Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Mainboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

Memory Prices

Shop



Sharky Extreme :

Auto Insurance
Quotes

Latest News


- Acer Fires Up Two New Ferrari Notebooks
- Belkin Debuts Docking Station for ExpressCard-Equipped Notebooks
- Logitech 5.1 Speaker System Puts Your Ears At Eye Level
- Dell, Nvidia, and Intel Fire Up Overclockable Gaming Notebook
- Gateway Puts Premium Components Into Affordable Home Desktop
News Archives

Features

- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with ATI's Terry Makedon
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Seagate's Joni Clark
- Half-Life 2 Review
- DOOM 3 Review
- Unreal Tournament 2004 Review

Buyer's Guides

- September High-end Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- September Value Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- October Extreme Gaming PC Buyer's Guide

HARDWARE

  • CPUs


  • Motherboards

    - DFI LANPARTY UT nF4 Ultra-D Motherboard Review

  • Video Cards

    - Gigabyte GeForce 7600 GT 256MB Review
    - ASUS EN7900GT TOP 256MB Review
    - ASUS EN7600GT Silent 256MB Review
    - Biostar GeForce 7900 GT 256MB Review





  • SharkyForums.Com - Print: How long does it take your comp to do this????

    How long does it take your comp to do this????
    By bihwoo April 14, 2001, 01:13 PM

    This is a cool benchmark that I just stumbled across. Just use windows calculator set ot scientific mode. Then type in 40,000 and press shift 1 or click the n! button

    Try computing 40,000!. That's 40,000 x 39,999 x 39,998....etc.....

    My P133 takes 7:36....for 40,000!
    2:57....for 30,000!
    I haven't tried yet, but I estimate just over ten minutes for (50,000!).

    NOTE - This test only works on win98 or later
    Try it and post your benchmark time.
    just ignore the window that comes up and says it will take forever.....it doesn't...it comes up every ten seconds so just leave there. Time it from when you clicked n! or typed shift 1

    By scott April 14, 2001, 01:27 PM

    By CastorR April 14, 2001, 02:06 PM

    HEHE...when i first did it I got an error that said this may take a long time to compute. Then aout 5-7 seconds later it was done. I have a 1.2 T-bird and all that fancy jaz.

    By OOAgentFiruz April 14, 2001, 02:20 PM

    About 6 seconds on my Athlon 850@950.

    By ynd69 April 14, 2001, 02:20 PM

    Takes approximately 25 seconds at 145FSB x 8 = 1160MHz (not my final overclocked speed, as I still waiting for my Mushkin RAM to get here). This time is from when I press Shift-1, and including the time when the computer asks me if I wish to continue with the operation, to the answer.

    By tituswolf April 14, 2001, 02:20 PM

    about 29 seconds

    By bihwoo April 14, 2001, 02:34 PM

    when the window comes up after 10 secs just leave it. It disapears by itself when it's done. The calculator still is working in the background. Try (100,000!) I estimated about an hour on my computer

    By GHeTTorAiD April 14, 2001, 02:41 PM

    ~8 seconds after the "may take a long time" dialog cool find lol

    By Mandorallen of Molynnr April 14, 2001, 02:51 PM

    I got that dialogue twice.

    Took me 23 seconds. Celeron 633@1062

    By foob April 14, 2001, 02:52 PM

    50 seconds from start to finish. P3 650

    By Waterman April 14, 2001, 03:21 PM

    65 on P3 550 @ 575
    25 on P3 800 @ 1024
    Both with Seti running in the background.
    30 on the 800 without Seti. Hmmm a speed increase with Seti. Odd.

    By Hey Yoda April 14, 2001, 03:52 PM

    32 seconds - Thunderbird 860

    By Arcadian April 14, 2001, 04:08 PM

    38 seconds for 40,000
    21 seconds for 30,000

    Pentium III @ 920MHz (8*115)

    Great. Now I know how fast my computer is with factorials.

    By ChencChris April 14, 2001, 04:09 PM

    15 seconds for 30000!
    29 seconds for 40000!
    46 seconds for 50000!

    By scott April 14, 2001, 04:18 PM

    5-6 seconds 1.2g TB

    By scott April 14, 2001, 04:32 PM

    quote:Originally posted by bihwoo:
    when the window comes up after 10 secs just leave it. It disapears by itself when it's done. The calculator still is working in the background. Try (100,000!) I estimated about an hour on my computer

    Just did 100,000-in 2 min. 30 sec.

    By scott April 14, 2001, 04:33 PM

    quote:Originally posted by bihwoo:
    when the window comes up after 10 secs just leave it. It disapears by itself when it's done. The calculator still is working in the background. Try (100,000!) I estimated about an hour on my computer

    oops

    By clickx17 April 14, 2001, 04:57 PM

    1 sec on 1.2ghz T-Bird @ 2.2ghz T-Bird 256ram.

    By bihwoo April 14, 2001, 05:01 PM

    no kidding!!!!!!!! 2.2 GHZ!!!!!! that rules....how's that? what fsb? 12.5x176?

