I.nfraR.ed

Why do we need that category anyway?

a little race with Phantom_K :)

Getting there!

97.44 driver is bugged at least in 3dm03 - soldiers in test 2, girl and trolls in test 3 are all missing, giving higher FPS in those tests. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKWyaU7jNK4

Excellent, nicely done!

I just wanted to see where I am compared to the other guys Could do a little better, I believe.

Very nice, I was able to do a similar result, but for me there's no point in pushing even further as my old LN2 score is out of reach without going cold again.

I was aiming at 2500, but it seems to be out of reach for my sample.

You should be at 14.7xx -14.8xx at these clocks and timings, definitely something wrong with DRAM settings (default is not optimal for y-cruncher)

A better memory with unlocked PMIC and around 1.30sec faster. Also easy 14.770 y-cruncher 1b (prev best with same mem speed and comparable cpu clocks around 15.0xx). It should give me a nice boost on LN2. 6GHz update 4m 44.272s

Great score! Most of my sessions are the same :D Curious to know the vSOC required, I need around 1.52V for 7400 and 1.55 (max on my board) are not enough for 7600.

I am very sceptical about AIO, air and "normal" water during winter :)

@GorodJust lucky with the IMC, I think. Max I've been able to run so far is 7400 (on LN2 though). It could always be some MSI magic, but I doubt it.

A little improvement 6GHz https://hwbot.org/submission/5178335_i.nfrar.ed_superpi___32m_ryzen_9_7950x_4min_45sec_747ms 5GHz https://hwbot.org/submission/5178336_i.nfrar.ed_superpi___32m_ryzen_9_7950x_5min_38sec_598ms

Clear evidence for a hack! I don't know why this isn't taken down yet. @Leeghoofd are you sleeping? I guess there's still more in the tank. Great job!

Then I take my words back, thought every chip scales I have a limited set of data from my testing and info from other people. Maybe I'm just lucky with the IMC and unlucky with the cores.

Yes https://wallpaper.dog/win95-default-wallpapers This is a thing that @Seby9123 started with using XP background, so I followed with 95. OS is standard Win10 21H2.

Excellent! I knew it was possible sub 14.300 with similar settings, just had no time to try more. Next time, 7600+

Nothing special, really. Depends on chip's IMC and they all scale on cold. With 6400 (if that's ambient) you should still be able to do 7000-7200 on cold CPU.

Win95 tweak You can see my other scores with this cpu. It's coldbugged (-110) no matter what I tried. Now, when I have some more experience with the platform, I could probably get a bit better scores on other benches, but not by much. The clock difference with the top guys is too big.

Hmm, I had hpet enabled (useplatformclock) as it is required for x264, but it didn't cause the bclk to drop, it happened "out of nowhere" for me and was back to normal after the bios almost killed itself. As you mentioned that though, I can see there are other scores with the same drop in bclk.

Excellent score! You got the same bug with bclk showing as ~98.6? My bios almost committed suicide after that happened, wiped all its profiles and settings, had to start from scratch and it worked afterwards. Also, at some point, I could see all cores, but the scores (dropped in half) were like the second CCD is not there at all.

Ah, the optimization with xp background. :) Great score!

Yeah, I can change it in OS as well, although not much with a board without extra external PLL, but asked because of all the "unreliable/skewed" stuff in Benchmate. What is the difference in memclock compared to ambinent if you have tested? IMC seems to scale quite nicely with cold, but I'm unable to post at over 2200 fclk strap and haven't seen any other result with higher fclk - I think that's the limiting factor for (much) better scores. I can almost train 7000 on the chiller, would probably be ok on LN2. And...do you know when the Tachyon will be available in Germany? That's the only board I'm interested in right now. FYI: I've tested 100 -> 100.50 in OS (internal CPU PLL) and benchmate spits the same unreliable/skewed stuff, although QPC is still displayed as Reliable. I think hwinfo does not detect the bclk correctly as it seems to use the Zen3 algorithm, however it seems to be different on Zen4, e.g. if I set 100.25 with my app, cpuz reports 100.50, while something like 100.1250 is not reflected. Either the granularity is different or there's more in it as the bios allows intermediate values. Need to investigate it, but overall bclk detection on Zen is PITA.

In my testing, 1:2 doesn't really bring anything in terms of clocks. LN2 guys can probably tell more, I only have 2 cold sessions so far and they were with M-die.