Massman

... soon, when NDA is lifted. Kinda looking forward to this board, though, as it's already been thoroughly bug-tested by a famous Swedish overclocker. At launch date, you should also see a very nice video ... Anyway, here's a couple of quick "unbox" pics and vid. Pretty heavy board: 1.5KG!

Then submit the score to the person's account that should get the pot?

Oh wow. With tesselation tweaking, you'll go well over 10k on air!

What would even help more is add this information in the GUI. Why don't you just disallow older versions altogether anyway? If the score is different, you can't compare anyway.

I already tried . 280.26 doesn't work with X79 properly: it doesn't allow 4Way SLI to be enabled. FYI, the HOF rules do state that v1.0.1 is still allowed: "The lists are compiled from submitted default benchmark results of 3DMark 11 (Build 1.0.1 or newer), 3DMark Vantage (Build 1.0.2), 3DMark06 (Build 1.2.0)." (http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame/)

Most contributing member is defined by the amount of categories users participated in. If there are multiple users who entered in an equal amount of stages, we look at the participation in stage 1-4; if that is equal we look to stages 5-6 and after that to stage 7. For HWBOT, this competition is all about team effort. How much is your fantastic Gulftown score worth if there would be no Sempron score to complete the 5 out of 5 necessary scores and vice versa? I'm sure within the Polish community you will have a lot of people who are grateful for your efforts .

XP + AM3 works just fine ....

- Asus Rampage IV Extreme --- 1005: download - Asus Rampage IV Formula --- 1005: download - Asus Rampage IV Gene --- 1005: download Changelog: - Updated PCIE Codes

We will have 6 pots in total (3x GPU, 3x CPU). Prizes are: 3x SF3D Inflection and 3x Kingpincooling F1 Fat. - Winning team: 1x CPU, 2x GPU - Runner-up: 1x CPU, 1x GPU - 2nd runner-up: 1x CPU The most contributing member of the team will get a prize; the others will be done with a lucky draw within the team.

With Tesselation tweaking?

There's already a better score for the same platform (LGA1155): http://hwbot.org/submission/2233074_jbul7_pcmark7_core_i7_2600k_5790_marks

Just saying there's quite a gap between V1.0.1 and V1.0.2/3. It has nothing to do with skill or anything; just a different version of the software. So, that brings us with another Tesselation issue: the only way to verify which version of the benchmark was used is to have a verification link. In the screenshot, it's not possible to see the version number. So, again, we'll either have to force everyone to buy licences or we just go with it (like we did with Tesselation) and allow people to use their version of the software .

Yes, and stummerwinter is 1K ahead with 5400 2200CL8.

This is it: http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=32095 I now have 15.8K Physics with 4500MHz

