Matsglobetrotter

proposal list looks good to me just get rid of Catzilla. It has not been supported for years and even when it was it was halfbaked. Enjoyed the ugly cats but a 3d bencher that messes you up even on the first load screen.... and the halfbaked uploader for the links... Meanwhile maybe take in one of the real games benchers if there is any that does not rely on buying the gamer to get the scores.. Might get some interest from the gamer community to rank their hardware so they get into ocing.

no worries Scott. Then the scores for those who have obtained such should be removed.

Thanks Antinomy. I fully understand the bug list is long. I am not going to get big scores on this one but this was also the reason people went crazy ocing the SR-2 Classified in the days (still want to play with those one day) that even today costs over 700 USD. Simply to see if it is possible to sync to separate CPUs in OC. So the resolution for me is not urgent. I flag what I see as i keep playing with hardware Intel Xeon X5670 @ HWBOT the links to my subs are below This first one is 3199 Mhz with 2 OC'd Xeons thus dual socket card Matsglobetrotter`s CPU Frequency score: 3199.25 mhz with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) This on is one single Xeon in a different MB single socket mb Matsglobetrotter`s CPU Frequency score: 3517.76 mhz with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) pifast dual socket Matsglobetrotter`s PiFast score: 20sec 550ms with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) pifast single socket Matsglobetrotter`s PiFast score: 18sec 750ms with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) Superpi dual socket 1m Matsglobetrotter`s SuperPi - 1M score: 11sec 264ms with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) Superpi single socket 1m Matsglobetrotter`s SuperPi - 1M score: 10sec 338ms with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) superpi dual socket 32m Matsglobetrotter`s SuperPi - 32M score: 10min 6sec 716ms with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) superpi single socket 32 m Matsglobetrotter`s SuperPi - 32M score: 8min 49sec 14ms with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) Geekbench 3 dual socket Matsglobetrotter`s Geekbench3 - Single Core score: 3143 points with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org) Geekbench 3 single socket Matsglobetrotter`s Geekbench3 - Single Core score: 3599 points with a Xeon E5 2678 v3 (hwbot.org)

great score :-)

Thanks Antinomy. If that is the decision can then the multi core uploads already getting scores be removed? and can we make it clear that such is not applicable. I have significantly better scores here but they are not recognized.

Thanks. Do note that scores have been posted for the same in the past by others. Even if i have higher scores now it does not get recognized. I believe the challenge is to get any hardware we have to perform better thats why we oc :-) I guess this is also why we in some cases have dual ram slot competitions as its easier to OC a single ram than 2 or 4. Thus i must beg to differ.

Hi, Am using double Xeon's on a MB. When i upload the scores the report files only consider 1 CPU thus it ignores that there are two distinct CPU's. this both on GPUPI 3.2 and GPU3.3.3. even in the naming of the file in 3.3.3 version the name state 1x

Hi, im playing around with some dual CPU mb. I noticed that when submitting a system with 2 overclocked cpus with cpuz validation the system reports it with 0 points as its reported under the 1 cpu section. I have a higher single CPU score as its with a different MB where i can adjust BCLK. Meanwwhile it is ofcourse a very different complexity overclocking 2 CPU's in one system. https://hwbot.org/submission/4613634_matsglobetrotter_cpu_frequency_2x_xeon_e5_2678_v3_3199.25_mhz/ I also note the same issue on Pifast and Superpi. Indeed these as single thread banechers but it should be consistent for same reason as above. Seemingly same also on Geekbench one core scores

Please add: HUANANZHI X99 F8D Socket Socket 2011 LGA North Bridge Intel Haswell-E rev 02 South Bridge Intel X99 rev 05 its an 2011-V3 motherboard dual socket https://valid.x86.fr/hq9qku

love your work bench :-) just as neat as mine hehe.

i dont believe in imposing BM on everything. I consider we are still allowed to use Win XP, Win7, win8/10 strip down versions and we also have access to various server windows versions and part of the fun is to get optimized Operating systems for better scores. and that is part of the game. Meanwhile i could not get benchmate to work on my Rampage II Extreme with W3540 any OS due to some ACPI check it does. We have to be careful so BM itself does not just become another bloatware impossible to get to start while we are minimizing the ways to cheat. Unless we also say everyone must use latest bloatware riddled OS and only the latest Drivers and latest Bios. ( that would be a loss for the sport though) But to that effect I think we also need to know more about what actually is required as pre-requisite for Benchmate to work. At times we can already spend hours trying to get for example GPUPI to work due to some issues not related to Open GL nor the standard faq issues listed on the site and sometimes have to go through large part of forum to find that a certain KB can cause issues or is required. Have faced a multitude of BEX64 issues as an example when using just standard VGA drivers rather than Nvidia bloatware drivers. Thus i could run GPUPI perfectly but can not upload as then it crashes trying to use it through Benchmate only to find i have optimized OS so it could not even start that one. And again, to make the interest wider we still need to ensure Legacy platforms and OS can be used.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/15897029

