Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

yee245

Members
  • Posts

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

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

yee245's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • Week One Done Rare
  • One Month Later Rare
  • One Year In Rare

Recent Badges

17

Reputation

  1. Can you please add? Thanks. Asus WS Z390 PRO http://valid.x86.fr/m337fp
  2. When Intel goes with the big.LITTLE with Alder Lake next gen on the mainstream platform, do we know how that's going to affect frequencies and stuff, as reported by CPU-Z? And/or, how might it be affected next year by these potential rule changes to CPU-Z validation? So, somewhat related to the third question of this poll, if the little cores don't/can't clock as high as the big cores, wouldn't that sort of effectively be like the situation where you're running some cores at lower frequencies (if not disabled entirely)?
  3. Looks like the changes must have gotten applied a little under 2 weeks ago, since it seems like there had been some submissions for it as recently as Feb 13. Good to know.
  4. I'm not sure if it's a hwbot submission page issue, or if it's a Benchmate issue, but lately when I try submitting y-cruncher Pi-25m results done with Benchmate 0.10.7.1 (I think I've tried it 2 or 3 times), I've been the following error: Runs done on the same system for Pi-1b seem to go through just fine (no error about version number). It appears that some of my Pi-25m submissions (from BM 0.10.7.1) were going through fine a few weeks ago, so I'm not sure if maybe something just got messed up on the hwbot end. A similar error message pops up and indicates that hwbot rejected the submission if I submit it directly through the program as well. I've attached an example set of files from a submission that gets this error. y-cruncher_Pi-25m_1.326.hwbot y-cruncher_Pi-25m_1.326.json
  5. Oops, forgot to change the wallpaper for the competition. I'll re-run the benches.
  6. Oops, forgot to change the wallpaper for the competition. I'll re-run the benches.
  7. Oops, forgot to change the wallpaper for the competition. I'll re-run the benches.
  8. Just checking, but given the LGA 2011/2011-3 and Xeons being allowed, does that mean dual socket systems are allowed, or is it supposed to be limited to single socket?
  9. I was just taking a look at a couple of the results files and screenshots I had for some benchmarking I did earlier this week before submitting them, and when I was looking over the rules again, I noticed that they would all have been "invalid" since I didn't have the platform clock enabled (fortunately, I have some Benchmate ones with HPET enabled, so I can submit those, though they weren't quite as good as the ones done from the HWBOT submitter). Anyway, I noticed mainly that in the y-cruncher HWBOT Submitter, under the "Clock" column, it would list "HPET" if it was enabled. As an example, this submission shows that HPET in that column, but this one and this one do not. (I only referenced those ones, mainly because those were a couple of the scores I was chasing after). Should the sample screenshots be updated to show the HPET in that column? Poking through a handful of the top scores, it seems like a number of the submissions from the submitter also don't have the platform clock enabled (because it's really easy to forget the rule and not enable it, and heck, even a couple of my submissions are technically missing it too), at least according to that column. It would appear the rule for the HPET being enabled for y-cruncher has been in place for awhile.
  10. Oops, I think I'll need to go back and re-run this, since I messed up the screenshot and had a couple of the cpu-z windows partially covered.
  11. I probably just had the laptop set on the high performance power plan, had the Cinebench task set to be either high or realtime priority, and then ran it a few times (taking screenshots when I got a new high score, with this being the best it got). The 3.2GHz clock speed is probably whatever it just happened to be when I grabbed the screenshot, since 32 doesn't seem like any of the standard boost multipliers for that CPU under load, at least according to Wikipedia. It seems that it should either be at 3.1GHz when all cores are under load, 3.3GHz when 2 or 3 cores are loaded, or 3.5GHz single core boost.
  12. UL/FM is actually pretty quick at adding hardware (at least in my experience with sample size of 1). I think it took them about 1.5 days before they added the i7-5775R, Pentium G5500, and Quadro P1000 to their database after submitting a support ticket.
  13. CPU-Z validation link indicates 493.2 for the memory, but I could only get a screenshot with it showing 493.1. Close enough?
  14. Can I get one of my submissions removed from the competition? https://hwbot.org/submission/4589377 I accidentally forgot to change the cache speed down to 4.5GHz, and it was at 4.8GHz during this run. I've already submitted a (lower score) replacement for it.
  15. Can this motherboard be added? Thanks in advance. EVGA X299 Micro 2 (121-SX-E296-KR) I added the part number, since that's how the other EVGA boards seem to be in the system (the manufacturer product page) http://valid.x86.fr/2z0exg
×
×
  • Create New...