    By seniorstooge April 14, 2001, 08:58 PM

    I ran 40000! using Windows calculator on a P!!! 700:
    OS/2 (w/ Seti) -> 46 sec
    OS/2 (no Seti) -> 46 sec
    Win98SE -> 46 sec

    On a 486 50:
    OS/2 (w/ Folding) -> about 39 minutes (had to answer door so maybe between 37 and 39 minutes)
    OS/2 (no Folding) -> N/A (didn't try)


    I whipped up a Rexx program to calculate 40000! (it's not efficient but it works):
    code:
    i = 40000
    s = 1.0
    do while i > 0
    s = s * i
    i = i - 1
    end
    say s

    The P!!! (w/ or w/o Seti) finished right away, and the 486 (w/ or w/o Folding) finished in 17 seconds. Rexx is interpreted so there are no compiler optimizations. That Windows calculator is slow!!!


    EDIT: changed "there is no" to "there are no"

    By AMD Soldier April 14, 2001, 09:09 PM

    Hmm mine doesn't even give me a warning sign intil about 100,000 hehe. Does it in about 4 seconds. Tbird 1.1 @ 1.23

    btw looks like Tbirds are in the lead here.

    By Vizer April 14, 2001, 10:08 PM

    took my
    cyrix mII 233 3:19
    old p90 15:57
    Tbird 1ghz 25 seconds

    By Ghettoweasel April 14, 2001, 10:56 PM

    ummm, about 3 seconds after the warning for 40k

    1.2 @ 1.49

    update:
    30k-11sec
    40k-19sec
    100k-2:20

    By Thoth April 14, 2001, 11:23 PM

    40k: celery400@500 1:20
    duron600@940 :28

    cool benchmark!

    By Abit400 April 14, 2001, 11:27 PM

    Hey seniorstooge, you still use OS/2!

    What version are you running, and do you use it for normal tasks?

    By KonGo-JeE April 15, 2001, 12:59 AM

    about 10 secs on a duron 800@1.05ghz

    By Ryan291 April 15, 2001, 01:22 AM

    27 seconds

    By seniorstooge April 16, 2001, 12:23 AM

    bihwoo:

    I was curious so I stuck in my older CPU's and set my CPU's to varying core speeds at stock FSB speeds. Timing started when I pressed "!", ignored the message, then ending timing when the answer came.

    PII 300:
    133/66 -> 4 min 40 sec
    233/66 -> 2 min 27 sec
    266/66 -> 2 min 8 sec
    300/66 -> 1 min 53 sec
    300/100 -> 1 min 53 sec
    350/100 -> 1 min 37 sec

    Celeron 466:
    466/66 -> 1 min 16 sec

    P!!! 700:
    466/66 -> 1 min 9 sec
    700/100 -> 0 min 46 sec


    I chose the 133/66 speed to compare with your Pentium 133 speed, and the 266/66 (a core speed multiple of 133) to compare with both.

    I chose the 300/66 and 300/100 to compare same core speed with different FSB speed. No difference in time so FSB speed doesn't matter for this particular benchmark test.

    I chose 233/66 to compare with both 466/66 speed as well as 700/100 speed (all core multiples of 233).

    I chose 350/100 to compare with 700/100 (core multiples of 350).


    Abit400:
    I use OS/2 Warp 4 + FP15. I do use it everyday for regular stuff (web surfing, spreadsheet, etc) + Seti in background. I have Win98SE to play games, although I played some win98 games under OS/2 -- Q2, Q3A, and Star Trek Elite Force (has Q3A engine) run, not great, but they run.

    By Newbie-Overclocker April 16, 2001, 12:35 AM

    DUAL p3ghz 40,000 7secs
    Pentium 4 1.4ghz I just built 4secs
    Pentium 3 850 23secs

    By mr. self destruct April 16, 2001, 12:38 AM

    25 seconds on 1GHz @ 1.1 :/

    By sww April 16, 2001, 12:43 AM

    Athlon@1.51 (11x144)

    40000! 19 secs
    100000! 144 secs

    I'm a little skeptical of those really low times some of you reported.

    My times are from the time I hit n! until I got a result. I got 1-5 windows depending on which calculation I did. I did both of these at least 3 times and my deviation was less than 5%.

    By Tensai April 16, 2001, 12:57 AM

    TB900@1050 (105x10)

    40000! about 25 seconds
    - average after about 5 tries

    By Odd44 April 16, 2001, 02:07 AM

    62 seconds on athlon 500 with asus k7m...i never thought a calculator could crush my computer! tried 100,000 but got bored waiting

    By patlo April 16, 2001, 04:34 AM

    T-Bird 1050mhz
    40000! 26sec
    from the time i hit n!

    By CastorR April 16, 2001, 04:35 AM

    quote:Originally posted by sww:
    Athlon@1.51 (11x144)

    40000! 19 secs
    100000! 144 secs

    I'm a little skeptical of those really low times some of you reported.

    My times are from the time I hit n! until I got a result. I got 1-5 windows depending on which calculation I did. I did both of these at least 3 times and my deviation was less than 5%.

    I can assure you mine are accurate, from the warning window till answer. However they were just me coundting seconds not a real stopwatch, same to me.

    By mrwhite April 16, 2001, 04:37 AM

    21 seconds for the 40000... that good?


    Contact Us | www.SharkyForums.com

    Copyright 1999, 2000 internet.com Corporation. All Rights Reserved.


    Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46

    previous page
    next page





    Copyright 2002 INT Media Group, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. About INT Media Group | Press Releases | Privacy Policy | Career Opportunities