I.nfraR.ed

What about 1.9+ V and 1 core, does it scale?

First two sound like 7+ GHz chips, Splave. Hopefully they will scale past 1.84V, then you have a winner!

No, I made a "fake" pifast. Simple c++ project for the sake of showing it running, otherwise a simple bat file would output whatever you want just for the screenshot. This benchmark is the most insecure and have a lot of loopholes. Strange I haven't thought about this before. What I did is illegal ofcourse. But I made it obvious. If I had bad intentions, I could do a "normal" result that won't be suspicious. I don't think everyone can do it, because the specific way pifast calculates the times, but it's not that hard.

Yes, I already suggested that long time ago, so I'm up with you - VGA slots, CPU sockets.

One with a large cache Remember Opteron 144@3.1GHz beating Venice at 3.4. Not sure about dual-core vs single core. Dual core should be better, but if it's too gpu-bound, I don't know. Finally some use of my AGP cards, but I'm not sure if I will have time for all this.

I found some great tweaks for pifast. They have similar effect of the super tweaks in PCMark05. Managed to beat the current record with cpu at only 5.1GHz. Before: After the tweaks: Video of the tweaked run: Don't know if my calculations are right, I just wanted to show it's relatively easy to fake a pifast score without photoshopping it. PS: This is not really related to the case here and the screens from John, but thought it would be worth showing.

I don't want to sound like a hater, but if it was me or some other ordinary overclocker (not in the pro league), I'd have been banned already. Those evidences on the screenshots would mean direct ban. Don't want to ban anyone without reason, don't get me wrong, but it shouldn't take that long to investigate the case. I understand that it could be bugged run or some glitches on the screen (regarding the cut label on the shortcut). It could be similar to when some parts of the baloon tooltip are sticking sometimes on the screen or the asus turboevo transparent area is making an invisible overlay on the screen. But it should be a user responsibility to check every screen he's uploading, especially when some of his submissions were questioned recently. However I can't explain myself the odd text displacement/errors in the cmd windows. It's clearly not a valid run, whether bugged or shopped.

why not I've gone up to 1.5V (didn't scale with more) on normal ambient water cooling and 1120MHz gpu.

I can eventually try with my GTX2, but they aren't matched pair anymore. One of the sticks died (dunno how and why) and now I have 2 different sticks. The matched pair ran well on the Maximus IV Gene and Sandy, but required a lot of tweaking.

This one - no. Only pifast and 1M at ~1300, but when I tried 32M it was crashing on the initial loop. On the other 3218B cpu I had no problem at 1300 on cold.

You guys suck at Photoshop - missing superpi, different font, no alignment, etc. CN, ban them all! Here's the correct one and all mu subs are shopped as well.

Board posts and I'm able to load windows at DDR3-2800 10-12-10 dual channel loose BBSE profile, VCCIO 1.15V and run 1M, so it's not the IMC. At 2933 divider I get 55 code, but I don't have memory capable of this frequency, at lest not on air. Hmm, ok... probably something got wet, but I dried out the board thoroughly like I always do. Now it worked without any special setting, just ones I use with all cpus. Anyway, going to change with M5F.

Good luck I can't find it anywhere here, so I'm going to buy M5F. And I need to catch up with the rankings

Excellent How do you like the OC Formula?

Hmm, it seems I've read the documentation wrong. The pin is VCC for the cpu. Going to check with the other cpu when I get back from work and if it's the same, then I have no option, but change the mobo. Not sure if I read it right, but... Broken pin marked on a photo found with google If I read it correctly, it sould be A18. From the 3rd generation datasheet and the socket land map, page 98 From the LGA1155 datasheet, pinout diagram, lower right quadrant, page 91 Swizzles were at auto, but I thought they are RAM related, not CPU IMC. The memory is capable of running tight timings 1300 8-11-7, but I tried with slack timings as well. Even tried loading mem profiles from bios. I set LB at 6 usually, then tighten up further in windows to 1-1-1-1-4-4-1-4-4-0 when needed. Now I got it up to 8, 9 and 14 - no difference.

