Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

alexmaj467

Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

alexmaj467 last won the day on February 21 2018

alexmaj467 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

31 Excellent

About alexmaj467

  • Rank
    maintenance bot
  • Birthday 04/16/1980

Converted

  • Location
    Russia

Converted

  • realname
    Алексей

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thanks. I do not know the benefits, I immediately changed the BIOS and did not try to use the native BIOS . I guess I did it because of better function Load-Line Calibration
  2. Thanks. one of the eight went so well, he needs a SS. Would have been almost everywhere first. china,5603B171(2L604057)A1377
  3. alexmaj467

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    The calculation of points is correct. Just these results somehow so considered, the rest of which I counted more than 80 processors correctly raschitany.
  4. alexmaj467

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Sorry about my English . I found a bug in the scoring system. I did recalculation of the results GEEKBENCH3 - SINGLE CORE and noticed that if the gap from the first place and the last is more than 25% then this last result gives not 0.2 points but much more. look at the first and last result. https://hwbot.org/benchmark/geekbench3_-_single_core/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_1491 https://hwbot.org/benchmark/geekbench3_-_single_core/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_550 https://hwbot.org/benchmark/geekbench3_-_single_core/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_921 https://hwbot.org/benchmark/geekbench3_-_single_core/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_1316 GEEKBENCH4 - MULTI CORE https://hwbot.org/benchmark/geekbench4_-_multi_core/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_301 https://hwbot.org/benchmark/geekbench4_-_multi_core/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_397 maybe it's just the individual results, as there is where the right thinks.
  5. 50 hardware in season too many. But it can cause people to get old, hardware and overclock the fact that they still do not have available in hardware the library . Thereby increasing the popularity of a particular iron. But I for number of results 30.
  6. alexmaj467

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Sorry for my English. Comrades , the Number of global points for the season interesting for those who uses the top iron and the cooling Nitrogen. I is the number of no matter though 5 results put. (decide among those who are on Global scores work). 10 Global per season Let it. Global 20 for the season, let it be 20. 30 Global points let it be . Those who do not receive Global points this number does not matter. Leave those who use water or air cooling 30 Hardware results per season .
  7. alexmaj467

    is hwbot.org down?

    I can't get in more than 7 hours, on hwbot. uat works perfectly.
  8. thanks I just forgot . unlock new cores i need to specify the number and have the result be in another section. And when i disable the processor cores , I submit the result to the category of how many physically there are cores in this model, without coming up with anything new.
  9. Sorry my English. I forgot if I can disable AMD cores for cpu-z , pifast and superpi feed. My processor Athlon x2 7750BE above is overclocked if I disable the second core.
  10. The screenshot shown is not A pcmark04 test, it is from another PCmark05 test
  11. Sorry my English. This is Google translate. I read this topic , where it was said that the use of version 130 build 1.0.0 is allowed, in which you can set the priority of the process in real time. But the fact is that the use of real - time priority increases the result in the first three tests (Multithreaded test 1, Multithreaded test 2, Multithreaded test 3) almost twice and thus greatly differ the overall result from those who use build 1.1.0-1.3.0. And this applies only to processors with one core. To get a high result on a processor with one core but two threads you need to disable HT. I had to create this topic earlier before posting the results, but what's done is done. Let's decide whether it is possible to use the build version 1.0.0, if not then I will have to redo all the results of 754 socket , 939 socket and 478 socket. Perhaps those that I have posted with real time you can edit and disable them credit of points , they will as an example to calculate who will also use the 1.0.0 build. For example, the result of which I have not yet laid out. My old result Intel Celeron D 335 (2.80GHz, s478)_Speed__3708MHz__-__build_1.0.0__-__real-time_priority_=_6105_Marks My result at higher frequency, which has not yet been posted. Speed 4557MHz - build 1.0.0 - real-time priority = 8189 Marks Speed 4557MHz - build 1.0.0 - high or normal priority = 6021 Marks If you need to write a list of my results where I used the 1.0.0 build . so as not to waste time looking for them in my profile. The file of the version of the program I used can also be found here.
  12. alexmaj467

    Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    The Google translator. Let's find a program that accurately shows the bus and the multiplier for these systems, and add to the rules only for this socket that this program should be in the screenshot. And take the frequency of the final program is not CPU-Z and from another program. And from that time on, future results will only be checked for this socket.
  13. And this edit in the screenshot you do not have AGP video card
  14. alexmaj467

    The Official Team CUP 2018 DDR stage thread:

    responded on your command forum. You need to run the old version 1.78 without closing it to run the new version 1.83 or 1.86 and the new version will tab SPD with information..
  15. Welcome to the team. Fix the result. you have one processor, not four at the same time on your motherboard .
×