bolc
-
Posts
689 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by bolc
-
-
-
-
5 hours ago, yosarianilives said:
Well hyper will be hard to get to higher mhz like 2280, I'm only considering it cause once you get to 109.9 you have to use the 1866 strap which gets me 2050 mhz, where hypers could shine.
my kingston hyperx with hyper can do
(voltage for each stick) so no issue to get 2300 888 24 1t if the imc wants
i am more afraid that subtimings will be harder to tighten on hyper than on psc, and I have no bbse capable of similar results, hum, let me see
I have these crazy bbse that do
didn t know they could go to 2666 cas9
might do 2280 cas8.... to check one day
-
16 hours ago, yosarianilives said:
I didn't use it at the time, but in later testing I found that the sandy no avx preset may improve performance. Also I didn't use hypers cause I didn't think they'd work, but now I've seen with some better testing that the preset is just crap for hypers and if you all manual they might work some wonders.
good to know, I might give a try at 2280+ cas8, but 8 10 8 24 1t with tight subs with psc, against 8 8 8 24 but perhpas with losser subtimings. will see
-
8 hours ago, websmile said:
Why do you think these are not correct? You get global points in relation to no 1 result on percentage and top 5 get bonus points on top of this. I think on hardware the same, but not sure if top 5 or top 3 now. This is determined by date of submission iirc when results are identical. This was made to prevent especially on xtu that 150 guys get top spot points at same amount. richba5tard can explain this better, but that\s the main scheme
ok got it, i was stuck with rev6, sams rank = same score
top10 would have been nicer
-
I am left to do 0.6051, but given you did 0.606ish with 109.9 bclk...? I am screwed
or hope 2.2 can do miracles
-
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/hwbot_x265_benchmark_-_4k/rankings?start=0&cores=1#start=0#interval=20
as of #7 and 0.59 fps, all 0.59 get 28.5 pts. glad I worked so hard for 0.6... given I had 0.6 at 12.19 AM :cry:
-
Luumi and I submitted on 1/25 both 0.6 fps, I believe my screenshot (3am) is earlier than his (8.30 morning or evening) but I am #6 and he is #5
we don t see time stamp though for the submission, I guess I submitted right away
http://hwbot.org/submission/3768609_luumi_hwbot_x265_benchmark___4k_celeron_g470_0.6_fps
http://hwbot.org/submission/3769054_bolc_hwbot_x265_benchmark___4k_celeron_g470_0.6_fps -
4 hours ago, GeorgeStorm said:
Whilst you do get equal points, there's a bonus for places 1-5 for global scores, so your total points will be great for 2nd even if scored the same as 5th for example.
Ranks are done by submission date I believe.
date will sort out yes, but since when there is a bonus for first 5 places...? :cry:
global looks ok on the ua for x265 4k, but for xtu, there is obviously a pb with scores, why would #8 score less than 9 or 7 ?
-
I have for sale 2 kits of 2 x 1 Gb Crucial Ballistix DDR2.
First kit is Ballistix Classic with orange heatspreaders.
Second kit is Ballistix Tracer with LED
Both do 620 5-5-5-5 trfc30 at 2.30 V, tested ok on SPI32M on EP45-UD3P with E8500 and ram coefficient x3.0 vs FSB, XP SP3 and maxmem = 550 Mb.
Failed test at 625, did not test in between. Some say max voltage can be much higher if you need more o/c room.I suspect D9GMH chips given the 5-5-5-5 series and nice o/c.
Asked price is 20 eur per kit
Shipping to Europe
-
hey oh here
i suppose the points for ranks #2 to 6 are not correct ?
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/hwbot_x265_benchmark_-_4k/rankings?start=0&cores=1#start=0#interval=20
same goes with hw points?
-
350shipped worldwide so shipping included....?
