Dell E1505 with dual core 1.83Ghz Proc result

FrigidNDEditing wrote on 8/24/2006, 10:50 PM

I got this little laptop for school, but thought I'd try some rendering just to see how it did, wasn't bad. Took the old rendertest.veg from the vasst sight (the one from 2002) and I got a result of 47s with a 5400 rpm drive (not that that makes much dif. since it's all gen media) and a T2400 1.83 Ghz centrino core duo. Anyway just thought I'd share :)

Dave

Comments

apit34356 wrote on 8/25/2006, 1:01 AM

Dave, could you "reflesh" the old memory about the old results using VASST's veg compared to your new results.

FrigidNDEditing wrote on 8/25/2006, 9:28 AM

not very well, ha ha ha :) Sorry I'd say best would be to do a search - Glen Chann seemed to have a pretty good handle on what's a good result in the past (seems to me), but I can't recall too well right now (could be the impending wedding one of my dear freinds has coming up tommorow).

Dave

Ecquillii wrote on 8/28/2006, 6:28 PM

Reference
Here

GlennChan wrote on 8/29/2006, 5:07 PM

Updated. :)

I'm still looking for results of the new Core2 processors... somebody please run a benchmark. (They are shipping now right??; As you can tell, I've been out of it.)

---

39s - AMD X2 4600+
SOURCE: JohnnyRoy @ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=423138&Replies=4

*39s/74s - AMD X2 4400+ (Toledo core, 2X2.2ghz, 2X1MB cache, no dual channel memory, Vegas 6.0b)
SOURCE: philfort@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=399447&Replies=26

*39s - AMD X2 4400+ overclocked to 2420mhz
SOURCE: Jayster @ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=465519&Replies=0

*40s/76s - AMD X2 4400+ (Toledo core, 2X2.2ghz, 2X1MB cache, no dual channel memory, Vegas 6.0b)
SOURCE: TheRhino@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=396239&Replies=61

44s - Pentium D 3.0ghz
SOURCE: GMElliot @ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=454055
see also: http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=423138&Replies=8 (45s)

47s - Core Duo 1.83Ghz (laptop)

*75s - P4 3.6ghz overclocked from 3.0 Pentium. A new 5xx-series 3.6ghz should be as fast or slightly slower.
SOURCE: Stormcrow@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=396239&Replies=57

78s- AMD64 3700+ (san diego core??? [2.2ghz, 1MB cache], vegas 6, dual channel RAM)
SOURCE: Charley Gallgher@ http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=45178&page=2&pp=15

*78s- P4 3.2 overclocked to 3.8ghz (Northwood core???, 800FSB [it's overclocked, so the FSB is actually higher])
SOURCE: jamcas@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=256422

79s- AMD64 3400+ (unknown core, Vegas 6)
SOURCE: Charley Gallagher@ http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=45178&page=2&pp=15

89s- 3.0E Pentium Prescott (865 chipset, dual channel RAM, Vegas 5)
SOURCE: Glenn Chan@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=396239&Replies=57

90s - 2.8ghz Pentium (Prescott)
SOURCE: TalawaMan@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4&MessageID=262716

90s - Opteron 246 2.0ghz X 2 (dual channel memory, old 2004 core, *VEGAS 5*)
SOURCE: rohde@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=256422
*Please keep in mind Vegas6 has optimizations for dual processors, while Vegas 5 does not.

93s - AMD64 3200+ (2004, so probably old core)
SOURCE: PH125@ http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=256422
99s is Sid Phillip's report in the same thread.

95s - AMD64 3000+ (2.00ghz, 512kb cache, single channel, socket 754, 2004 core)
SOURCE: ibliss@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=256422

114s - Pentium-M 1.7ghz laptop
SOURCE: The_Jeff@ http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4&MessageID=262716

128s - Sempron 2400+ 1.4ghz (Palmero core, S754, 256KB cache)
SOURCE: Glenn Chan

Athlon XP: There are results if you look around. They aren't as fast as Pentiums or AMD64.

Platforms that support dual channel can run a few percent slower when running memory single channel. See Glenn Chan's (that's me) benchmarks at
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18841
Systems with 2 pairs of identical RAM may also perform slightly faster.

Northwood-core Pentiums are about 6% slower than Prescott-cores (the 5xx series). Northwoods are typically faster at everything else, and consume less electricity.

Overclocked systems are not necessarily stable. As well, they may perform slightly better or worse than a stock system running at the same clock speed. Overclocking on Intel/Pentium platform implies an increase in FSB speed, and an increase or decrease in RAM speed (depends on the RAM they use).

Vegas 6 results may differ from V5 results. see http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=396239&Replies=57
Johnmeyer writes:
My results on the old render test, using a 2.8 GHz P4, no hyperthreading:

Vegas 6.0b 1:46
Vegas 5.0d 1:43

---

These results are for the original rendertest.veg, not the new one. You can download it from:
http://www.vasst.com/resource.aspx?id=35443070-0b67-4a2e-807c-a7f431ebd02d

FrigidNDEditing wrote on 8/29/2006, 5:36 PM

Better hurry now, cuz Vegas is changing soon and then all these results are mute - MUAHHAAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Dave :)

GlennChan wrote on 8/29/2006, 7:56 PM

Dangit, you may be right.

...well, you better be!

FrigidNDEditing wrote on 8/29/2006, 8:32 PM

I hope I am :)

Dave