knopflerbruce

If we talk about motherboards and more "complicated" hardware, absolutely - a motherboard has many variables - BIOS, layout, choice of controllers, cooling etc. A set of sticks got speed/timings (= stock performance), design (looks are very subjective, and almost any heatspreader is adequate in terms of cooling today, but OK...), price and overclockability (I guess that's what you mean by stability?). GTX2 got great specs, very fast even when not overclocked. Though... what are the FPS gains in games compared to a much cheaper 2000 cl8 kit? 2-3% tops? Other real world applications? Basically, GTX2 was never a good buy for a 24/7 setup. A review meant for a regular consumer would normally conclude with the fact that the performance increase is so low that it's not worth the extra cost at all, and let the rating suffer from that. A review targeted to overclockers would probably look at things from a different perspective. Enthusiast award sounds good, as an enthusiast doesn't care that much about the cost. A top SCORE product should give bang for the bucks, and not only on the spec sheet. As for mediocre stuff... again, what are the real world performance differences between a mediocre kit and an "outstanding" kit? Doubtfully enough alone to use those words in a review targeted at regulars. I guess price is what could create some differences here, as a low bang for buck ratio makes a kit not that great of a purchase. For a superpi 32m addict... things are different. You can put the "base line" wherever you want. You put it on 80% instead of 90, then you'll most likely never get above 90% 80% of the kits would be between 75% and 85% because of what I've written above - the performance differences are too small, and for most kits the cost difference is the same. Maybe the old 1600 7-8-7 kits with good chips could be good examples of 90+ kits Maybe the 6-8-6 kits, too, but I have a feeling they were a bit too pricey in the beginning.

But if you "must" include overclocking potential in the "score equation", it IS a drawback that they cannot be pushed a fair bit above stock, no? I'm fully aware of the quality of the GTX2's, which was exactly my point - if a huge part of the rating is based on a ~50% expected increase in memory performance then good kits are bound to get relatively low ratings. I'm not doing memory reviews (maybe that's a good thing!), but I find it difficult to ask for insane clocks on low end sticks, and then lower the expectations for high end kits - effectively making it difficult to compare awards or ratings - even though it is unreasonable to expect the highest bins to exceed world records on stock air. The only reasonable way seems to be to lower the expectations for value/midrange kit overclockabilities.

Socket F looks like that, too:p ...but neither of those look like Intel sockets.

Agreed! ...except I'm not sure if I agree to the GTX2 being a "must have" given the lack of overclockability. They really cost alot, and were hard to push much more than 10% above spec on air for 24/7-stability, from what I recall.

I'd like to know the actual reaction(s) that took place. Can't seem to find much info about it, though... No matter the outcome, people being idiots is still classified as fun in my book

Well, is the overclocking potential what separates a 60% and a 90% score? Of course not. I'd say overclocking is worth 10%, 15% tops if you're really into it. "Must have" is too much, but "good choice" - that's quite reasonable in these cases, I bet. A "good choice" product - IMO - is a product that does it's job and can do a bit more than the bare minimum we can expect. 1866C9 -> 2133C10 should be enough here. A kit that can go from 1866C9 to 2666 sounds like a contender for a must-have, it matches what you can expect to run on air/water, and surely it matches the specs of much more expensive kits, even if the specs are very value-like these days. And a quick reminder: most P67/Z77 motherboards were barely overclockable, maybe those ratings were a notch or two too high. I mean... 100bclk... surely we should expect at least 150MHz, no? Maybe 175 to get the top ratings.

I just thought of something regarding memory... the differences are very small between comparable kits. Nothing really makes one particular part number so much better (for an average guy, that is) than the competition. Small performance difference, small price difference between comparable kits, and the heatspreader design is irrelevant as long as the sticks are not too tall. I'd like to give HH credit for one thing: they don't overdo the small differences just to show that there is SOMETHING that separates one kit from another. I mean... you can't say that one kit is worth 80% and another 90% just because one costs 5% more and "doesn't look as good" as the other Maybe I'm a bitch, but if they lowered the scores by 5% (except the 85% one, which should be raised, if anything), it would look quite reasonable. If the sticks run cool, don't consume much power, and run stock nicely + have a little bit of headroom for overclocking, then they deserve to be recommended. What else can we ask for?

