LED Lamp PCBs Arrived
I ordered the parts for it yesterday, and almost screamed when several of the components were out of stock. But I found some shady sources to get the extra parts from.
Defcon talks posted online
The defcon talks from this year are available now:
http://www.defcon.org/html/links/dc-archives/dc-18-archive.html
I think the other stuff like the code for the badges will be posted soon.
-Rez
Defcon 18 summary
I like....hacking conferences.
First off, I did not participate in the Crack Me If You Can contest. I had all my code ready as well as some dictionaries, however the competition was ungodly. My home-brewn code was singlethreaded, and would take 4 days to go through a 2gb dictionary on my machine. The winners of this contest had 11 people with off the shelf software, and quad-core or greater with sli latest-gen gpu crunching power. I think the stats were that 60% of the hashes were cracked within 48 hours average across all teams.
I unfortunately did not get to participate in the badge hacking contest either. I arrived on the first day to registration at maybe 3:30pm, and they had just sold out all of the hackable badges at 2:00pm. So they gave me a paper badge. Luckily on the closing ceremony some extra 9 came in, and I got one. It's weird that Kingpin(the guy who designs the badges) doesn't like the arduino(referred to it as retarduino). Arduino is my first, but now I will have to try out the microcontroller on the badge and see what non arduino mcs are all about.
Altogether the talks this year were more mediocre than Defcon 17. Amongst these there were some gems however, and DC18 had more less shiny gems than DC17's less more shiny gems.
But the bad talks were baaaaaaad. There were guys giving python talks that admitted on stage that they only started learning python a week before their talk. There was a girl who demonstrated how to rip songs from internet websites........which any 'retarduino' as kingpin puts it, can do with 5 minutes of googling. Then there was a guy who just read off his slides which were a million pages long with no demonstration at the end. He basically theorycrafted.
Now, EFF is cool but the amount of EFF pimping was too much. I donated a little bit, but it seemed around every corner I was getting asked to donate and then being scowled/shunned for not giving more money.
So, one of the things EFF was doing to raise money during defcon was giving 50$ mowhawk haircuts. At the ending ceremony some EFF spokesperson(I think it was Kellie Brownell) was like "thanks for the money, we are SOO grateful", and someone in the audience yelled "wheres your mowhawk?" Then the audience started chanting "do it on stage, do it on stage," the EFF spokesperson said she would get one later and disappeared with haste. Everyone with a mowhawk in the audience, of which there were many, quickly realized how hard they were trolled. I lol'ed.
The How I Met Your Girlfriend talk was an all around 10. Every point made had a purpose, and it all fit together very nicely.
That said, there were many script based attacks. I'll be dipping my toe in this area from piqued curiosity.
There was an increase in talks relating to radio technology. DCFlux's moonbouncer was really cool, and the talk on how to intercept cellular GSM data. This defcon (18) was more useful from the hardware hacking side. Lots of "Oh I didn't think it would work but I never thought to look at it that way." Talks this year were waay more practical and elegant.
One thing that I didn't like though was the no camera policy was changed. You are now allowed to take 'public' photos, which means anybody can photograph anybody else at defcon.
-Rez
Phonophrenic in App Store
I already found 3 bugs, and will be submitting a patch shortly.
-Rez
My Descent
This is the second year I am going to Defcon, and for the past few days I have been trying to get up to speed on cracking hashes for a contest. I've never done this before.
My first reaction was to try brute force, so I whipped up a program in OSX to do it, but it became evident that the process would take too much time..
My second try was to do rainbow tables, but they can take longer. I cracked for three days and only got one password out of a practice hash list.
So now I am just going to gather all the dictionaries that I can and use them. The contest is Crack Me If You Can, and contestants will have two days to crack 53,000 hashes. The person who has cracked the most at the end wins.
The competition is totally hardcore though.
Leaving the 29th and coming back the 1st or 2nd.
-Rez
Phonophrenic in review
I reaally hope they approve this, because I went out of the way on the aesthetics, which for me is a total chore.
This is the app I was talking about that will replace Song Lottery, it gets random keywords from wikipedia, then searches the net for songs to stream to the device based on those keywords.
