Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Antinomy

Crew
  • Posts

    1893
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

Posts posted by Antinomy

  1. 3 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

    not gonna complicate the current rules with info one can derive himself

    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.

  2. 11 hours ago, Sparks.nl said:

    Please note that there was nothing stated here about processors. 

    Really?

    11 hours ago, Sparks.nl said:

    Only use processors using socket AM2, AM2+ socket

    I'll put it very simple for you:

     

    11 hours ago, Sparks.nl said:

    Taking this as a reference (for example) a Phenom II X2 550BE cpu has the exact same architecture as the X4 940BE.

    O.K. then show me a X4 940BE valid with DDR3 and we'll keep on talking.

    550.PNG

    940.PNG

    • Like 2
  3. 15 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

    It's done simply because in other way there would be garbage results in the global leaderboards submitted by the same person multiple times.

    Well, there's that little company UL that doesn't seem to have such a problem.
    So I've thrown my money for nothing...

      

    19 minutes ago, Mr.Scott said:

    Omit the link then. I mean, is it really needed?


    I suppose the initial idea was to validate everything that can be validated.

  4. On 9/5/2021 at 3:25 AM, Splave said:

    What do you guys say about when you can finish a threaded benchmark, and then cpuz crashes your score? Or 5 minutes of pi then cpuz wont open? How is that fair to the bencher that is doing all the tweaks and days of pretesting to be killed by the validation software?

    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.

    On 9/4/2021 at 8:38 PM, Leeghoofd said:

    The Corsair compo could  have been so much more, it has a strong competitive field of our community members, but nearly no newcomers. You should have seen the reactions on the Discord channels when you posted the placeholder. 

    You know what happens if you'll try to take your daily driver to a drag racing? Same thing. Like one said,

    On 9/4/2021 at 6:40 PM, Leeghoofd said:

    Life has rules

    I can't see how a general purpose car could or should compete with a custom racing build. Same thing for overclocking.

    On 9/4/2021 at 6:40 PM, Leeghoofd said:

    Running a game benchmark might make it more interesting, but we need to rely on raw clocks instead of lowering graphical image quality or other nifty software hacks to boost the ouput score.

    Aquamark is a game benchmark precisely (ever heard of Aquanox?).

    On 9/4/2021 at 6:40 PM, Leeghoofd said:

    Game benchmarks could be comparable what the gamers run daily, they can compare their setups to ours.

    That's the whole point and goal of what Futuremark/UL are doing for more than 20 years.

    On 9/4/2021 at 6:40 PM, Leeghoofd said:

    I'm a Patron, who else is supporting Mat's great work?

    If I didn't start with only problems to get, I suppose I'd be one.

    On 9/4/2021 at 6:40 PM, Leeghoofd said:

    I think the rules set has moved along quite well and are as easy as it gets. If you can't get the hang of it, this is not for you.

    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.

    • Like 2
    • Confused 1
  5. 2 hours ago, ludek said:

    Do you want me to check some things on these boards/CPUs?

    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.

  6. 8 hours ago, Tzk said:

    All this wouldn't be possible without the overclocking elders (OskarWu, Tictac, Polygon) which did the groundwork for this. Also the openness of recent socket 462 overclocking and sharing all findings and infos was key. So a true team effort

    Completely agree. As I said, I believe it's now or never to figure out this platform.

     

    8 hours ago, Tzk said:

    I also believe there is more to gain, especially on 1:1 dualchannel. I'm still stuck at 263Mhz for 32M runs.

    Very true.

    • Thanks 1
  7. 6 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

    check topic hardware sharing

    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.

×
×
  • Create New...