havli

How about this? Pentium 4 3.06 GHz Rage 128 Pro 32MB 512 MB DDR Asus P4S333 Windows 98 SE + some random Ati drivers Clearly all textures are in place, so no bugged run. I can run 3DMark like this all day and it will always score +/- 12k at default clocks. Is this proof good enough?

Oh, one more thing - I am really curious how good Skylake is in this benchmark. If you have one, please post a screenshot. Preferably using Windows 8 / 8.1 / 10 with HPET enabled and disabled (so I can check whether timer detection works on socket 1151 platform).

Update: Version 1.1.1 is online http://downloads.hwbot.org/downloads/temp/HWBOT_x265_Benchmark_final_portable.rar The alpha stage has been successful, it is time to move on. I've enabled Beta status, the benchmark is open for submissions. Plenty of free gold cups to take. At the moment we have no dedicated video encoding benchmark on HWBOT. So I thought it would be nice to create one. There are plenty of video encoders available on the internet and benchmark applications for most of them already exists. I don't like reinventing the wheel... Therefore I picked the most modern encoder - H265/HEVC. Only one benchmark exists (that I know of) and it isn't really suitable for our needs. http://x265.ru/en/x265-hd-benchmark/'>http://x265.ru/en/x265-hd-benchmark/ My benchmark is working the same way, but GUI is used instead of command line interface. I also added some tweaks and options to get the best possible score on most computers, even very extreme ones. HWBOT x265 Benchmark is based on the open source x265 encoder (http://x265.ru/en/). It can take advantage of modern CPUs instructions set and multithread support is also very good. However this benchmarks is also capable of running even on as old processors as Athlon XP (maybe Pentium III as well). Of course on the legacy hardware the encoding time is rather long. There are two presets available - 1080p and 4k. The main goal of both of them is to convert H264 source video to H265/HEVC and measure average fps. Now to describe the new Benchmark options: 1. Benchmark type - 32bit or 64bit encoder. Use 64bit if possible, it is faster, on some platforms by quite a big margin. 2. Priority - priority of the encoder process, not much to say here. 3. Pmode - enables better thread utilization, improves performance on some platforms. Also can slow things down a bit, depends on CPU type. 4. Overkill mode: For even better multithreading support it is possible to activate the overkill mode. Two or more (up to 8 in the current version) instances of the encoder will run simultaneously and when all of them are finished, the final score is sum of all sub-scores minus small compensation to avoid score gain by uneven compute time. If the sub-scores time variability is bigger than 5%, the overkill run is considered invalid and no score is generated. The HWBOT x265 Benchmark implements security features which should block any attempt to replace external components of the benchmark (source videos, ffmpeg, x265 encoder) or score manipulation. There are two ways to upload score to HWBOT. Save the data file which contains screenshot and all necessary information. Or direct online submission from the benchmark (currently in development, will be ready in the final version). Also this benchmark should be safe to run using Windows 8(+) - when HPET is active. Minimum system requirements: Athlon XP / Pentium 4 (maybe PIII) 1 GB RAM (1080p) / 2 GB (4K) 1 GB free HDD space Windows XP SP3 Java SE 7 or later Recommended system requirements: AMD FX / Core 2 Quad 45nm (with SSE 4.1) 4 GB RAM 1 GB free HDD space Windows 7 x64 (SP1 for AVX support) Java SE 7 or later Beta testing of v1.0.0 has been running on local PC-related forums for a week or so and no serious bugs were found. So I think the benchmark should be ready soon. There are still some features to finish. When all is done I will enable the public status. In the meantime if you like to test the current v1.0.0 (1080p only), link to download: http://hw-museum.cz/data/hwbot/HWBOT_x265_benchmark.rar Warning - this version (1.0.0) is meant only for testing, saved data files will not be accepted when the submit option is enabled in the future. Known bugs / things to be improved in the final version: - wrong Overkill mode formula is displayed. Time of each instance is shown instead of fps. - final score