knopflerbruce

OK, so G.skill booth is the place. But where the schn00t is it?

There used to be a fix for this... edit the submission by emptying the cpu or gpu field, and then just readd the component. It worked in FF on some other subs I tried, but in this case it doesnt work in IE8 Lmk if it works.

Those of you whop will be on a specific stand, is it possible to write down the stand details? What hall, stand number etc...

I use vaseline too. Vaseline and a bunch of sheets of toilet paper. Not much condensation issues from this method, but I wouldn't recommend being as sloppy as I am if you want to run the same setup for several hours at -196:p But it literally takes 1 minute to insulate

If only one man knows the trick and it seems to good to be true, then the correct way of dealing with it is to assume it is what it looks like - something that fucks up the benchmark.

Yeah, if it happens on several screenshoits, then it's something he does every time that causes it.

can you replace the grammar check?

Hooray:D

There should be a maximum number of cores for certain benchmarks, yes (like for PCMark04 we only need single core and multicore, as it only benefits from two threads). PCMark05 up to 4. Vantage and 7 I don't really know. I bet the number of threads is specified in some white papers. Same thing goes for 01 and AM3, no? neither of those take advantage over more than 2 GPUs AFAIK.

I don't really like all the new thoughts where we want to make everyone average Joe's, if you have the resources, then you SHOULD have an advantage. That's how a proper competition works. This is a prime example, one week isn't enough because people "don't have time" (I put it that way because people do have time, unless they work 18h/day - it's just about priorities).

Some of those Manchesters run at nice temps. I just tried a good X2 3800+ - that is, it was good until it coldbugged at -60c only... could've been a VERY good chip, so I had to settle for PCMark04, UCBench and both wprimes:p Need to buy a new X2 4200+, too! @Honda - don't challenge people yet, I'm going to CeBit so I cant bench until I'm back around the 12th THis time with a GTX460 or two in my hands:D

3D is a bitch that way (and this is one of the reasons why I haven't started running all my GPUs yet), but i don't see a good solution. V1 and V2 rankings are OK in some ways, but you'd have twice as many rankings - which is alot. Plus, the V1 rankings shouldn't be fully closed, you should be able to submit using a CPU from a generation that was released at the time the GPUs were the newest technology.

You had coldbug issues at -30, btw?

-18c or so, but i didn't boot 3.6, I booted 3550 and clockgen'ed it up to 3600. At 3600 it had a coldbug at -20, but I saw artifacts in GT3 even at -28 during the 3650 run lol. Bound to fail

think i gotcha, but this system is at it's limits lol, don't want to waste ln2 if you imrpoved your score, then im behind again - close....

You playing the backup game?

It only applies to GPU categories, but even then it sounds like a bad idea. I see the problem, but that solution is just wrong.

OK, bad idea:p

We could always make the enthousiast league less cash dependant by not allowing for example multi socket setups and 3/4-way GPU setups, if that's your problem. At least that's a solution to the problem.

I'll see if it helps to OC the GPU at all, but after thinking about how i did the testing i think it could've been my lack of 3D experience that made me continue running it at stock:p The first run after a reboot was always the fastest. What I did when i tried was to run the game tests with the GPu at stock, then I bumped the frequencies like 10%, and got 0.5% gain or so - but if I had done that on a fresh boot maybe the difference would've been higher... maybe I should buy a card tomorrow just to improve the result:p

Just thoght about something it would perhaps be a good idea if admins had their own nickname color, same for moderators, and perhaps VIPs too.

I was afraid he meant 3.7GHz on the fx60... damn.

7ghz?

I dont know what you did to that HDR1 test, but you beat me by a mile lol. I would've had exactly 14k at 3.6, but got "matrix not invertible", so stuck with my 3550 score that I'm about to post... Well done

BeepBeep? Wasn't that guy like 14 or something?