lanbonden
-
Posts
276 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by lanbonden
-
-
Interesting, I am on my 80hrs run now, but I will test on the 100hrs run.
on a run that long should it be rather easy to see, I meen Im close to twice the time compared to what the program reports.
1h 34mins as reported in the benchmark have taken ~2h50mins in reality so should be easy to see on a 80h run if your missing a few days in the ressult
-
I decided to try GPUIP for that Slowest GPUPI for CPU 1B part in the team cpu today and encounted a very wierd problem as the showed time in the benchmark doesnt match the real time it took to run it.
This is a far from complete run but its already pretty far out of sync Id say.
I know the screenshoot doesnt say much but I keep an external document running for comparing times as I was suprised the first rbatch only showed up as 12 mins when it feelt way longer.
For example, I know the 00h 38mins 20 sec batch occured between 17:42 and 17:50 and the 01h 22mins 55sec batch occured between 19:10 and 19:19
The time differense between those 2 batches where ~45 mins but even the minimum time between my messurments is 17:50 to 19:10 or 80 mins.
Next round 01h 35min 17sec, its just 13min after the batch before but it showed up between 19:39 and 19:46 so atleast 20 (19:19 to 19:39) mins after the batch before.
Same thing happend for the batch after the screen shoot, 01h 48min 12sec. It showed up exactly 20:07 so atleast 21mins after even if GPUPI only says there is 13 mins differense.
The clock in windows is staying synced so thats not the problem atleast.
Is this a known problem? Any idea what could couse it?
Its very anoying now when doing a slow run but I have a feeling it might be of great advantage when trying to do a fast run instead...
-
Thanks for some good reading, really appreciate it
-
...no update overnight, 2247 frames stuck
Damn. Too low ram clocks, probably. Or the lacking cap that was torn-off from the card? Dunno. So pls make at least the two scores already done, w/o the caches it is probably too slow to pass these hot days even with fan on it...Thats a shame on what could have been an amazingly bad run, it seems to be a rough frame for some reason tho.
I had 2 crashes on frame 2247 and 5 crashes on frame 643 when testing tweaks and underclocking. Happy I didnt combine them for super slow times when testing.
-
Why? These Adata ones are pretty and there is no reason why we shall not have a pretty nice pictures
No company is making / selling DDR1 rams today, so no taking sides or advertising there... Do you really want me to look for ughly generic DIMMs pictures?
A nice pair of BH5 memorys are always pretty no mater if they got a heatspreader or not
-
Anyone else having problem with that stupid frame 643 in the aquamark lowclock test? Doesnt mater if I got the system setup to reach it in 15 mins or 5h, it still get stuck on that single frame every run when I try and go below 500 in score.
-
Grats for a finished run, may I ask how long it took? Is my calc of ~3 days roughly correct?
I just had a bad failure on my own run 2days in, pump died -> water boiled in the waterblock? -> hose raptured -> motherboard soaked again
-
An example of a test with chilled water. So yes you want to insolate the blocks and probably the tubing close to the bench rig aswell. For the Pcb of the motherboard/gpu I wouldnt say that its needed as they will probably always be above the dewpoint if you dont live in a extreamly hot and humid area.
-
As a fellow AGP bencher, my tip is to just make it simple for yourself and do a Vmod for the memory, it should be well documenteted already for that motherboard so not even any reasearch needed.
Ive been benching like 10 agp cards so far on a Asrock AM2NF3-VSTA, the AM2 equivalent to the motherboard you got that supports ddr2, Phenom2 quads and AGP and my experiance so far is that memory dont really mater with the slower cards atleast.
With that said, my card was also limited to ~2.03V for DDR2 at ultra high settings so pretty much first thing was to Vmod that part. Other then that is the problem an extreamly weak powersupply for the CPU, Max Vcore is 1.55V but over 1.475V gives me random crashes, the motherboard also give me ~200Mhz lower OC then a decent board at same measured voltage with the same CPU.
-
I feel like we're having two discussions in this thread.
1) On the principles of overclocking: "should points matter?"
2) On the practical matter: newbies at HWBOT are often discourage because the only way to get to the top is with LN2 -> what's a solution.
I sense this idea is not good enough, and that there's better things to spend our time on. Thanks for the feedback, though!
As an answear to 2) I think alot of it got to do with the current situation that once you do one single submit with cold your sudenly moved up and competing with the pros. My guess is that this stops alot of people from taking the step and buying some DICE just to test it out and thereby missing out the feeling of geting hocked for real.
