Antinomy

Yep, it's the pre-39th week CPU. I've got some of these. No need to mod - their multi is free and can be easily changed. But some are locked (after 39-th week) and there is no way to change the multi on NF2 (you are free to read some smart articles about why this is so). The interesting part is that all Semprons have a locked multi so it can't be changed on NF2. This is the main but not the only evidence. There are more

Agree. The Semprons have a loked multi (like the CPUs after 39th week). And yes, the Sempron in no way is being detected as AthlonXP, it has some differs so the soft can check this out.

And this is not the only innuendo

If we look at the Celeron category, http://hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=17 and check to view the Super pi 32M resilts, we can see that s478 Celeron 315 has 19 results. But in fact http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/celeron_s478_315?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=7&manufacturer=intel&hardwareTypeId=CPU_931&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks it has 18. Some categories differ on 3-5 results from what is seen on category page and 2D rankings. If we look this: http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/celeron_s478_320?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=9&manufacturer=intel&hardwareTypeId=CPU_932&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks we can see a more interesting thing - the Celeron category page shows that there should be 25 results in PCMark. And yes, there are 25 listed. But if we compare the 15-20 and 21-25 results - these are the same ones counted twice. Would be nice if both of these would get fixed. Thank you

On the contrary - a fake result that got an achivement and was deleted afterwards. But the achievement is still active. So deleting a result doesn't make the achievement recalculated. For example, this one: http://hwbot.org/community/submission/1002215_danit_cpu_z_celeron_lga775_347_8180_mhz?tab=info

Yeah, and another one - can you make the achievements being recalculated from time to time? http://hwbot.org/community/achievement/804_joined_the_8ghz_club - I mean the badly known most recent record here.

The categories are not divided by core revisdions => all revisions of a certain model should be submitted in one place. My datasheet says that there are A5, A6, A7 revisions too (but not necessary all for the mentioned 1300MHz model) - this would make too many categories.

Yes, it's the bug that is about to be fixed in next version: http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6393 If you had experience with 1 thread being faster why not switch all affinity of all processes to only this core? Vista is kind of bitch that likes to switch processes from core to core making the C&Q work badly and other stuff.

Yeah, Scotty, there's only one problem. The wprime.exe is not the one to calculate the task. When you click the run button, DCOM service creates a new process (as I remember called wPrime.exe too, but with another process ID) and this is the one to do the math. If you select multiple threads, then an appropriate number of processes is being launched. So changing priority like you said will make realtime to the GUI, the window and as I suggest (don't remember the tests) will make it worse. You can't change the priority of the math processes after they are calculated neither - despite they are not killed after calculation being done, they do die when you start it next time. So your realtime calculation threads will be killed and new ones with regular priority will be created. If the answer was so simple, I wouldn't ask You can use for example Process explorer to check this out.

Ticket ID: 885 Priority: Medium The category for s423 Celeron is wrong - both the 1.7GHz and 1.8GHz. There were none Celerons with this package.\r\nThe results from 1.7 (1.8 is empty) should be combined with Celeron s478 1.7GHz Willamette.

One more question on this - how were the countries included in the region selected? I perfectly understand why Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan got here and why Lithuania and Estonia didn't (a very wise decision I must say ). But how about Georgia? Were the team members asked and they declined? Because as far as I know, the situation is rather same as with Ukraine - our governments are fightning with each other and their own nation. And as for the nations by themselves - they communicate very well (and against politicians of both countries) So the question is - did you ask the georgians and did the decline?

I want to make a thread for this feature so that opinions could be seen in a single place. Maybe this will be better than a dozen of them. If we look at the achievements for example: http://hwbot.org/community/team/pure http://hwbot.org/community/team/ocalliance We can see that they are bot sorted - the golden cups are in order - level 2, 4, 3, 1 in OCalliance and 1, 3, 4, 5, 2, 6 in PURE. It would be more nice if they would go sorted by number of level. And about the team place achievement - I understand the idea, but the usual level order would be better. And maybe make a "level # out of #" in some kind? So that you'd know, which is the higher and how good are you and your team. I'm not a designer - but I'll try to find similar ranking visualization.

Maybe the SMbus? it's just a extended I2C. The thing you need to know is the registers values.

Hey, David Blaine, what did you do with the search? In the morning I could enter "486" in processor search field and get the full list (remember, the 486 category link is dead ). And now entering 486 shows only these CPUs. Maybe it's a search engine bug? If so, it might be easier to delete the "i" from all names - the categories at the present moment are for all CPUs - doesn't matter whether it's Intels i486DX4-100 or AMD Am486DX4-100 or even Cyrix 5x86 (which though is questionable but not with the current number of results).

Another hardware database fix required: http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/i486dx_40mhz http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/i486dx4_120mhz Intel never produced such CPUs - the DX40 was made by AMD, Cyrix, UMC, SGS Thomson and Texas Instruments. As for the DX4-120 - only AMD produced such chips. So the letter "i" before the marking is an error. Thank you

Why not just minimize the window? think it should do the same. I'd like to know a way to change the process priority - does anyone know?

I like the Vcore for this run

I would like to up this thread. In addition to the hardware class browsing it would be nice to make a search not only by exact CPU, but CPU class - P54C, Willamette, Thunderbird or even a socket class - Slot A, Slot 1, socket 478, socket 7. Or a combination of these. I think the way the Intel's processorfinder works - a way like that. But with the ability to be able to switch to the whole class. For example, Intel procfinder can show the E5000/6000 the E7000/8000 but can't show all them in a single list (because for Intel these are separate product line, though we now it's all Wolfdales). And another one - the new submissions button. For example, I've examined all Geforce 6 results and I'm aiming to certain places in a couple of categories. So I'd like to see - what submissions were in Geforce 6 class in last week, month, three months. Thank you

Oh, I tested before the TX97-XE and yesterday checked the TX97-E. Looks like some boards are not associated with their chipsets.

Thank you, the chipset/mobo ranking are now fine What about the rest?

It's even DIN! I have a favourite old DIN KB too But I prefer to use KVM for testing purpose.

:ws: Brilliant one, doc!

I was browsing the chipset and motherboard pages and found that the info is shown incorrectly. I mean the records done using the selected hardware. For example, we go to the P3B-F page: http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/p3b_f?tab=info I see that the board earned a number of cups but I can't search them because the results are stacked by the result in each benchmark - not the place or boints. It's obviously that a crappy P3-800 will rip an outstanding P2 result so why should it be shown before? And it would be better to view the cups and medals - when you look within one CPU/GPU category, it's easy to understand which results are in top5. But when it comes to MoBo ranking... And yes, there's a chipset ranking bug. http://hwbot.org/hardware/chipset/430tx_ - we look the 430TX chipset and see a board with cups, the http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/tx97_xe Let's look it's results: http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/tx97_xe?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=3&manufacturer=&hardwareTypeId=MBMODEL_5414&hardwareType=MBMODEL&tabid=cpubenchmarks We can see a single result. Then we switch to 430TX ranking and what do wee see? Two results, but the one that was done with TX97-XE is gone And yes, no idea about the place of the result in it's hardware category.

Thank you yes, you got me right - the don't have one certain nationality, but the region can be specified.

Anyway, I'm a crappy newsmaker, so this one is not for me. But what about adding MXS to USSR region?