Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/14/19 in all areas

  1. 6 points
  2. 5 points
    Everything should be removed, known good or bad. The only mention should be in a cheater's list, considering a life time ban.
  3. 4 points
  4. 4 points
    We have been debating this over and over, we need a coder like Matt, that can make a crapper for the older benchmarks to be run on eg 8 or newer OSses for the current blacklisted hardware on these platforms... Thing is this will cost money, will it ever be bullet/cheat proof, will the developper keep on supporting updates,... Major advantage of the OS limits are gone is that we will have a way more active community
  5. 3 points
    Not really, it is pain to install W7 on some modern platforms... And for example Raven Ridge is W10 only. In the future this wil get worse and worse.
  6. 3 points
    Apex wins then.... A good board won't make a dud shine.. However à good cpu on a bad board....
  7. 2 points
    Imo, yes, afaik a lifetime ban here at Hwbot means that someone cheated more than once, and like Aleslammer mentioned, the only place where a lifetime cheater name should be is in a cheater's list.
  8. 2 points
    Hi, I recently did a search for the oldest SP32M hardware golds. One that came up was OnePageBook's X6800 run. Great, I thought, let's try to beat a 12 year old record. When I researched it a little more, I came across this newspost. This brought up a couple of questions in my mind: i If OPB was a notorious cheater, is his 32M run also cheated and therefore possibly unbeatable? In general, should members banned for life because of cheating have all their results purged? I am not sure about 2). On the one hand it's very time-consuming to analyse potentially hundreds of submissions to check whether they are cheated, on the other hand you run the risk of purging legitimate historical records if you simply purge all of them without checking. I'd like to hear other people's opinions on this topic. Edit: relevant XS thread: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?227198-Onepagebook-Lifetime-Ban-at-HWbot/
  9. 2 points
    yeah i understand. IMO, 'accelerator cards' should be separated out from the CPU category, but then that means there is a whole new category, which in turn makes everything a lot more complex. All of that for like 5 people who will ever sub them. So yeah admins will have to find whatever they like best but keeping it in or pulling it out both seem to be bad ideas. /shrug hopefully whatever is decided, most people will be happy with it.
  10. 2 points
    Maybe a in between. If band for life, all points and rankings removed but score still visable with a mention on the page the member is band for life.
  11. 2 points
    IMO, yes. But you know HWB has a terrible track record banning anybody, and keeping them banned for that matter. Dupe accts. are rampant.
  12. 2 points
    Dark has the XP ACPI support advantage... awesome for older legacy stuff, think Luumi proved already its quite a strong board...
  13. 2 points
    Some weeks ago I decided to return to AM3 but wasn't sure which board to buy. In 2010-2011 I had good experience with ASUS M4A79T Deluxe, but following Infrared's advice, thought I'd give some Gigabyte 9x0 boards a try as well. So I ended up with the following selection: - ASUS M4A79T Deluxe - ASUS Crosshair III Formula - Gigabyte 970A-UD3 ver 1.0 - Gigabyte 970A-UD3 ver 1.2 All tests done using the same random Phenom 955 chip I got along with one of the boards, plus Corsair Hypers some of which got damaged along the way. Test #1: CPU overclocking - minimal voltage. Used 250x18 with same NB/RAM settings for reference. ASUS M4A79T => 1.48V ASUS C3F =====> 1.49V 970A-UD3 v1.0 => 1.47V 970A-UD3 v1.2 => 1.47V Test #2: Max CPU clocks. Used same preset as above, only with CPU multi upped to x18.5. Tried 1.5125, 1.5250, 1.5375 and 1.5500V set. ASUS M4A79T => instaBSOD at 1.5125 and 1.5250, crash after few sec at 1.5375, passed 32M initial at 1.5500 ASUS C3F =====> 1.5125 crash before initial, 1.5250-1.5500 crash before first loop 970A-UD3 v1.0 => 1.5125-1.5500 crash before first loop 970A-UD3 v1.2 => 1.5125 crash after loop 1, 1.5250 crash after loop 2, 1.5500 crash after 14 loops Test #3: Uncore. Used same preset as above with CPU clocks reduced to 250x16. ASUS M4A79T => 2750 pass at 1.20V set, 3000 can't enter OS at 1.30-1.50V ASUS C3F =====> 2750 pass at 1.24V read, 3000 can't enter OS at 1.30-1.50V 970A-UD3 v1.0 => 2750 pass at 1.21V set (mind the +0.2V offset), 3000 can't enter OS at 1.30-1.50V 970A-UD3 v1.2 => 2750 pass at 1.23V set (mind the +0.2V offset), 3000 can't enter OS at 1.30-1.50V Test #4: IMC using 2x2GB GTX2 or 2x2GB 2000C7 GT based on the kit that was most compatible / most alive at the time of testing ASUS M4A79T => 950MHz ASUS C3F =====> 953MHz 970A-UD3 v1.0 => 857MHz 970A-UD3 v1.2 => 863MHz I've spent some time trying to get Gigabyte boards to get anywhere near 900MHz but that wasn't to happen. It could be down to compatibility on particular CPU/RAM but the deficiency in clocks still counts against GA as it potentially adds additional constraints when binning CPU or buying Hypers Test #5: 32M efficiency. Used my CPU binning profile at 250x16 with memory settings as close as possible. Tested on two different OS (one with lots of stuff, one clean), straight run, no CW ASUS M4A79T => 16:45.031 on dirty OS, 16:42.047 on clean OS AUS C3F ======> 16:44.000 on dirty OS, 16:42.000 on clean OS 970A-UD3 v1.0 => 16:41.625 on dirty OS, 16:38.328 on clean OS 970A-UD3 v1.2 => 16:39.922 on dirty OS, 16:36.812 on clean OS If you look at other tests done at same settings, you'll confirm that the Gigabyte boards are ahead of ASUS on efficiency.
