I did a simple benchmark using PC Wizard 2008 to test the effectiveness of AMD Optimizer here

I am not sure if my result is truly reflective with regards to AMD Optimizer can someone double confirm using other benchmarks?

-------------------------
Acer Aspire 4530
AMD Turion X2 2.1GHZ RM-72 1MB L2 Cache
4GB DDR2 667MHZ
NVIDIA 9100M G
320GB WD BEKT
http://aspiregemstone.blogspot.com/

for starters YOUR MISSING the point.

Not so much of a gain but more so the effectiveness of how well both cores are utilized , keeping the temps on both cores more even and allowing for better multitasking and better data threw put of the CPU.

Stop benching the pore thing and watch and see if both cores are evenly utilized silly.

MY GOD , no it don't speed it up, it was never intended to do so. It was meant to force even threading of applications and games over multi cores.

I did a couple of other benchmarks and saw no improvement at all beyond margin of error.

As Adam said (albeit a little harsh) it is probably better in real-world scenarios since the CPU is going through unexpected loops and different code paths and not predefined ones like in synthetic benchmarks.

Most applications shouldn't be using the TSC anyway under Windows:

Under Windows platforms, Microsoft strongly discourages using the TSC for high-resolution timing, providing instead the Windows APIs QueryPerformanceCounter and QueryPerformanceFrequency.

I don't think the Dual-core optimizer load balances the cores, as it only synchronizes the TSC on each core.

Edited: 11/10/2008 at 03:25 PM by Firestrider

what kind of tests are you trying to run?
I am looking at system load, core temps being equall. core utilization etc not SPEED due to it have no effect on speed but maybe in a multi task scenario.

please post your findings here.

here are mine

Test base Far cry 2 with vista x86 ultimate drivers 180.43 - for starers

With optimizer and threaded optimization set to auto



With optimizer and threaded optimization set to on



with no optimizer and threaded optimization set to on



with no optimizer and threaded optimization set to auto



watching the average rates we see the optimizer has a rather profound effect when used with threading optimization in video drivers. The use of the optimizer and threaded optimization drops over all system load and keeps core utilization at a 1% difference. This was the point to optimizing the cores. Increasing speed was never part of it.

There is a little bit of load balancing but not much.

I played CoD4 with max AA/AF at 1440x900 resolution for about 3 minutes each time and here are the results:

The top chart is with the core optimiser installed and the bottom is without. I used xperf (great tool imo) to trace the performance in game.

The red line is core 1, the blue line is core 2.

http://img171.imageshack.us/my...?image=codtracegl3.jpg

Edited: 11/10/2008 at 04:17 PM by Firestrider

the results are very hard to make heads or tails off. Try Everest ultimate please. much easier to read lol.