chew*

I already ran 2x 6990. It's cpu bottlenecked Show me 6000 at 5.3 and i will eat my shorts

Might as well say NO!!!!!! chew* isn't allowed

yah it's tweakable. It's simple mix uber fast cpu with 2x 6990 + no tesselation...

I have 4 580 ref for sale full mods cheap.......

chew*, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons: 1. You suck. 2. Your a noob. 3. Massman hates you. Wow, the forum just rick rolled me.

The plot thickens...... Not his validation link.... http://www.hwbot.org/submission/2193824_toorope_cpu_z_4x_core_i7_2600k_5928.77_mhz In fact all of them are some other users name for the most part. Only CPu-z submissions...... http://www.hwbot.org/user/toorope/ Same team diff member, there is a 555 BE result that sticks out like a sore thumb ( it's on DI ) versus all his air scores. Also not his user name in cpu-z......verifying others he used his "name" http://www.hwbot.org/user/kof03/ http://www.hwbot.org/submission/1049367_kof03_cpu_z_phenom_ii_x2_555_be_5227.29_mhz Same team again. This user. http://www.hwbot.org/user/chuky394/ Has this Cpu-z submission and the valid name is that of another user on same team named morel david who uses david4820 in his validations. http://www.hwbot.org/submission/1050019_chuky394_cpu_z_phenom_ii_x6_1055t_5334.3_mhz

Someone stealing a validation link from SF3D or am i going crazy? http://www.hwbot.org/submission/2193826_toorope_cpu_z_4x_a8_3850_5278.34_mhz

Yah mine are preety hot, I have seen in the high 90C when gaming

Needs more vegetable dip

yah I would have thought a mod would have fixed this by now...... I did try to edit to 6x cores......option unavaliable. Mod will have to fix it.

Heh that never stopped me.......if a product sux I say so, don't like it oh well, make a better product. I don't care what company it is, there's 2 ways for them to respond to a bad review. 1. Screw this guy no more soup for him. ( immature way ) 2. They take it as constructive criticism and improve future products ( smart way ) All you accomplish by bending over and prepping your ass with vaseline for a company is not help to improve/innovate products. However this is off topic now. Sin as far as bclk at 250 how was effec at 250? Didn't test that did you Lucky thing is I did and it sucked so 250 bclk is useless other than a cpu-z which IIRC even 254 is possible on bloomfield. Unfortunately cpu-z is just 1 bench of many so me personally since it does not represent the "majority" I don't waste mine or readers time on it. Does it really matter? No.......gulftown is not an issue bclk wise nor does it have the issues bloomfield has so hitting 250 bclk with gulfy is irrelvant despite you boasting that it does it. The reality is however no one benches 3d on bloomfield anymore so normal QPI is also irrellavant. The other reality is most chips will hit frequncy limit before bclk limits.......

Which is why when you test you do a CPC comparison and hope that both boards acchieve the same speeds. If you look around I compared both boards at the same clocks..........I just didn't include a fancy graph with both. moral of story, they trade blows.

Maybe, just maybe your all barking up wrong tree. It's quite possible the OC board is eating chips and has no ocing/performance issues. It's just a cookie monster Didn't eat any of mine but I never tested it beyond phase.

5970 ref has scaling issues.......Scores are worse than a single 5870 in the 5970 01 rankings.

http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/2169814_chew_3dmark2001_se_radeon_hd_4870x2_124394_marks

Doubt the speed is actually higher, just because Aida thinks it higher and scores better doesn't mean its actual. We have seen similar trends with other benches. maxmem for instance can be exploited by raising AMD's NB multi in windows.........but the reality is it actually can not be raised. However the benchmark still reflects higher scores becasue it thinks the clocks are higher. My guess is certain benches can be impacted and certian ones can't.

True but that is common for 920's at an unstable QPI or uncore........ I can do same on an asus with a clarkdale and have........ It's up to the overclocker if he chooses to submit a bugged result.

mechanical WD's. Gonna have to drop to slow mode soon 1 or 2 bclk more. Won't effect 2d.

It seemed to clock uncore better for me to, but if they slacked on effec to do it then all it is is a higher number. I haven't done a compare yet effec wise so I won't go further than to say that.

Board seems to like 112. Tested with 3 bloomfields to 248 @ 112, high limit seems like 120 hard drive dependant, needed for 250+ if you are booting these speeds like I am.

Had board up to 253 with buttons.........also did a you tube of bclking on the fly in 3d to show limits of 3d benching at 234/235. 014 bios.

your confused this is the 930 this is single stage, going to get DI now, not expecting to much scaling though, hoping for 100mhz 200 would be a treat.

This is my last 1, I guess i need 2 more models so I can get rankings 1-5 in 32m in no particular order with any particular chips. I only have 1 of each, no special binning

Nice to see a run up there finally worthy of the clock speed. Getting tired of seeing guys with some ridiculous 5.8+ chip and crap effeciency grace the top of the rankings.

R3E BE is out and has been available for awhile, priced at $589.00 USD http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131726 You can get into a R III E open box for half the BE version http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131642R