K404

Amazing. You had your first ever GPU LN2 session a week ago and you might have access to extreme AB faster than some of the Pros.

Never mind 225-229 will be here soon!

Nice IMC bro! Keep pushing!!

That's REALLY weird but I appreciate you posting Roman Did you get any screengrabs of the weirdness?

Try absolutely anything you want. It has to be something random or unexpected if the MHz can be recreated. As far as I remember, these are the ONLY G92 results i've ever seen showing incorrect MHz. IMO, these results have been weird start to finish. He said he'd found a CB fix that he couldn't share, he had pics of the rig that he couldn't share or had lost and he's using the least OC-friendly 9800GT to start with (an MSI Green) eVGA ePower or not, I can't see why ANYONE would look at that particular card and think "Hardware gold." It can't even be pretested to show potential because it doesn't have an extra power plug.

IMO a company shouldn't have any negative comments for tuning their BIOS tight. There's a balance between performance tuning and compatability tuning..... the company decides which is more important.

Absolutely no idea if this has been reported. IE9- national flags are half width and result screenshots are something like 10% of the width they should be.

Thanks PJ

Congrats on getting back to #2 bro!

Was it decided that these results are "fine?"

0.0175v?

Score doesn't match screenshot

Police F right back, yo

I agree that most of the deliberate/malicious rule-breaking should result in that but previous discussions have.....not had enough support in favour of it. I would like to see an instant permaban for anyone editing results in any way- be it MHz, seconds or FPS. I'd like to ask staff that if that rule is mentioned, do NOT call it a photoshopped score, if someone uses an alternative, they didn't photoshop the score and technically, have not broken that rule.

Tell ya what bro, send the chip to me and i'll test it

I'll pledge $10. I'll send the money to IMOG when the time comes? I'll add another $5 if the rules set out clear punishments for the most common & worst OC crimes. (e.g. break rule X get 6 month ban. Break rule y, get a warning. Break it a second time get a one year ban) I think there should be a lot more detail than there is at the moment.

It's pretty cool to see Stilt submitting scores:D

Thishas reared its head again and is doing mine in. Seems highly dependent on motherboard. I have a GTS450. Some boards work fine with it, some are unusable. Has anyone read of a good fix for this? At the moment, my problem is manifesting as a freeze and restart when I boot. GPU jumps to 3D voltage when I would normally go from the welcome screen to desktop and this is where the freeze is. In the past, it's shown itself as a "display driver has stopped responding and has recovered" error EDIT: In safe mode, I set power options to Performance and it restarted normally. Dumb luck? Fix? I dunno.

3220B691: crap. It does appear to run cool though. Question (for everyone)! At 5GHz, What kinda temps are people seeing, both idle and load? (also need to know how many cores)

Crazy efficiency!

Valid question. +1 from me.

Should have added both bro. I agree ,Riva is needed to show all details and i'm glad you added it, but.....rules are rules. Maybe the staff will add a "non-suspicious" verdict. Congrats on 855MHz I hate the GS/GT PCB with a passion. I've recently given up on these cards completely, they die so damned easily and i'm bored of "wasting" money on them

Anything that helps get a comprehensive set of rules, with a list of consequences for willful/repeated/malicious rule-breaking THAT ARE ENFORCED with 100% equality gets my support. Maybe this comment is now slightly inaccurate or out of date, but I would also like more HWB staff to have access and "permission" to use the ban button, especially when it comes to established HWB users.

If a score doesn't scale with extra MHz, why OC further? If a leaderboard that's currently only open to 4s systems that, by design, do not OC, is given points by HWB staff, how is that the fault of the participant? There's my opinion

Any batch consistency? Were those MHz for CPU-Z? SPi1M? 3D05?