I.M.O.G.

Nice 1st Woomack!

I don't think its a bugged run either. Lots of ways to screw up wprime runs, and a few ways to make a good score slightly better than another at the same frequency.

What stage are we at currently?

Ya, I can only get it to post with the 400MHz strap, and only 1:1 and 3:4 memory dividers. (the 333Mhz strap with dividers that are almost equivalent to 400Mhz does not work) Nothing else I tried works, regardless of if I'm at 3GHz or 6GHz. I'm on bios 1301 currently, which allegedly supports P4's... Apparently similar to how my CIVE supported bulldozer (in a very half-assed kind of way).

No prob. That wasn't intended as a comment that you should search. It was more intended as a heads up that we have told someone about it, and its been a problem for a week or two. You aren't alone.

Use the keyboard to select, not the mouse... A few of us reported the problem a couple weeks ago, so its a known issue.

Thanks. I tried a lot of different ram configs mainly just to see what posted, then what would let me raise fsb, this one got me the furthest - many dividers were non-functioning when trying them near stock settings. I had a lot of trouble just getting the board to post with other settings. I don't have any experience with p4's, so I will try some stuff tonight and report back more specifically. I know one of the problems I had was just changing vcore and it wouldn't post... I had to boot on auto vcore then raise voltage by the onboard toggle, which worked fine, just setting it in BIOS was screwy. The board was awesome for c2d's, so if there is weirdness it is just with p4s, or just with certain BIOS versions and p4s.

Tweak-venetica, we have an easier tweak that works the same as the locking your computer thing. That isn't the tweak thats getting these guys to 60K or higher.

Thanks guys. @Crusty: ALL dead links there... The links that aren't entirely dead show the FBI warning because they go to Megaupload. @Mafio: 6GHz was easy, I'm hitting in the mid 6GHz range, which was also not bad to get to... Around that point things whig out, and it seems to be the board and not the CPU. @Turrican: I've heard others say that too. I don't have either of the other boards you suggested, so I'm just trying to do what I can with what I have. It looks like Booon got to the mid 7GHz, if his submissions are accurate: http://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?username=Booooon&cpuId=1046 One of those says foxconn blackops (cpuz), the rest all say Rampage Extreme. Probably going to screw around more with the p4 651 tonight and see if I can get it further. http://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?username=i.m.o.g.&cpuId=1046

I've found that the REX can really not like P4's, and generally acts a lot more finicky compared to how solid it is with C2D's I've ran on it. Anyone got a known good BIOS for P4's on the Rampage Extreme? I've got a few P4's with no cold bugs around here, and I'm not even pushing the FSB this board has done previously... But its wigging out in the mid 6GHz range. I think if I get the right BIOS on here, it can do a lot better. It's especially picky about what memory divider and settings are used on P4's so far in my testing, can be hard to run it over stock at all until you get those dialed in right.

They have had the SAP solution at the 2 airgas stations near me for some time. Both price match according to receipts, as I've always done cash over the counter without an account. The 2nd Airgas did comment that they never sell it that cheap and I was getting a good deal.

I thought the OC League was created to give people the opportunity to opt out. Previously, "pros" had no choice but to be in OC league because thats all there was. Now there is a choice, and I think that is an improvement. I think sometimes people lose sight of that, or otherwise create a fallacy that the leagues were intended to be an ideal system... I always thought it was intended as a less flawed system. For lack of a better solution (I haven't read any suggestions I perceive as an improvement yet) I think this one works well. A few people with extreme advantages still in the OC league don't ruin my fun. I prefer everyone has a choice, because I would like to have a choice too. Benching ES on the latest gen is a yes/no, I think? I know I didn't buy ES for two reasons - didn't want to be forced pro, and its sort of illegal.

I get it for $.50/L. They also quoted me something ridiculous when I called on the phone. I had to negotiate a better price by talking to them and stuff. Businesses which don't ask questions, or where the buyer is just expensing it... They probably just pay the initial offer price of $3/4 bucks. When they check you out, they just type in the actual price they charge you for it... There isn't a set price in the computer they have to charge.

You'd be ranked 11th in pro OC. I know a few guys in pro OC who are fairly poor, and who have only done LN2 a couple times... You wouldn't be most poor (in skill or money, certainly not in connections). I don't care what you do, just stating the obvious.