  14. 2 points
    I dont really like to answer Ozzie's posts without a high level of sarcasm. Look, some ES are good, and some are bad. sometimes retail are better, sometimes not You might get a mad retail 9900K like Bullshooter did, and wipe the floor with it, or maybe you work with a board manufacturer and have them bin through 100, 200 who knows how many chips intel/amd sends them and they send you one from their top 5 or whatever. Or maybe you work with a board manufacturer that makes something top end but in limited number, Z97 SOC Force LN2 board is the good example here, far better than any other board of its generation, 99% of these boards should be considered ES, although technically they're considered retail for Hwbot because they were available for retail purchase on Newegg for a hot minute. Maybe you're talking about ES Kingston AFR DDR4, given out to a few top guys, at the time, with ln2 it was far better than DDR4 MFR and Samsung E die (Until B-die was released) I think its important that ES for current generation stuff is kept to a separate league, if you're getting it - you're probably getting it for free, and that's not fair when you're talking about binned pieces, of sometimes very expensive hardware. but once that generation is up, I think it should be fair game. Technically you're not supposed to sell ES but its been sold since forever, and sometimes even given away - I've given up ES boards with permission to local guys for comp prizes and its a great way for guys to push their hardware to limits that retail sometimes cant compete with. I think the current policy of ES hardware at HWbot is just fine and support it staying the way it is.
  15. 2 points
    Wanna bet? Do not blame HWB for the RTC bug or the software hackers that make benching difficult.
  16. 1 point
    To circumvent HPET in GPUPI use Windows 7 or GPUPI 3.2 + Windows 10 prior to RS4. RS5 changes the QPC timer frequency to 10 MHz and GPUPI currently can't handle that.
  17. 1 point
    windows 7 ./ xp scores the best anyways on 99% of benches anyways. Its worth setting up a spare drive to bench on.
  18. 1 point
    XP support for the Z390 Dark is out -- check Kingpin's post in the OC Forum on the EVGA site. Availability of the Z390 Dark in Germany is the same problem as availability of the Apex XI in the US.
  19. 1 point
    Long time since last post, but i found some material that i collected back when i was digging for ln2 overclock history. I think it is interesting to post some more info here, despite not being ln2 overclock it has dry ice, ancient pots and other extreme methods from the 90's era. Take your time and enjoy https://www.fnf.jp/pc.htm (from 1996, extreme overclock using carbon dioxide and custom cpu block) http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-Bay/1214/omasu/omasu.html (extreme overclock session using custom pots and dry ice) https://www.fnf.jp/celeron3.htm (this one is ln2 overclock) https://www.fnf.jp/pcs.htm (from 1997, ancient custom water cooling system, chilled with peltier) https://www.fnf.jp/ln2_1.htm (from 1998, led experiment using ln2)
  20. 1 point
    I really like the fact evga returned with a competetive highend board, but due to price and availability in germany it is no option for me, Maybe if I see it do 4266 c12 32m air like I could do on apex XI I will buy a used board if it ever appears at europe at a decent price, but not now. Really sad story XP support for XI is not planned obviously
  21. 1 point
    There is LOD for DX9 and DX11, but if you enabling LOD on DX11 you can't have Tesselation advantages.
  22. 1 point
  23. 1 point
    A little bit of progress, this is already quite a few revisions in...
  24. 1 point
    Sure, you can freeze B.die....benches require a specific temp....because of cb.... memory Mhz , timing and rtls can tighten as well Will post some results of this when I have gear
  25. 1 point
    What method did you use because I tried practicing on a dead A10-6800K and completely wrecked it in the process.
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?

    Sign Up
×