Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

yee245

Members
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by yee245

  1. Yeah, I noticed that happened too with a previous Superposition result when I subbed something for the team cup. It would appear that Unigine's site only allows for single submission to be public facing/published at any given point.
  2. Okay, thanks for the clarification. Just one last one, but once you pick a platform, can you change CPUs on the one mobo, or is that considered part of the base platform? Basically, the only changeable part across stages would be the RAM (or other unrelated parts, like maybe a PSU for whatever reason)?
  3. So, hypothetically speaking, if over the course of the three stages, an Intel platform is more optimal for one stage, and an AMD platform is more optimal for another, to be eligible for any of the overall prizes (the 1st through 5th place ones), a participant must pick either Intel or AMD to use for all three stages? And then, hypothetically, would that also mean that you must stick with either a desktop/main stream platform for all three stages, and you can't use a desktop platform (e.g. z490) system for one stage, but then a HEDT platform (e.g. X299) for another stage? I just wanted to clarify the "All participants have to use the same platform for all 3 stages" limitation regarding whether "platform" means more like "Intel platform" or "AMD platform" or if more specifically means "the same specific motherboard with one specific CPU". And related, for the lucky draw raffle, there would be no such restrictions, just as long as you entered something in each of the three stages, or again, is it that same restriction as what would be used above? And, just checking in advance, but does the same set of DDR4 have to be used for all three stages as well? I'm not sure if it would necessarily come into play, but if perhaps a 2x4GB kit of Corsair memory worked best for one stage, but a different 2x8GB kit of Corsair memory worked better for another stage, would using the two different kits for different stages be allowed, or would it then disqualify you for those overall 1st through 5th places?
  4. Can you please add? Thanks. Asus WS Z390 PRO http://valid.x86.fr/m337fp
  5. 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)?
  6. 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.
  7. 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
  8. Oops, forgot to change the wallpaper for the competition. I'll re-run the benches.
  9. Oops, forgot to change the wallpaper for the competition. I'll re-run the benches.
  10. Oops, forgot to change the wallpaper for the competition. I'll re-run the benches.
  11. 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?
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. CPU-Z validation link indicates 493.2 for the memory, but I could only get a screenshot with it showing 493.1. Close enough?
  17. 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.
  18. 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
  19. Can this motherboard be added? Thanks. Dell 0HN7XN http://valid.x86.fr/4a0q4s
  20. Damn, I thought I had figured out the cheap/easy way to do that 4-way SLI. 😞
  21. Are Xeons allowed in general anywhere that they meet the requirements, or is it only where explicitly stated? For example, a quad core Xeon for 3D06 DDR4, hex-core Xeon for 3D03 DDR3, etc.
  22. I suspect it is messed up somehow, since my submission for that stage hasn't shown up for a week and a half (though MetalRacer's would replace mine, as it's higher on the same socket), even though we only have 5 submissions that are registering, and it should allow 6, and we don't have an LGA 1366 score counted either. It's probably because keeph8n has a submission on a R3E of 266MHz, which is essentially out-scoring mine and MetalRacer's, causing neither to be counted, but also has that M9A score of 463MHz that is counted. From stuff that had happened in a previous team event, I think he (or a mod) would need to go and delete that submission to "open the door" for other team members' scores to be counted.
  23. I was actually looking at some theoretical combos for stage 8, and I don't think just having a really good 2080Ti score is sufficient to guarantee winning the stage. Looking at the 2080 Ti scores for 3DMark06, it looks like the top score is 77,446, followed by 74,928, and those are with 8-core CPUs, so I'd imagine with the 4-core limitation, scores would only be lower. Having a good Vega 11 score for integrated graphics score seems like it could bring in somewhere around 24k points (or somewhere in the 20k range with other integrated graphics (and I'd have no idea how the Vega M's would do, since there are no results with them yet)). Then a team could add another 9-15k from an AGP card (because there's already a couple submissions at around 12k and 15k). Being able to bring in close to 35k points from just integrated and AGP could potentially overcome a high 2080Ti score, I would imagine. And I'm not even really sure what the hybrid category is (is it just an AMD APU crossfired with a select dedicated cards?)... I feel like it's still balanced enough that it's not just a "how has the fastest 2080Ti" stage. If anything, it's more likely going to be a battle of the teams that can muster really any PCI card, since they're realistically only going to be adding a a few thousand points anyway...
  24. The main Team Cup 2019 thread mentions a restriction of up to 6 cores for server CPUs for Stage 7 (dogpile), but I didn't see any mention of that restriction on the competition page. As such, it looks like there are a handful of submissions with 8-core Xeons. What's the ruling on this? https://hwbot.org/submission/4232261 https://hwbot.org/submission/4226821 https://hwbot.org/submission/4226820 https://hwbot.org/submission/4226818 https://hwbot.org/submission/4209929
×
×
  • Create New...