To touch on 1), I kind of guess they do or well not really, but the competition part of them do. Taking myself as an example. Im pretty new here, working my way up in the novice league atm with some oldschool hardware but I already have a Cascade at home, I got results with it worth way more points then what I got registered but I havent uploaded them yet becouse I dont want to fly up into the elite league yet as I cant compete there with the expensive new hardware it takes to get global points.
-
should have taken around 4hours.
-
i think target score stage is a nice idea, but it shoud be a little bit different: the target shoud be a secret until the stage starts. if the target is known before, everybody has already the result and will upload it within the first seconds. that´s imho boring and has nothing to do with the benchmark. the benchmark itself will be pointless
but if the target is secret until the stage is open, everybody has to hurry to choose the best benchsystem and clocks and try to hit the target first
i guess it would be much more fun, wouldn´t it?As the person that took home the stage Id say that if there was one thing to change for next year it would be to have a harder target.
It took me ~80 rounds to hit the target with roughly 10 hits of 1 point under/over before that. If the target was lets say 25.000 instead of 250 the chanse of anyone hitting the exakt target would be alot smaller due to a larger spread of the score between each run.
-
Why not just plug a graphics card in and get it done. Only takes about 2 hours to get the score with the right card so stop complaining and start competing!!!
Maybe I was unlucky, but took 3 tries to hit 249 points and over 80 to hit 250
-
Stage7: PCMark7 Single CPU (22.09.2015)
Use 1 processor(s).
Is that 1 CPU or only CPUs with one core?
-
No likes for the Fury stage?
haha, must say I hoped that Id never have to tough a Rage 128 pro again, Just glad you guys didnt decide to run it in Aquamark (if it even works there?) as that would have been like few hours runs
-
about the 6600GT sli, would it be alowed to run a GeForce 6600 GT Duo, the double GPU card?
-
I'm aware of the problem for those cards, you can run without the wrapper 'the old fashioned way' and just send me the screenshots to build you a scorefile.
Thanks in advance, thats great suport from you
-
Got the same problem as reported here before with some old AGP cards, Aquamark3 runs fine when starting it from its own launcher or when runing it from "Manual" run mode in the wraper, but when trying to run in auto mode to get a score to submit it tries to start before closing down and giving the "None-Default setting" message.
The wraper worked fine with FX5200 and newer cards but doesnt work with the Geforce4 MX440 I run now, anyone got any hint on how to get any results that can be uploaded out of this older cards?
Or would it maybe be easier to remove the requirment of using the wraper for those old ones?
-
"the hardware is limited to AMD AM2 processors and LGA775 processors"
But what about AMD motherboards? I can use only socket AM2 motherboards, or sAM3 motherboard with AM2 processor is allowed as well?
Thanks for answer
You can run AM3(+) CPUs in a AM2 motherboard but you cant run AM2 CPUs in a AM3(+) motherboard so the limit is in the hardware.
-
Same for me, havent been able to upload any results today.
-
Intel e6500k or Pentium Dual core e2180' can run in this competition ?
Someone correct me if Im wrong but Im 99% that no is the answeer to your question.
The following achitecturs are Core based and therefor shouldnt be alowed even if Intel decided to be logical and name some CPUs from some of them pentium.
Conroe
Allendale
Wolfdale
Kentsfield
Yorkfield
-
I agree on nr1,2 as that seems logic, but are you sure about nr3 looking at what websmile posted earlier?
This will have to be discussed, you get an update later - on question 3, X800 is not X850, otherwise there would be x8xx. Anyway, we will give headsup soon -
What about AMD Athalon processors?
Not sure if I understand your question, but 939 only got Athlon and some Opterons so they are ofc allowed?
GPUPI - SuperPI on the GPU
in Benchmark software
Posted
This was run on XP pro, 32bit with sp3.
As of the quick solution, there is nothing called HPET mentioned in bios or manual and from what Ive read its introduced around 2005 so after this motherboards are launched (dfi lanparty ut nf3 250gb). I was about to try and disabling HPET in windows to try and see if it worked tho but managed to corupt the instalation before I could do that.
I can also say that the timer worked good (no noticible variation atleast) when I tried running at the normal frequency (200fsb) atleast, unfortunatly didnt get a chanse to test how higher FSB affected the timer as that gave the corrupt OS...