Strunkenbold

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/m340c/

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/0k8077/ https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/1833/

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/7vt600_rz_c/

https://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/exynos_1280/

Of course! https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/je70_sb/

Update: added Mendocino added Raphael added Phoenix added Dragon Range added Rembrandt Refresh added Barcelo Refresh added missing A8 7690K

https://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/celeron_n5095/

This was as UHD GRAPHICS G1 (32 EUS) already in the db. I just renamed it to https://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/uhd_graphics_mobile_ice_lake/ to better match what GPU-Z shows us.

Added all of their DRAM products

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/868c/

https://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?t=62083 ...have a C3 Nehemiah 1GHz re-badged as a "pc1500" chip... Liqmet stop reporting these old stuff.

https://www.ecs.com.tw/de/Product/Notebook/G320/specification VIA® C3 processor (Nehemiah), _up_ to 1.2GHz, FSB133MHz, 64KB L2 cache @liqmet please stop reporting these subs except you know for 100 % the correct CPU. You can change multi on these platforms via software. Some even have it bios.

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/lnvnb161216_comet_lake/

Interesting but it seems that CPU-Z just has a hard time to detect this stuff. Hwinfo has much better support. And thats the reason I wont add those as Core i9's. I also saw multiple CPU-Z pictures on the net showing different spec name with the usual ES CPU string but still with the Core i9 logo, which seems to be wrong. I guess its a CPU-Z bug which was likely (hopefully) fixed in newer versions. And the problem seems to be this: Family 6, Model 5, Ext Model 55 is the same for all CPUs But stepping 2 just dont matches any production CPU (not even the ES samples of them). Lowest number is 3 (and even those were obscure OEM stuff): https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/es-xeon-discussion.5031/post-325960 So the CPUs you are showing here were some of the earliest Skylake-SP samples available. As long as nobody shows full spec for them with some current HWInfo and CPU-Z screens, I wont add them to the db.

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/7vt600p_rz/ Already there

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/x299_godlike_gaming_ms_7a92/

AFAIK there was no 650Mhz Ezra. As multi is free selectable by user, it could be anything. Best bet would be 866A though (133 x 6,5) Bad mobo probably fails to run anything over 100 Mhz

Yes, youre right, fixed the product number. Thx for the report.

https://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/snapdragon_778g_plus_sm7325_ae/ https://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/adreno_624l/ Sorry adding devices is not supported anymore.

https://hwbot.org/hardware/diskproduct/burst_elite/

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/th_20/

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/x79_turbo/

Please create a ticket with your problem: https://support.benchmarks.ul.com/support/tickets/new Most likely 3DMark database doesnt recognizes your Xeon yet.

Thanks Scotty! The CPU is a golden one. The Abit doesn't match the DFI but my Ultra-D needs new caps before I can use it again. Unfortunately I'm a moron and forgot about the taskbar thingy. I deleted this result, as it makes no sense to remove it from the compo while let it in the rankings if its against the rules. On a sidenote: The rule with the taskbar was there to have a chance of identifying the OS which is still needed due timer issues between Win 7 vs 10 and later. GPUPi, even in its standalone variant, checks the correctness of the system timer. So if you have a valid datafile, your result is 100% technical correct. The same thing goes for scores with BM, where it even displays the used OS. No need to see my lousy taskbar. I would propose to remove the taskbar rule for all benchmarks where a datafile or a verification link is needed.

https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/761mx/