TeamAU

"quite nice efficiency at lowish clocks"

LOL if you look at the run you will see there is some excitement left in it....i get excited when we get cars right hehehe.

look forward to seeing you this year mate, you were missed last year

great job mate, gotta find a better card

Leeghoofd are you still scared of me? lol looks like we got an awesome crew this year, who is in charge of allocating the party timetables? I am looking at you Pieter

see you there, Dino should be there too

relax Moose, seriously dude, i've got a life away from OC too..

hell yeah, ill be in on some sort of rpi competition

Had some issues here also with GPUz so we have to run it before the benchmark starts and leave it running in the background to be able to have a valid screenshot, Carl as well. It's to do with disabling power management in Xfire i think. Can you start GPUz as soon as the PC gets into windows?

I should have made things clearer, I was not aware of Sweet posting the requirement for FM link for top 20 global AND HARDWARE, I take total responsibility for the confusion of both HWbot members and staff, I should have had my head around this information I will get Sweet to REMOVE his post regarding validation requirement for top 20 hardware, as the official rule page only asks for validation for top 20 global

as i have had a few questions about requirements for submissions, i thought i would clarify in public, these are all listed under the pcmark05 offical rules page http://www.hwbot.org/news/881_application_9_rules/ when submitting a pcmark05 results you must have: 1. validation link for top 20 global only (not hardware top 20, global top 20 only) 2. a picture of storage 3. results.txt in screenshot as of January 1st 2013 for every submission 4. plus your normal requirements of benchmark score, benchmark settings, hdd startup shown, cpuz cpu, cpuz memory, gpuz, etc You can find the results.txt in the benchmark folder (normally C:\Program Files\Futuremark\PCMark05 or C:\Program Files (x86)\Futuremark\PCMark05)

i am looking at the TW now, i am sure its fine, but as with anyone result that looks bigger than the norm, we are looking at it, discussing internally requirements of result.txt, etc

Moose you already know the answer to this question, so why try to make trouble? Just do as you have done in the past and report those results for moderation, if there is some ram disk happening, then they will be removed

had to switch to BBSE for 05 today was behaving same as samsung during benching for this run i was using 1.88vdimm 8-11-7-26 auto 4 4 8 auto 88 4 16 1 auto auto tertiaries at auto!

my light OSes i used to use in the past dont install properly, gives me some error that it cant configure with hardware but with a full OS no drama... i guess im yanking something out of the OS it needs but you are seeing this on full OS?

Aussie, Aussie, Aussie!

Quality over quantity I really think if anything there are already too many benchmarks, I think in hardware leagues more benchmarks make sense In pro/oc league I think having the highest quality results possible is important, sometimes a single result can take two weeks to do properly, personally I'd rather see less benchmarks but higher quality results and competition Bruce I think lots of people would be very sad if 01/32 ever disappeared, myself included

shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

opa

hmm i seem to be experiencing the same problem with CPU not fitting in properly!!!! dropping the standards i bit i must say!

nice work, new drivers looking strong. we definitely couldnt do that with the other we benched 4 cards on might have to revisit this at some point

Good job

live benching, nice man!

hey guys, please leave the moderating to the moderators, we appreciate your assistance in reporting submissions you dont believe are correct, but please leave it at that, if you think nothing is being done or its slipped between the cracks, please contact an administrator

put that too hard basket ish away, the mods here put in huge hours giving you a clean/fun environment to bench, if they thought for a second by spending months cleaning up the db they could make things fairer these guys would do it, one of the key issues here is all the guys that have put up submissions under the current standing rules, put up a score, knowing they are within the rules, knowing it wont be taken down in 12/18 months time, this is where things get complicated, this is one of the key reasons rst/raid xpert will stay allowed and only sector size changes will be outlawed, sure some of these guys might have used sector size changes and they will be removed there is one key difference between sector size changes and rst using some ram caching and thats the whole benchmark speed perception issue, ram caching isnt decieving anything, its a real world speed, but its something we have long outlawed due to it out weighting hardware we want to shine throught in these rankings, changing the sector size is decieving pcmark, as its poorly written and not designed to deal with those changes, its the equivalent of changing the basketball hoop from regulation size to 2 foot high it seems we are argueing removing rst just for the sake of it, sure it goes against a long outlined pcmark rule of "no ram disk" but it isnt and hasnt been a problem, life isnt one straight line dude, sometimes different decisions are required that will achieve a similar or even better outcome for me personally and totally isolated from my hwbot decision making, pcmark without rst would be boring now, its a great little twist that adds some compexity into anyones rig wanting to push for high pcmark points