Rauf

Very nice efficiency

Bump

The i3:s actually makes this a bit of an issue for me. Some of the big companies obviously have access to several from a very good batch of ES i3. They hand them out to some overclockers who take most of the high global points. The rest of the high points are taken by other ES cpus. The problem I have with this is the scaling of the globals, below the top 3-5 the scaling is virtually none. So for the extreme guys we must spend a lot of money for binning a top 5 i3, which scores 5 points more than an pretty average top 10 cpu. And 10 points over a cpu that is actually pretty bad (top 20). This takes some of the fun and the competition out of XOC. I have a couple of i3 for binning, but now there is actually no point because I don't need another couple of 30-35 pointers...and the chance of hitting higher is virutally none. And I know that any day there might come more ES cpus to push my scores down even further. Another thing about ES cpus is that I know for a fact that some of them travels around a bit. Don't know how common that is but some rankings may have the same cpu twice in the top positions. That is not impossible for retail cpus either, however I think it is more questionable when it comes to ES as they are not paid for by the OC. Still, considering all the above, I'm not really against ES cpus. They are physically the same I guess, just cheaper for the big companies to bin. As for the points, I have hopes that the coming proposition for adjustments to global points will have an adjusted slope for points distribution that makes it worth competing for a top 5-10 score.

Thanks for sharing! Seems it's just a good batch!

Exactly my thoughts, the die on retail i3 is different from the 6700k. At least when it comes to size.

Yes it is probably possible to find as good retail. But binning i3 seems harder than 6700k and they are very hard to find at 6.4 ghz multicore stable. Also there seems to be a bit of a trend with very good ES right now. I don't mind, it is always nice to see good results.

Ok, lets make it 500/400 for the 6700K.

Very nice! Elmors cpu?

Hi I'm selling a good retail 6700K. Does 6.4+ GHz in 3D05. Not maxed out, only given it 1.88V max and not gone below -170. Bought it from Zwitterion a while back. Delidded of course! Link: http://hwbot.org/submission/3005241_zwitterion93_3dmark05_geforce_gtx_560_ti_66239_marks Also have one 6700K that I haven’t tried much. Did 6.17 GHz in CB R15 with only 1.85V and -150. Didn’t push it more as I needed it for the GOC qualifier. Never got around to try it again. Completely untested in legacy 3D. Selling cheap because of this. Retail and delidded. Link: http://hwbot.org/submission/3003539_rauf_cinebench___r15_core_i7_6700k_1357_cb Price: 450€ for nr1. SOLD! Buyer pays fees and shipping. Paypal or banktransfer. 375€ for nr2. Buyer pays fees and shipping. Last I have an i3 6300 if anyone wants it. Not a good clocker but if you want it for 100€ it’s yours. Not delidded. This one is also retail. Shipping is around 17€ for EU. 22€ for non-EU. EMS is around 50€ for non-EU.

Very nice! Then I would expect there to be quite a lot of room for extra performance for some of these CPUs. Also for the low CBB cpus some voltages could make a major difference. For example I can take my old one from CBB -120 to -170 with a little tweaking on some voltages.

I'm a little curious about how you test these. Same voltage settings for pll core, pll termination etc.? Or are they more finetuned than this? Would be interesting if you could share voltages if you use the same for all?

Superb guide again! Have been waiting for this Strange that it has OCP issues though...

I don't see any real problems, I see opportunities. The 4 core cpu category should be for the true 3D benchmarks which steponz listed earlier. As for the popularity the "unrestricted CPU" category should not be affected as all GPU submissions (incl. 4 core cpu) should count towards the points in that category. Will be the same as now. As for 4 core CPU it is the most popular CPU so it will probably get enough points. I don't think it should get as much as the unrestricted category anyway, doesn't seem fair. Yeah, you still need the highest end GPU, and from an economical point of view both 4 core CPU + low and mid end classes of GPUs would be better. But that would mean an impossible amount of rankings. If I have to choose one I would go with 4 core CPU over GPU classes. 4 core CPU systems must be the most popular systems on hwbot and that means a 700€ GPU to compete for top rankings. Otherwise it would mean X99 MB, 5960X, extra mem + GPU = >> 700€.

You did read the part about a great achievement? Of course my score is because of skylake, never said otherwise...

Don't know why you talk about "the real agenda". If you have followed this discussion you would know it has always been about the global points for 3D vs primarily XTU. Your agenda is quite clear by the way as you only bench for HW-points...Try reading the topic of this discussion... Yeah, he is nr1 because of newest Skylake CPU, vs nr2 who runs higher GPU clocks but on haswell... Still a great achievement, but it actually proves my point. Don't know why you bring up 2D HW-points. Of course a new generation of cpus is not gonna help an old E8500 clock higher...2D HW-points is all about binning or being very lucky. Don't see the "hard" part but more on that below. I don't understand why you have to belittle my result to make cheap points in your argumentation. Or maybe you're just mad about Country Cup I don't want points to be given out based on how "hard" a benchmark is. That is very artificial and can never be made fair. I want 2D and 3D to get similar global (and HW) points. Or maybe you don't think there is anything wrong with XTU points and that a GFP XTU is much "harder" than a GFP in Fire strike and therefore, by your own argumentation, deserves more points?

Well, statistics shows that the collective wants to bench 1 GPU with 4 core CPU Done deal! Problem with this is that it will result in A LOT of benchmarks that gives globals if we have unrestricted CPU category as now with 1,2,3,4 GPUs. And then add 4 core CPU with 1,2,3,4 GPUs... GPUPI is 2D so it's not affected by CPU cores

Very nice! Found a good cpu!

How about this: http://hwbot.org/newsflash/3327_upcoming_broadwell_e_core_i7_6950x_may_cost_up_to_usd_1500 Don't know if FS scales with more than 8 cores, but even if it does not next gen from Futuremark probably will. 1500$ cpu is out of the question, even for me Something needs to be done, not only with the points but also with categories. 4 core CPU with FS/FSE etc would be really nice! What happened with the lowered threshold and adjusted slope for globals? Most seemed fine with that. Also don't know if anyone but the HW-benchers think HW points should be more important in the rankings. HW points (top spots) is mostly about running average GPU clocks and pair it with a golden last gen CPU. It is not so much about the HW the points indicate (the GPU).

Online qualifier for the last two spots would be very good

Sanded die? Great chip you got!

A 4 core CPU category for FS and the other non-legacy 3D benches would be very nice. I have two 980 ti that I ran on ln2 for the goc qualifier. After that only legacy 3D. And I actually have a Rampage V Ex and memory, only missing a good 5960X. There is just not enough incentment to spend much money on a good 5960X. Then a heap of ln2 to bench for very little points (my cards are not that good).

What volts do these b-die like? Still not available here, but soon got some coming.

Hideo always runs 4 sticks! Nice work on the ASUS, and nice to see 11-11-11!

Insane, that chip would even be good for some 3D...

That's why I suggested grouping cards in more artificial "classes". Three seems like a reasonable number to me. Any more would probably create more problems than solve them. The amount of compute cores is not really relevant to performance and constantly changing.