Leeghoofd

This is the reason we are conducting this experiment, we got partial info from AMD and are aware of new Intel configurations that are right around the corner. At the moment the current path seems to be the best option. Choosing between the plague, cholera or massive flooding... no choice was the ultimate one and would create a stir whatsoever.

Well let me start by saying this is not only my show, this has been discussed/decided by more than one person. I was initially on the same boat as many of the people that chimed in here. But I got persuaded by valid argumentations, mainly due to things to come and HWBot is obliged to be more open to these manufacturer innovations. Remaining on the old cores level thinking will not work for these new and upcoming architectures. Moving to the threads option would be too complicated, keeping with the old core stuff will get HWBot rankings into problems next year. As always there's a lot of resistance when something new is introduced like this or when shifting the global points or whatsoever. But does one eat the same sandwich or has sex in the same position for their entire life? Firstly this is a test, if it works it stays, if not it gets removed (yeah even more drama). Secondly Roman wants to do the same with all AL and new AMD CPUs, I would limit it only to the K(F) and analyze how things will go. My main reason is to protect the older legacy 2D stuff where a lot of them "happy" users still have fun. People have to understand that boints don't last forever. Yes blood , sweat and tears gets wiped on a regular basis. People are forced to buy the latest and greatest, rebench all their 3D cards and/or focus on new benchmarks to retain their positions in the ranking. And that's my main point, most of you only see it at an individual level on what you are benching/running right now. AL CPUs are really not that expensive and there's no real requirement for DDR5 (yet) So why not do this upgrade and move on like most do ? The latter is entirely your choice, but at a certain moment you will have to decide to go along with the flow or focus on other rankings like hardware masters. I wished the new points system was already up and running by removing the percental cut-off and doing the same for the complex algorithm dictated by the nr 1 score. Than this massive loss of points would not have happened. Sadly Tim is only ready with some initial rankings and we have to decide on what to display yes or no, also regarding the future releases. By using this new wrapper, he's developing, we would get: Less calculations being made each time a new score is added to the ranking. Thus resulting in a faster and more responsive website as now it is mainly handled by one server. Less error prone as the complex algorithm will be a goner. More boints will be given to lower ranked users. Rankings will get more competitive as there is no longer huge boint discrepancies between users. There is also the idea to have a front page selection tab between extreme and non extreme users. We need to have an automatic flushing cache and removal of deleted scores this to keep the Bot running on its own, without me having to remove thousands of deleted/incorrect submissions yearly. And of course the tons of bugs that still need to be ironed out. All the above causes massive delay on the point system that has been decided upon. Fingers crossed for a Q1 release.

Hail to the new king of Australiaaaaa

Gee Gee needs a better CPU Nick

Nice one, bronze medal :) DDR5 holding back this score I guess

Plz check the rules at https://hwbot.org/rules?referenceId=5277. A verification screenshot is a requirement, plz check out the sample screenshot, thank you

Good job, solid clocks there sergmann, time to find better memory

Crazy cool, any pictures of the setup sir?

Read the post above yours, Z170 & Z270 are 1151V1, from Z370 you have 1151V2.... you will have to use the other proposed sockets to complete the stage

This comparison was made to show there's already other hardware where you have the benefit of getting double or even triple points from the same hardware. Very energy consuming thread, like trying to convince a non vaxer of the benefits of a jab... And it is not coring down, you are disabling a cpu with different architecture on the same die.

Good start

Fully correct analysis: A far better IPC will always shake up the rankings. Like stated before, with AL this has now happened a few months earlier than with the release of the new AMD's (expected ipc gain over 10%). This is a re-occuring effect in any competitive ranking and due to the amount of hw releases these effects are way higher than in previous years. The 70% cut-off shall be gone in Q1 2022 and points distribution no longer percentual wise dependant on the nr1 score, resulting for lower ranked users to get more points. To conclude no matter what we decide at HWBot it will never be fine for all users. There is always drama involved as users only see the individual concept of things, we have to take decisions not only for now but also for future things to come...