-
On 3/19/2018 at 6:52 PM, sale_quiche said:
Hi,
you have PM
u r alive dude
-
1 hour ago, _mat_ said:
Hi bolc,
thanks for your kind words, much appreciated!
Regarding your problems: Can you provide a screenshot for the bad checksum problem please? I need to know the exact error message and where it happens.
Next time I will save a snapshot
funny thing is that it give the checksum error, but when you retry 1 or twice, it is then ok. but in the same oc conditions, the 3.1 will not give the error, so I tend to use 3.1 currently but I will ++
-
it is getting better for globals for #1 at 0.61 and #7 to 11 at 0.59 getting the same amount of points, but not for 0.60 fps ranks #2-5
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/hwbot_x265_benchmark_-_4k/rankings?start=0&cores=1#start=0#interval=20 -
also looks like spi1M is for me tomorrow
with 546ish fsb I should get below 11.500
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/superpi_-_1m/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_1692&cores=4#start=0#interval=20 -
on the q9400, looks like I hit the wall at 561.7 ...
life could be worse
http://hwbot.org/submission/3818943_bolc_cpu_frequency_core_2_quad_q9400_4493.62_mhz -
is 2.2 now mandatory ?
-
I just benched a q9400 slb6b coeff x8 and had no trouble with the aio for similar voltages, so there was nothing to worry with the q8200 coeff x7
http://hwbot.org/submission/3817911_bolc_superpi___32m_core_2_quad_q9400_10min_54sec_78ms
and now I am quite sure I should be able to take #2 rank with this board for max frequency, if the cpu does not wall...
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/cpu_frequency/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_1692&cores=4#start=0#interval=20 -
http://hwbot.org/submission/3818758_bolc_pifast_core_2_quad_q8200_25sec_280ms
it is really good man, I used my 2nd best or what I thought was my 2nd best ep45 ud3p to bench it on a 240mm AIO, went from 1.64 to 1.70 V, and the cpu went all the way to 565 max fsb... which is pretty much the max fsb of my best ud3p on quads, so far. ok I pushed further vtt and nb to get there on this board, but it may surely do close to 570 on the other board /and/or on cold if I didn t hit the chip fsb wall.
it gave me some practice at least and some fun, I was happy to best scannick -
umounted it and read q8200, hence my first guess, but the code name is SL9GT... so Q8200S... will have to move everything to this category. The scores were amazing though...
-
damned I didn t see that. I will take a picture of the cpu to make sure when my spi32m run is over. I would be pissed if that is the case...
-
hw points seem ok, although sometimes the whole set of subs of a given bench / cpu go away and come back. but in my case, all my hwpoints seem fine. the global are fine too since I recalculated them to make sure I did not have "fake" points, which helped or it did adjust itself but all is fine except the x265 4k global on g470.
however, for many users, the globals are artificially high, hence as is the ranking. but they will come down soon
here. I like my 1200 hwpts and expect about 250 global, so I should be in the top 10 for sure, maybe 7-8ish
Ps: check the rounding and exxact value on your 0.61 note, in fact it is 0.6066 fps. to get to 0.6151 to get a 0.62 is a long way... and if x265 2.2.0 becomes mandatory, no more easy roundingx265 2.2.0 now calculates 3 digits after the point (thanks to me complaining...? :D)
https://hwbot.org/submission/3803493_bolc_hwbot_x265_benchmark___1080p_core_i7_7700k_45.273_fpsin that example, I am not sure if they truncate or round : 45.273 becomes 45.27, but what would happen to 45.276, rounding to 45.28 or truncating ti 45.27...?
so 0.608 may become 0.61 but might still be ranked after yours since you submitted first. since I am sure they will not manually check any 2.1.0 and older subs to get out the 3 digits number, but how the 3 digits will come out is still a mystery. they will round probably, but hopefully will use the 3 digits to establish ranking
-
You got me upset :D
GPUPI - SuperPI on the GPU
in Benchmark software
Posted
I make only offline save and submit later files