Dead Things
-
Posts
241 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Dead Things
-
-
Example results:
Without RAM cache (average over three runs):
XP Startup = 84.938
General Use = 62.592
Virus Scan = 218.089
First run with 1.5GB RAM cache enabled:
XP Startup = 297.482
General Use = 149.934
Virus Scan = 239.430
With RAM cache enabled (average of next three runs):
XP Startup = 1251.457
General Use = 1008.222
Virus Scan = 1516.974
...one might argue since most people tend to use their computers for similar tasks on a day-to-day basis and thus can take full advantage of a RAM cache if they were so inclined, that these results are actually a reasonable approximation of real-world performance.
-
It's true. I use RAM caching in my day-to-day computing. It's non-volatile like ramdisk since all data is stored on a physical drive. But the RAM cache learns over time what data is accessed most often and caches it in RAM for faster access thus improving your overall storage experience no matter how large or small the cache (obviously, the bigger the cache the better for day-to-day stuff).
It's a bit of a philosophical dilemma, I fear. RAM Disks are ruled out for PC Mark 05 since they do not reflect the real-world computing performance that PC Mark is meant to measure. RAM Caches, on the other hand, do reflect real-world computing. And yet the way PC Mark perceives a RAM cache is somewhat exaggerated since basically all test data can be cached in even with only 2GB installed.
-
This score is like a double rainbow. So beautiful!
-
Not only an awesome score - but an awesome-looking rig too! Way to represent the EL!
-
Nice re-up! I may be forced to attempt a retort...
-
Actually, in retrospect, Matose has a good point. Take 'Dead Things'
http://hwbot.org/user/dead_things/#Points
Check his global points. Lots of 60pts, because he has access to multi-CPU servers, so is taking crown in the 24x CPU space and so on, and is now top 5 in the enthusiast league.
w00t! Who knew folding boxes could make for such good benchers too! lol
Seriously, though. I will say that due to my lack of cooling, I have been forced to target more obscure hardware and less popular benchmarks if I had any hopes of posting a competitive score. Now that those benches are worth something, guys with more skill and time on their hands will be taking those boints away from me right quick, and I'll be back in my rightful spot in the rankings eventually.
For now, I'm enjoying my time in the Enthusiast League sun while I still can, taking lots of screencaps so I can show my grandkids one day!
-
To reduce sandbagging, you could set up the monthly challenges to be closed randomly at any time during the last three days of the month. If nobody knows precisely when the contest will end, it will encourage them to get their score in before the random closure period begins (e.g., before the 29th of this month) - otherwise they run the risk of having the contest close before they submit. Just a suggestion. I support your initiative, though, Massman - sandbagging seems very anti-competitive and unsportsmanlike to me.
-
I, for one, would also tend to agree with PsySc0rpi0n. Clearly, I have benefited greatly from the advent of the Enthusiast League. Prior to that, I had to content myself knowing that the only way I could post competitive scores was to use more obscure hardware and target less popular benchmarks.
Having said that, it's a double-edged sword. See, now that I'm an Enthusiast Leaguer, I no longer feel motivated to try sub-zero benching. In fact, it's quite the opposite: I am motivated to steer clear of it in order to maintain my Enthusiast League ranking.
And therein lies the rub. One of the great things about the Country Cup is how it introduces new people to the world of competitive overclocking. Sure it hurts, but it's also pretty eye-opening when the UCBench score you worked on for hours and hours over several nights gets absolutely blown out of the water in embarrassing fashion by guys running LN2.
So if HWBOT is interested in promoting more extreme benchmarking, then it actually makes sense to introduce people to it in the form of handing them a crushing defeat! By separating competitions like this into extreme vs. non-extreme cooling, it may have the opposite effect of encouraging people not to try more extreme forms of benchmarking.
In the end, I still selfishly agree with PsySc0rpi0n's post. But I can see there's another side to the argument as well.
-
-
Since the stage limits didn't mention anything, safe to assume that test sequence and LOD are fair game for the competition?
-
Many thanks!
-
-
Wow - great score!
-
dhenzjhen - 2x Xeon E5 2680 - 2sec 900ms wPrime 32m
in Result Discussions
Posted
2.90, very nice!