jpmboy

HOw about a GTX 550Ti? Would that old card be allowed for aquamark? GPU has little effect. (lol... I already put the 960 back in my wife's work rig. I got it out on a "one time" deal. :-0 ) Would like to see how much XP impacts the benchmark.

nice one bro. XP make a really big difference?

funny how Intel does not list this processor on their website. 2699 - yes.

just down load it and re-sud.

Great score - wrong background.

Thanks. wasn't 2011(-3) allowed in Round 1?

competition background download links are not active?

boom! Nice Marc.

no screenshot?

yeeah... 16GB sticks. :-0

Nice one bro! jp

so how do you cheat?

Yeah, it's really an 8 core thing. 8+ core E-class server processors will downclock when AVX calls are in the prefetch or stack due to the high current capability of the instruction set, so p95 stability with a 5960X for example will usually lower the OC by 1-200MHz due to neat management issues in most day-driver rigs. On Ivy 6-core or Haswell 6 core, p95 is not really a problem. Hopefully BW-E 10-cores can (somehow) address the heat-transfer issue at it's 10-core density. But frankly, p95 really does not put any higher logic stress on the architecture than many lower current stressors. Nice benchmark you worked out - adds the need for high load-current stability to the cpu benchmark set. The Kelvin cooler class will be burning thu lots o' LN2. :-)

Regarding the "coefficient too large failure" - it seems to be a stability issue for stages 1 and 2 (I only have 32GB so could not test stage 3). I got the same error with HPET on or off however, lowering the core clock one multi with all other settings the same, it passes. Load seems similar to p95 and current draw is very high on an 8 core. Is there something I'm missing? Different question: Stage 1 needs at least 195MB of ram, Stage 2 needs at least 4.8GB RAM... then stage 3 jumps to 46GB (so 64GB min with all channels populated the same on most platforms)? Bypassing the more common 32GB configuration? Very limiting for Stage 3 entries, no?

Does the required screenshot need to have cpuZ (2) and gpuZ open and visible?

CPUZ, yeah that's the issue. In many cases, for many of the highest in the XTU category for example CPUZ is reporting 5000 for 102.15x49. It can't do multiplication. But thanks for the reply. If CPUz readout in the screenshot is the rule, I now understand how the game is played.

hey bud, before the mods pick it up, win 10 may not be acceptable for Heaven bench. check the rules. I think only skylake/w10 or haswell/w7 ?

Thanks to kimandsally and ZFeSS for the workarounds. I'm not sure what's causing the link failure, gotta dig. Thanks again.

Thank you - that's my exact problem. No browser will work and firefox give the same message return as you guys posted... I'm not using IE. strange.

Hello, Help! For the past two days when I hit the Submit button in an OC eSports comp - 5G tweaker for instance - it fails to load the HWbot page. On another rig, this is not occurring. Any ideas on how to fix the link for firefox (already reloaded 2x) or IE, or Edge? Seems like the link is broke for any browser on this machine.

I ask since I see several subs with CPUZ reporting 5005MHz?

How is a submission's 5003 MHz limit determined? CPUZ?

ugh - what nonsense. my crappy ES chip subs have been blocked. what bullshit.

okay - found it. why this would apply to a product already available at the retail level is hard to understand: "currently available in shops". My specific 6600KES was a lab test animal subjected to brutal punishment - hence it's very poor MHz per mV performance as can be seen in the blocked sub. http://hwbot.org/submission/3128714_jpmboy_superpi___32m_core_i5_6600k_6min_18sec_674ms

Can someone point me to the rule that 'generally forbids' a 6600K ES sample from the Challenger DivII Round 1 competition? http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/roadtopro_challenger_season2_division2_round1 probably would have been best to specifically exclude ES samples in the limitations.