TASOS

Do you know if there is a bios for the regular Z170 OC Formula ?

True But only hardware modded ... and with a lot of pci-e Good luck with your project ... have fun

Probably the best of the bloorage series. Convenient cause it has both holes on pcb (775/1366). Tough board to bench with ... it has rev12 chipset ... and the known 220 fsb wall. It was a strange board , back in the days ... Too picky with ram modules. With latest bios it can also play with Xeon Westmere-EP both X-series and E-series.

Michael It's not like other common cases of cpu speed fluctuation. For this exact score you have to recall , which is the absolute max bclk for this gen motherboards. Many can reach the 102.9 spot A few can reach a bit more , like 102.95 and even less can reach 102.98 But none (in my opinion) can overcome the 103 barrier and maintain stability to do a validation. That is the case here. delly and hyperhorn have the exact same bclk , but their core speed validations are different ... that's why i assume that hyperhorn's score is not correct. Now If hwbot tells me that , in cpu-z validations , we accept the core speed validation (as shown) ... and we do not take into consideration the bclk (or fsb) and multiplier reports ... I will accept it , and move on. Please consider , that i am not talking in general I am talking about certain cases , with known limitations.

I've done that , a while ago http://hwbot.org/submission/3608861_hyperhorn_cpu_frequency_pentium_g4560_3606.82_mhz

I would like to ask , how the moderating team of hwbot , handle cpu-z validations , where clearly the score is somehow bugged. Correct core speed Wrong core speed

Allowed. Let me know , if you (or anybody else) have any other requests.

In favor of bigger participation , i decided to remove the difficulty factor from this round. Which was indeed , trying to run the (Intel unlocked) SMP feature of Celeron PPGA's ... Since it requires above average modding skills , on both hardware and bios level . When i saw old members , experienced members , getting the wrong dual boards or assuming they had the right dual boards ... I realized that the "art" of running dual ppga celerons was a bit forgotten. Buried deep into hardware history. Sad , but a reality. So Easy , plain simple stage , for everybody. No dual celerons And slot-1 adapter allowed Have fun !!!

Yes you are correct. http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/osibs_s3r4/3380/cinebench_2003 All teams started with single cpu , until OnisA from XtremeOverdrive OC team Italy , posted a score with dual cpu's After that , the teams adjusted their entries. Scott I havent changed the specs of this round. There was no mention about cpu count , from the start. You could have written your opinion in the preparation thread earlier. Why now ?

I agree with you , on the second part of your phrase. On the first part , no. Because since the Abit BP6 era , the pc industry created a special product category for home users. Dual socket boards where not server-workstation only (not anymore). Boards like BP6 , VP6 , A7M266-D .... up to later models such as EVGA SR-2 , were not server products. They were dual cpu boards for home users.

If you are lucky to have a dual cpu board (like Abit VP6) which can SMP Mendocino ... you can use it.

You can use any board , with VIA , SIS , Ali chipset and SDRAM. In case you have a hybrid board with both SDRAM and DDR , you can use it with SDRAM only. I hope it's clear enough.

Please lets stay as close as possible to the Mendocino era !!! Meaning , lets stick to SDRAM only. Gregor Please adjust the competition page , with the available chipset options for VIA , SIS and Ali

The general idea for this OSIBS , is pure stages , no adapters. https://community.hwbot.org/topic/171301-osibs-season-4-design-thread/?page=4

Please follow the general rule guideline , which is (Mendocino cores only) (Non Intel chipset motherboards) (No server hardware allowed-only desktop products) <= General rule for all hwbot competitions , and also specifically for osibs to avoid ServerWorks chipset boards What's left ? Plenty of boards with VIA Apollo Pro133A I hope i helped you.

For this round , the percentage % stage , went wrong , cause of the cpu-z bug , especially on non-Ali chipset boards. The good thing , is that Strunkenbold's move , contacting Franck Delattre about it , will provide us a better cpu-z for future use. I thank them both (Gregor and Frank). As a sidenote , just to laugh a little ... imagine all of us to have picked an other proposal for OSIBS (use of older 486 systems) Personally i feel sad about making a bad choice for this stage ... my goal was to have fun and not cause trouble to participants and moderating team also. Although i dont think anyone had the intention to cheat in this round. I would have expected more of a cpu variety (regarding AMD K6's) in this round , but it seems that most of us played safe with Intel MMX , instead of experimenting with the AMD's. Perhaps this round needed some more time ... cause of the general situation of Hwbot , the past weeks. Anyway ... I am also sad , because my GA-5AX went bad during testing ... and now i have to try and fix it (if it's possible) or replace it (even harder). My other board , a FIC , Via chipset , was constantly reporting 1X multi only (whatever Intel MMX cpu i used) and i chose not to present any scores , cause they looked weird. Congrats to all participants ... and see you all in next round !!! Have fun !!!

Get ready !!! Wallpapers ?

You are both willing to take a risk , on a board you cant easily replace ???

Thanks for all your effort to make this thread complete. It was a great move.

Already done that ... nothing so far ?

No P54CS please. Please attach this wallpaper link to the competition page.

My opinion on verification for this round. Photo of the system (motherboard used). Close photo of the cpu used , with all markings visible. Screenshot with wallpaper including all possible cpuid software (cpuz , aida , crystal cpuid or whatever).

I'm with you on this one max !!! I did propose for a live wallpaper for this OSIBS ... but they didnt listen. Maybe if we can gather some votes , we can still make it happen. Oh yeahhhh This is it https://www.youtube.com/embed/0g7KawdsVSQ ok , ok , i'm joking

The validation "problem" is my fault. You can blame me.

Me too I believe that it should be obligatory Anybody tried Aida ?