Massman

If you submit again, send me a PM and I'll update straight into the database.

It's also on the frontpage: http://hwbot.org/newsflash/1889_hwbot_application_api___how_to_get_your_benchmark_a_hwbot_ranking and in the forum: http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?p=219028

Fixed ... but now the screenshot is gone :-/

//UPDATED: The new benchmark has been launched. Latest Download link: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/hwbotdownloads/downloads/benchmarks/HWBOT_aquamark_v.2.22.exe Changelog: v2.22 [FIX] Memory Tab was not opened in CPU-Z OC version. (Thanks topdog) [uPD] TRISCORE is displayed using a bigger font size. [ADD] Partial Persian/Farsi translation. (Thanks Olesius) [ADD] Hover mouse icon for hwbot logo. v2.21 [REM] Removed the 'Check for updates' button because feature is not implemented yet. [FIX] Button 'STEP1' is not shown if benchmark was aborted using ESC key. [FIX] Main GUI did not load after benchmark closed. v2.20 [ADD] Pressing ESc during benchmark will quit instead of abort. [FIX] Stuck in a loop when trying to detect CPUZ. [FIX] Uninstaller deletes registry keys left in Wow6432Node. v2.19 [uPD] Improved startup dialog. [uPD] Can detect custom CPUZ versions (ROG/G1/OC) [ADD] Spanish Translation (Thanks Sweet) [FIX] STEP1 button no longer worked if there was an error in CPUZ detection. [FIX] When manually browsing for GPUZ the filter is *.exe instead of gpuz.exe v2.18 [FIX] On Windows 7 with Classic Theme applied the screen couldn't be captured for SS. [REM] Keyboard/Mouse input is no longer blocked during STEP1. [FIX] Duplicate score files are renamed instead of being overwritten. [uPD] Exception Catch for the 'Submit' button and Logo click. [FIX] Smarter window arrangement. [FIX] Minor GUI changes to improve i18n for both Wrapper and installer. [ADD] Dutch translation (Thanks Massman) [FIX] Romanian translation updated. [FIX] Wrapper will check if aquamark executable exists before trying to open it. [ADD] Will check for local CPU-Z/GPU-Z. [REM] CPU-Z and GPU-Z are no longer bundled with the wrapper installer. [REM] CPU-Z is no longer used to read CPU/RAM/Motherboard info due licensing issues. [FIX] The main GUI no longer starts with it's titlebar underneath Windows taskbar. v2.17 * Score swap fixed * Italian + German Translations (thanks Chris and Roman) * New logo + minor gui changes * aquamark.exe renamed to aquamark3.exe * Installer is a little more compact. v2.16 * Added the new logo Massman suggested. Im not sure it looks better tho * i18n support based on Windows language. User can't manually change it. * Save/Submit buttons only appear after pressing the previous button(s) to avoid empty scores. v2.08 *Fixed the archiving process. *Improved Win8 support (DPC latency is crap on this OS) *Minor GUI fixes *Supresses GPU-Z "Install" option automatically *Uninstaller selfdeletes *Removed the HASH check of the 2 dll's *Inputbox sets default affinity to last core //ORIGINAL TEXT As you all know, GENiEBEN is working on a new version of the Aquamark3 benchmark wrapper. The development is in the final stages now and we are aiming for a full implementation on February 4, 2013. The new wrapper is fully compatible with the new HWBOT Submission API and will be much more stable than the current version. !! Important Note !! From Febuary 4 forward, the old wrapper will no longer be allowed at HWBOT and scores done with the old wrapper will be INVALID.

Ok, moved to public

Shall I move this discussion topic to the public forums so we can hear more opinions? Obviously, they will be able to read all the comments we wrote in this thread already.

Cool, keep us updated!

