Massman

I can't remember that evening clearly. Must've been good.

I'll only take one of your suggestions. The UD5H

I think the main thing to bin is comparison. I use same ambient temp, same thermal paste and same cooler to see how high i can get on air. Someone else can get higher on air with lower temperature, but it doesn't mean the chip will be better. Another 5 (2x Costa Rica, 3x Malay) on my pay account, let's see if they are any good!

Official PR follows on Friday. That one includes the lucky draw too .

Switzerland is in EMEA. The timer will be fixed shortly

If necessary, that's one of the solutions yes.

2/2

Alright, it's 5AM here, so I'm going to keep it short. On monday, MSI and HWBOT agreed that the 3DMark11 results of Rbuass and Gnidaol were suspicious enough to ask for additional verification. The way to do it wasn't simple as, after all, people were accusing them of sharing the results. We agreed to have a livestream head-to-head benchmark session, monitored by yours truely. Here were the guidelines: Here's a picture of the livestream: The entire streaming started around 1:30AM GMT+2. Around 2:38h local time, Gnidaol showed a 14.7k score. Here is the HWBOT validation link: http://hwbot.org/submission/2283713_gnidaol_3dmark11___performance_radeon_hd_7970_14717_marks. The score was done, confirmed, on livestream by Gnidaol. For Rbuass, things went a little less smooth as he had many issues with the CPU stability in Physics (might be memory too). In any case, since the major concern was about using the same VGA for both results, we decided he could focus on putting out a GPU score to prove the second card was also capable of those clock frequencies. After lots and lots of troubles, he got a 14.5k GPU score at 1660MHz GPU clock (link), which is close enough to the score he submitted. Conclusive lines HWBOT and MSI went over the livestream and the results and decided that it forms more than sufficient proof of the full legitimacy of the 3DMark11 scores. Neither results will be pulled and the ranking remains as it is. This decision, backed up by both MSI and HWBOT, is final. Splave, Rbuass and Gnidaol go to the WW final. On a more personal note, I'm not too happy with how things went down in this thread. I have no problems with raising questions about scores once in a while; in this case there was a valid basis for concern. What I do have a problem with is the typical opinion-maker who takes the concern and uses it to accuse people. Besides the screenshot, no one had any additional information that could objectively allow accusations. This type of noise-making is, in my opinion, below the community's standards. I hope you guys could think about that.

Mid-comp? The EMEA qualifiers starts in 3 days ...

Whoah. Nice find!

Efficiency on the MSI board seemed fine. It's a different OS install, though, but applied the same tweaks. Well, it actually works perfectly at stock settings, but goes into x16 mode when adjusting the ... cpu voltage . Flashed BIOS, switched BIOS, flashed ME ... still going into x16 after Vcore adjustment. No maxmem tweak ... basic stuff first.

Used the GD65 before ... that one was efficient enough. But now it's stuck at x16 multiplier

Not sure what's going on, but the Saberboob I'm testing seems highly inefficient in 32M. I think I'm not doing anything wrong as LSC is enabled as well as the cache options in the bios. Anyone got any clue? Pretty sure I'm just being a retard-at-the-keyboard again.

Lol, okay, so Ivy has become super predictable on air cooling. Time to schedule a day for preselecting time

No idea if he will. Maybe Gamer or Pt1t, no clue really.

I won't

Fyi, this chip can do 5200 32M on air cooling with 1.4V. Other chips i tested can't. Just sayin' ...

Giga's arriving here tomorrow or the day after. I need them, the Pi-efficiency of the Saberboob is horrible it seems.

2/5 tested, already a nice one. No CB, no CBB, no IMC issues ... seems like a fairly cool CPU! Batch: 3204B824 PS: also 32M stable. Easy bootup at 6.8G too ... need a bit more V'ssss

Hasjman?

Let's get this one going! Two notes: First of all, there's an important addition to the rules compared to the Americas qualifier: "The following system components may not be shared between individual MOA participants: CPU, memory or graphics card.". This means a much tighter hw sharing regulation than normal at hwbot. Secondly, a point I already made in the other MOA thread. I'm all in for complaining how the limitations are too high-end for qualification stages and that we would prefer to see everything happen live. But, we have to make sure that MSI also knows that we love the MOA competitions and want them to continue this for at least another decade! Therefore, I would strongly recommend anyone who wants to support the MOA competition series to at least make one submission. You can use the description box to make a complaint or a suggestion. At least then I'll be able to show hard figures to MSI and tell them there is a lot of interest and enthusiasm for MOA, but even more would be happy if there's some change to the qualification stage . Just make sure that MSI knows you love MOA (if you do, of course) ... pretty important

She's not going to be your team mate?! How to explain that!

September or October, I think. Not sure if they are willing to release that info yet. You know ... all the press are eager to find out!

Oh. Did it include a "Christian, you're fired" too ?

Just a heads-up: - we already followed-up with Futuremark regarding the scores on friday. - today we confirmed with MSI that additional proof is necessary to validate both scores and confirm the ranking. - MSI agreed with the validation procedure we suggested (livestream - more info later) I'm checking with Rbuass and Gnidaol for the practical stuff now. Please keep this thread clean from opinion-making and other drama. Thanks.