The icon is a bit bright, but that is to compensate for my ipod's dim screen. Not sure, but the colors are different on the device. The difference is about 20 brightness units in GIMP.
-Rez
iOS4 codesigning
Apple changed code-signing without updating the documentation. My clients reported problems, so I had to scour forums to find out what the problem was.
The first thing to mention, is that an app cannot be codesigned for ad hoc and appstore distribution at the same time anymore. You will need to get your provisioning profiles again.
I got things working back to normal by doing these two tasks.
-Rez
Nails in the coffin for custom pc case
I axed the elance custom pc case project a few days ago.
There were several things that went wrong.
1. Provider asked for extra money outside of the contract amount, and put my project on back burner when I said no.
2. Provider changed and deviated from the criteria despite reminders, then told me his version was better consistently.
3. Asked for milestones to be funded before they were met.
4. Provided and submitted new funding projects which I had to disapprove.
There are more, but this list is enough..
So I decided to cut my losses. I read that Red Beard from Corsair had the same issues when designing the 800d. Mainly that the designer he hired decided to go in his own direction as well. But, Red Beard worked through that issue I think.
If I had to do it over, I would not do one project to get a prototype. I would do two, one project to have the case designed in Solidworks, and then another to materialize the Solidworks design into real life. Second, don't pay anything upfront. Always have a milestone, even a small one so you can fold if your provider isn't what they presented themselves to be.
I plan to do it this way when I get around to the case for my led lamp.
-Rez
Overclocking & Left 4 Dead 2
Here is my setup:
Athlon II x2 240 cpu
Dfi 785g-m35 mobo
4gb 1600 8-8-8-24 1.65v crucial ddr3 ballistix tracers
corsair hx520 psu
ati 4670 gpu
What I did was record a timedemo in L4D2 and then ran the timedemo on my system at stocked and overclocked speeds.
Stock Setup:
200fsb
Ram @1333
2.8ghz cpu frequency
Overclocked Setup
300fsb
Ram @ 1600
3.75ghz cpu frequency
The first test was using the settings in l4d2 that I normally play with.
Results:
Stock 69.57 fps & 10.360 fps swing
Oc'ed 73.22 fps & 11.54 fps swing
At first I thought maybe there really isn't any gain from overclocking. Then I decided to check if my gpu was the bottleneck. For the second test I turned all of the graphics in l4d2 down as far as they would go.
Results:
Stock 93.91fps & 8.803 fps swing
Oc'ed 118.62fps & 11.324 fps swing
That is a 24.71 increase in fps on the oc'ed setup when I lowered the gpu settings, indicating that I am gpu bottlenecked. It is roughly a 34% overclock giving a 27% boost in performance.
Other thoughts:
The max memory speed this mobo supports is 1600. In reviews of the crucial ddr3 ballistix 1600, it is demonstrated that they can run at 2100 9-9-9-24.
So I should have gotten a mobo that could support higher memory frequencies, at least above 2100. Now, running higher frequencies at relaxed timings on ram doesn't necessarily mean more speed. It's benefit comes from being able to run a higher fsb when your memory divider is already maxed.
I tried running the DFI board with higher than 1600 memory speeds, and it was just not stable.
-Rez
Best bang for buck cpu April 14th 2010
The results are at InformedSelection.org.
I know its' not much, but it is still a work in progress.
The code for the bot that feeds the database is getting more and more robust.
There is a new metric I made called the Trifecta Score. Basically, a cpu gets points for having an above average bang for buck ratio, below average price, and above average performance. These are all computed as percentages relative to the average, and then summed.
It is a more valuable metric, that takes everything into account minus overclocking potential.
So for example a processor that costs slightly more and has a lower bang for buck ratio can still win by having massive amounts of raw computation power.
I posted asking for feedback, HardOCP let mine stay, toms hardware deleted my post but not my account, and Anandtech banned me as a spammer. I didn't try at xtremesystems because they have a clear no external links policy.
Notice that I said these benchmarks don't take into account overclocking potential. This is because the passmark guys don't want to put their overclocked cpu list in html table form like they do for their list of processors at stock speed. I asked them to do this and they flat out said a big fat NO.
