Geekbench results are different for 12-core

Hello,
I'm using a 12-core Mid 2010 2,66 GhZ. After having some performance troubles I've used Geekbench and found that the very same system has very different benchmark results. Following my results (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/519313)
Integer
Processor integer performance
17404
19222
Floating Point
Processor floating point performance
33928
Memory
Memory performance
4194
Stream
Memory bandwidth performance
4178
Another system with the same Processor, Motherboard, OS, etc. shows this result (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/313784)
Integer
Processor integer performance
22938
23771
Floating Point
Processor floating point performance
40492
Memory
Memory performance
4707
Stream
Memory bandwidth performance
6299
The only difference between them, I have 32 GB RAM and the faster system has 24 GB RAM, but is it possible that this will cause such a performance difference?

I've bought it... and now, the result is much faster... http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/519415
Integer
Processor integer performance
22033
22447
Floating Point
Processor floating point performance
37994
Memory
Memory performance
4598
Stream
Memory bandwidth performance
5186
Unbelievable, but true! I know that Geekbench didn't make my system faster, but the results better...
So there's only a slight difference left, which could probably be eliminated by using only 3 memory slots...

Similar Messages

Balance Display are different for the same GL account in FS10N & FAGLB03

Hi,
It was noted that the GL account Balance Display are different for the same GL account in FS10N & FAGLB03.
Please advice what would have cause the matter.
Thank you,
Regards,

Hi Vani,
Think you are using version 6.0.
I had observed that TCode FAGLB03, displayes balances for particular Ledger (0L) leading by default.
While in FS10N there is no option for selecting ledger.
Try FAGLB03 with all ledgers one by one.
Add the total and then try to matc wiht FS10N.
Assign points of Good.
thanks

BEx:Hierarchies in DIM and FAC are different for Cost Element

Hi Experts,
Whenever we execute a report we are getting a warning message as "Hierarchies in DIM and FAC are different for Cost Element", but in report level we are not maintaining hierarchy properties for Cost Element.
We have executed Master Data tests in RSRV also and still the problem.
Is any other to do to get rid of this warning message?
Thanks in Advance.
Regards,
RAO.

Hi all,
I face the issue like this but with transaction KOAP - Plan settlement
But, the problem is that, I do not active reconciliation ledger, so I do not maintain any thing relate to reconciation ledger or adjustment posting? I can do transaction "actual settlement" without error
So, How this error come to me?
And how I can fix it?
Thanks all!

The risk analysis results are different when choose report type as "summary" and "management" summary

Hello experts,
I found a expired user with SOD conflicts in "management summary" report format, but it doesn't exist in "Summary" report. You can find the screenshot in attached file. The user name is "YINPENG2_BK".
What happened? The result of different report formats are from different data source?
Sincerely yours,
Lynn

Hi Lynn,
that's not an issue from the system. It's more a handling issue as the results are splitted into several result sets. In management summary view you have only one result set as it's grouped by user and risk, whereas you have more than one in summary view (as you have multple entries for each user and risk).
Change to the second, third, etc. result set and you will see the user in the list:
Regards,
Alessandro

Search results are differed in Quick and candidate searches

Hi Everyone,
I am using ECC 6 EhP 5 system with Trex search 7.10.48.
We are having a scenario where search is behaving differently in different places.
We are able to find some Locked candidates in quick Search (ERC_C_QUICK_SEARCH_UI) as well as in Candidate Search.
But as per standard behaviour the Locked candidates should not be able to search in Candidate Search.
So how to restrict the Locked candidates to able to see in Candidate search.
I tried SNOTE 1301016, i confused how to use that one.
Please help if you have faced similar issues.
Kind regards
Chetan

Hi Nicole,
I am able to find one entry in IT5134, So exactly where we need to check for the attachment status.
Below are the table entries
MANDT:300 PLVAR :01 OTYPE:NA OBJID: 50027289 SUBTY:0001 ISTAT:1 BEGDA: 17.03.2011 ENDDA: 31.12.9999 INFTY:5134 OTJID: NA50027289 AEDTM: 17.03.2011 UNAME: AMXJUE ATT TYPE: 12 ATTACHMENT:1 LANGUAGE:EN ATT HEADER: Juechter 2011 REC GUID: ATT GUID:
Thanks for your help.
Kind regards
Chetan

SWITCHOVER_STATUS value are different for Oracle 11gR1 and 11gR2

Hi All,
I would like to know why is there a difference in the SQL output when run on a 11gR1 and 11gR2 Primary database in a DataGuard configuration.
On a 11gR1 Primary database
Open an SQL Session on the Primary database and run the SQL statement
SQL> select switchover_status from v$database;
To Standby
Now open a second SQL Session
Run the above SQL statement
SQL> select switchover_status from v$database;
Sessions Active
Now, when I do the same on a 11gR2 Primary database here is the result
On a 11gR2 Primary database
Open an SQL Session on the Primary database and run the SQL statement
SQL> select switchover_status from v$database;
To Standby
Now open a second SQL Session
Run the above SQL statement
SQL> select switchover_status from v$database;
To Standby
Is this a bug in 11gR2 ? Is there a patch/fix available ?
Oracle 11gR2 version 11.2.0.1.0
TIA,
Sudhir