will be moved below the "1080p benchmark complete" message to be more clear - online submission feature is work in progress - portable version of the benchmark (java included) - No need to install java, can be useful on computers where you don't have permission to install stuff - perhaps enhance the Overkill mode to use more than 8 instances of x265. Could be useful for very large servers (more than 30 CPU cores). Combined score table from ongoing beta testing at http://forum.cnews.cz/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27656 and http://pctforum.tyden.cz/viewtopic.php?f=97&t=229511 You can get some inspiration here - what to expect from your CPU. Score------------CPU--------------------Cores/Threads----------Clock-------------OS.............Tester 85,58........2x Haswell-EP ES Xeon........24/48..............3,2GHz.........Win 7 x64--------DOC-Zenith 30,03........Core i7 5820K...................6/12..............4,2GHz.........Win 10 x64-------le1tho 29,68........4x Xeon X7550................32/64.............2,0GHz.....Win Srv 2008 R2 x64--skipped1 21,81........Core i7 4770K...................4/8...............4,7GHz........Win 10 x64--------l.zdvorak 19,92........Core i5 4690K...................4/4...............4,9GHz.........Win 10 x64-------iOioo 19,44........Core i7 4790....................4/8...............4,0GHz.........Win 10 x64-------skipped1 16,05........Core i5 4670K...................4/4...............4,3GHz.........Win 10 x64-------Darth Daron 14,26........Core i5 4670K...................4/4...............3,6GHz.........Win 7 x64--------JXP 14,03........Core i7 2600K...................4/8...............4,4GHz.........Win 7 x64--------Caderom 13,39........FX-8350.........................8/8...............4,4GHz.........Win 7 x64--------husbja 12,92........Core i5 3570K...................4/4...............4,6GHz.........Win 7 x64--------NoNeStaciTi 12,51........FX-8350.........................8/8...............4,0GHz.........Win 10 x64-------berazde 12,20........Core i7 3770K...................4/8...............3,7GHz.........Win 7 x64--------Killing joke 11,85........Core i5 2500K...................4/4...............4,6GHz.........Win 10 x64-------havli 11,21........FX-8300.........................8/8...............3,6GHz.........Win 7 x64--------Mani2 10,94........Core i5 3470....................4/4...............3,8GHz.........Win 7 x64--------pohodar 10,79........Core i5 3570K...................4/4...............3,8GHz.........Win 10 x64-------Profi-Lama 6,75.........FX-6300.........................6/6...............3,6GHz.........Win 10 x64-------kolecko 6,72.........Core i7 5500U...................2/4...............2,7GHz.........Win 8.1 x64------Tomix 5,81.........A10-5700........................4/4...............3,7GHz.........Win 10 x64-------hob 4,83.........Core i5 3230M...................2/4...............3,0GHz.........Win 10 x64-------RayEndCZ 4,83.........Core i3 2100....................2/4...............3,1GHz.........Win 7 x64--------Caderom 4,45.........Xeon L5410......................4/4...............2,33GHz........Win 7 x64--------havli 4,37.........Core i5 2410M...................2/4...............2,7GHz.........Win 10 x64-------cpt.America97 3,68.........Core i5 520M....................2/4...............2,66GHz........Win 10 x64-------hob 3,05.........Phenom II X4 965..............4/4...............3,4GHz.........Win 10 x64-------cpt.America97 2,9..........Athlon 5350.....................4/4...............2,05GHz........Win 7 x64--------Tralalák 2,49.........A8-3850.........................4/4...............2,9GHz.........Win 8.1 x64------Jan Olšan 2,22.........Core i3 2367M...................2/4...............1,4GHz.........Win 7 x64--------Tralalák 2,17.........2x Xeon 5110....................4/4...............2,0GHz.........Win 7 x64--------havli 2,12.........Phenom II X3 720..............3/3...............3,2GHz.........Win 10 x64-------siddhi 1,42.........Atom Z3740......................4/4...............1,86GHz........Win 8.1 x64------Jan Olšan 1,16.........VIA U4650E......................4/4...............1,0GHz.........Win 7 x64--------Tralalák 0,71.........Core 2 Duo T5500..............2/2...............1,66GHz........Win XP-----------melkor unlimited 0,38.........Pentium 4 640...................1/2...............3,2GHz.........Win XP-----------skipped1

