Your are welcome
Good work sandin
Test: Dual/Quad Core optimization
Your time: 23.8289 sec
π (pi) result: 3.14159265358979
Your CPU: Intel® Core2 Duo CPU T7300 @ 2.00GHz
You can use & "Your CPU: " & StringStripWS($processor_name, 7) in line 170 and 486 to compact the CPU output.
And CPU usage during benchmark on my notebook for both CPU cores is "only" 50%
ya, I changed the stringstrip in line 471, and as for 50% of your CPU, I tried many methods of overloading CPU, and found out that complicated calculation formula would overload CPU the most, I couldn't make it 100% myself either, AutoIt is limited to only 15 decimals, if that could be changed I'm sure the script would overload CPU more than 50%
Why doesn't my gui look like the one in your screenshots?? Are you keeping the working script for yourself?
strange, I uploaded script with some modifications, try now.
Does it work with two processors? (yes, I mean PROCESSORS, not cores)
I got a dual-processor computer at home, (now at school) so I could test it if it doesn't work.
Also, Does my RAM Memory make any difference in the results?
There's only one way to find out, run the script and monitor CPU usage in task manager. No, ram shouldn't make much difference.
I have a C2D T7200 @2.00 GHz with 4MB L2 cache (667MHz FSB)... It's the older version of the T7300 (which has 4MB of cache, running on a 800Mhz FSB) but I get a result of 43 seconds.. The 7300 is a newer processor but nearly double the performance of the T7200??
I also have a brand new C2D P8400 @2.26GHz with 3MB L2 cache running on a 1066Mhz FSB.. The result on that is 35 seconds... (sounds right considering it's slightly faster than the T7200)
So there is really no way you could have gotten a ~24 sec result on a T7300 (unless you OCed it to what.. 3.8Ghz?? and the T7300 is a notebook CPU at that). What's your windows performance index score for the CPU?
As for the program itself: It hardly crosses 60% on both my cores on either of my laptops... How can it be a CPU benchmarking s/w then?
as for 60%, it's the same answer I gave to UEZ, and I stated this in the 1st post, but your results sounds little bigger then they should be, maybe some other high resource taker application was working on the background?