So, I plan to wean the benchmark scores off of passmark by writing my own benchmarking program. That way I don't have to parse data off of some site and can gather overclocked stats to factor in.
Benchmarking programs are very tricky to write. I am still way in the R&D phase.
-Rez
CpuBang’s future and things about Google
For those who do not know, CpuBang is bang for buck calculator that I made to give metrics on pc components so I could make "cold" buying decisions.
You may have noticed that I posted the April results of cpuBang on the 7th and then pulled them. This is because I had automated affiliate links for the processor names, and Google ranks sites down that have affiliate links(Only April's results had affiliate links, I decided to experiment).
The cpu bang for buck results literally disappeared from Google's search engine. Since nobody would find it, and it was doing harm(lowering this site's pagerank), I pulled it. Looking into why Google ranks sites with affiliate links down is much more interesting than what one would think on the surface.
Google has a webspam team, Matt Cutts is the head of that team. Now, if you don't know the basis for Google's ranking results, the gist is it works on trust. Trust is gained by reputation. Reputation for a website would be how many positive links are going to it. That would mean say an authoritative site links to this blog, it's trust would go up, and so would it's rank in the search results. Notice I said positive links, if you have a link from say a malware site, thats bad reputation, and will reverse the effects described above.
What happened is that people started posting comments on authorative blogs linking back to their own site, to boost rankings. Boosting one's rank in anything increases one's exposure, and opportunity. That is, people were creating pages with affiliate links, then driving massive traffic to those pages which through conversions turned into cash. This is the basis of all that spam you see on the web, "this mom found out how to whiten her teeth", "Get six pack ripped abs" and the "make money at home with google posting links" setups. The people who make these sites are getting money through affiliate conversions. If they can advertise on the sites that you go to, you bet it is working.
Now, with those kind of people posting links in comments in your blog, your reputation goes down. Matt Cutts is credited with creating the nofollow href tag, which means that when bots scan your site, the links with nofollow will not be evaluated. WordPress automated nofollow, so now people don't need to worry about spammers posting links to increase search engine rankings.
The thing is, use of nofollow essentially walls off sections of the internet from Google's search engine. This means that results from programs like cpuBang are essentially invisible. If I use nofollow, then there is really no content for the bots to crawl besides the math which will not rank for "bang for buck cpu" results. If I don't use nofollow, those links are counted against me and the post is banned from Google.
Here is a good page that explains the matter very well
This would all explain why I couldn't find an existing cpuBang like program and had to create my own. Some may have already existed, but were rendered invisible. As Korn says, "Even ghosts get tired and move on."
But I will prevail, building rep for cpuBang how reputation comes in the real world...through consistent excellent results.
-Rez
Case in progress
That's right, I have decided to try my idea of a computer case on the market. A guy from Texas is my man for the job, and we are currently working on designing a prototype. He is actually from Sioux Falls.
Meanwhile, I'm continuing work for hire jobs to raise money when the production run rolls around.
-Rez
The Blur Starts
Ok, taxes done, check.
New hard drive for mac mini, check.
New correct-height desk for typing, check.
Sparkfun is out of the parts I need, check.
Business card to make it easier to track expenses, check.
Song Lottery new version approved, check.
Snow Leopard installed, check.
Xcode reconfigured with correct font, check.
New Elance jobs gotten, check.
I won't be posting the elance work I am doing anymore because my clients have had me sign NDAs. Also, if I keep filing posts under new categories, then the category list will swell until it is unmanageable. From now on, posts will have keywords/post tags. The sidebar with categories will be replaced back with posts by date.
I will have some good stuff coming up in the next weeks that I am pretty excited about.
-Rez
Best Bang-for-buck GPU March 4th 2010
Here are the results for GpuBang, my gpu performance-per-price calculator. It crawls the passmark benchmark database for benchmark numbers and newegg for prices.
The numbers shown are percentage relative to the performance-per-price average, here is the formula 100*(((performance/cost)/performancePerCostAverage)-1).
