Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22 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. 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! 🤣
  2. 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.
  3. 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
  4. 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.
  5. 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...
  6. 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.
  7. 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
  8. 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.
  9. WHAT?! That's false advertising then. I'll sue their ass!!! Not really...but I might try contacting them to tell them they need to fix it. Because...I'm not sure I could mod the BIOS(not my strong suit). And I can almost guarantee it's not a hardware limitation. Well...it might be. But I can fix that.... Pretty sure it wouldn't need fixing though. It's 3 phase(like just about every other P4 board). And unless they used the absolute weakest MOSFETs on Earth...it'll handle 103W-115W just fine. Even if they did...like I said...I FIX EASY! 👨‍🏭
  10. Dude...the site is so fucked up now after the latest update it makes me wanna kill people. Too much shit to list... "If it ain't broke...keep fixing it until it is!"
  11. One glaring omission from that article would be the CPU cooler support for the ASRock P4i945GC. Or...rather...the lack thereof. The way they offset the socket SEVERELY limits what kind/type of cooler you can use. Luckily I had an older style OEM/stock Intel aluminum HSF with a flat base that worked for mine(running an SL7Q8). What also sucks is no feasible way to run processors bare die on it(which I do with all my other s478 boards). I guess none of that really matters much when the board can't/won't OC for shit anyway. But still...why TF did they do that? Sideways was bad enough. But then put the socket off to one side like that? So you can't use just any old s478 cooler? WHY?! I'm tempted to switch to the G31-M4 just for that reason alone. Which has Prescott microcodes in the latest BIOS(and specifically the F41 needed for the SL7QB/8). So they should run on it. Not sure why you think they won't. On top of the fact it mentions EMT64 support in the manual. You obviously know all 64-bit s478 processors are Prescott...right? The fact that the specs page states "Maximum CPU TDP : 95 Watt" probably(nay...almost certainly) just means they didn't update that to reflect support for up to 103 Watt CPUs(like the SL7QB/8) with the later BIOS. And the 115 Watt models are likely supported too(microcode in the latest BIOS for those as well). Wait...what the hell am I talking about? That BIOS is supposed to be the "Initial" version. So it's always supported Prescott. If that's true... Anyhow...now that I'm thinking about it...I'm almost certainly going to grab a G31-M4. Just to experiment with. Can't be any worse than the P4i945GC. Which is a total POS IMO... EDIT: Hold up...just now reading the next article. Maybe there's hope for the P4i945GC still? I need to try that OC Tuner 1.54 and mess with the "1.5V"(didn't know what that was all about...feeling like a complete idiot ATM for not knowing). I'll tell you one more thing...or rather show you. BRB... Ok...so the OVP mod is bunk. Doesn't do shit. HOWEVER...the OCP(OverCurrent Protection) mod is VITAL!!! I haven't done the VDROOP mod yet. Which might help a little. Next...VTT is the termination voltage for the RAM. You need to up it if you overvolt the RAM and it's not stable. Since you asked. Oh...and G1 RULES!!! No idea what you're on about there. Just know it's BULLSHIT!!! You're just pissed you can't find one...
  12. I would want something like that if it were more "finished". With features like... Terminals for wiring, instead of having to solder wires to it. Possibly spring loaded clamp, friction fit(pins), or screw type terminals. So you could just plug/unplug wires to it. Makes it more easily usable and reusable. Actually...terminals for everything. Make it so everything can be plugged/unplugged. Except things like the caps, resistors, switches, USB connector and the LED. Which should all be preinstalled. It would be cool to be able to swap trimmers and add or remove voltage meters plug and play style(without soldering). I'd also like at least 2 more circuits on the board. Just 4 is too limiting(I don't want 2 boards, I want 1 that I can have my mobo and GC wired to). I'm sure this would all add considerably to the cost. But I'd be willing to pay extra for the added convenience. I mention this because that's basically how I wire all my volt mods. Everything gets wired with bullet style disconnects. Wire soldered to board/IC > female bullet disconnect > male bullet disconnect > wire soldered to trimmer. I don't use switches because...disconnects. My boards all have leads with female disconnects, and my trimmers all have leads with male disconnects(and are never glued to the modded device). I love it like that. Everything is easily plug and play usable/reusable. And as far as the little voltage meters, I don't use those either. I just solder a wire to the voltage read point with a female bullet disconnect on the other end. Then use my DMM.
  13. I'm not accusing you of anything. Just confused how that's possible. If you compare it to the other 2 subs with this processor...it just doesn't make any sense. Maybe it's the adjusting priority(no affinity with 1 core/thread). That never seems to make a significant difference for me when I mess with it though. So I never bother. I'll give it a try with BH4 and see I guess. EDIT: I'm running the same processor, same memory timings(+ 2 more GB), and XP. Priority set to Realtime just hangs the system. And setting it to High does absolutely nothing compared to Normal. Anyway...the more of your BH4 scores I look at...the less sense it makes. You seem to be consistently scoring WAY higher singethreaded than anyone else with similar hardware/specs. You would think you'd notice that. Maybe not acknowledge it...or explain exactly why. But whatever. It's not for points. So I don't really care.
  14. Hmmm...nope. Wouldn't do me no good. Not the worst idea I've ever seen though.
  15. Yeah...that one works too. But I can only get it to work with compatibility mode. The one I mentioned works with or without it. Anywho...both are in that folder I attached. Which it looks like everyone is afraid to touch. Oh well...just trying to save ya some time. Download them all yourself and check them against mine. You'll find they're all bit for bit identical(aside from folder names...which I added numbers according to which came first on a few of them). Here's the list of what's in there: 3DM 2000 Framelock Fix 3DMark 99 Compatibility Fix (1 & 2) 3DMark 1999-2001 Patch Pack 3DMark 2000 mmx check switch 3DMark 2000 Video Memory Error Fix 3DMark 2001 SE 3DMark Startup Hang Patch v1.01 3DMK 2000 patch (1, 2, 3, & 4)
  • Create New...