Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

jab383

Members
  • Content Count

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

jab383 last won the day on January 21

jab383 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

36 Excellent

About jab383

  • Rank
    kitchen robot

Converted

  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes, IMO, in as much as it addresses the compatibility and vulnerability issues that have been the point of many complaints.
  2. I take it by "stock" you mean air cooled. If so, you probably need to say it in such terms. There are many AIO hybrids and some full cover water blocks factory stock. For instance, I have Classified Hydrocopper GTX 580 up through the K|ngp|n Edition 2080 ti which is a hybrid. I may not submit in many stages since I have so few air cooled VGAs. Perhaps DIV I and/or II could use water blocks?
  3. XP support for the Z390 Dark is out -- check Kingpin's post in the OC Forum on the EVGA site. Availability of the Z390 Dark in Germany is the same problem as availability of the Apex XI in the US.
  4. Thanks, marco.is.not.80. Core clock was run as shown on DICE. What does not show is the -2 multiplier setback for AVX that takes effect in most of x265.
  5. The hexa core stage has no temperature restriction. LN2 and dry ice temperatures are legit. That much cold may not be needed for 5300MHz, but does not violate any rule. In fact, I believe that temperature monitoring is not needed in this stage, only the core clocks. Leaving the temperature monitor on in this stage only causes confusion.
  6. Cheapaz seems to be drifting farther from the concept every season. The GT710 was truly cheap. The 1030 cost around three times that much. Now the list has several models over US$140. Cheap compared to a Titan, but not compared to the cheapaz concept. That's where the HD5450 gets the love - back to the concept with a board I can get for US$45. That's a price where I won't care if the magic smoke gets out. If repeating 710, 1030 and HD5450 don't suit, here's more of a list. From the Microcenter web site, the cheapest boards are: HD5450 1GB, GT710 1GB, HD6450 1GB, GeForce 8400 1GB, followed by the 2GB versions of those and the R7 250 1GB --- all for under US$50.
  7. Wait, What?? Points from only one division? I was hoping that multiple divisions treated as multiple contests would go a long way to filling the 10 or whatever competitions for the season. I think the competition aspect should have many contest scores to fill the season so that meaningful ranking lasts longer that two days before the end of the year. Last year we could pick that one division after the fact. Now we have to be extra careful to put our best scores into the desired division late in the contest, submitting to the highest scoring division last in order to "choose" it. I know HWBOT puts up with sandbagging, but this really encourages it. The competition pages are up, but I'm confused by differences between those and the original post of this thread: Div I 3dm 11 Physics or Time Spy Physics? Div II Cinebench r11.5 or r15? Div IV 3dm11 Physics or GPUPI for CPU v 3.2 1B
  8. I think this proposal makes a great challenger stage - emphasizing OS and RAM tweaking. Count a vote in favor, regardless of the details being discussed above. Previous temperature limited contests have called for 20C minimums. "Positive ambient temperatures" appears to allow above-zero chilling, ice baths, etc. That reads like the contribution of the former moderator who had experience in those contests. Relating to zero is probably easier to moderate than if idle and load temperatures were related to ambient, there being so many ways ambient can vary. I am also in favor of entering many divisions, with none excluded, and that each division counts as a separate competition for the season and the career.
  9. The principle dividing tweak from cheat is clearly stated on most benchmark rule pages: " Any software or human interaction altering the perceived speed of the benchmark program, tricking it to believe it ran faster." Leaving HPET off when it's needed, resetting OS clock or shifting Bclk in Win8/10 on Braswell are obviously cheats by this principle. No benchmark rules allow modifying files. Tweaks like WAZA in XP, opening 3dm11 when running Catzilla, cherrypicking drivers and Java runtime and streamlining the OS are examples of tweaks that make benchmarks actually run faster. Driver tweaks for LOD and the necessary AA adjustment are slightly grayed because, while the benchmark actually runs faster, it does so because the VGA is doing less work. Does this fall into the same category as modifying benchmark files? In the past, LOD has been an allowed tweak because finding a sweet spot short of MIPMAP has been considered a tweak requiring skill and time. We are left with a history of legally tweaked submissions. People who know how much work and trouble would be involved are reluctant to try to delete that history. Accordingly, the rules need to continue on a level playing field with LOD and the needed AA tweaks allowed for those benchmarks where they have been allowed. Eliminating LOD tweaking on Time Spy and newer benchmarks is acceptable to me because it is possible to do without destroying a history of submissions. I am opposed to limiting drivers to FM/UL "approved" versions. FM is often late with new versions or omits approving beta versions. Omega drivers have been explicitly allowed for AMD VGAs, but not approved by FM. Wanna try benching a GTX 580? The current crop of "approved" drivers don't play well with Fermi. Wanna bench a Quatro or FirePro? The pro drivers are rarely approved by FM.
  10. I disagree that competition points are completely unrelated. They are the result of a participation in our sport that is in addition to globals, hardware points and leagues. In my opinion, competitions are a parallel participation that should have resulting points recognized along with the globals and hardware. A banner for the winner doesn't provide incentive to participate to those of us who work hard to occasionally get into the top 15 of a competition. I suggest that competition points be a component of Career ranking - say the best 10 or 15.
  11. max1024, I'm using the x299 Dark now and haven't had any issues with it's VRMs. I've also used the Rampage VI Apex, but can't say that I had no VRM issues there. X299 Dark experience compared to the specs of the Omega, the two motherboards come out about equal. Both have 16 phase VRMs and both have 25 mm fans to circulate air over VRM heatsinks. Although presented differently in the user interface, both BIOS are about as useful for overclocking CPU and RAM. ASUS provides some pre-tuned memory profiles that may be an advantage. For me, I prefer the Rampage VI Omega (as far as the specs and FireKillerGR's post can inform me) because the X299 Dark lacks SafeBoot and Retry buttons, a slow mode switch and any functionality like the OC Panel for external OC control. I notice that EVGA is catching up on the Z390 Dark by adding SafeBoot and slow mode.
  12. Thank you for the response, FireKillerGR. That's more than I'm getting on the ROG forum. At the bottom right of Omega pictures on the ASUS site, I see a front panel connector, two chassis fan headers and the "ASUS Node" connector. Does the OC Panel connect to the "Node"? It does not appear to be keyed the same nor will the larger OC Panel plug fit that header. Is there a new cable? Most telling to me is that ASUS does not list OC Panel capability among the Omega's (nor Maximus XI) features in any documents including the user's manual.
×
×
  • Create New...