Dead Things
-
Posts
241 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Dead Things
-
-
So, >24H is possible with 1M but not with 32M?
How about 4M or 8M?
Has anyone tried 32M on a 64bit OS?
Doubt it. All the >24 hour runs were done with an old version of SuperPi that only counts to the nearest second. I imagine >24 hours is impossible for all tests in either 1.5 or 1.6.
-
And sadly I did not took a photograph using camera from the amazingly fast run - 23 loop was at 23h 43min! IMHO good for 90MHz K5 PR75...
Now this is interesting. I just assumed that since 1.6 was slower than 1.5 on new stuff that it was just plain old slower. But if it's faster on old stuff, well, I guess I have some rebenching to do!
-
I liked about half of it. The other half (i.e. pre 2005) belongs in Old School, IMO.
Team Cup has always had a strong old school component - that wasn't something new for this year or anything like that. I think the comp is intentionally designed to offer a mix of old, new, expensive and cheap.
All the "slowest," "lowest" and "most boring" stages were new-ish, though. I know some folks found those a real hoot and a holler. But personally, not my idea of a good time.
-
The results from v1.6 will be accepted as these using v1.5...???
You've always been able to use 1.6 if you wanted to. http://hwbot.org/news/879_application_7_rules/
-
1) What do you think about the round lenght of 1 month?
In terms of round length, I personally believe one month is better. I believe two months is too long and either generates boredom or complacency in the form of procrastination. Having said that, I know the lower divisions in the Challenger series are more old school-focused. So there ought to be some consideration paid towards overclockers who wish to participate in both the Challenger series and OSIBS, either in terms of hardware overlap or time to submit.
-
Sandbag penalty.
This I accept. Sandbagging ought to be inherently risky for this very reason. Wanna make sure you make deadline? Don't sandbag.
-
It's a strange example. But let me ask a question. Why are so many users inactive all year but suddenly join Team- and Country-Cup while they are not motivated to bench for the Team-Ranking?
It's a clear message to me that the people are still interested in the bot and like to bench (especially in a team) but not for the team-ranking.
I feel like I'm in a decent position to respond to this query. My team, Hardware Canucks, has had what I would describe as a passing interest in overclocking. There was once a time when we had guys like 3oh6 and Eldonko on staff, and yet they still benched for different teams. So competitive overclocking never really became part of our culture.
Following a moderately successful Country Cup 2012 in which Canada placed seventh, myself and another team member attempted to keep the momentum going at HWC with regular intra-team competitions in the style of OCN. Initial response was very encouraging, but interest and participation waned with each successive comp. In the first comp, we generated 15 submissions (including Rasparthe, because he's an animal), but by the sixth comp, mine was the only submission. There was no seventh comp. And yet when County Cup 2013 came rolling around, the team got excited again.
Bandwagoneering is what it's all about. I'll use the Toronto Blue Jays as an example - during the dog days of summer, only the diehards pay much attention, but during a pennant race, everybody is Superfan No. 1.
And that's what events like the Team Cup and Country Cup do - they give team captains something to work with in terms of motivating their members in a way they simply can't during the rest of the year no matter how much time and effort they put in.
edit - And I don't mean to suggest that we need more large-scale team-based events throughout the year. Not at all! Doing something like that would only take away from the uniqueness of the Team and Country Cups, make them less special. We need them to stay special. However, ongoing minor team events (like OSIBS, for example) might yet prove effective in encouraging participation from teams such as mine. We just haven't seen it yet.
-
Well, it is definitively not related to over 24h for calculation, as 33+h runs are shown:
That's an old version of SPi, though, so it doesn't rule out the possibility of in-built cheat detection getting tripped in mod1.5.
-
What about the sub above? Marc couldn't get it subbed before the stage ended because HWBot wouldn't accept subs. We took second in the stage instead of first.
Yeah - we weren't able to get in a sub for that stage at all because of the downtime. Kinda crummy.
-
This is a very good score! Well done!
-
"Sorry, we are experiencing temporary issues. Technical reason: org.apache.torque.TorqueException: java.sql.SQLException: Lock wait timeout exceeded; try restarting transaction"
Yeah, same here.
-
Nice score! Actual jumpered speed is in fact 4 x 50 MHz ~ 200 MHz, correct?
-
Now you just need a PODP3V to get it even lower. Good work!
-
The stages are very, very specific
I would guess this was done deliberately in order to try to prevent the same boring ol' crew from winning round after round due to being unable to meet all hardware requirements. Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way. So I'd agree - less specificity might encourage broader participation.
That's my comments on the first Season, wish I could have participated more but couldn't find the time to get it done. Hope to see this return!A hearty +1. Hope I can play with you guys more in Season 2.
-
Maybe we can actually get some interest in it this year.
You'll have whatever support the HWC community can provide this year. Last year was just a mess for me life-wise.
-
Excellent work, my friend. I can't imagine this one was much fun.
-
-
There's something wrong with this score - it should be much higher at these clocks, even with Win7. Sure it was running two threads (under 'Advanced Settings')?
-
Thanks Strunk!
-
Please add motherboard: Lucky Star LS-486E
Socket: Socket 3
Chipset: SiS 85C496/497
Specs: http://motherboards.mbarron.net/models/486pci/ls486ec2.htm
Cheers!
-
I bet you had soooooo much fun with this one!
-
Sweet! Adding this to our Team Cup subs...
-
Thanks guys. Nice thing about the SiS 496/497 board is that it "just works." That's more than I can say for my UMC 881/886 board, which is a real diva to work with.
-
FWIW, it had been happening to me as I attempted to manually submit a PCMark 7 score. That sub just went through after several tries, though. It's this one if it helps: http://hwbot.org/submission/2960317
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS on very old machines
in Benchmark software
Posted
Just bumping this old thread so it's a bit easier for me to find when I need it soon-ish. Mods, please accept my sincere apologies for the willful forum abuse.