I.nfraR.ed

Well, cas 1.5 should not be real according to the specs, but Oskar Wu did something (maybe related to internal latencies or idk) and infact it's a little bit faster than real CAS2. There's almost no difference for stability, but CAS2 goes a little higher if we speak about max benchable frequencies. Anyway, nice cpu there. I'm glad to see people are still benching these cpus...

Yep. I don't know why they all want removing the scores and continue digging into that direction. Plus, current rules does not force using the hwbot app for the screenshot, so these results fully comply them.

I kinda agree with rbuass, although he's skewing things towards his opinion, without providing enough arguments. Probably it's the language barrier. So, there's perfect sense in forcing the user to have a valid screenshot included in the benchmark. This way, we eliminate the possibility for submitting a photoshopped result. I think it's good to change the rules. Ofcourse, I don't doubt the validity of the forementioned scores. On the other hand, if the mechanism validates the file, it doesn't matter if it's bugged or not (could that happen at all?). I don't know what the mechanism is, but I giess it doesn't validate against the clocks used and the relative performance expected from those clocks. Opening required cpuz and gpuz tabs after the validation file is saved doesn't change anything. It would eliminate only a photoshop patch work. However you still need a valid file to submit.

If the score/screen is real (not edited), then for me it doesn't matter. As long as the score is the same. What's the difference between both cases? 1. Finish benchmark, open cpuz tabs, gpuz, make a screenshot from the hwbot app and save the score (it will contain the screenshot) 2. Finish benchmark, save the score from hwbot app, open cpuz, gpuz and make a screenshot manually You can manipulate frequencies in both cases, so I don't think that's a valid point. And you can't save the file, then open it within the program (like with 3DMark -> submit offline result). This means the system didn't freeze after the benchmark. The only difference I see is that with the first case you don't need to make a correct screenshot manually, it's already in the hwbot validation file.

Thanks, Massman! Kinda not the idea I had, because initially I wanted some of the air/water guys get that board (or ideally one that competed with a low-end board, regardless of cooling). All top-5 guys, except me (970A-UD3), had used top-of-the-line UD7 board. So, basically they don't need UD5 if we assume UD7 is better. For example saint19, Strunkenbold, fgi, MrPaco, kirbster have competed with older boards and probably don't have the funds to buy FX990 board or can't justify spending so much money for it. They could have been happier, imo. Anyway, congrats to froxic. You're pulling really nices scores lately. Keep going in that direction!

60+ on the cpu

Why not upload it then? It's not about prizes.

tWWDD = 4, otherwise it just freezes on 32M.

It could do 281. I have pencil mod on this one, but had somewhere another NF7-S v.2 with a hard-mod. It doesn't scale much with volts. Up to 2V is ok, but scaling after 1.8 is small and over 2V makes it even worse for my board. Yours might be different. Here's one good guide http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=106&pgno=0 . Some of the boards need Vref mod as well. It depends on the board rev (numbers on the back of the pcb), but I don't remember which one, it was looong time ago these boards were new. Other than that, you must actively cool the SB as well, it gets very hot. If you choose the resistor method. never change its value while the board is running. You'd better put a small heatsink on the voltage regulator, too. And ofcourse...triple-check everything before firing it up. I've had no problems running with vdd mod for a long period of time, but the leak killed it .

Noone beleives this could be possible - omg, Honda on top

So you're comparing max clocks on SB with max clocks on Bulldozer. Nice I think Knut asked about comparison on the same platform. Anyway, great clocks on that screenshot.

Nice scores from all participants. The competition was quite helpful, pushing me to tweak as much as I can and try to compensate for the not-so-good CPUs. However not possible to win over much higher clocks just with efficiency. On the other side it was my first serious touch with PCMark05 and even I was following the tweaks in the thread, I still suck at it . Honestly, it's not my type of bench. And I lost my good HD4890, had to bench with the other one after that (30MHz less on the core and 70MHz/280MHz GDDR5 less on the memory)

Ok, no more LN2 left, that's all from me.

I will, but it's just not a DFI I've tested some Epox boards that need cold to only reach DFI air clocks.

...when you eventually remember to copy them, but get the usb-stick out before the save operation is complete..and then find out half of the screens are corrupted

Nice, would be hard to beat with my AN8.

Yes, it had been commented before and I know that from chew*. Then experienced it myself, as you did If you don't go that cold, it's really fine - dry ice, cascade, ss..but it just freaks out when under -150 (not sure about the exact temperature, but it's somewhere there). I wrote it worng - Thuban IMC doesn't play well with Hypers when really cold. Deneb IMC is fine You learnt it the hard way and you'll know for future, that's the normal way to progress.

Damn it, I'm out as well. I was expecting an ending at midnight (15th to 16th) as most competitions (or I'm wrong?). 12 CET means 13 here and I'm on work . "1 day, 7 hours to go" Should have paid more attention.

Just one question. The competition ends tomorrow at midnight, right? I want to be sure, because I'll be benching till the very last..as always.

Hypers don't play well with Thuban and cold. But they fly with Deneb.

Yeah, me too. I think it's due to lack of uefi crap Seems close or even better than Crosshair III.

Subzero on the chipset helps a lot, but you'd need the right cpu, ram and of course hot cpu. 520+ is not doable on all boards with conventional cooling.

Yes, it's alive. It's an old C3 and runs like a tank . Vcore is around 1.932V load, according to software. Unfortunately no 7GHz for me again. Validated 6690, but I forgot to change cpuz to 1.6, doh... I'm a little disappointed, because MILANS is some milliseconds ahead in the 955 rankings, lol. Too bad I didn't have enough LN2 left. Someone said, you'd need a high-end board. Not sure if a high-end one would give me higher clocks, but this board seems pretty suitable (pricetag 90 euro). The only thing I didn't like is its inability to boot with higher than 1700MHz RAM (not sure why) and I had to go up using software in Windows.

Unfortunately (for me), that's all I can do. All my K10 CPU's are in that range frequency wise. I had high hopes for this old C3, because I've never tested it on subzero before.

I used the hot-air gun almost immediately. Anyway, I'll check it again after some days. Really hope it will work again. I've had leaks 2-3 times without any consequences. It just stops working as expected, but when dried out, it works again. Circled area was in water: