Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Antinomy

  1. They're wrong, all reviews state 125/143. Fixed. I'll check my cards later this year. When GPU-Z or other utilities will tell all of them apart.
  2. Well, the requirements would indeed be very nice to see. You never know what new tests require or new versions of old ones like Benchmate a month or two ago after an update.
  3. I've sorted out most of my datasheets. Here's some nice VIA package: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tGgb4Qpt74xXC6u522FBY0nSmA9ur0Ur/view?usp=sharing
  4. Really? I'll put it very simple for you: O.K. then show me a X4 940BE valid with DDR3 and we'll keep on talking.
  5. Well, there's that little company UL that doesn't seem to have such a problem. So I've thrown my money for nothing... I suppose the initial idea was to validate everything that can be validated.
  6. It's not just about the comp, all subs require valid links. And as I see, you can only make one link public at a time. So for 20 subs on different cards you need like what, 20 keys? So much for their HWBot support.
  7. @Leeghoofd, I've posted two Superposition results under my profile and now the first link is dead. I see it in my profile but it's unpublished. And I can't see a way to publish them both, only one. Could you clear out, how exactly do I provide a validation link for each submission? TIA.
  8. IIRC, there was a newer rev and Premium might be of the latter, that has this fixed.
  9. We're all equal in this. But I like your point - yes, after time CPU-Z has become more stressful than benchmarks themself, which is ridiculous. And if alternative verifications apps will be approved (like HWinfo, BM) it would give a nice opportunity to squeeze some more. You know what happens if you'll try to take your daily driver to a drag racing? Same thing. Like one said, I can't see how a general purpose car could or should compete with a custom racing build. Same thing for overclocking. Aquamark is a game benchmark precisely (ever heard of Aquanox?). That's the whole point and goal of what Futuremark/UL are doing for more than 20 years. If I didn't start with only problems to get, I suppose I'd be one. Yep, if only we had a place where we can just read them, that would be lovely. Usually it's some here and there and some you need to figure out on your own and new benchmarks that have their own new rules. And after you're done, a year has past and you need to start all over again because rules have changed and there a bunch of new benchmarks. Don't get me wrong - the rules are good. But the way they're composed is hard to get into them. I suppose I've asked around ten times about different rules and benchmarks. And that it I don't consider myself dumb and I've read the rules page more than once before asking each time. I suggest we should narrow the conversation and not bring all the stuff here, just take one question at a time.
  10. https://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/jsl_camellia_jl/
  11. Try setting 5-6x multi and pus FSB to the max. Try 1M stability and push over 250. Check different CPUs, BIOS, memory, anything that helps get over 250. That's one of the main goals. You are welcome to the Discord channel (link in the first post) for details.
  12. Completely agree. As I said, I believe it's now or never to figure out this platform. Very true.
  13. Excellent score! Any specific settings to make this happen or just volts?
  14. No, I'm not talking about sharing rules, but team cup ones. For example, on a joint bench session you can take 10 P4 3.0 Prescott CPUs and make submissions using 2-3 best of them. But in team cup the submissions should be made with different hardware categories, right? Like you can't use two P4 3.0 but can use 3.0 and 3.2 CPUs. This one isn't represented.
  15. Would be very nice to have both written in team cup rules in the future. If it wasn't for my teammate, I wouldn't remember this.
  • Create New...