Recently been experimenting in mining Monero (XMR) and seeing one of my machines is surprisingly underperforming the others in terms of average hash rate. Both are using CPU only for mining, and running 100% for the mining at the Linux command prompt with no GUI services. Connected to the same network via home Wifi from the same room. Seeking some kind of explanation on why I might be seeing these results!
System Specifications:
1) Dell Optiplex 790 Ultra Small Form Factor PC
2) HP Compaq 6005 Small Form Factor PC
It is the (poor) performance of the HP with the AMD processor that surprises me! This is a straight Quad Core processor, as compared to the Dell with the Intel i3-2120 which is a hyperthreaded Dual Core processor. Furthermore, while the AMD's clock and system memory is slightly slower, it has more L1/L2/L3 cache per core than the Intel's. Overall, with double the number of cores, I was expecting something more like 800 H/s or better from the HP-AMD, but strangely these two machines are performing nearly the same.
I'm wondering if there is some other factor that could explain why these two computers are producing similar results?
System Specifications:
1) Dell Optiplex 790 Ultra Small Form Factor PC
- Intel Core i3-2120 Processor 3.30GHz (2 Cores, 4 Threads, L1: 128KB, L2: 0.5MB, L3: 3MB)
- 6GB of DDR3 non-ECC Unbuffered RAM (DDR3 1333 MT/s PC3-10600 1.5 volt CAS latency 9)
- Avg. Hash Rate 460 H/s
2) HP Compaq 6005 Small Form Factor PC
- AMD Phenom II X4 B95 Processor 3.00 GHz (4 Core, 4 Threads, L1: 512KB, L2: 2.0MB, L3: 6MB)
- 16GB of DDR3 non-ECC Unbuffered RAM ( DDR3 1066 MT/s PC3-8500 1.5 volt CAS latency 8)
- Avg. Hash Rate 500 H/s
It is the (poor) performance of the HP with the AMD processor that surprises me! This is a straight Quad Core processor, as compared to the Dell with the Intel i3-2120 which is a hyperthreaded Dual Core processor. Furthermore, while the AMD's clock and system memory is slightly slower, it has more L1/L2/L3 cache per core than the Intel's. Overall, with double the number of cores, I was expecting something more like 800 H/s or better from the HP-AMD, but strangely these two machines are performing nearly the same.
I'm wondering if there is some other factor that could explain why these two computers are producing similar results?
Last edited: