K404

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?56837-P4C800-E-Deluxe-Vcore-mod-Vdrop-mod-Vmem-mod Fully ten years old! Trollolol What's the voltage stability like? Might be gettin your solder on anyway!

If History does not update, you are doing something wrong. Task Manager will show you how many cores are being used, as a % of full CPU utilisation. That is a non-sequitur. They are completely different tests, using completely different instructions. There's one problem right away. PCM04 explicitly uses Internet Explorer.

I just had a really really quick try on my daily machine (Sandy i3...2C/4T) The single-core command didn't change anything, Task manager still gave me 50% core use for M-T Test 3. The next test (File Decryption) Went through at 25%. That's....6? minutes of install & test, so if this has any point.... the point would be... make sure it's doing what you think it is.

It's been a LONG time since I used that software, but if the command had went through, shouldn't it be in the history? What time did you start the bench? Does Task manager confirm that it worked?

Ker-bump

Thankyou The fuselage went together today, FINALLY!. I have some fill/sand/prime/repeat then the wings & tailplanes can go on, then the ventral "tub" needs work, because I'm scratch-building a replacement. Maybe soon I can think about paint

I've never heard of that site before and WHOA! at the exponential price jumps!

Oh! Sorry. Either get good enough at OC to get a reputation that a local shop with large stock can make use of, be very good friends with someone who is connected to a large shop, or buy as many as you can, keep the best, sell the rest and repeat until you strike gold or run out of available cash. Or:..... Reputation, connections or money.

Either pick a MHz point and see which chip will do it at the lowest voltage, or fix the voltage and see what MHz a CPU will do

Bump! More CPUs sold, quantities updated

I had one of these. It was a while ago though... I don't remember having any problems with it Please can you post up some BIOS screens, that might jog a memory.

Bump

It's cool that this is being discussed semi-seriously, but i'm in two minds about the approach. Making changes when they have little effect makes the transition easier to "cope" with and get used to... no-one feels s***-on but only making changes when nothing changes is...fearful of the backlash? Things evolve, some people take a short-term setback in the name of progress- man up and stop being selfish This post has no point

If someone wants a particular plane built and has time to wait, I'd consider it. The more I like the plane, the less I would charge for "my time" (charging a normal rate for the time put in would bankrupt most people) The collection I am building at the moment, I would consider donating to a good museum or "selling them in exchange" for a big enough donation to a particular heritage fund/charity (thousands)

I'm struggling with motivation Sam, sorry. You WILL get the info, but... you might be waiting a while Ha.... if/when I finish this testing, it would be faster and easier (for me, anyway) just to post you my notes I know, that's lazy and unfair. I am struggling a LOT with OC these days.

LOVE the efficiency

Glad you like it and thanks for posting! :D

Weekly bump The more ya buy, the more negotiable the price is

Current gold is 20K and you think that a score almost four times higher is LEGIT? You have a lot to learn I can't see the screenshot, but because of the score difference and a report of a bugged game test, I imagine you used W7, which doesn't work well with 3D03. In a particular benchmark, with a particular mix of hardware, there is a rough pattern for the FPS between each game test. Also, a lot of the time, the FPS are "similar" and if one is very very very different, something is wrong.

Well.... I don't feel the same Hence the thread This was what I was thinking... instead of using the time to completion as the score, have it run for a fixed time and take the average/peak/min iterations per second or run length or similar. I don't know enough about coding and manipulation to know how easy or hard that is to protect from cheats.

Out of the 11 things you miss, only one has any kind of connection to overclocking :D :D I miss the good old days too. IMO 2007-2012 were the golden age of OC. (IMO!) I couldn't pick one best OC memory. Most are people-related though, not score related. Some scores and sessions, I do remember Net time, it will be single-malt, not bourbon

I agree, much appreciated My questions in reply: Why enable WR points for it, knowing how long it takes a 4+ GPU setup to complete it on day 0? Why code the bench in such a way that it will complete in less time with each new generation of hardware? The benchmark, by design, has a limited shelf-life in terms of stress.

5? Oh....sorry. All I saw was the "4x" as listed by HWB

There is no way I can take such a short benchmark seriously. What does 3.5 seconds prove? I can't tell any of my non-benching friends about this and expect any of them to be happy for me or my "achievement" ...... and these are the people who actually care about my happiness..... How is anyone supposed to "sell" this benchmark to an event promoter or PR guy? Who is going to attend an OC event as a spectator for this? Did you sneeze? Sorry, you missed a WR run. Do you see what I mean? There might also be something very wrong with the benchmark is 1600/1500 is only a fraction faster than 1250/1400, as currently shown in the leaderboard.

This is no benchers fault, so I don't want to discuss this is connection with a specific result. Why are WR points being awarded to a 3.5 second benchmark? How is that going to help increase/improve the perception and respect for overclocking?