Rauf

It definitely requires some thought on how to do the split. ROP, cores/shaders or something else or some kind of ratio or product between rop and shaders. If we do ROP we see that titan pascal has the same amount as 980 Ti, which makes it less than ideal. We also see that 1070 and 1080 would be placed in same category. On the other hand, for AMD they have a large amount of shaders but low ROP on the Furys, which would be unfair towards them if we do just shaders. Maybe ROP x Shaders gives the best way to categorize GPUs?

Try mem at 1800, I got lower score with mem higher than that. Congrats on nr1, I might take up the fight when 1080 ti is released. Don't really care for hw-points, which is all you can bench now...

PM some of the FM guys, they will surely fix it. Datafile is actually the only thing we have to prevent photoshop WR's, we need to keep it as long as possible.

Turns out I was using another key I got from FM right before they published the keys here. Maybe they have some kind of detection against too many ip:s or something which have kicked in now for the keys published here.

I think I have used the free keys, and it has worked.

Thereby the interval... or do you mean the instruction per cycle, or whatever it is called for GPUs. We can't account for that. If some generations are inefficient, too bad. Same situation as for CPUs, too bad AMD...

Ok, the new titan is out and it upsets the rankings on hwbot like nothing else. Aircooled WR's and GFP's. And then a few months later when 1080 Ti comes everything is back to normal. Why don't we make things better to remove this "downtime" which occurs every time a new titan is released? Imagine if almost every 2D-benchmark was multithreaded and were not divided into categories by the amount of cores. 6950X would rule every benchmark, wouldn't you react to that? Couldn't we do the same kind of categories on GPU's as well? Split up the rankings based on the number of cores/shaders/streamprocessors? Now of course we can't divide by exact number of cores because there would be too many categories. But we could make intervals 0-500, 500-1000, 1000-1500, 1500-2000, 2000-2500, 2500-3000 etc. Maybe the intervals need to be tweaked and maybe they need to be changed over time but wouldn't it be a good way to lessen the impact of the titans and at the same time make 3D-benching more popular by making it possible to compete with cheaper GPUs?

XTU is definitely broken. You get bugged scores without processlasso or other software. And really, don't bash processlasso. It just sets cpu priority, if a benchmark can't handle that, it is bad software... As for other bugged benchmarks, I haven't really noticed anything. Maybe that just means you and other mods are doing a good job As for legacy 3D I have actually suggested that it should be moved to 2D category for globals. Which would be lower points in R7... But I love the legacies so I would bench them most anyway.

I don't know that to decrease 2D hw points have been requested. I think if anything to balance things out 2D hw-points should be given a boost as it is much more difficult to achieve. 3D hw-points in many cases is just about decent GPU-clocks and skyhigh cpu-clocks. Also, you can't fix a broken benchmark by altering the points it gives in the rankings. XTU should be put on hold until intel fixes it so that it doesn't bug out AND (wishful thinking) so that it actually measures some kind of performance.

If you are looking to do overclocking as a job you might find it easier to become president. Anyway, I'm 32 and I love the competition. Pushing to do great scores. I like the current gen hardware, so there is always something new coming out to keep you interested.

Amazing cpu!

Yes, that was my proposal also.

So we'll just agree on that only cowards will use Titan XP

Ok, I will do the best I can with 980 Ti

"GPU of user's choice" This was decided before the new titans were released? Are they allowed...?

It will be better in R7, but nonK xtu will still be problematic. The first person to get the "max" score gets the good points, which is fair in a way. The problem is that it cannot be beaten because it is limited in a very artificial way. The score cannot be beaten and lives on forever. A key aspect of any competitive ranking is that you can affect not only your own ranking but also take down someone else.

Would like to once again bring up the issue of that all users that have the highest score gets equal points (xtu 742). We have seen lately that benching locked skylakes increases quiet a bit with the result of multiple users get 49hw points. If this continues we will soon have maybe 10 cpus that very easily gives 49 points and that can never be beaten. And then kaby lake comes with perhaps the same principel and hw-points will become mute. Everyone gets 20x49 points...

Thanks for handling it quickly. The one thing I don't agree on is that rules have to be strict, they have to be clear and as simple as possible. Why not limit to xtu freq only, what does cpu-z add? Cpu-z can be tricked...

I have uploaded another run, please remove my previous one and check that everything is correct...these damn rules... You should also check the 5G Skylake tweakers challange. If you have the same benchmark, the rules must be the same! Edit: The site was responding slow last night so I might have accidentally uploaded my first score twice...

Rules say freq determined by xtu! Edit: I have another 1797 run, I'll check if screen is ok for that one and upload as backup if ok. But in my opinion the first should def. be ok.

Of course, I already have. It was mostly meant as a heads up for others.

The rules tab says that xtu don't need screenshot, but at the xtu stage it says it is needed. I'm guessing the later is correct? Also I guess we have to monitor cache freq during run and show it in the screen?

The time depends on many factors. Bigger board will not freeze up as the impact does after some time at full pot. Also if you bench at full pot or higher temps. If you bench cpu only or gpu/mem on cold etc. And of course humidity. Eraser is no point as it makes the board freeze faster. And insulation is not that big an issue if you have some experience and think about what areas will be the ones you need to focus on. Basically you need to think about what gives you the issue and try to adjust next time. A few things you can try while you are running: Bring temps down if you bench at a higher temp. For example -100 is not cold enough so it can cause free water at some spots on the board. Bring the temperature down colder and turn the system off. This may freeze the water and ice do not conduct so it can give you a little more time. Second is to heat up a little if you run a smaller board at full pot and the board is too cold. This will only give you a few more minutes though is it will freeze fast o ce you go colder again.

I have never really used vaseline except for on old vgas. I don't think it is good. I have used LET alot, but I'm actually moving more to just the blue shop paper towels. It is enough for any sort of XOC, and actually better for some applications. I would recommend you to pack these blue paper towels tightly around the memory and the slots. If there is no free air around the memory or slots there can be no condensation. Or get a powerful dehumidifier

it is not overclocking...all I have to say about it