So the winner out of this set would be the 7900gs(out of stock ) at 128% above the performance-per-price average. Right behind it is the GeForce 9600 GT at 99.97% above average and the Radeon HD 4850 at 99.49%.
The loser is the GeForce 6200 LE at -87% below average. Hilariously, if you click the link and visit the newegg page, some noob is saying it is good value for the money.
Enjoy,
Rez
GeForce 210 (((183.0 / $38.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -29.87%
GeForce 256 (((64.0 / $29.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -68.11%
GeForce 310 (((288.0 / $129.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -66.90%
GeForce 6200 (((58.0 / $40.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -78.86%
GeForce 6200 LE (((37.0 / $44.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -87.71%
GeForce 6600 GT (((255.0 / $29.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 27.05%
GeForce 7300 GS (((78.0 / $24.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -53.36%
GeForce 7300 GT (((234.0 / $69.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -50.04%
GeForce 7300 LE (((75.0 / $18.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -40.99%
GeForce 7600 GS (((237.0 / $29.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 18.08%
GeForce 7900 GS (((612.0 / $39.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 128.67%
GeForce 7900 GT (((620.0 / $44.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 105.91%
GeForce 8400 (((159.0 / $26.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -11.98%
GeForce 8400 GS (((140.0 / $26.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -22.49%
GeForce 8500 (((127.0 / $39.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -52.55%
GeForce 8500 GT (((240.0 / $39.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -10.33%
GeForce 8600 (((224.0 / $49.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -33.05%
GeForce 8600 GT (((394.0 / $49.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 17.77%
GeForce 8800 GT (((950.0 / $99.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 41.96%
GeForce 8800 GTS (((871.0 / $89.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 44.62%
GeForce 9400 (((370.0 / $39.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 38.25%
GeForce 9400 GT (((278.0 / $39.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 3.87%
GeForce 9500 GT (((364.0 / $49.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 8.80%
GeForce 9600 GSO (((594.0 / $64.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 36.57%
GeForce 9600 GT (((932.0 / $69.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 98.97%
GeForce 9600GT (((757.0 / $69.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 61.61%
GeForce 9800 GT (((928.0 / $89.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 54.08%
GeForce 9800 GTX (((1150.0 / $134.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 27.29%
GeForce 9800 GTX+ (((1125.0 / $134.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 24.52%
GeForce 9800 GTX/9800 GTX+ (((1107.0 / $134.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 22.53%
GeForce DDR (((72.0 / $18.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -43.35%
GeForce FX 5200 (((44.0 / $27.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -76.51%
GeForce FX 5500 (((55.0 / $34.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -76.51%
GeForce GT 130 (((555.0 / $54.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 50.80%
GeForce GT 220 (((462.0 / $51.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 32.78%
GeForce GT 240 (((747.0 / $79.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 39.54%
GeForce GTS 150 (((1027.0 / $139.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 9.62%
GeForce GTS 240 (((994.0 / $349.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -57.56%
GeForce GTS 250 (((1083.0 / $104.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 54.13%
GeForce GTX 260 (((1702.0 / $199.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 27.16%
GeForce GTX 275 (((1849.0 / $349.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -21.06%
GeForce GTX 280 (((1924.0 / $349.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -17.86%
GeForce GTX 285 (((2024.0 / $354.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -14.81%
GeForce GTX 295 (((1685.0 / $559.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -55.04%
GeForce2 (((107.0 / $32.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -51.54%
Radeon 7000 (((32.0 / $34.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -86.33%
RADEON 9250 (((100.0 / $32.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -54.71%
Radeon HD 2400 (((121.0 / $74.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -75.89%
Radeon HD 2400 PCI (((86.0 / $74.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -82.86%
Radeon HD 2400 PRO (((132.0 / $74.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -73.70%
Radeon HD 2400 XT (((148.0 / $74.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -70.51%
Radeon HD 3450 (((145.0 / $34.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -38.08%
Radeon HD 3650 AGP (((245.0 / $59.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -38.98%
Radeon HD 4350 (((229.0 / $34.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -2.21%
Radeon HD 4550 (((358.0 / $44.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 18.90%
Radeon HD 4650 (((457.0 / $44.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 51.78%
Radeon HD 4670 (((778.0 / $62.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 84.55%
Radeon HD 4770 (((1245.0 / $99.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 86.04%
Radeon HD 4850 (((1335.0 / $99.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 99.49%
Radeon HD 4850 X2 (((1426.0 / $229.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -7.36%
Radeon HD 4870 (((1745.0 / $154.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 68.23%
Radeon HD 4890 (((1952.0 / $219.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 32.58%
Radeon HD 5450 (((309.0 / $42.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 7.40%
Radeon HD 5750 (((1384.0 / $129.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 59.09%
Radeon HD 5770 (((1537.0 / $142.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 60.61%
Radeon HD 5850 (((2374.0 / $309.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 14.43%
Radeon HD 5870 (((2591.0 / $379.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 1.88%
Radeon HD4670 (((736.0 / $62.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = 74.59%
VisionTek RADEON 9250 PCI (((67.0 / $58.99 )/6.69)-1)*100 = -83.03%
Best Bang-for-Buck CPU March 3rd 2010
I wrote a program called CpuBang, which calculates a particular CPU's value based on performance per cost. It uses the passmark database for the benchmarks, and newegg for the prices.
