knopflerbruce
-
Posts
4290 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by knopflerbruce
-
-
Excuse me Knut but there is no active thread for anything around pcmark as it seems. Moose's score with dual arecas is up from 12/12/12. Don't tell me that almost one year you're trying to contact Moose for this. You see on your own that noone from the staff cares about it and to go one step further, noone will care.
Excuse me, but it's not in the moderation queue:D
(I assume it's not reported, as I doubt it would be checked without further proof. I can't take a look at a score that I don't know about.)
-
There is no active thread on removing points for PCM05 in the crew section, just to make that clear. That'll be the last thing we want to do, so need to worry about that for a while
-
I will not share the drivers for Dual-Areca, thats why accept to loose some records;)
And most of tweaks are shared in this threat.
Then you can never use that dual areca setup for HWBot. Simple as that
But I guess you know that already... -
What the heck does lcn mean, anyway?
-
One can always remove globals, but not right away. I think the community should be warned a few months before that happens.
As for the Fusion IO device, 10k sounds too high to my limited knowledge. Seems more likely a bug than not.
-
Way to go
Must be awesome to pull off a run like that! -
I usually check newegg feedback rather than reviews. If I check memory reviews it's because I want to check OCing potential and/or ICs used
-
Ticket ID: 1782
Priority: Low
http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=150-SE-E789-KR\r\n\r\n\r\nPlease add this one
-
This one was bad.
Lol @ neweggThough I wonder if one really should give high ratings to any sticks these days. We've had hypers for over 4-FOUR years now. PSC for 3.5 years? Still BBSE/PSC are the ones we use for benchmarking. If you think of it that way, NO memory kit in the world made with newer ICs should be given more than 6-7/10, and most probably from 3-5/10 simply because the performance does not increase with time. Given the cost of these Avexir sticks relative to their performance, I'd say 2/10. 2 because 3000+ is sexy and the sticks do run what they're specced at. Other than that a complete failure measured against 3-4 year old sticks.
I want thumbs up for this
Strict reviewer style! -
If we want 100% secure benchmarks only I think we can remove globals altogether. Even the wrappers are not safe (though safer than no wrapper at all!).
I wonder if superpi/pifast are safe. My guess is that they're very easy to manipulate, especially pifast.
-
-
If you change the timer to one that actually works, and then change the bclk, I guess those results won't be marked as invalid?
-
A "safer" word would be "ambient cooled" or something, perhaps. Strictly speaking, these entry level kits ARE defined as water cooling, so air is wrong. I'm with hyperhorn here, water is water, not air.
-
Any Ivy-E BIOSes out? Seems like f11z wont work...
-
Perhaps it's a good idea to make the error message a bit more informative?
-
We could have a workaround: make the score calculation slightly different, instead of avg. time, we can use avg time divided by threads run. So, a 10 thread chip with an avg. time of 1000 seconds will have a "score" of 100. Then these singlethread results will be worthless
This is just my idea, nothing that has been discussed internally.+1 for a wrapper.
-
If you ask me, either we remove the benchmark, or we block subs with less threads than the cpu is capable of. It's clearly the purpose of the benchmark to run the same number of threads that the CPU is capable of. I don't feel sorry for the folks who have chosen to run just one thread, it's CLEAR that this benchmark is just superpi32m if one thread is selected - and that it's not supposed to be run that way. Rules are rules, but mistakes happen, and why those who read the # of processor sentence in the rules didn't scratch their heads a bit is quite strange.
-
@Knut, can you check if this is the problem on your end indeed?
Not for a while, no, as I'm away. Not sure when I'll be back, could be a couple of weeks. How do I check it, btw?
-
You should be getting an email everytime someone comments on a submission of yours. Don't you?
I get one when a thread is made, but never after that.
-
A bit bigger than the OCing scene
Don't like that game genre at all, so I have no idea what they were doing -
I have nothing to do with this. I swear
-
I just hope the older ones can still be used. That's a solution that could work as well. I have like 50 subs here that I can't submit
-
None of these users are in Team PURE. They seem to belong to PC Games Hardware, must be a weird bug that causes this to happen.
-
I'm using the latest version of Multi Core PI@LINPACK and I'm getting errors when uploading my xml files for both benchmarks. Why?
I'm definately using the latest version.What about allowing manual uploads until this is fixed? The screenshots I've made should fit the regular rules (two CPUZ tabs + score window) nicely. There's no point in having a benchmark where you can't submit scores:o
Error: Invalid data file: Unable to decrypt the datafile
Haswell 4670K/4770K Batch and Serial Numbers
in Haswell (Z87/Z97) OC
Posted
So, what should I look for if I want a chip that's good on air, but scales like shit?
Need a chip for my bro's new 24/7 build.