2. I see, updated the bug report. Definitely a good idea! Added the two other achievement bugs to the buglist as well.

1. Admins and moderators can search for results with a specific status, but not general blocked/deleted. Added to the backlog. 2. Only on the submission page there's a history, I think. Not really sure as none of my results get reported (). Added to backlog too. (just thinking out loud here: maybe we should improve the transparency of result moderating too? Ie. have an overview page with "last moderator actions" or something. Just for people to follow the moderators' work) 3. Added to buglist. Would you like to have a separate thread or is the general one okay too? 4. Okay, good suggestion. Added as well. 5. Added too. Good point, added to backlog!

Have you not been contacted yet?

Did it for you

About +0.100 ~ 1.35V

If you want to run 7970 on LN2, you have to remove the shim

No distribution in Singapore ?

i3 540 at 280 isn't impossible afaik - people were hitting 300 with P55.

Cool stuff, great info! Maybe put the part number in the thread title too; might be easier for people to find your threads

Seems cool, good luck!

Hehe ... no worries. I've played with that board more than once, glad to share workarounds

Score blocked and discussion opened on the staff forum. Editing essential information of a benchmark verification screenshot is NOT allowed.

I'm assuming you're using a HD 7970. For HD7970 and UP7: switch PCIe to gen2 will give you the possibility to get higher BCLK frequency. I've been able to run 105+ with gen3, but it's hit'n'miss - sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. There is a marginal loss in performance. According to Gigabyte, the problem is located on the 7970 (their implementation of pcie gen3 switch). BCLK and PCIe frequency are linked on SB, SB-E and IB. Only on SB-E you can get higher BCLK with lower PCIe frequency because of the BCLK ratio gears 1.25x or 1.66x. On SB and IB, it's always linked to the BCLK frequency.

No GPU-Z ?

Rules in threads => complain official rules not updated Update official rules => complain the real rules are in threads The official rules can be found here, everything else is discussion stuff. The Result.txt was suggested by some people around 24/10/2012, obviously you can't make it a rule instantly without annoucement.

Change system language to English ?

Trying to answer all the posts at once. 1) The actual transition (or "switch") is not clear yet as it will depend on how the actual implementation of the registration process will be. Roughly speaking, there will be a page for Pro OC users to choose to either register a Pro OC Cup team(*) or join an existing one during the registration period. Pro OC users that do not join a team will just have an inactive user ranking, but of course all their scores still get ranked/points/cups and still contribute to the team ranking. Users that do no longer want to participate in the Pro can go back to XOC, provided they don't violate the ES rules and they are not working for a vendor (for very obvious reasons). (*): we are currently considering linking Pro OC Cup competition teams to actual OC teams. Ie: I could get a Madshrimps Pro OC Cup team representing the Madshrimps overclocking team. Considering means still looking into the implications of that idea. 2) There will be a demo site up and running. The Pro OC Cup feature is currently under development, which means even I don't know what it will look like exactly. I'll try to put the whole concept into a couple of images (memes!) over the weeking to clarify the idea. 3) As for keeping the old Pro League alive: not a good idea. The more leagues and rankings there are, the less transparent overclocking is to the outer circle. Simplicity is the key here. And, yes, I know you guys will mock me using the word simplicity knowing how R4 was much more complex, but it's not because simplicity does not overrule everything. Simplicity is part of the equation; transparency, fairness, complexity, etc are also important. 4) The "rules" for being forced to Pro OC have never been written down because we don't really want to force people who just bench occassionaly for fun to be forced into that league. Only "ES" has been a restriction, but again only if the score was generating points ánd if the ES was current gen. Getting direct support was never a reason to move anyone; ie. reviewers were not forced to go Pro OC. Perhaps we could specific the requirements to move to Pro OC more clearly with this new revision. Let's discuss this outside of this thread maybe? The question is: who else enjoyed the competition between you two? In light of having the Pro OC to promote the hobby overclocking, did it really help? The big problem with the Pro OC League is that no one outside the inner circle of overclocking gives a damn about it. And ultimately the "new overclockers" will have to come from the outer circle ...

Yup. Be a stage champ!