-
Posts
1117 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Strong Island
-
-
it would suck for people to lose points that worked really hard on there scores and had no clue about this tweak.
-
really nice scores, good job
-
-
wow what a sick score, definitely not easy.
-
This is exactly why I agree with SI's idea of having 4 Intel stages, I would bet big money that the winner is someone who has an 8 core and 4 core i7. So it's as much about spending money as it is skill because anyone with only K sku cpu's has zero chance of winning, and this is a well known fact. Div. 1 is not for Pro or Elite only and for the average serious overclocker finding a good clocking K sku i7 with a strong imc is already daunting enough, and now we gotta go spend $1500+ to even be in the conversation. Another thing as well is last year you could compete without having to buy a $700 gpu especially in Div. 2 & 3, now you have to buy a 980ti to win the Pentium/i3 or core i5 classes. Not a good way to attract newcomers, I thought that was a big part of this years mission or is that only for the World Tour?
I do agree with the i3 and i5 stages allowing any gpu, because of course there will be people submitting with 980 ti in those stages.
We almost need like a gentlemens agreement and nobody should submit 980 ti in those stages, haha.
But I think for right now the staff has done a great job and there are a ton of comps going on for all different types of hardware, plus they limit xtu stage to 4ghz which helps non-ln2 people. They have tweakers challenges going on and old school, so I think things are moving in a cool direction.
The more I think about it oc esports does seem like the future. because once the points are part of our ranking they can make any piece of hardware viable and worth points. Just like the tweakers challenge or they can make a cheap gpu challenge and since it's worth points it makes that cheap hardware worth something. it's cool. They could do a 970 challenge and then all of the sudden 970's are worth benching.
I just don't think it's fair to change any rules once a comp has started. I would be saying that even if I didn't bench already. I spent a lot of money on my scores based on the starting rules.
-
nice score, nice cpu and memory.
-
I thin there is a bunch of connectors hidden under the sound card. Though that might be the previous impact.
the voltage check points are under the sound card, there could be something under there, maybe even the plug it plugs into.
-
I'm sorry if this is a really dumb question but is it possible to create a bios to allow for a little more bclk for the locked i3's on the asus boards. I'm sure it obviously wouldn't be a priority but a beta bios to compete a little more in xtu would be awesome.
-
I'm sorry if this is a really dumb question but is it possible to create a bios to allow for a little more bclk for the locked i3's on the asus boards. I'm sure it obviously wouldn't be a priority but a beta bios to compete a little more in xtu would be awesome.
-
Therefore limited only to the Division 1 i7 quad core.
And the problem will be resolved.
Because I do not think the only one to think that for the XTU course, the i7 quad core, have no opportunity to pass, socket face 2011-2011v3.
Ditto for Cinebench R15.
On the other challange, it was not divide the number of cores, so why not this channlange there?
I completely understand what your saying, the only real problem I have is that it wasn't in the rules from the beginning, I spent a whole night benching based on the rules I read before I started. And if we do add a per core score then we need to address the scaling issue after 2 cores because everyone knows that cpus don't scale perfectly per core, so dividing the score per core isn't really that fair.
-
Yes actually, I measure the scale of the work
ya I definitely didn't mean you, really nice job on the cut.
-
Therefore limited only to the Division 1 i7 quad core.
And the problem will be resolved.
Because I do not think the only one to think that for the XTU course, the i7 quad core, have no opportunity to pass, socket face 2011-2011v3.
Ditto for Cinebench R15.
On the other challange, it was not divide the number of cores, so why not this channlange there?
I'm all for cheaper cpu's and I have a bunch but I have had this 5960x for awhile now and every contest divides by amount of cpu cores and totally takes the 5960x out of contention.
Just like you said all the past comps have done it by core so maybe one time it would be nice for a change to go all out. Also it wasn't in the rules at the beginning otherwise I probably would have chose different cpu.
Also there are 3 other stages where the 4 core cpus have an advantage or are close to equal, so I think it's kind of interesting
next time maybe they should do 4 divisions.