I can see that the current G.skill memory challenge is quite interesting as it looks at having a dual channel fully occupied and stable for more than just for validation. Meanwhile I think that on the hwbot itself there is too few benchmark ideas to actually use for memories (while they are often the key to getting a top score in benchers). Meanwhile it could actually be made more interesting without adding new benchmarks. Why not have different segments for DDR2,3,4 as in 1 channel, 2 channel, 3 channel and 4 channel. It seems to me that the more channels we add the more difficult it get to high frequencies.

https://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/xeon_w3540/ 504 error

very nice builds ? Would love to see more closeup pics of the units. What is the reason for coiling up parts of the copper tubes instead of just making them shorter? would be interesting to see closups of how you connected the instruments. I have also bought some to install in my unit.

Hi, good initiative. I would propose that the Hwbot team clarify if there are more such changes anticipated as if a multitude of new verification links are to be required where payment is involved in 2021 some users might have to select wisely as to which benchmarks they consider to purchase.

I think that there need to be a time to mature/quarantine new hardware and new benchmarks before they are used in competitions/point giving challenges. like 2-3 months even if scores are posted on the bot. For hardware. Based on that some new ryzens have even been noticed to break even CPUz with wrong reporting. Thus any new hardware need to be going through informal tests by users and experts on a number of benchers before they are confirmed. To for example update benchmate or other envelope. For benchmarks. Based on that its not fair to have updates in the middle of competition to have to re-run scores based on issues found. Meanwhile cudos to the developers who keep correcting the issues found and for the guys who can actually find such issues ?

I think each user would have to determine what he/she is interested in. I am sure some of the Enthusiast take great pride in having potentially beaten someone's Dry ice scores while they have only air/water cooling. It would be directly illegal for me to run LN in the place i live at present. I think different leagues are important and one should not have to be interested in getting to extreme leagues. Its a significant different cost factor. I correlate this to another technical hobby (ham radio) where people are working in different leagues also with great success since about 50 years. People building their own transmitters with 1mW output to basic radio with 100W and the general norm as max output with 1000 W amplifiers. Meaning the cost for individual can vary from 50 USD homebrew to state of the art 100,000 USD stations. The challenges are completely different but equally interesting and no need to push someone to take part in something they will never have interest in.

I am starting with SS for now so will see how it works. still learning to braze ?

I consider CB R23 should be included, minimum length. but get rid of R20 and the hack version as we never got points for either. I assume AMD will be on 100 cores soon ? I enjoy these more than 3 versions of geekbench. I wish someone could convince UL/Futuremark to Change their PCMArk10 to something that has a overclockers run.. I bought it and think used it 10 times as its way to long and boring but like the concepts of PCMark 7 and PCVantage (even if vantage is a drag of 20 minutes)

I dont mind everyone having a go. inhouse or not. but then I like the League approach we have. What I strongly believe though is that the boint system must change. If Im overclocking a processor that is made from 3Ghz up to 5Ghz then some real scores should be there. If someone then get it up to 8Ghz so be it my boints should not be considered less because of the same. I think that is the biggest detractor at present especially to bring new rookies in and keeping them. Spending 2 weeks and get 0.1 boint is just not helping. I have been playing with a Xeon the last few days. I outrank the few who have used the same by a 50% margin and it aint even worth any hardware points worth the name. so lets ensure people are encouraged to overclock old second hand hardware cheaper as a learning ground before breaking the new expensive hardware. Meanwhile I also consider that any bios mod used by Inhouse clockers by rule should made publicly available to all on hwbot in the forums or the point should not be allowed. Considering that would otherwise be counterproductive to the community here. I know some of the Guru's do the same already and it is highly appreciated. It would probably the death of the bot if we dont have the inhouse guys actively being able to compete here... simply as a new place would pop up as the need for speed is there.

The competition started what 10 october? the release of the 3080/3090 was a week before in selected markets so it would necessarily be an impossibility for most users to get their hands on them (I can buy as many as i would want i have no cash flow issues but its besides the point). This is a challenger series and not the PRO OC competitions. So lets atleast be within reason as to what can be used.

no problem paying.. not to be found...and no i dont believe chasing users is the way to go ?

fully agree with Marco. we have now seen atleast 10 different youtube channels clearly showing its not available. except to a few reviewers and more or less those working in the industry

link is required for competition