[Time to enforce bench mate for AMD in windows 10]

36 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

K just for info, I cleaned most Ryzen first gen results, Ryzen2 xxx is up next

I just had two subs blocked, 

http://hwbot.org/submission/3509163_johan45_wprime___1024m_ryzen_7_1700x_1min_5sec_335ms

http://hwbot.org/submission/3509160_johan45_wprime___32m_ryzen_7_1700x_2sec_875ms

I understand you can't see that I'm using Win7 by the SS but I have two examples which were ran on the same day same HW which clearly show the full screen.

https://hwbot.org/submission/3509136_johan45_hwbot_x265_benchmark___4k_ryzen_7_1700x_13.43_fps

https://hwbot.org/submission/3509155_johan45_superpi___32m_ryzen_7_1700x_7min_5sec_101ms

I understand why you're doing this but how much proof do we need to have a submission allowed?

[The Official Country Cup 2018 thread]

1 hour ago, Leeghoofd said:

Question 1:  For the reference score, Frrderik has to figure out why it bugs if I select Socket of the motherboard, 

6 different socket types (thus read 6 different mobos) are required...  I hope it will be fixed soon...

 

Night Raid: If it's only a non approved driver I can live with it, but no LOD or other tweaks...

Thanks, that's reasonable. They have always been lax on drivers IMO

[The Official Country Cup 2018 thread]

So we pay cause UL can't do their damn job, awesome!

[The Official Country Cup 2018 thread]

For the Night Raid submission, it says valid UL link. Is unapproved driver an allowed exception? I don't understand why the driver for my board which has been up since August hasn't been tested/approved, it's an official driver, not a beta.

[Johan45 - Ryzen 7 2700X @ 5500MHz - 2526 cb Cinebench - R15]

Thanks Flank3r

[Samsarulz - GeForce GTX 1070 Ti @ 1999.5/2176.9MHz - 22558 marks 3Dmark11]

That's good to know!

[Challenger 2018 Div IV GPUPI V3.3]

Thanks for the clarification Leeghoofd

[Challenger 2018 Div IV GPUPI V3.3]

That's why I want some clarification, just because it took the GPU and not the CPU doesn't mean the filter is correct. It appeared you were having issues right from the beginning. If you check the 3Dmark tests it specifies GPUs in the limitations, I think they would do the same for GPUPI if it was intended to be run on a GPU. Seems counterproductive since the Division is for Ryzen CPU, not video cards.

[Challenger 2018 Div IV GPUPI V3.3]

That's not the way I read it. Under limitations, it specifies all the ADM CPUs you can use not GFX cards.

[Challenger 2018 Div IV GPUPI V3.3]

Are we running this on the CPU or GPU. I assumed the CPU since we already have two graphics tests in the division and it is for Ryzen but the first submission I see is for GPU which was unexpected. I see in the discussion the poster thought it was for CPU as well but the engine wouldn't take it. Just looking for clarification

[Johan45 - Radeon R9 FURY @ 1130/600MHz - 24228 marks 3DMark11 - Performance]

Thanks. I notice that the unlocked shareds still hasn't been fixed. I posted that months ago

[Johan45 - Radeon R9 FURY @ 1130/600MHz - 24228 marks 3DMark11 - Performance]

Is that enough verification ?

[Johan45 - Ryzen 7 1700X @ 5165MHz - 2352 cb Cinebench - R15]

Thanks FLANK3R

[Needed CPUz verification]

9 times out of 10 ES suck to begin with

[Needed CPUz verification]

Sweet jeebus this is getting really lame

[Needed CPUz verification]

Do we really need all those tabs open or just what's required by the rules?

[Scammed by NCspecV81?]

That sucks Marc. Tracking is not a huge expense and the whole transaction does sound a bit suspect. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the end of it already. Like bassplayer says I've seen people go bad before like flicking a switch.

[Johan45 - Ryzen 5 1600X @ 5230MHz - 35016 points Geekbench3 - Multi Core]

The turboV seemed to work properly, didn't notice any weird settings but as soon as I used it then GB and GPUPI would fail at known good settings. Cinebench 11.5 and 15 worked fine using TurboV

[Johan45 - Ryzen 5 1600X @ 5230MHz - 35016 points Geekbench3 - Multi Core]

All from BIOS, It would boot at 5200. Using TurboV would cause Geekbench to crash, took me a bit to figure that one out

[Johan45 - Ryzen 5 1600X @ 5216MHz - 20.19 points Cinebench - R11.5]

Thanks

[Johan45 - Ryzen 5 1600X @ 5216MHz - 20.19 points Cinebench - R11.5]

I was lucky this one didn't mind a bit faster memory

 

[Johan45 - Ryzen 5 1600X @ 5216MHz - 20.19 points Cinebench - R11.5]

Thanks Marc that was quick

 

[Johan45 - Ryzen 5 1600X @ 5216MHz - 20.19 points Cinebench - R11.5]

I was so close to #1 ended with a water problem

[ROG Crosshair VI]

To be more specific as far as LLC, should we try to keep the vcore idle voltage to be THE SAME under load or should it be MORE than the idle vcore (with the help of LLC)..?

 

My understanding is that the higher LLC we choose, the higher voltage overshooting will happen when CPU is under load, which means more potential damage to the CPU, or am I understanding this wrong? I thought the whole point of LLC is to prevent the CPU from going under what is set in the BIOS (cdroop), but it seems LLC is actually allowing the vcore to be MORE than what it is set in BIOS. Can someone clarify all this as far as the CH6 goes?

 

You worry too much, auto works fine so does LLC 3 you just need to set V_Core to accommodate your needs. Auto will have a larger droop under load. I never had issue with that until I pushed harder and the droop started to increase. Then I raised it to LLC 3 which kept load voltage ~ .025V lower than BIOS setting under load.

[My first LN2 session with R7 1700X+CrossHair VI Hero]

That could make all the difference just don't expect those speeds. timings yes but the IMC is kinda cold sensitive as I said earlier but it's very CPU dependent, some are better than others.