I had a nice argument with a friend of mine... what would rather have thrown at you - 1L Ln2 or 1L hot coffee. Tried to convince that person that the Ln2 is harmless as long as you don't get it into your eyes or swallow it When I was benching with Kingpin in Detroit, one of the 160L (ish) dewars started failing, I guess some membrane broke... the sound was ridiculous, I think most of us were wondering if the thing would explode at first. Happy ending: what was left after it had gone silent again was moved to smaller dewars and Vince got us another one for free, saying everything had vaporized due to the fault

-Massman -Free gold cups -Free points -Turrican (for adding obscure CPUs)

:celebration:

I agree, why didn't I get a set of Abu Dhabis??+ Everything is so unfair 'll throw myself infront of a bus now. ...but first i must make a thread titled "Not enough sponsoring in HW masters league"

I got this:D Scottyboy:D

There's really no point in having a separate cup for the pros if what separates a "pro" from an XOL guy is the access to binned stuff. Maybe 5 people would be automatically included. Getting hardware worth a bunch of money helps alot in any league, even if we're not talking high bin stuff - the cash you save can be used to purchase a binned CPU or GPU. No matter how you look at it, a 4 figure USD sponsorship gives a pretty big advantage compared to the regular guys, and if we're not going to eliminate most of the gaps between different types of overclockers, what's the point in having these leagues separated at all?

I don't want the Norwegian edition - it will be nearly all-red, you have to pay fees and tax for every feature you want to use - as well as being forced to use a built-in "pro detector", which, when activated, limits your overclocks to make sure the rookies can follow close behind. Oh, I added POLITICS to the meme thread. Shame on MOI

Maybe all these gold/black themes are meant to recruit more black people to the overclocking scene

Neither does a single GPU setup for a 3D benchmark, or a single CPU setup for a multithreaded CPU benchmark. You won't get any world records with those limitations, as they belong to the "out of reach"-platforms, like my 4P server and 4-way Titan rigs. The question is what the Pro Cup really is. Is it a place with no limits, which encourages people to try to beat the world records regardless of cost? Or is it made to rank the best overclockers against each other? Ronaldo's limits are neither. It's not possible to get any records, and it's still too expensive for most individuals. I tried to create one set of limitations for both cases.

SR2 is the server board with the most overclocking oriented BIOS, for sure. Skulltrail would be a good #2 here. Asus L1N64 WS had two sockets and also decent options for overclocking in the BIOS, but was never popular because AMD was so far behind back then. Personally I don't mind if we focus more on "normal" rigs, but then the really high end GPUs and desktop CPUs should also be forbidden. Say, 4670k/3570k and GTX670/HD7950 as most high end parts allowed. There's no reason to allow $1000 parts if the goal is to make the competition financially accessible for everyone. Then we have to reduce the costs even more than what you suggest.

Have you ever tried to sell a setup like that? No. There are many people who run distributed computing programs that love having that much CPU power. There is definately a market for such setups, and it's not unthinkable to imagine others could be interested as well - especially now that cinebench has global and world record points. Server CPUs are not for pro use only. Remember SR2? Very popular for Vantage and wPrime. That's a server setup, in the sense that it used server CPUs. Back in the AMD K8 days people bought server CPUs, Opterons, to get high overclocks for their 24/7 setups. The Xeon series for 775 was very popular, too - lots of people used Xeon 3060/3070 for example, instead of E6600/E6700. In the end, a server CPU can be used for whatever you like. If I could find a solution to the power draw issues I'm facing, I bet I could even use this for gaming:D

...and yet the "monster obscure server"-setup wasn't really more expensive than the one Ronaldo uses for benching anyway. *sigh*

One thing I'd like to add is that the team system and adding Cinebench to the first round actually helped me compete in the league, there's no chance I would've done the same if I had no option but to bench 3770k and the most expensive GPU to be able to produce useful scores. Systems that are a bit "strange" to see in high end competitions could draw fresh blood to this part of the overclocking scene.

Wouldn't it be alot better if the 3DMarks were orderes chronologically, and then alphabetically (for 11 and the new ones)? The other benchmarks could be above or below the 3DMarks...

As I'm ronaldo's bit*h... yellow card given as punishment... Now stop this b*llsh*t... I don't see what you want to achieve by posting personal attacks... stay... on... topic...

Spouse... in the benching room?!? Unless you're stupid and bench in the kitchen that's a disgrace!

It's $10 here... except for those lucky enough to get it elsewhere, like Uni. Great, eh? Everyone envy us for our wages, but it doesnt help when something costs 20 times as much as in the US:D Norway must be the most expensive LN2 country, even if you adjust for the fat oil wallets we have.

Really? I thought Ln2 was available in most countries, if not all.