Hello Loic,
The result on the Standby Database is "Not Allowed". This is because there is no alternative Standby Available.
I have some scripts which does the switchover based on the Database status. As per Oracle 11gR2 DataGuard Admin docs.
Cut pasted for Oracle DataGuard Admin docs.
Step 1 Verify that the primary database can be switched to the standby role.
SQL> SELECT SWITCHOVER_STATUS FROM V$DATABASE;
SWITCHOVER_STATUS
TO STANDBY
1 row selected
Note: The WITH SESSION SHUTDOWN clause can be omitted from
the switchover statement if the query performed in the previous step
returned a value of TO STANDBY.
When I use SQL statement "ALTER DATABASE COMMIT TO SWITCHOVER TO PHYSICAL STANDBY;" and if there are Active SQL sessions then I get the error
ALTER DATABASE COMMIT TO SWITCHOVER TO PHYSICAL STANDBY *
ORA-01093: ALTER DATABASE CLOSE only permitted with no sessions connected
Thanks,
Sudhir

Explain plan results are different in SQL Developer than SQL Plus

My Environment:
SQL Developer 1.0.0.15.27
Platform where SQL Developer is running: Windows XP 2002 SP2
Oracle Database and Client 9.2.0.7
Optimizer_mode: FIRST_ROWS
I have the following SQL statement:
SELECT a1.comp_id
FROM temp_au_company a0, au_company a1
WHERE :b2 = a0.temp_emp_code
AND a0.comp_id = a1.comp_id
AND a0.sls_terr_code != a1.sls_terr_code
AND a1.last_mdfy_date > :b1
When I run an Explain in SQL Developer I get the following access path (which is the one I really want):
SELECT STATEMENT TABLE ACCESS(BY INDEX ROWID) FEDLINK.AU_COMPANY NESTED LOOPS INDEX(RANGE SCAN)
FEDLINK.UX2_TEMP_AU_COMPANY
INDEX(RANGE SCAN) FEDLINK.PX1_COMPANY
However, when I execute the statement with sql_trace turned on and use tkprof to generate the actual access path, the statement executes as follows (which is WAY more expensive):
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 1 3.58 6.68 28136 29232 0 0
total 3 3.58 6.69 28136 29232 0 0
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer goal: FIRST_ROWS
Parsing user id: 979 (FEDLINK) (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
0 NESTED LOOPS
0 TABLE ACCESS FULL AU_COMPANY
0 INDEX RANGE SCAN UX2_TEMP_AU_COMPANY (object id 49783)
Notice the FULL access of au_company.
I understand that SQL Developer has nothing to do with why the statement executed the way it did, but why is the Explain in SQL Developer different than the actual execution plan?
Added note....when I run the explain in SQL Plus it is the same as the actual execution. Here is the explain from SQL Plus:
explain plan for SELECT a1.comp_id
FROM temp_au_company a0, au_company a1
WHERE '1' = a0.temp_emp_code
AND a0.comp_id = a1.comp_id
AND a0.sls_terr_code != a1.sls_terr_code
AND a1.last_mdfy_date > '01-MAY-2006';
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 2 | 76 | 2597 |
| 1 | NESTED LOOPS | | 2 | 76 | 2597 |
| 2 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | AU_COMPANY | 2 | 42 | 2595 |
| 3 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | UX2_TEMP_AU_COMPANY | 1 | 17 | 2
Thanks,
Brenda

The explain is different (full scan of au_company in SQL Plus / index access in SQL Developer) even when I use variables in SQL Plus. Here is the output for SQL Plus using variables instead of literals:
SQL> variable b1 varchar2
SQL> variable b2 char
SQL> explain plan for SELECT a1.comp_id
2 FROM temp_au_company a0, au_company a1
3 WHERE :b2 = a0.temp_emp_code
4 AND a0.comp_id = a1.comp_id
5 AND a0.sls_terr_code != a1.sls_terr_code
6 AND a1.last_mdfy_date > :b1
7 /
Explained.
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 3184 | 118K| 2995 |
| 1 | HASH JOIN | | 3184 | 118K| 2995 |
| 2 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | UX2_TEMP_AU_COMPANY | 3187 | 54179 | 3 |
| 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | AU_COMPANY | 24009 | 492K| 2983 |
Any other ideas? They should be the same.
Brenda

Table width are different for IE, than with MZFX & GLE

Hi everyone,
I have three tables and would like them to be the same width (for looks).
I tried the following:
#code_selection {
width:50px;
margin-left:30%;
#wash_type {
width:398px;
margin-left:30%;
#wash_schedule {
width:398px;
margin-left:30%;
In IE, they are not aligned, but in Mozilla & Google they are?
Can someone explain, what's happening?
Thank you.

