Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

MrGenius

Members
  • Content Count

    69
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Excellent

About MrGenius

  • Rank
    kitchen robot
  • Birthday 10/16/1975

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yeah right. I know exactly how all of it works. It's not rocket science. And no, you don't need one of those to do any of it. Need more volts? Wire to the 3.3V or 5V rail. Need more amps? Replace the MOSFETs with better ones. Need better capacitors? Better coils? Replace those too. Trimmers in a box with a fancy digital voltmeter/display. Whoopty do... It's unnecessary because what's already on the board is likely plenty to do whatever you want to do as far as OC the shit out of your RAM. RAM isn't a high power device that needs epower...EVER!!! You're trippin' with that comparison. And even if you needed to replace some MOSFETs or whatever(not likely)...they're a hell of a lot cheaper than that thing I'm sure. Hence why those things never caught on. They're pretty much good for nothing. Meaning they do nothing that can't be done just as easily and/or more cheaply without them. And that's a fact. Or maybe you can point me to an instance of one being used to break some kind of RAM OC record that could never have been achieved without it. I'd love to see that...
  2. Looks like a little dedicated(and pretty much totally unnecessary in most cases) PSU for your RAM. With some built-in volt mods and a digital voltmeter. In other words...nothing...that can't be accomplished without it.
  3. I presume that means fixing GPUPI 3.3.3. Since it is supported by GB. Yet doesn't work with MANY early processors. Like anything IVB or earlier...so far as I can tell. Which I know you know. But don't seem to give a rat's ass about. For some reason... So yeah...I just made the jump to Z97 here recently. Tried 3.3.3 again with that....and what do you know...it does actually work! Who knew? Not I anyway. I coulda swore it was a totally broken POS. 🤨
  4. LMAO!!! Well...like any sane person these days...I have 2 step verification on EVERYTHING that matters. Hackers can go ahead and have my email address and all my passwords if they want. I seriously DO NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK!!! What are they gonna do? Send me more spam email? Steal my HWBOT account? OH NOES!!! What will I do then?! 😂
  5. Smells like a pile of bullshit to me. I mean...is that all I have to do? Make a thread saying so and so told me HWBOT maybe got hacked...and everybody pushes the PANIC button. I'll remember for later...
  6. Scores keep rolling in with v3.0, and there's seemingly no concern about them totally NOT being legit. Am I really the only one here who gives AF about this? This is for points and all... Side note: There's a new MaxxPi² Multi out now too.
  7. Point taken. And for the record...I've come to find out running GB4 compute without BM on W10 gives me a similar +50000 point score(compared to W7). So it's not BM with that at least. Anywho...well...whatever I guess. There's something going on with it and GB4 on 7. Whether that's worth looking at might not have anything to do with supporting GB anymore. Maybe it would provide incite in general. I mean...it's broken pretty bad...whatever it is. EDIT: I appreciate the correct usage of "couldn't care less". Really irks me that no one says that right. "Could care less"? Then DO! Nobody's stopping ya! 🤣
  8. Seems to be something going on with GB4 compute and BM on W7. That is trying to run it with my Vega 64. For some reason it will barely run the compute test @ stock(1663/945). Yet I can run it @ 1700/1200 on W10 with BM. And @ 1735/1215 on W7 without BM. The score with lower clocks and BM on W10 is also RIDICULOUSLY higher. ~50000 more points on W10 with BM and lower clocks? Seriously? Is it that messed up? That doesn't seem right. And not being able to run it overclocked at all on W7 is DEFINITELY not right.
  9. Yes, rebooted afterwards. Here's that... Windows Boot Manager -------------------- identifier {bootmgr} device partition=D: description Windows Boot Manager locale en-US inherit {globalsettings} default {current} resumeobject {65541ec8-d19b-11e9-bd1b-d40162ba09a9} displayorder {ntldr} {current} toolsdisplayorder {memdiag} timeout 5 Windows Legacy OS Loader ------------------------ identifier {ntldr} device partition=D: path \ntldr description Windows XP Professional Windows Boot Loader ------------------- identifier {current} device partition=C: path \Windows\system32\winload.exe description Windows 7 Ultimate locale en-US inherit {bootloadersettings} recoverysequence {65541eca-d19b-11e9-bd1b-d40162ba09a9} recoveryenabled Yes testsigning Yes osdevice partition=C: systemroot \Windows resumeobject {65541ec8-d19b-11e9-bd1b-d40162ba09a9} nx OptIn debug No
  10. Bug report sent. Pentium 4 1.8GHz Willamette 256 ASUS P4P800-VM Tried... bcdedit /set debug off bcdedit /set testsigning on Still won't run.
  11. I've been unable to get any version of BM to run on W7 Ultimate 32 and any s478 P4/M. So that's where I'm coming from. I suppose I'll send you a bug report or 2(pretty sure I already did). Maybe you can fix it... And yeah...it's the coherent English I speak. Nobody understands that these days...
  12. So…let's just run it like we run 3 & 4. Like I said...it runs just fine on 7. What's the problem with that? Other than the obvious problems. Like not being able to submit scores without a datafile(that can only be had via BM). And having the compute scores going under the processor used...instead of the graphics card. Simply....get over all your pissing and moaning, make a rules page, fix those things so we can submit scores properly...and let's play ball. Oh...and do you want to know 1 good reason why GB should NOT be run with BM? Because that precludes all the 32-bit systems that can't run BM, but can run GB 3 & 4 just fine. Like systems running EVERY 32-bit processor ever made(maybe not all...but a HUGE number of them CAN run GB 3 & 4 but CANNOT run BM). And that's a stupid thing to do. Artificially limiting things so only modern hardware can be used that is. Which is exactly the case with BM and GB 3 & 4 anyway. I know it's a little off topic(since GB 5 is strictly 64-bit). But I feel it needs mentioned here.
  13. MrGenius

    Please add HW

    Western Digital WD Blue SSD KLEVV URBANE DDR3 Intel Extreme Graphics 2(integrated graphics), Speed: 133MHz(Stock) SYNTAX S651M(motherboard), Chipset: SiS 651, Socket: 478 https://hwbot.org/submission/3917269_mrgenius_cpu_frequency_celeron_2.0ghz_(northwood)_2666.05_mhz
  14. Yeah...but we're talking about BenchMate. And no...you don't need a licensed version of GB to run the 64-bit benches...or to get a valid datafile. With BM v0.9.3 anyway. Jesus...pay attention people. It's not that complicated. EDIT: Forgot to mention...GB5 also runs on 7. Despite them claiming it doesn't.
×
×
  • Create New...