The numbers shown are percentage relative to the performance-per-price average, here is the formula 100*(((performance/cost)/performancePerCostAverage)-1).
So the amd athlon ii x3 435 is 68% above the performance-per-price average, and also this month's winner.
The intel core i7 975 at -65%, which means 65% below the average, is this month's loser.
Another way to read it, say take the Intel 750 and AMD 965, the 965 has ~9% more bang for buck.
If you are in the market, at least pick one that has a positive number.
Peace,
Rez
PS I did get my gaming computer up and running, the replacement DFI mobo worked 
amd athlon ii x2 240--- 100*(((1617.0 / $57.99)/20.30)-1)= 37.4%
amd athlon ii x2 245--- 100*(((1686.0 / $60.99)/20.30)-1)= 36.2%
amd athlon ii x2 250--- 100*(((1695.0 / $64.99)/20.30)-1)= 28.5%
amd athlon ii x2 255--- 100*(((1670.0 / $74.99)/20.30)-1)= 9.7%
amd athlon ii x3 425--- 100*(((2381.0 / $71.99)/20.30)-1)= 62.9%
amd athlon ii x3 435--- 100*(((2553.0 / $74.99)/20.30)-1)= 67.7%
amd athlon ii x3 440--- 100*(((2324.0 / $86.99)/20.30)-1)= 31.6%
amd athlon ii x4 620--- 100*(((3121.0 / $95.99)/20.30)-1)= 60.2%
amd athlon ii x4 630--- 100*(((3338.0 / $102.99)/20.30)-1)= 59.7%
amd athlon ii x4 635--- 100*(((3657.0 / $119.99)/20.30)-1)= 50.1%
amd phenom ii x2 545--- 100*(((1747.0 / $87.99)/20.30)-1)= -2.2%
amd phenom ii x2 550--- 100*(((1872.0 / $87.99)/20.30)-1)= 4.8%
amd phenom ii x2 550--- 100*(((1872.0 / $105.99)/20.30)-1)= -13.0%
amd phenom ii x2 555--- 100*(((2198.0 / $100.99)/20.30)-1)= 7.2%
amd phenom ii x3 705e--- 100*(((2312.0 / $119.00)/20.30)-1)= -4.3%
amd phenom ii x4 810--- 100*(((3062.0 / $139.99)/20.30)-1)= 7.8%
amd phenom ii x4 905e--- 100*(((2826.0 / $174.99)/20.30)-1)= -20.4%
amd phenom ii x4 925--- 100*(((3407.0 / $139.99)/20.30)-1)= 19.9%
amd phenom ii x4 940--- 100*(((3648.0 / $155.99)/20.30)-1)= 15.2%
amd phenom ii x4 945--- 100*(((3526.0 / $167.99)/20.30)-1)= 3.4%
amd phenom ii x4 945--- 100*(((3526.0 / $150.99)/20.30)-1)= 15.0%
amd phenom ii x4 945--- 100*(((3526.0 / $150.99)/20.30)-1)= 15.0%
amd phenom ii x4 955--- 100*(((3886.0 / $160.99)/20.30)-1)= 18.9%
amd phenom ii x4 955--- 100*(((3886.0 / $159.99)/20.30)-1)= 19.7%
amd phenom ii x4 965--- 100*(((4265.0 / $185.99)/20.30)-1)= 13.0%