I don't perceive a problem. I think people should choose to join Pro league if they have the industry contacts to warrant it, and if they wish to. I've reached top 10 in US and top 75 in the world the old fashioned way mostly - the same way anyone can do it... Run hardware worth a lot of hwboints (buy used stuff to cut costs), buy massive quantities of LN2, and fortunately, I have a team of people that tell me how to run benchmarks correctly and teach me. I manage Overclockers.com, but I haven't used that position to get CPUs/GPUs for benchmarking. I know many writers who may get a sample or two a year, I also don't think they should be forced to pro league when benching is just a hobby for them. If I had access to bin dozens of CPUs/GPUs, I would join the pro league, because that would personally make sense to me. I don't think we should force that on people. There is a lot of grey area and this is a hobby, intended to be fun - there are no clear lines, and it is unfair to make the decision for people IMO. Hell, half the time points aren't even calculated correctly. It's just for fun. Getting too caught up in the politics detracts from that. Trying to make hwbot a pure representation of skill, or seeing it that way, is a joke. Many low ranked benchers are skilled, but don't have funds/time/access... The top of the ranking is not always the most skilled, its just the people who have actually managed to do the benching (I can name 10 off the top of my head on my team that are better benchers than me, but I am ranked higher than them). That doesn't make it less worthwhile, or less impressive. I think problems come in when viewing hwbot as a skill based ranking - it should be accepted that ranking represents many factors, of which skill is only one. Accept that others have some advantages.

Nice score bud! You are 200MHz faster than me, and .07s ahead - I know you were just messing with XP yesterday. If you can get this same frequency on XP for wprime, you should smoke me. This is a sub 4 second frequency!

Thanks homie.

Ok, thank you. There were a number of J models in the rankings, so I wasn't sure what the policy was.

Ticket ID: 1516 Priority: Low http://ark.intel.com/products/27460/Intel-Pentium-4-Processor-520J-supporting-HT-Technology-(1M-Cache-2_80-GHz-800-MHz-FSB)

Are those system DLLs or application DLLs? If I understand correctly, changing application DLLs falls under the same rule as replacing codecs (not permitted).

Wow, that doesn't bode well for batch numbers meaning anything once again!

Thank you for the experience.

You know, I didn't really test that... Everything I read said start at at least 105MHz to avoid CB/CBB, so I didn't even test <105MHz. Now I'm kinda curious. The chip may be sold already, but if not I may check that out. When changing the BCLK on your 3570K that acted like mine, what temp was the coldbug at? What BCLK was it at when it coldbugged low, then what BCLK did you change to which eliminated/made the cold bug better? Seems odd that BCLK would change the coldbug... But I'm really hopeful to get another chip. Heard the same from others as well, so I just want to be a believer!

Thank you. Those seem like pretty harsh voltages at warmer than -100C I guess. 2V PLL doesn't seem too bad, but 1.9V on the CPU seems scarey without being at -190C already (maybe I'm a wuss, these chips are just new and I'm definitely being a wuss). I'll get braver with the next chip if it behaves similarly to the first.

I didn't try 2V+ on PLL or anything about 1.75V core. I bought the chip retail, and am selling it so that I can try another chip... I didn't want to beat it up so that I could sell it in good faith. Keep in mind my probe is bogus. I 'm pretty much at the exact same CB/CBB everyone else is talking about... My probe reads 10C warmer than it actually is. It is consistent, just inaccurate. With the settings I changed in the ranges stated, none of them had ANY impact on CB/CBB, 1.0Vcore to 1.75V, 1.7PLL to 1.95PLL, 105bck-110bclk, CB/CBB was exactly the same regardless of settings... Maybe 2V PLL or 1.85Vcore will make a difference. If the next chip I buy does the same thing this chip does, I will try those settings. I think no-CB could be totally blown out of the water so far... Coldbugs are beginning to look a lot more common if you look around at retail experience than we were lead to believe, or maybe more common than I wanted to think. I for one know that this IB can easily do 5.7Ghz which was really hard to do on my best 2600k, and yet I consider it a crappy chip - if it can't do 6GHz and run really cold, it isn't what I was really looking for in Ivy Bridge.