What is the name of each core on your Pentium D? Is core 1 running at the same clocks as core 2? Can you OC these Pentium D cores individually? Are both Pentium D cores based on the same technology? Do both Pentium D cores have the same amount of threads? Do both Pentium D cores share the same cache? Think about the fact: Would these CPUs sell if Intel labelled the 12900K as an 8 core CPU and that retails between the AMD 5900X and a 5950X? they labelled it as a 16 core while it is not really a TRUE 16 core. AMD made the same PR stunt with their Bulldozer, Vishera (although these were not as performant or competitive as Intel's AL is now) Over a decade ago users bought CPUs based on the MHz, now they buy them based on the amount of E-peen cores... Summary: Cores sell Last line on this matter: There's more to these CPUs than just adding up the cores. But I guess you will not find that an acceptable answer. Your points would drop anyway within a few months thanks to AMD's newest offering. So the thread you started is a few months ahead of what is inbound Leeghoofd out.

It is both, you get twice the fun with one chip. Compare it with the unlockable AMD CPUs on AM3. You bought a dual core and you could bench it in the dual, triple and even 4 core ranking (if you got a good CPU) if it unlocked the cores. So this is not really new, same with AMD GPUs where you could unlock the shaders, they were also dual submittable... Maybe have a watch at UnityOC's comment on the splitup (around 1h and 5 minutes mark), hits one of HWbot's objectives spot on with Alder Lake.

With this technolgy you can disable the E cores and then it depends on how the CPU is configured, for 12600K its 6P+4E= 10 but its 16 threads :p. 12600K(6P) is the 12600K with the 4 E cores disabled You are NOT disabling the same cores on this architecture as you are suggesting. This is the same logic when disabling half of the 5950X to make it eg an 8 core, they are the same cores that ones disables. This is the big difference between previous gens or smartphones that use this tech already for a long time. You can now overclock them all and disable them.

So you replied yourself to a previous statement in the thread by the OP if this split-up was Intel driven.... nope it was not. It is really just more than cores guys but I understand your perspective on things and the decision we took to give it a try-out

Thats how it is configured. Already looked at the number of threads ? This uniqueness is the new era we are just entering....

Only the 12600K has E cores, the regular 12600 doesn't, so the 12600K gets listed as 10 core and once as a 6P core.

Well Team Red might also go into the same direction, so we took the opportunity to give it a try out. Point system needs to be looked at as the user can get double points now , so that needs to be looked at. Also there will be a lot of weird core/thread releases in the near future so the chosen path by HWBot might make more sense in half a year from now. Also it seems to be forgotten that the P and E cores are pretty different in clocks and architecture. 6.8Ghz on P (15% IPC gain vs RL) and 5.5 on E cores (SL performance). So its a bit different than just disabling cores as you proposed and to sub in 1 -2-4-6-8 core with the same CPU.... that would be the death to the verification purpose right ? The thing is you can make this hobby as expensive as you want, if you want to maintain high in the ranking, you will need to follow each trend and buy the latest and greatest. This always has been the case and will not change no matter which path we picked. The new upcoming AMDs will also thrash your current scores and AM5 will do it again. I guess you notice the pattern. I always went for 2D hardware masters, as I don't want to buy and LN2 cool 1K GPUs to maintain my ranking. Review sites, I only respect a few as most don't even test properly or are just testing what the manufacturer tells them to do. Anway we are not about best performance for the buck, we want higher scores and last but not least Intel was not the thriving factor for our double database decision.

Great one!

You loose points, I loose points, unless you bench the newest architecture. It's always like this and will be the same again soon when AMD releases their oomphed Ryzens. Rankings will shift once more and this will happen over and over again. Hardware is released at a way higher pace than before, where it was more common for a release like once a year. Nowadays we have 2-3 times a serious performance gain. Neverending story... Hence why I only bench for hardware masters. Hardware points stay, globals and such not...

If you want to participate in Country Cup, check out the competition page at: https://hwbot.org/competition/Country%20Cup%202021%20-%20INTEL%20CPU/stage/5325_xtu_2.0 Screenshot requirement with official background, CPUZ tabs for CPU, memory and motherboard

If you want to participate in Country Cup, check out the competition page at: https://hwbot.org/competition/Country%20Cup%202021%20-%20INTEL%20CPU/stage/5325_xtu_2.0 Screenshot requirement with official background, CPUZ tabs for CPU, memory and motherboard

stay away from DDR5 atm for SuperPi... look at Crazzy 85 CPU@7100Mhz run, hardly beats RL 6.7Ghz