Bones

I don't recall selecting that BUT may have checked/unchecked the box for some reason. I'll go for a redo and see if it does right this time around. Thanks and if it still does it after making sure it's for public viewing I'll let you know. EDIT: That was it - I made sure I didn't have a brain-fart and uncheck the box, it's working. Thanks!

All day today I've been getting this even though it's files from different systems including this one at stock. Says it's validated but with the big red "?" instead of the usual info, looks like it would be considered not valid. I've basically tried several CPU-Z files for validation and all are doing it. Here's what I'm talking about, does have all the relevant info but with the red "?"..... ??

I take it yours is acting up with everything you try it with right? Mine works OK with all else as mentioned so it's not actually retired, just put back for whenever I may want to use it again.

I too have had problems with the older CHV version except mine are when using a 8320, loses dual channel and nothing I do affects it. All other chips I use including my 4300 work fine in it and I know it's not the CPU, works as it should in my CHV-Z and Sabertooth boards. The fact it's a Vishera shouldn't be it either or my 4300 would act up too but it doesn't do that. What you are describing isn't too far from what happened with one of these I had bought new and it ran fine for about 3 weeks, no real OC'ing had been done since I was still learning the board - Then for some reason it began throwing an "Out of range error" related to USB and nothing I did would correct the problem. The BIOS was also "Stuck" as you described and was doing much of the same, it would not save any changes and always defaulted to whatever it wanted to do and that was it. I finally had to RMA it and the CHV I have now is it's replacement and it hasn't done that but the issue with my 8 cored chip is still there with no solution. BIOS updates and the like all failed to fix it, in fact the BIOS was updated BEFORE I set the 8320 in to the newest version. I believe these early version boards are picky/quirky about things and do remember that when Asus first released these they were having to do RMA's all over the place, it seems the first few runs of these were buggy and since yours is similar to the one I had that could be it. My solution was to get a CHV-Z along with a Sabertooth 2.0, pop it in and run it. The 8320 is doing fine in those boards but no so much in the CHV. Yeah, it makes me go hmmmmm..... I know others have ran such chips with no issues in the older CHV's and could be just one of those "Things" associated with these.

Can't let Splave have all the fun. http://hwbot.org/submission/2911600_bones_superpi___32m_fx_4100_15min_31sec_547ms?recalculate=true Still tweaking ATM.

Already done and version 1.60 and newer will lock things up. From 1.59 and older works no prob and note that this is the point when CPU-Z began to be shown as X32 or X64 versions instead of just plain old CPU-Z. I don't know how things were changed in it but these changes are the obvious culprit here.

So far it's done it whether I'm running a stripped OS or not with every Socket A setup to my name. Haven't paid much attention to a USB device in use being a possible culprit but since I'm currently installing a stock/nonstripped OS on an A, I'll see what happens. I don't use USB periphials whenever it's possible to run PS2 with both a keyboard and mouse so I doubt I had one in use in the past with these issues BUT I'll be sure of it this time.

There's also the problem with some like myself having trouble with CPU-Z not working with a Socket A to get a validation. To this day the newer versions will not work for me, locks up the system everytime.

Noted when I ran it with my 560-448 GPU the validation file when submitted had the submission info boxes open and it showed the card as a regular 560, not a 560-448 and these are indeed different cards. Had to edit the entry once done to place the results into the correct hardware heading. I don't know if that wiped out the validation file or not for the entry but I did submit it and still have it here if needed. There will be a few issues like this I know, just pointing out one here to be worked on or at least to make it known. Another thing is the 6870's are ignored due to the double precision issue so I guess they don't support it. I do have the latest drivers loaded into the OS for it (Omega drivers ver 14.12 with dotnet 45 for Win 7 64 bit). Downloaded the drivers only two days ago and I guess these GPUs would have to be ran with the legacy version - I'll try it and see whether it works or not.

I'll try it again - Thanks for checking. EDIT: Worked this time, I don't know why it woudn't come up earlier but it did just now.

There is a problem - I'm not getting the proper version of this board to come up ( DFI LP UT CFX3200 ), Instead it's coming up as the Intel version of this board (LanParty UT ICFX3200 T2R/G). I know at least you did set it up but it's doing this. Need this fixed please - Thanks!

Checked to see and this one is not in the database so need it added please. Here's a link you can use for more info:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813136009 Validation: http://valid.canardpc.com/8t6twq Thanks!

I'll throw in a tip or two myself. I noted you're running a fairly high multiplier (23x), sometimes with these chips using a little less multi and a little more FSB gets more from them. Of course this will affect things such as RAM speeds and your CPU/NB speed with what you finally get but it's something you can experiment with. The deal is simple - Try any and everything (That's HWbot legal of course). Haven't noted it being mentioned but don't forget to use the Bulldozer conditioner, that will help out alot if you're not using it already.

Thank you for the info.

Not exactly sure if this would be the right place for such a thread and it's not a voltmod I'm asking for..... But anyway here goes. I'm trying to redo some MOSFETs on a board and I cannot find any real technical info on the ones I'm trying to replace - The part numbers from the MOSFETs I have I'm using but so far I've come up with nothing. Trying to find a direct replacement also seems to be a real pain, haven't found anything on that part of it either. Getting an equivalent MOSFET per specs would work fine but trying to find a place to start so I don't drop in a piece that will do more harm than good isn't going so well. The MOSFETs in question are for the CPU circuit of a board I'm working on and this is the info I have on these. MOSFETs are manufactured by Alpha and Omega according to the mark before the part number itself. These are the two pieces I need to redo the power circuit: D414 BE5Y2P D412 BE555A Thanks in advance guys.

