem just holding out for a few weeks to see
what happens.

If you count since the start of the iFUD campaign, it's a little more than
a few weeks that some have been *waiting".

 

[The little lost angel]

If you count since the start of the iFUD campaign, it's a little more than
a few weeks that some have been *waiting".

Well, if the person was planning two months ago and needed the
performance within a month, then he/she was being foolish waiting
until June/July for it. But at this point, it would be worthwhile to
wait.

I guess ultimately it boils down to this one thing: How urgent do you
need it? Only the person in question can decide that

 

[The little lost angel]

Those are odd timings for A64/NF4... any reason for 750MHz and 266MHz(DDR
?)? Was this a laptop?

No, this was somebody's else computer because I didn't want to reboot
mine in the middle of downloads

According to him, the strange timings are due to a need to ensure old
DDR266 modules worked with newer DDR400 modules while getting as high
a clockspeed on the lowest possible cpu multiplier without worrying
about the default 800Mhz HT being unable to take it so HT was set to
3x.

 

[George Macdonald]

On an IBM R50, Intel "Centrino" (should be i855GM/GME) Celeron-M 1.7
using Ubuntu 6.06B liveCD in CLI, I'm about 135~137ns, with some odd
readings that cluster around 145 or 165ns readings.

if i tried Jan's suggestion and did
nice -n -19 time ./a.out I get pretty much the same clustering of
results at 1.35~1.36 1.44-1.46 1.61-1.62

On an A64 2.25Ghz with HT at 750Mhz and ram locked at 266Mhz safe
timings on NF4 Ultra chipset, it's 100ns to 107ns.

Those are odd timings for A64/NF4... any reason for 750MHz and 266MHz(DDR
?)? Was this a laptop?

 

[George Macdonald]

No, this was somebody's else computer because I didn't want to reboot
mine in the middle of downloads

According to him, the strange timings are due to a need to ensure old
DDR266 modules worked with newer DDR400 modules while getting as high
a clockspeed on the lowest possible cpu multiplier without worrying
about the default 800Mhz HT being unable to take it so HT was set to
3x.

Hmm, so one of those early nForce4-4x "binned down" parts? I wouldn't have
bought one but I thought the word was that most would run 1Ghz HT OK, i.e.
4x multiplier in this case.

Is there any need for this "lowest possible multiplier" trickery in a
non-FSB system? The usual 200MHz base system clock in an AMD system is
just a base system clock which gets multiplied up and, though I could be
wrong -- docs are vague -- I'm pretty sure that AMD does not run the
internal North Bridge or any other part at that 200MHz base clock. The
memory clock is derived from dividing down from the CPU clock, in this case
the 2.25GHz.