yosarianilives

Sounds like comp needs to be all benchmate

Igp comp, the results may surprise lmao. Or yeah 32m with 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5. Although I don't think leeg will want that many subs per stage during covid

Also anyone that has the capacity if you could bring extra pots and dewars to lend to people who maybe can't that would be much appreciated!

That is correct, free entry, free ln2!

Well I finally stopped procrastinating and organized the thing. Anyways doing a free bench meet for anyone who wants to make it over to my neck of the woods, renting a venue and a bunch of ln2. Event is sponsored by Intel and International Computer Concepts (an overclocked server company). Cost to attendees: FREE! Dates: Nov 17-19 & Dec 15-17 Location: 1801 Eastland Drive, Bloomington, IL 61704 Who's invited: Literally everyone! US or not Comment below with comments or questions or just to show interest!

Oh as much as I might hate running them, we should probably do 3dm01 and 05/06 stages. And firestrike, Timespy, and port royal. Superposition, and gpupi for gpu and cpu, and 7zip

Like I said single global listing per cpu, so alder would be 8+8 or 16, this whole 8+0 listing would be just a way to cheat. We don't let 11900k participate in 4 core rankings so why let 12900k participate in 8 core. Superpi 32m would be single core as per normal, and if we're lucky wprime 32m will go away

I mean people should stop acting like the slower cores are shit, they're still supposed to be faster than rkl. So 16 core alder is still way faster than 16 core rkl. If the point of new categories is to make it more fair then let's not do that as it would still be unfair, we never allowed down core to compete in more categories because it would still be unfair. Higher core count cpus have more advantage than just more cores, they have extra cache etc. If Intel wanted it to compete in 8 core they wouldn't call it 16 core. The only way aside from just counting all the cores I see as fair is if you make a category called 8+8 that's separate from 8 core and 16 core. Would need to go back and do it for all the big little arm cpus as well so might create a lot of work over time, but anything other than just counting the cores will create a lot of work. Regardless I think each cpu should only count towards one global category per benchmark, so either a 16 core or as 8+8

Yes, cc is usually new. Tbh I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't any stages that ddr4 wasn't allowed.

Now that TC is over its a good time for the community to start suggesting stages for country cup. Should help keep us occupied while leeg is busy moderating scores. Anyways for my suggestions I think some basics, should be a 32m stage, igp stage, ycruncher stage at minimum. Also should keep it to newer hardware as is tradition for cc Comment below your thoughts and whatever you're thinking

If s771 cpus are not s775 then am2+ is not am3, not sure where you're getting confused. Competition is by cpu socket not architecture. If you break the pin off of a 940 be it still doesn't work on am3 motherboard. It's an am2+ cpu. If you put a 550 be into am2+ mobo it's still an am3 cpu.

Is a socket 771 cpu suddenly socket 775 if you put it in a s775 board? Same architecture. We go off of native socket of the cpu. Am2+ cpus physically don't fit in am3. Also I can say that the am2+ phenom IIs clock so terrible that it almost feels different lol

If you had both chips in hand and looked at the bottom you'd see they have different pin layout/count. They are physically different socket cpus

Don't have to short anything on board, just gotta short two pads on cpu so it posts on top of modding bios. Tagg just wants extra vdimm lol

Oversight

For amd apu ddr4 it should be, are you having difficulty subbing?

I think that's IF we're going to require newer os, maybe require benchmate etc then making it from certain architecture onwards seems like the best way. That way we don't end up with unbeatable legacy score but we can also implement newer requirements.

Weird to see so little of it on the bot, although like I mentioned if you going hard on storage s771 might not gain anything

Same for Intel

Imho the biggest handicap is the pcie arrangement, pcm is mostly about storage speed. That's why x48 might still be faster than p45 because 32 pcie lanes vs 16. So you could do a full 16x raid card instead of 8x. All the s771 chipsets have a good amount of lanes but they're all split into groups of 4x and 8x with no way for a 16x slot. Raiding multiple cards isn't gonna happen on a bare metal install so x48 is gonna have fastest storage.

Regardless of if it's allowed I don't think there's any s771 board that use normal ddr2 and fbdimm is classed as a different mem type so couldn't be used in this stage.

It's relevant for fx because we're making categories for cpus with different core strengths in different core configs. if fx shares part of its instruction pipeline between two cores, not just cache, then creating a one core per module category is no different from creating a 12900k category for disabling all the "shit cores" (they're Skylake speed, stop acting like they're super slow guys). I still think that just adding up all the cores is the best, if Intel says it's 16 core then it's 16 core. This approach was used when people wanted fx to be 4 core with ht historically, the decision was if amd says its 8 cores then it's 8 cores. Of course historical decisions don't have to be future decisions as undeniably some historical decisions are probably not the way to move forward.

Ht would become a huge handicap until you get above the non-ht thread counts. So currently 8 thread. Throw away 7700k, throw away 5300g,7350k is useless. It's time for 7640x, 9700k, and all that other shit nobody has spent as much time benching hard. Not sure this is good or bad, but that's mainly how it would shake up rankings. Oh and g470 would become even more irrelevant lmao. At least 1, 3, 5 cores wouldn't really change in the slightest

Getting people to follow rules is hard enough, now add them to have to disable cores for a ranking? Not possible, will just make a big mess

Let's remember that the little cores are supposed to be roughly as fast as Skylake so not exactly completely weak cores. It should be total number of cores, if Intel OR amd choose to make half their cores suck then it just will do worse in its core rankings. No need to make hwbot any more complicated, count all the cores and that's the ranking the cpu goes in.