Hi, I have 2 identical 3218B chips in terms of core clocks. Both validate around 6.9, run 1M at 6850 range, 3DMark 03/05 at 6.6+ range (6.5 with 1.74V pretty stable). However there are 2 differences: 1. The second chip works no matter if I restart, shutdown completely or change any values in bios such as active cores and bclk. First one have CBB issues (00 code) when changing active cores from bios and sometimes after a hard crash, so I need to heat up to -135 in order to save the settings when bios recovers. Otherwise they are identical for core clocks. 2. Thought the second chip would be better and save me some LN2 with lack of CBB, so I can always run full pot without need of heat-freeze cycles. It was looking pretty good and in line with the first chip in terms of IMC capability. In fact all three chips I've bought so far seemed to work with 1300 memory and I don't have better modules to check real IMC capabilities. The oldest cpu and the first 6.9 chip are verified to run 32M at 1300 no problem with pretty tight timings. Now, the issue is that it actually works at 1300MHz memory, both with 2600 divider or with lower divider and raised bclk. No 55 code for memory, no 23 code for IMC. I have some runs at ~1300 8-11-7 pifast and pi 1M. But when tried to run 32M it fails instantly. 1200 is around the max I can run 32M. Tried CPU PLL low and high, VCCIO, VCCSA low and high, VDIMM low and high and nothing seems to work even for the initial loop. Tried very slack timings as well with no real difference, also tried with a known working good primaries with slackier secondary and tertiary. I always delete all generated files in pi directory before run. It errors out with "Not exact in round". Same on watercooled cpu, checked it after the session. So, is it the IMC not capable of stable operation at that frequency, cause timings make no difference? Haven't tested much 3770K, so I can't make a clear judgment... that's why any suggestion is welcomed. I really wanted to keep the second chip and sell the other one, but now I can't decide. Plus I can't run 32M at anything higher than 1.8V. It keeps restarting with a black screen and it makes it faster with higher vcore. Doesn't matter the frequency - tried 6.7GHz and 6Ghz. I'm stuck at ~6740MHz with 1.8V. Any tips about this? Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to make it as clear and informative as possible. Board is Maximus V Gene with 1 broken pin which should be VCC for the integrated video.

No condensation issues on the mainboard and slots, but I didn't cover the whole card with eraser and it got wet on the backside of the PWM.

Thanks, but it was another fail session It was dedicated to one great GTX280..and by great I mean clocks that noone have in the rankings. However had condensation issues again. On the other hand Pi 32M fails instantly with mem higher than 1200, while it's perfectly fine with the other cpu And I can't run 32M with vcore higher than 1.8, it just goes black screen and restarts, so I'm stuck at 6740 or something.

You could do it 1-2 times just to show the boost in points, but you keep submitting with every cpu you have. On the other hand it seems you don't like the way PCMark is going. I don't get it, but it seems you do it for the points. And it's like "look at me, I'm the best, destroying all records". Offense not intended, but it's just the way it looks to the observer.

The easiest thing is to try older drivers. I don't remember having such an issue with old Nvidia cards + old drivers and Win7. Regarding XP and SSD - easiest solution is to install it with IDE mode enabled, not AHCI. Otherwise you will need to supply the SATA controller drivers e.g. by integrating them in the install with nLite.

Or just disable points and interest will fade away by itself PCMark lovers, don't tell me you all bench it because of the global points...if you're so passionate about the bench, then you will continue even without points, am I right? Don't think so . There are some real PCMark addicts, but I don't see them posting scores lately. Except 1 or 2. They all stopped benching when the scores got so skewed that you can't tell anymore if it's a bug, cheat, tweak or something else... E.g. I bench a lot of old stuff, just because I love it and have fun. I don't get a lot of points, sometimes just 1pt or so, but I don't care about it. These points don't even add up for my global ranking.

The question is why HDTune doesn't work with it, but PCMark05 works and how PCMark is indicative for system performance If a 3DMark run bugs and I see a black screen through the whole subtest, then when my subtest score is a lot higher than comparable systems, my score is invalid (for obvious reasons). When someone discovers another loophole/exploit in PCMark, then it's a tweak. But yeah..I'm a hater, you know .

Congrats to the winners. Very tough battle. Next year Eastern Europe should fight back

That card is sick. I can see the winner...

Go Joanna, go!