Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Strunkenbold

Crew
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2209

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    39

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Strunkenbold

    GPUPI - SuperPI on the GPU

    in Benchmark software

    Posted

    On 3/8/2020 at 1:45 AM, yosarianilives said:

    Anyone experience with this error? I get it on launch on both 3.2 and 3.3, only the legacy versions launch but obviously they suck for effi

    20200307_155108.jpg

    I had the exactly the same error and in case its still interesting to some one: the cause seems to be the opencl.dll in GPUPI folder. Simply delete it.

    • Like 1

    PLEASE ADD MOTHERBOARD THREAD:

    in Support

    Posted · Edited by Strunkenbold

    Old MSI boards are a mess. We have now the following categories with MS-7125 in our db:

    https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/k8n_neo4h_ms_7125/ <-- neo4h printed on pcb but seems to be the F with newer revision, does not officially exist and should get merged with the F
    https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/k8n_neo4_f_ms_7125/
    https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/k8n_neo4_fi_ms_7125/ <-- this comes with the ultra right away
    https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/k8n_neo4_ms_7125/<-- just added, stunnies OEM board
    https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/k8n_neo4_platinum_ms_7125/

    I was looking a bit on old MSI page via webarchive and it turns out that PCB 3.0 of the Neo4-F has indeed the nforce 4 Ultra on it while PCB 1.0 just has the nforce 4.

     The mainboard tab of CPU-Z actually shows 1.0 and 3.0 but its not visible on the verification page. Now the difference between ultra or not is SATA2. CPU-Z doesnt show any difference. All boards are more or less the same.  So I'm in favor of merging the F with FI and the plain Neo4 to a category like K8N Neo4(-F/-FI) (MS-7125). Opinions?

    POLL: CPUZ Feelz, let your opinion be known.

    in Benchmark software

    Posted

    22 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

    How about an added column in the CPUZ ranking? Is that a feasable solution for all parties ?

     

    cores.png

    I think this is going in the right direction. But that still would have the problem of not knowing if someone downclocked his cores. If I got it right, this discussion is about showing if someone overclocked all of his available cores to a specific maximum frequency, right?  So what if Tim codes a script, which reads out the page from the provided CPU-Z verification link and IF 100 % of x cores are active AND frequency between them is within a reasonable deviation mark them as all core max frequency and call it a day. This way you could filter them too like in your above example.

    Im twisted about the possibility of separated ranking. I mean CPU max frequency is not really a bench. Its simply the take whatever it takes to maximize your clock game. If you want to have all of your cores at the same level, youre simply not playing it right. 

    PLEASE ADD OTHER HARDWARE THREAD:

    in Support

    Posted

    On 3/30/2021 at 12:22 PM, XtaS said:

    CPU: Qualcomm Snapdragon 865

    GPU: Adreno 650

    Also

    CPU: Mediatek Helio G90T (MT6785)

    GPU: Mali-G73 MC4

    and

    CPU Snapdragon 730 you already had but you're missin

    GPU: Adreno 618

    https://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/snapdragon_865_sm8250/
    https://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/adreno_650/

    https://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/helio_g90t_mt6785vcc/
    https://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/g73_mc4/

    https://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/adreno_618/

     

×
×
  • Create New...