Okay, this has been bothering me for too long now. If you've followed the X79 benchmark results closely, you will have noticed that there seems to be an issue/bug/trick to the 3DMark11 physics subtest score. This issue/bug/trick is basically a 1500 point discrepancy between "high" and "low". I've been trying to replicate this bug for the last month, but so far I haven't even gotten close to figuring out the issue. I've reached a point where I'm starting to consider certain hardware samples are just broken which, even for me, sounds too crazy to be true. So, let's figure this out together. Booj and SoF's "high" runs So far, there are two overclockers who are hitting the high physics scores: Booj and SoF. Both claim not to have tweaked anything special and just let the board finetune everything. And if SoF says he didn't tweak, I'm certain he didn't tweak (even if he says he tweaks, it's hardly any faster). Both overclockers seem to have consistent high scores. Here are the scores: 1) 17399 with 4980, DDR3-1992CL8-10-8, quad 2) 17145 with 4870, DDR3-2000CL8-10-8, quad 3) 17468 with 5000, DDR3-2000CL8-10-8, quad 4) 17468 with 5000, DDR3-2000CL8-10-8, quad 5) 18753 with 5400, DDR3-2133CL8-10-8, quad Everyone else's "normal" runs The first score you can use as comparison is Asus HQ's own 3DMark11 record. In that score, they achieved a physics score of 18775 with the CPU clocked at 5643MHz and the memory at DDR3-2500CL7-11-7; much much faster than what SoF is running ... but a similar score. Everyone who has run 3DMark11 thoroughly knows that this subtest scales mainly with CPU and memory MHz and that 5650/2500C7 should kick 5400/2133C8's ass big time. Fyi, here are a couple of normal runs at 5400 and 5000 MHz for comparison purposes: 1) 16446 with 5000, DDR3-2133CL8-10-8, quad 2) 15871 with 5000, DDR3-1333CL8-8-8, quad 3) 16747 with 5020, DDR3-2280CL7-11-9, quad 4) 17945 with 5400, DDR3-2400CL7-11-7, quad 5) 18378 with 5682, DDR3-2360CL10-11-10, quad 6) 17736 with 5400, DDR3-2133CL9-11-9, quad And so on. What it is definitely not: - C0 vs C1: Booj gets high run with C1, SoF uses C0 and Asus HQ has C0 but normal score - Win7 SP0 vs SP1: tested and no difference - Memory timings: timings hardly make a difference in physics. The total boost from finetuning the subtimings is about 500p; "high" runs are 1500+ points better. This test mainly scales with frequency: - Memory kit: tested now 7 different kits of memory with all sorts of ICs ... none of them give a magic boost (Hyper sucks though!). - Mainboard: so far i've only seen the high runs on R4E, but I'm using the same board, but no boost - ES vs Retail: tested C1 ES on Sabertooth and I had a normal run. Pretty much all ES/retail scores are in line with the normal scores. So, still no clue what it is. Maybe it would be useful to start a Physics low-clock challenge to try and figure things out together. Let's run one at 4000, 4500 and 5000. Any memory configuration is allowed, but please report MB/mem settings . 4000MHz Physics Ranking 13878 | 3960X 105.2 x 38 1:18 | QC DDR3-2524 CL9-12-9 13767 | 3960X 100.0 x 40 1:18 | QC DDR3-2400 CL8-11-8 13738 | 3960X 102.5 x 39 1:18 | QC DDR3-2460 CL9-12-9 13609 | 3960X 125.0 x 32 1:12 | QC DDR3-2000 CL7-9-7 4500MHz Physics Ranking 18017 | 4930K 132.5 x 34 1:16 | QC DDR3-2826 CL9-12-12 14910 | 3930K 100.0 x 45 1:18 | QC DDR3-2400 CL10-12-10 14889 | 3960X 100.0 x 45 1:16 | QC DDR3-2133 CL9-11-9 14793 | 3960X 125.0 x 36 1:12 | QC DDR3-2000 CL9-11-9 14472 | 3960X 100.0 x 45 1:18 | QC DDR3-2400 CL11-12-11 14272 | 3960X 100.0 x 45 1:16 | QC DDR3-2133 CL11-11-11 14240 | 3930K 128.6 x 35 1:10 | QC DDR3-1715 CL9-9-9 5000MHz Physics Ranking 17468 | 3960X 125.0 x 40 1:12 | QC DDR3-2000 CL8-10-8 17399 | 3960X 124.5 x 40 1:12 | QC DDR3-1992 CL8-10-8 16446 | 3960X 100.0 x 50 1:16 | QC DDR3-2133 CL8-10-8 16321 | 3960X 100.1 x 50 1:16 | QC DDR3-2133 CL9-11-9 15992 | 3930K 100.0 x 50 1:16 | QC DDR3-2133 CL9-11-10 15871 | 3960X 125.0 x 40 1:8 | QC DDR3-1333 CL8-8-8 15786 | 3930K 125.0 x 40 1:12 | QC DDR3-2000 CL8-9-8 15595 | 3930K 100.0 x 50 1:18 | QC DDR3-2400 CL11-13-11 15268 | 3930K 100.0 x 50 1:12 | QC DDR3-1600 CL9-9-9 15185 | 3930K 125.0 x 40 1:14 | DC DDR3-2333 CL10-12-10 5500MHz Physics Ranking 17932 | 3930K 131.0 x 41 1:14 | QC DDR3-2444 CL7-11-7 17453 | 3960X 100.0 x 55 1:18 | QC DDR3-2400 CL10-12-10 16306 | 3960X 100.0 x 55 1:18 | DC DDR3-2400 CL9-11-9

Argh! Boris, do you sometimes get "normal" runs too ? :-)

So, if we change rules during the competition, they they will compete again? Liberté, égalité, fraternité ...

140% of Russian results cannot be posted

Final winner list: The winners: - #1: Lucky_n00b -> MSI X79A-GD65 (8D) Frio Adv - #2: Perica_barii-> MSI X79A-GD65 (8D) - #3: Coldest -> THORTECH Thunderbolt 1000W Gold PSU Lucky draw: - #1: Probn4lyfe -> MSI X79A-GD45 - #2: 04ahgy -> MSI X79MA-GD45 - #3: Rustyballzz -> GeIL EVO CORSA 1866MHz CL9 16GB Quad Channel Kit Random.org screenie:

Ok, found it. This score was still linked to the competition stage and was blocking Crantana's score from being picked up. All seems fine now!

Looking into this issue right now. There shouldn't be a bug; but it definitely looks like one ...

Have you tried upgrading to IE9? IIRC, that's the fastest browser for PCMark.

We had another quick PCM7 session the other day. This is what we have to put up with during the benching ...

Another update. Tones (the shop I was going to buy the sample from) was supposed to receive a drop shipment of FX-8150 chips. The total amount of chips dropped was 1 ... hopefully there will be some in the next couple of days.

Backup