Div I - extreme cpus
Div II - i7 quad core
Div III - i5
Div IV - i3
-
ya there are a lot of signals volts and controllers you have to trick. Definitely not easy, I feel like a lot of people think you can just cut and plug in and good to go. But after reading tin's posts it's a lot of work.
-
The Stage XTU ans tha stage cinebench, is wrong because all those who are equipped with i7 - 4 cores have no chance against the i7 2011 and 2011v3.
but it is division 1, the absolute highest division there is so I don't see why 5960x should be handicapped. For some reason whenever we divide by cores the 5960x can't compete because I guess the scaling goes down after a certain amount of cores. The scaling really isn't right so it's unfair to divide by cores.
it's not like a 5960x automatically scores double compared to 4790k so when you divide by twice as many cores it's not fair really.
They also chose 32m and they chose catzilla which you can still get a great score with a 4core. And they also chose heaven which actually prefers z170 over x99.
I mean we are talking about division 1.
If we do divide by amount of cores we need to give the higher core cpus some sort of a modifier to make it fair.
Why make a 5960x uncompetitive in division 1.
-
how come everyone who is tied for first place gets the max points but everyone tied for second place doesn't seem to get 2nd place points. Is this weird or just the way it is. Because that sucks to only be 1 point off but there is a difference of 116 global points between the top 2 scores.
-
seems your card run in cold slow , that gpu score seems is for ~950mhz core clock!
ya something was definitely off with that run, I finally re-did it with a sammy card and much better now, but second place was best I could do, smokes score is untouchable.
-
Are we still allowed in multiple divisions this year
-
I guess what I was really meaning to say is, with such a cool product I would only want the best tester possible who knows a lot about this stuff releasing results and posts. By no means was I saying you suck at oc, I still lose my mount all the time, I guess I meant that when unveiling something to the world you should put it in the best light possible and not give anyone a reason to be a little skeptical. I don't know I think I'm confusing myself.
-
We've been developing this machine for over two years, and we know how well it holds temps especially after extensive testing. Holding the -100 or 120 temps during the benches just seemed normal :-)
not trying to be a jerk but I am a little confused, how do you know how well it holds a load if your not even sure if the head was making proper contact. During the testing stages did someone use correct paste or is it possible it was never used?
Instead of testing it yourself when your unsure of what paste to even use, you should have given it a well known person over here for some real testing. That would be the best marketing tool you could have. I'm sure you have already invested a ton of money so to loan out a unit for testing and marketing would probably be worth the cost. Because I think right now everyone is a little confused with the testing that has gone on so far.
-
awesome scores man, nice.
-
here we go, serious gpu benchmarks annihilation incoming.
-
Would be a good idea to lap your pots. Also check your paste spreading techniques/mounting pressure.
You shouldn't be losing contact at -110. Try drying out your paste also.
Good luck man...
Not that I don't like 2D.. just boring compared to 3D.
I absolutely love 3d and if I had some more money I would be benching my 980 ti every time, just sometimes I can't afford the ln2 so I try and get the most for my money which almost forces me into 2d if I want points.
Ya maybe I need to lap my pots. I have had them for 2 years and there the only ones I have ever used, when I first started I used to tighten way to hard so there marked up. maybe they became a little concave.
I was benching the kpe 980 ti and got to like 1905mhz -80c 1.55v so easily and was about to start getting serious and brought it down in temps some more and then all the sudden I was artifacting and couldn't even pass like 1650mhz, then I warmed up but it happens all over again at about the same point.
I feel like I don't know how to bench anymore, it's weird.
-
-
Not bad man
thanks man. Having a really tough time oc'ing lately. I feel like I lose contact every time now even without skylake. I was benching my 980 ti kpe and my paste was losing contact around -110c. I'm going nuts, I have tried everything, I wonder if my pots could be slight off.
Its time to overhaul XTU.....
in Benchmark software
Posted
maybe not for you, but for people that benched it honestly it would.