I'm hoping I can explain it well enough myself. OK - With benchies that can/do utilize each individual core such as Cinebench, WPrime and the like, down coring (Switching off cores) isn't allowed since each core in use affects the results of the bench. It's done that way to avoid issues (Cheating) with folks trying to sneak in a better model core/chip by passing it off as a lesser model with less cores. For benchies such as Super PI, the number of cores makes no difference and has no impact on the results so you'll see folks switching off cores with that bench for example. As you probrably know AMD AM3 chips are the ones that tend to unlock so increasing the number of cores (Upcoring) based on chip model is actually OK. I've done that with a few including a 555BE ran as a quad core, my 960T Zosma ran as both a 5 and 6 cored chip but again, it's illegal to run it with less than 4 cores (Downcored) unless the results based on core count won't be affected. The stock number of cores for the chip as it was sold is the standard related to this. You can always unlock it and run it that way but with Cinebench being the example here, you cannot run it with less than the stock number of cores your chip is spec'ed for. If you should have a 6 cored chip such as a 1090T, you'll have to run them all with that bench, if you should have a chip like my 960T, anything from it's stock 4 cores to a fully unlocked 6 cored chip is OK - If it will unlock in the first place. The above applies with any bench that the number of cores affects the outcome or result. I hope this helps a little and if not there are others here that's probrably better than I about explaining it correctly - Just ask, they should chime in if need be. AND...... If I got it wrong in whole or part, we'll both learn something.

While I was browsing through the database I noted the DFI NFII LanParty Ultra A isn't listed, would like for it to be added to the database please.

FYI; Clearly not valid because you don't have any CPU-Z tabs shown and the Asus utility doesn't take the place of CPU-Z. You must always have at least the tabs for your CPU and RAM speeds/timings shown. Not against the rules to use the utility for tweaking but you cannot base your displayed hardware info purely on it in your screenie, CPU-Z must be used. As for Win 10, don't know about that but I'd suggest XP for best results and to be "Legal" from an allowed OS standpoint.

Thanks for the link Newlife - I will check that out. As for OC'ing it, maybe I'll get lucky and the kernel I do have will allow it.

Looks like someone already brought the fail-sauce....

Yes we do and thank you for doing this. I do have a question or at least I'm trying to get the idea on how it's done straight here. I noted in the Socket 754 HOF as an example, the #1 DDR RAM frequency listed was at 371.300MHz and #2 on the list is at 274.900MHz - I do have a 754 sub in this category that's higher than the #2 spot: http://hwbot.org/submission/2247289_bones_memory_clock_ddr_sdram_308_mhz but does not have any HW points with it since my Socket 939 DDR result trumps it. : http://hwbot.org/submission/2566030_bones_memory_clock_ddr_sdram_377.1_mhz I have to assume this is done in this way due to whether it currently has hardware points with it or not and the HW points are what makes it count for being in the list. Is this correct? Also noted with all HOF listings WPrime entries along with Cinebench results aren't listed (Yet) I have to assume but if not, no biggie. Once again thanks for doing this.

Point taken - Guess this one is a lost cause. However I'm not worried, honestly I hardly ever use it anyway but it does work well for what it was designed to do. I'll just find something else to mess around with.

To get some of the benchies to run they must have root access or they won't work along with proggys for OC'ing it in the first place. I've looked around and from what I can tell ( I'm not very knowlegeable about rooting as you can tell ), you have to have a kit that works with the device the OS is installed on. Plenty of these for obvious makes and models but for a DB Power tablet, there's basically nothing out there for it since it appears to be an obscure brand. I haven't changed anything from the specs shown above, all is still the same.

I can understand your thoughts/concerns over this subject. Those of us that don't have access to the "Good" stuff being made to go up against those that do is unfair from several points, yet to say they don't deserve what they've earned isn't fair either. The pieces of hardware they used didn't tweak themselves - They had to do it, set it up and all - That does take experience and the simple know how to do it at all. Those same guys could do very well without these cherry-picked examples too. Related to teams, my team as mentioned has no sponsored members or even any Elite classed benchers yet we've worked our way into the top 5. We bench any and everything we can get our grubby paws on for good reason and it does pay off. While I do feel your pain in having to go up against those guys at the same time I feel privileged to be able to and even on occasion beat one or two of them. I can say if I had the same or close to the access they have I could do much better than I do now and even be a real PITA in the rankings for many here but I don't, my results from for example the 5 GHz 32M Super PI comp is an example that I could. However with my recent health issues and the lack of funds due to the bills associated with these current issues I'm not able to spend the money on stuff like many here can. Time would be another restraint with having to deal with all of this and hold a job too, it's a real struggle at times to simply hold a job with all this going on yet I do and I still find time somewhere to do a few runs. That's how it's been for me and why I haven't been so active as of late yet I still continue on. Each person's situation is unique and does have an effect yet we all knew going in it was like this and that's just how it is. You'll never have a system that's 100% "Right" so just manage the best you can - It's what I have to do.

No, straightup result on H2O with good ambient temps at the time of the run.