Massman

Hey guys, Just a quick thread to show how you can save your GIGABYTE OC settings so you can share them with other users or use them for future reference. There are two methods: - save OC profile - save entire BIOS (!!) If you want someone to boot up with exactly the same settings you're using, the second BIOS save option should be much more interesting than the first one. 1) Save OC profile What everyone probably everyone already knows is you can save/load your OC profile to and from a USB drive. All you need to do is go to the save profile section, select 'select drive in HDD/FDD/USB' and save/load the file you want. Essentially, you are just saving the bios settings here and loading them back in as you do when normally using a BIOS profile. Note: if you want to load the OC profile, you need to make sure you're on the same bios version as at was set up on. 2) Save entire BIOS with Q-Flash A feature I was completely unaware of and Hicookie just showed to me is the option to save the entire BIOS, including default settings and OC profiles, to your drive. This is very handy for people who want to OC multiple systems to exactly the same settings. To save the entire bios, just open the Q-Flash, click save BIOS and it'll make a dump of the BIOS. So, if you have your PC running at 4GHz set in the BIOS and then save it through Q-Flash, if you re-flash that saved BIOS it will automatically run 4GHz too. If you're on the same BIOS, you can use the first function. If you're not sure the person who wants to try out your BIOS is on the same version, or you want to batch OC a series of system, use the second option.

Hm, seems like a little bug.

Moved

Who doesn't want an LN2 bunny ?

Might be able to help in 24h

Killer CPU !

I don't think there's anyone in Nvidia doing any validation testing for 4way sli. There's not much people using it anyway...

After some testing, it seems the driver is not really bugged, but some of the caching options just boost the PCMark subtest score. You can try this out yourself. The 12.6 drivers only allows 512bytes sectorisation whereas 12.8 supports 1K, 2K and 4K as well. The results with RAID set at 512bytes is the same on 12.6 and 12.8; it's only when you go to 1K, 2K or 4K that you have a performance boost. So, the scores of Vapor are valid. It does give some food of thought for the PCMark05 benchmark in genera, though.

Still resting in the rooms?

Strong VGA overclock!

Okay, got the concept. Interesting idea!

News update follows. We were still looking into the PCMark scores, but it seems that issue is worked out too.

Spoke with KP about this yesterday - seems to be driver-related indeed. Do you get the issue if you stay below 5GHz CPU frequency?

We do have the "prepopulate fields by previous submission" option. I assume this would just be a different version of the prepopulate-function?

Good argument, but I don't think it's really a function of the current hwbot system. Imho, sandbagging is a phenomenon that is caused by two things: 1) the game we're playing is based on the 'final' result you achieved over a given period. The way we compete (well, enjoy our hobby) is not realtime; it's an indirect competition 2) people want/need time to prepare their competition submissions, because for most of us (excluding myself for example) overclocking is just a hobby. The more realtime the competition gets, the less time you have to make a score, the more pressure there is to succeed. The HWBOT system is one that has these two as principles, but it's not exclusive to the HWBOT system. There are several ways of forcing people to submit higher scores during the competition (eg: like the moa qualifiers), but the only change here is the timeframe in which sandbagging can take place. It doesn't take sandbagging away, it just reduces the time in between obtaining the score and posting the score. If you pull things to the extreme, you could suggest to have a competition where you have to submit new scores on a daily basis and points are awarded on the ranking on a daily basis (maybe two months to prepare). In essence, then your "overclocking" competition becomes a "backup score posting"-event. It's an artificial way to make it look like everyone's benching realtime, but really they are just logging in to submit a score. If you're lucky, there are two or more users with similar backup scores and you have some kind of a battle. Worst (and most realistic) scenario is that after two months of preparing, one person has a decent lead and is just winning every day with 30 backup scores differing 1pt. But interesting, though. I think our HCE can support it, so maybe we could try it out? In that case you essentially force everyone to sandbag (="have scores, but don't show") for 3 months and then submit everything at once. Is that more fun?

20y? There are overclockers that haven't been around for that long

Dat CPU

Btw, this is the work-in-progress for the general rules page (contains everything aside from the benchmark-specific rules): http://hwbot.org/news/7914_rules_update_2012_hwbot_general_rules_and_guidelines Currently this is just one big wordpress blog page, but I assume it would be more convenient to turn it in a hardcoded page with different sections under different tabs?

Final decision has been made and will not change.

I prefer to close this thread until we figure something out Marketplace-wise. We don't need this forum to become an advertisement place

Pretty kick-ass pictures!

You can always try. I like the idea of a marketplace, but moderating it is always a big problem. I really don't like the idea of HWBOT having to get involved into settling problems because of lousy sales. Not only because it's a lot of work and quite problematic given this is an international site, but also because I don't want people to associate HWBOT with bad marketplace. There are some good suggestions in this thread, though, so my mind has not been made up yet. Convince me there's a way to do this without risking having to get involved in each deal .

Nice idea, but a pain to implement and finetune. I think the effort/time needed to implement this does not outweigh the benefits of this, to be honest. It makes the whole system also even less transparent than it already is. The points will never be perfect (even with this new rule), so the question is how much better it would be with this update compared to the effort it takes to implement.

Is it possible because none of the new scores you are submitting is generating enough points to be included in your League total? Only your top-15 global and top-20 hardware count for your points in the Leagues.