Massman

It's not about percentages you gain by tweaking, it's just that GT1 and GT2 are very close to each other in Vantage. Sometimes there's a difference, but absolutely postively never this big. 50FPS in GT2 is not possible on single 4850; never gonna happen. Might be a bug, don't jump to "cheat"-conclusions, but if this score is in some sort of competition I wouldn't accept it .

GT2 is definitly bugged or cheated

The hardware cache has to be reloaded; both categories are linked to the same database (thus: same results).

no points for sure; cups is something we can talk about

Bitchy thing about that is that in each family, the dual core will win.

I want to say it's the chip, because a lot of people are pointing in that direction, but I can't help but thinking the board is maybe a bit to blaim. I will test my 750 on the UD6 this weekend, so I'll know for sure the board was holding me back or not. Let me know what you think; i'll forward the stuff to MSI HQ anyway, would be cool to know if I'm the only one having issues or not . Btw, don't try high PCI-e clock, it doesn't really work. 102-103 maximum ... with earlier biosses I could get it running at 110MHz, but it seems they've "fixed" it, hehe. Doesn't matter anyway, it helps maybe 3-4MHz BCLK.

I used the 1.5B2, but I reckon 1.5B4 is as good as that one. None of the previous biosses (except the very first beta releases) have ever let me down.

Things are moving in the right direction; been able to play a bit with the mysql server and single Gpu rankings queries are becoming less and less of an issue :-D Not ready for integration on the site, but I guess this is already good news?

Coldbug and coldboot are a bit of an issue; not only with this motherboard, but probably with the chips. I did all these runs at temps between -60°C and -70°C; -80°C was still pretty much stable, but anything lower than this results in complete instability Coldboot wasn't a problem as long as you don't mind resetting the CMOS. Everytime I had issues booting I cleared the CMOS and the board could boot up again. Btw, this combo was very vcore/vtt sensitive. You need to find a balance between vcore/vtt to boot, preferably setting vtt higher and vcore lower. With the DIP switches you can adjust the volts quite easily and that's how I did it: low vcore/high vtt boot, +0.1V vcore via the dip switches just before I enter Windows. Oh, right: issues above 1.6V VTT!

Time to start using the Hwbot forums more often; it's too quiet in here!! I've been testing the GD80 two months and a couple of days, but only recently I was able to lay my hands on a retail 750 (thank you, Leona from MSI). Got the chip in Beijing, went home, was bored, so threw it under some LN2. The whole session lasted about 5h maximum and wasn't particularly focussed on anything besides getting familiar with the retail i5. Anyway, I'm done talking, let's give some numbers. Chip: 10 sheets of paper towel - no condensation whatsoever. What's all this BS about eraser being the best Results For those who are interested, I also did a quick Everest benchmark. This was after I finished the 32M run. Everything can also be found at the bot. I didn't push VTT higher than 1.55V as the board had some instability issues. Forwarded everything to MSI, so let's hope for improvement. It does seem, though, that all 750's have inferior silicon quality compared to the 800 series as almost everyone maxes out at around 240-246BCLK.

I don't really care about who started or what happened, in the end you're not wasting your own time but the time of the result moderators. Given we're all grown-ups here, I reckon there must be another way to solve issues like this. So, let's all give hugs and go in peace

To get Nature well over 2000FPS. Actually, SLI gets disabled for the other system tests as it's making the system slower. But, on Nehalem it's already quite difficult to hit 1500FPS in nature as the limitation is the platform rather than the videocard. And 1500FPS is doable with 88GT's

Not in this challenge: it's to see whether or not a Nehalem platform can hit high numbers in the global ranking. And for high 01 numbers, you can even use the old 8800GT's

VGA is not important in this challenge: it's the platform that needs to be tweaked.

I'll this afternoon. But ... Please don't abuse the functionality of the site just to get back at people. I can see some serious reporting by you as well, Hondacity ... please, just don't report just for the sake of it. Thanks

S775 stage = current top 150 probably

Fixord that :-)

As many of you die-hard overclockers already know: 3DMark01 still is old-skool LGA775's territory since Nehalem (LGA1156 and LGA1366) doesn't provide the specific power required for this old, yet extremely challenging, benchmark. But! Some people are convinced that Nehalem has in fact the power to break, or at least come close to, a couple of world records; the only issue is that not enough time is spent on this platform to really troubleshoot the issues and figure out the hidden performance tweaks. So! We need a challenge. This time it's not a low-clock challenge, but a go-nuts-go-hard challenge. The objective is very simple: prove Massman either wrong or right when he states that Nehalem has the power for 3DMark01. As there's no other place where I can link the competition to: it goes here. Feel free to post links to other forums where this challenge is being discussed. LINK: http://hwbot.org/competition/Nehalem_3DM01

Different HDD configuration?.

No problem, 1.6 = 1.5, only a new title

If you want the score in your profile, please select the "no points" box. This way the score doesn't affect the team points

Not entirely sure. The ORB sometimes rejects 3DM03 scores for no obvious reason. I had a couple of my runs which were unpublishable and after checking with the FM staff, it seems that the score was performed on an "unstable" system. The bad thing, though, is that they wouldn't publish it manually, so I had no verification link.

The difference is significant indeed. Too bad there are so little results available to compare to. Comparing to the results of the Pentium E6300 (http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/pentium_e6300_2.80ghz) the results of Eiswolf seem to be correct, so yours are way off.

Hm, did you check the box in the bottom of the score submission page? I checked out your 6500K Wprime score and the box was indeed checked. Checking the box will give the score a "bointless" state, so no points will be awarded. If you want points for your scores you need to keep it unchecked.

You have hit 300 hardware points. Any more hardware points will only count for the team, but not for the personal score. So, you need to improve your global rankings to get more points. This limitation was set in place because the Hwbot members ranking is about the top scores.