I.nfraR.ed

Янтарные Слёзы - Прочь от Солнца (Amber Tears - Away From The Sun)

Mine can also do 4000 12-11-11-28-220 2T with 1.83V tight profile from bios, but fail with wazza. XTU no problem even tighter..but on i3, haven't tried on my i7. Also easy 3866 1T tight with 1.73V from bios and tighter than bios profile. Still working on 1980 12-12-12-28 1T for 32M, but it is hard on OCF. I only tried 32M with 5/5 CPU 1.6V, direct die cooling, so that might be the problem... the CPU is too bad and hard to stabilize at 5/5 on AIO PS: 3600C17.

First try with B-die. Having hard time running this CPU at 5/5 VDIMM set at 1.735V in bios.

Yes, it is ridiculous... Even if you don't tweak your ram and just run close to stock, you will still get a lot of points with almost no effort. Got it from first run, btw.

This is a nice idea, indeed. Michael, by this I meant: 1) An example: I had personally reported some older socket A score with typo in let's say pifast time which was ranked 1st, while I had a better score. The typo was that the user entered 12, instead of 21...something like that. There should be a way to correct this. A moderator can't go through all submissions, but when another user is benching some specific hardware and browsing through scores, he might notice such things. 2) Yes, this is not a real problem. So you're right about it. It would be nice for example to add the cooling method if it is written in description of really old subs, but that does not mean the submission is incorrect. Just nice to have

I agree with Strunkenbold. Maybe it will be good to add: - Statement in rules regarding old results and results with lost screenshots. - A link to that statement at every submission's sidebar - Perhaps a marker that a submission was checked by a moderator previously or better the moderation history - A warning/info box that a certain submission is older than <insert date here> and some of the rules can't be enforced for it - Maybe even remove report functionality for old submissions, but sometimes you would need to report some of them, when for example score entered does not match the one on the screenshot - typos happen and need to be corrected by a moderator. On many of the old scores the info about cooling and components used are in the description. There should be a way to report them, so this info can be entered by a moderator. I also remember a period when all validations for socket A were flagged as invalid, because cpuz read double the FSB. New users might not know this. And many more things like this.

It's my first try on that matter, but will wait for one b-die kit to arrive and will try again for 741.

@Strunkenbold, @Kojima45 Very good info, thanks. Will try it in the future. Want to see the limit of this CPU. External PLL mod does not seem too hard to make, so I will try. Never done it before, but love to learn new things.

Yes, I have a Argon 650MHz and it booted straight up. Don't like the Epox board though, better mod the Asus, which is much more stable.

Very strong PCMark04 score, indeed. Even though I have 2001 on PCMark, I lose in almost every subtest compared to kotori, so in fact my score I got just before the stage ends and could not upload so fast is worth 3rd place. For first stage I could not solve the low score on Win98 and on Win XP I could not improve much, since the board was not stable at 112 and 115MHz no matter what I did. The goldfinger device somehow worked and I also tried to force 10.5x multi by desoldering one resistor, but it did not boot. Same thing if set with GFD. This CPU has no VID3 resistors, so I don't know what else to try. The CPU is definitely capable of higher frequency, but I was limited by the board. I also got an Epox board yesterday evening, but could not run the 1GHz Thunderbird at higher than 8.5 multi and the board was so unstable even on stock... Guess I need TurboPLL to achieve more, or maybe some better board, like the Abit. Good job everyone, kotori-san was unreachable for me. -------------------------

Damn it, 1 minute late Could not transfer it fast enough from benching PC.

I vote "yes".

You can still sell it. Socket A 1400 is the fastest Thunderbird and not many people have it anyway. Just need to comply to the rules, otherwise the mods will have to remove the thread.

This CPU is socket A, not slot A. Plus you're breaking some of the rules of the trade subforum. Sorry, but you can't make some money out of this CPU.

@lanbonden I gave up on Win98. Solved that grey screen with new directx (9.0c I think, or was it smth else? not sure), but score was not better than on xp.

I see what I did here Maybe this topic came as a result of me commenting under one Dancop's result. I just said it is somehow discouraging for people like me seeing those crazy ES results popping up. But if it's not ES, then it would be a binned retail. The only difference might be if all chips are retail you get the illusion that you actually have a chance It's alright for me, I just don't feel motivated anymore to bench my 6320 (which is bad on air), but that's my problem. It had been discussed a lot in the past and it can't be done as in motorsport or any other live sport. In every motorosport there are people who can inspect the actual car if it complies to the rules, while on hwbot/overclocking you can't. You can't tell if anyone is sponsored or if it is ES hardware (unless it is obvious like most Intel CPUs in cpuz). You can't have a flawless separation system (as in classes/divisions), because some things can't be regulated. That's why it can't be a true e-sport in this format and I don't want it to be anyway. We often see complains about somebody having advantage - being sponsored, having access to enormous amount of chips to bin from, having a chiller in enthusiast league, living on the North Pole, etc. I mostly complain about money . It's just a hobby for me with my limited free time and resources. Most of the time it's just for fun and I'd like to see what is possible with the current-gen CPU. I realise that will never be on top, unless (still questionable ) I spend all my money on hardware and dedicate my time on benching. But it's all fine with me.

We will probaly see soon retails that match these ES (a lot of binning will be involved I guess). Anyway, good job!

Awesome score. What's up with those ES though? They clock much better than retails. Don't get me wrong, but it's very discouraging for the average joe

I cured this problem by "re-installing" directx. I had the same problem as you. Tried multiple times to install a clean 98SE, but always the same - 3DMark just closes and if I try to run it again it says that I need a VGA which supports DX6.1 or newer. Then I need a reboot. I can't use drivers newer than 44.03 or so. Everything I get after restart is black screen with blinking cursor. With 44.03 and some other 4x.xx drivers I get grey screen in first test. Had the same on Win2000 with 44.03. With older drivers like 3x.xx performance is bad. Don't really know how you guys do it

I'm fighting with 98 for more than one day, but can't get better score than on XP. 44.03 does not work for me, getting grey screen only when launching first test.

Seems we all need to move to 98 I tried 2000 some days ago, but did not get higher score than XP.

Excellent score for the CPU clock you're running!

You make those 6.4 chips in the selling thread look too weak, lol.

That sounds interesting. Bring it on! Want to see what a true oldchool bencher can squeeze out of such system, I suck at both 3DMark99 and PCMark 2004.

Pure luck, I guess? Posted on a local forum that need slot A system with preferably T-Bird CPU and a guy responded I'm not able to clock it higher on this motherboard though and don't want to mess up with resistors for 10.5x multi. Want to keep it authentic.