Early GF6200 are based on the NV43 GPU which sometimes is possible to unlock as Mr.Scott pointed out. But even then the performance is somewhat slower than regular 6600. Some features still remain inactive after unlock - I think some kind of Z-buffer compression... although not really sure about that. I can assure you Leadtek GF6200 NV43 indeed exists and with some luck it can be unlocked using Riva Tuner. Here is a hires photo: http://hw-museum.cz/view-vga.php?vgaID=207 And screenshot of default pixel shader configuration: http://abload.de/img/6200_agp07pfl.png Unlocked hardware always go to the original category, as far as I remember. Thats the point of unlocking...

HD 4800 should work just fine. Well, at least it did when using older GPUPI 2.0. http://hwbot.org/submission/2830026_havli_gpupi___1b_radeon_hd_4870_16min_54sec_963ms Maybe I'll try it again tomorow with latest GPUPI version.

Please add this board: ENMIC 8TTX+ thx.

No offence... but as I said - you need to learn much about effective benchmarking. You really thing vsync = 15 / 30 / 60 fps? And that vsync checkbox off in ATi CP = 100% sure disabled vsync? This is real world, things doesn't always work as expected here. Christian Ney: Well I'm sure I didn't take advantage of that "tweak". 10k+ score on Rage 128 Pro is easy to get and no questionable methods are required for it. For example http://hw-museum.cz/benchmark-2-2.php - I did this back in 2009... before I even registered on HWBOT, no overclocking, no tweaks, and still 12k score on a 128 Pro.

Turn off vsync And a little advice - stop accusing others of cheating. You still have much to learn about proper old-school benchmarking.

All these benchmarks were removed few days ago... http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=138054 So probably your cups were in these benchmarks.

Thank you for the help - here it is: GPUPI 2.1.2 Legacy - CUDA (1M) LOG START at 2015-07-10 01:07:04 ---------------------- Starting run to calculate 1000000 digits with 1 batches Batch Size: 1M Maximum Reduction Size: 64 Message box: Press OK to start the calculation. (Start) Result digits: 000000000 Result time: 0.191000 Device statistics for NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285: Calculated Batches: 4 of 4 (100.000000%) Kernel time: 0.176000 seconds Reduction time: 0.012000 seconds Message box: Invalid result! (Error) GPUPI 1.4 CUDA (1M) Also I've noticed the 1.4 has 384 / 448 threads and 2.1.2 has 512 / 512. Perhaps this could be part of the problem?

Please add: Opteron 2224 SE Tyan Thunder n3600M thx

I'm having trouble to run legacy CUDA version of GPUPI 2.1.2 on my GTX 285. The old (discontinued) GPUPI 1.4 works just fine... but the 2.1.2 is giving me "invalid result" error all the time. I can't get even a 32M score (the whole calculation process runs fine but the result seems to be invalid). And the 1B run aborts just after 2nd batch: Log: LOG START at 2015-07-08 16:31:13 ---------------------- Starting run to calculate 1000000000 digits with 250 batches Batch Size: 4M Maximum Reduction Size: 64 Message box: Press OK to start the calculation. (Start) Error while calculating series term! Result digits: 000000000 Result time: 41.874000 Device statistics for NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285: Calculated Batches: 125 of 1000 (12.500000%) Kernel time: 41.701000 seconds Reduction time: 0.147000 seconds Message box: Invalid result! (Error)

Uh, it is... sorry, I didn't notice that this one should be the correct Celeron http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/celeron_s478_330/

http://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?username=stonecoldmurphy&cpuId=927 Can you please move all these scores to correct CPU category? should be Celeron s478 330 http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/celeron_s478_330/ I guess it is easier this way than reporting them one by one. //edit - Celeron s478 330 is the correct CPU, thx to Mr.Scott

Please add this board: Not sure which name is the best. CN700T is written on the MB. thx.

Please add: GeForce 6200 AGP I believe this model isn't in the database yet - AGP, NV43, 128bit DDR thx

Late i440BX boards have PCI divider 1/4... at least some of them. However AGP clock is still FSB*2/3.

Yeah - there are also chipsets that work with both EDO and FPM but don't use advanced EDO features and report everything as FPM.

I was wondering when someone will come up with this idea. :-) Nice work.

GPUPI 1.4 with CUDA is working fine. http://abload.de/img/gtx285_gpupi_1b_9m_13w1o1b.png Separate multi-GPU capable GPUPI version for GTX200 sounds good. (It is a low priority of course) I'm planning to run GTX 295 some day and later maybe even GTX 285 + 295 3way.

Yes, what I meant is - CUDA version of GPUPI doesn't detect the GTX 285.

I can't get my GTX 285 working. No matter the GPUPI settings, I always get "invalid result" error. I've tried latest 341.44 and older 320.18 drivers... makes no difference. CUDA is not supported on this GPU it seems. Testing platform is: Xeon W3565, GA-EX58-UD3R, win7 x64 Any idea how to get this thing working?

RV670 (HD 3850) doesn't support opencl on my system either. _mat_: If I understand it correctly the oldest supported GPU for the GPUPI is RV770 and GT200, right? Too bad the whole GeForce 8 and 9 family is out because of the lack of dual-precision.

Xeon W3565

I had no problem running single HD 4850 and HD 4830 + 4850 combination (win7 x64, cat 14.9, X58 platform). At the moment it is impossible to submit score due to the CPU detection bug.