Sorry Jon,
The wrong/bad alignment:
 | Table1 |
 | Table2 |
 | Table3 |
The right/good alignment:
 | Table1 |
 | Table2 |
 | Table3 |
I don't know how this is going to come out, but it suppose to be aligned perfectly one on top of the other.
Here is the site: http://108.132.14.185:80 <------- look at tab codes
Let me know if this is still unclear? I will try again.

WIP results are zero for PCC

Dear FI Experts,
I am calculating WIP for product Cost Collector in transaction KKAS. The posting rules and update for line ID are configured with proper GL account and Cost elements for posting rules and update.
When I execute transaction the reults are showing zero in both columns WIP and WIP (chg). There is no error message. I tried display in both company code and controlling area currency.
Please advise to overcome this issue.
Thanks and regards
Murugesan

Hi,
This was resolved. We had to increase the values in the T parameter for the negative test for the Dynamic moving average for all the periods ( 6,13 and 26 weeks). We set it to 1.5 and it worked.

How to get result behave differently for one column?

Hi,
I have 3 columns in a Bex report say A, B and C.
C = A % B.
Results for columns as desired :
Result of A = Summation of all values of A
Result of B = Summation of all values of B
Result of C = Result of A % Result of B.
But at present result for C = Summation of all values of C.
How to achieve the result for C as desired i.e Result of A % Result of B?
Plz note formula for column C is already there and equal to A% B.
All help appreciated and rewarded by points.
Thanks,
Gaurav
Message was edited by:
 Gaurav
Message was edited by:
 Gaurav

Gaurav,
Just interested ..
Isn't your scenario something like this?
A B C (%)
2 4 50
2 8 25
4 12 75 (Result) this is right 4%12
Would n't the Result of percentages C be equal to Result of A % Result of B?
Maybe I am missing something completely.
Mathew.
Message was edited by:
 Mathew Muthalaly

Results are different when printing from CS5 and CS4

A file that printed fine with Photoshop CS 4 printed very dark when printed with CS5, with no changes made to the settings. Has anyone else had this problem?

RE: "You don't indicate what Xerox printers you have"
In my first post I named it, is that the information you need?
Docucolor 3535 using Splash 3535
That's interesting, so I have to find a way to turn off the printer's Color Management function? I mailed them, hope they can tell me how to do it easily. They usually just tell me to not use any profiles and so on, but that's the general rule in this area, I'm really tired of hearing it. Everybody seems to think profiles and LAB mode are nuclear science and I should stay away from it.
Anyway, the test image I'm using is a simple photograph (size A3, 300dpi), so no transparencies at all. I'm placing this image into an equally large ID file and print it from ID, then export it to PDF-X/3 and print it from Acrobat. Hope that helps.

HT1420 I have more then 5 macs and all are different for different use.

I have 7 computers and Apple tell me that they dont autorize more then 5, cant down load movies and sync, what can be done about this

bluesly144 wrote:
.....what can be done about this
Nothing.
Choose the 5 you want to authorise.

Different EvDre results in different PC

Hi,
my question is very simple but it makes me fool.
I build new report with EvDre, but the results are different when we lunch it in different personal computer.
For example, in my PC (logged in with my user and password) I return my values. In an other PC, logged in with the same user, EvDre report gives me no results.
How can I resolve it?
Thanks in advance.

PLease include your version when posting; Assuming you are using BPC 7.0, the first test I would run on the PC that is not returning the values under the same ID as the first PC, is a Report Wizard report. DO those 2 reports match in values? So if you run a trend report on both PC's using the exact same point-of-view from the Action Pane member settings, do you get the same values?
Then create a simple EVDRE report and test results for both PC's.
If that doesn't work, the next thing to do is run from BPC for Excel, etools, Client OPtions, Clear Local Application information. Then exit. Logging back in, please go through the Connection Wizard. Retest the wizard and the EVDRE reports.
Hope this helps.

Coldfusion Oracle query results are inaccurate

I have run the exact same query in toad and in oci8 php and get the same results. In coldfusion the results are different. I made sure the query is not being cached. What could be the reason for this?

DB version 11
CF version 9
CF driver oracle
CF query
<cfquery name="getUser_ac" datasource="oracle">
 SELECT sibinst_pidm as pidm
 FROM sibinst a
 WHERE a.sibinst_fcst_code = 'AC'
</cfquery>
<cfoutput>
 <cfloop query = "getUser_ac">
 #getUser_ac.pidm# 
 </cfloop>
</cfoutput>
TOAD query
SELECT sibinst_pidm as pidm
FROM sibinst a
WHERE a.sibinst_fcst_code = 'AC'
CF results Records=5845
TOAD results Records=5912
If you need more information let me know.

Windows 8.1 PC, using reader, when searching a folder containing approx 100 doc's. If i search for a word, no results are returned. only the doc names can be found but nothing from within the doc. This is a new problem and was not the case before.

Windows 8.1 PC, using reader, when searching a folder containing approx 100 doc's. If i search for a word, no results are returned. only the doc names can be found but nothing from within the doc.
This is a new problem and was not the case before.

Works perfectly fine for me with the latest Reader version (11.0.09).
You write that it worked "before"; before what? An update? Update from what version to what version?

Geekbench results are different for 12-core

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for