amd sempron 140--- 100*(((884.0 / $32.99)/20.30)-1)= 32.0%
intel celeron 430--- 100*(((532.0 / $41.99)/20.30)-1)= -37.6%
intel celeron e1500--- 100*(((1231.0 / $50.99)/20.30)-1)= 18.9%
intel celeron e1600--- 100*(((1007.0 / $61.99)/20.30)-1)= -20.0%
intel celeron e3200--- 100*(((1568.0 / $51.99)/20.30)-1)= 48.6%
intel celeron e3300--- 100*(((1655.0 / $52.99)/20.30)-1)= 53.9%
intel core i3 530--- 100*(((2678.0 / $119.99)/20.30)-1)= 10.0%
intel core i3 540--- 100*(((3047.0 / $139.99)/20.30)-1)= 7.2%
intel core i5 650--- 100*(((3115.0 / $184.99)/20.30)-1)= -17.0%
intel core i5 660--- 100*(((3252.0 / $199.99)/20.30)-1)= -19.9%
intel core i5 661--- 100*(((3120.0 / $199.99)/20.30)-1)= -23.1%
intel core i5 670--- 100*(((3182.0 / $279.99)/20.30)-1)= -44.0%
intel core i5 750--- 100*(((4217.0 / $199.99)/20.30)-1)= 3.9%
intel core i7 860--- 100*(((5555.0 / $279.99)/20.30)-1)= -2.3%
intel core i7 870--- 100*(((5864.0 / $569.99)/20.30)-1)= -49.3%
intel core i7 920--- 100*(((5590.0 / $288.99)/20.30)-1)= -4.7%
intel core i7 930--- 100*(((5319.0 / $298.99)/20.30)-1)= -12.4%
intel core i7 950--- 100*(((6308.0 / $549.99)/20.30)-1)= -43.5%
intel core i7 960--- 100*(((6714.0 / $587.99)/20.30)-1)= -43.7%
intel core i7 975--- 100*(((7002.0 / $969.99)/20.30)-1)= -64.4%
intel c2d e7400--- 100*(((1902.0 / $126.99)/20.30)-1)= -26.2%
intel c2d e7500--- 100*(((1989.0 / $115.99)/20.30)-1)= -15.5%
intel c2d e7600--- 100*(((2141.0 / $144.99)/20.30)-1)= -27.3%
intel c2d e8400--- 100*(((2216.0 / $167.99)/20.30)-1)= -35.0%
intel c2d e8500--- 100*(((2385.0 / $189.99)/20.30)-1)= -38.2%
intel c2d e8600--- 100*(((2610.0 / $269.99)/20.30)-1)= -52.4%
intel c2q q8200--- 100*(((3258.0 / $183.99)/20.30)-1)= -12.8%
intel c2q q8300--- 100*(((3569.0 / $149.99)/20.30)-1)= 17.2%
intel c2q q8400--- 100*(((3663.0 / $259.99)/20.30)-1)= -30.6%
intel c2q q8400--- 100*(((3663.0 / $169.99)/20.30)-1)= 6.2%
intel c2q q9300--- 100*(((3534.0 / $199.99)/20.30)-1)= -12.9%
intel c2q q9505--- 100*(((4057.0 / $239.99)/20.30)-1)= -16.7%
intel c2q q9550--- 100*(((4295.0 / $349.99)/20.30)-1)= -39.5%
intel c2q q9550--- 100*(((4295.0 / $259.99)/20.30)-1)= -18.6%
intel c2q q9650--- 100*(((4557.0 / $309.99)/20.30)-1)= -27.6%
intel pentium g6950--- 100*(((1817.0 / $95.99)/20.30)-1)= -6.7%