trodas

Okay, case noted: no political discussion. Sorry. But that thread was asking for it...

GENiEBEN - thanks for the tip! I installed the ADM SDK v2.9 and the install went fine. I just did not installed the samples, but that it is... However the GPUPI still failed to work at all: Error code -1001: could not query for available OpenCL devices! Damn. Should I try some settings or higher version... or... something? ... _mat_ - well, GENiEBEN specificaly mentioned v2.9, not 2.9.1 ... so I go on with the old version. I emailed the two responsible people (Russ Beutler - russel.r.beutler@intel.com and Kathy Farrel kathy.a.farrel@intel.com) and hopefully someone take a look soon to these failures Thanks for your efforts. Any debudging tools that could help me out? It does not look like the AMD OpenCL drivers accept my CPU as the OpenCL rendering unit....

Guys, I checked the Contribute page and find out two errors there: http://hwbot.org/article/contribute 1) Local Representatives: Aerou is not from Colombia, but from Czech republic (quite different region) 2) Site Translation: Wizerty Translator (FR) is mentioned twice. I did not want to doubt his work, not at all, I just think that this is error and people should not be mentioned twice... All in all, great job! :nana: :celebration:

Sh...! That is a problem, because from the list of supported graphic cards: http://developer.amd.com/tools-and-sdks/opencl-zone/amd-accelerated-parallel-processing-app-sdk/system-requirements-driver-compatibility/ ...I have none. Lowest for OpenCL 1.1 is HD 5400 Series GPUs, for OpenCL 1.2 are Radeon HD 5800 and for OpenCL 2.0 it is Radeon HD 7790 Radeon 9600 XT does not qualify at all. Suxx. So I'm where I was started. Unless these OpenCL drivers cannot be somehow extracted from the drivers, then I'm stuck

So, after uninstall of the Intel OpenCL, I use this: REGEDIT4 [-HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Intel\OpenCL] Done. Ah, thanks for the tips, _mat_ ! Did someone reported that bug to Intel yet? I, sadly, did not have any OpenCL supported AMD cards, so could you pretty please extract the OpenCL installer for me from the drivers, so I'm out of luck?

Very nice result. Thanks for sharing! Looks like your processor is good clocker - 5.7GHz stable for SuperPi 32M is pretty solid!

run better that govt

Okay, your points are valid. Yes, there are more reasons why I look for visualy nicer images... so it might look as shifting goalposts. Glad you agree that winners are shown - so it all just boil down to what we will consider a win. Either specific test, or maximum GPU clock (in case of graphic cards) could be used. Who says that I will be the one to determine the most relevent benchmarks? People can vote on that. Good point is, that first is the reference card fastest. But then it get overcomed... so the pictures could look nicer and more relevant to winners! And no, there is no need to change good pictures. Besides, the no. 1 post did not change very often and the fact, that the fastest card CAN have GRANTED the picture does not mean that it will be REQUIRED to have it now... And as long, as the complaining party bring an image, it is relatively easy job to do

Thank you very much. Looks nicer now, just pls remove the sample image over it... that should show the legendady ram well and make the site pleasing to view. BTW, the size on web is 360x240 ... to help you to center the image, I enlarged the canvas to 512 to get the center easily when resized:

Bump for construction of the scores, GENiEBEN

I envy people that can start the GPUPI

I'm not Asus. My nick is trodas and (unless I do some mistake) I always submit dumps for validation to CPU-Z under my nick trodas. Tried submit again, got: http://valid.canardpc.com/775207mg (maybe 32bit CPU-Z is not happy on 64bit Win7? Dunno.) PS. made another validation and it works now: http://valid.canardpc.com/k06jpn Must be a bad valid them, then files are different...

I O/C a bit higher to get higher score and CPU-Z produced this page: Tried this few times and get same result. It my computer going crazy from the heat, or their server is cooked?

Hmmm, the inner size of the rectangle (so, picture size) is actually exactly 342x195 pixels... so, let me resize mine and compare: - mine got nicer (and more real) colors - show a little bit more details - have pretty logo on the blower - reassembly way more clearly the product you get, since on all the 6800 GT they stole the caps and one phase on the regulator (!) ... and worsest problem is, that the traces are not even connected, so I can add the missing caps, but there is no reason to do so, because these spaces are not even connected, grrrrr!

I made the Unique Heaven score (run twice, two times - once score 137, then 135) ... could you convert it to the output file, GENiEBEN, just like you offered for the Aquamark?

Much nicer (for a generic card), thanks! ... And when talking about design, I'm rarely happy and satisfacted with the result. But it is true, that the image of MSI GTX 980 ti there will be probably a bit unfair advantage for MSI. Hmmm. But it looks nice... I still think that highest score (or simply highest overclock for core?) should somewhat "grant" the possibility to use the image. Maybe you can add that possibility to the poll too?

Well, if you want, I still can submit a nicer generic image of ram... but to tell the truth... why should DDR1 ram not represent a NICE image? These Adata Vitesta will look damn good there and... There are not sold anymore, so it is not like you favor some brand for money. Also you can always fall back and point at me, that I was the one to suggest that... Pool sounds nice. Hopefully the results will be respected (pool about PCMark come to mind...). IMHO DDR1 should be represented with some classic icon like the Adata Vitesta. DDR2 should be represented with another classic, I suggest Crucial Ballistix. DDR3 should be also represented with some kick-add Hypers. Maybe Corsair Dominator GT...? ...and I'm sure Don_Dan can come up with some good DDR4 rams, when he get around to Skylake and pushing DDR4. All I care is - how well it looks. (I'm not affiliated by any company, I did not get payed by anyone, all I go is the looks...) And HWbot team should take the look of the site into account, IMHO. After all, the better it looks, the more likely people return, participate, etc. Sure, best is some Winbond BH-5 rams... as lamboden says - but I did not know any that have cool looking heatspreader Mine Mushkins are dull looking, even they do 2-2-2-5 at 200MHz easily... so AData. Even I never had them... but they are good looking Same Crucial Ballistix (older versions with the clip) - they do looks nice AND they are (with the right Micron D9Gxx chips) legendary. ... When legendary and good looking combine - why settle for some generic crap? I mean... will you exchange your best Crucial Ballistix for some generic crap rams? If yes, then pls drop me a PM, because I'm interesed

Thanks... I still not getting what you have against the Inno3D, I could have shopped the logo out, but it looked so nice... Sure you have plenty more intersting things to do, but if you care to elaborate about it a bit, maybe I could understand the point. ATM I find hard to swallow that you (and HWbot team in general) could go for ughly pictures rather that have NICE pictures of non-generic components.

Soundcard drivers you say? Piece of cake. Enabled in bios, x64 drivers installed, still fail: HWbot Unique Heaven still won't work As you can hear the music, it is working well. 31 frames are allegedly rendered and that it is. No more What is wrong? Can you help? What to test? ... Unique Heaven is working all right Despite the slow framerate (6800 GT not overclocked and it is not particulary good gfx card for Unique Heaven bench, not to mention when there is M-JPEG recording at 15fps running as well...) you can see that Unique Heaven is working perfectly. So, what it is, that the wrapper cause to epicaly fail?

Thanks! But it seems to help a lot on PCMark 05... also my first result with Vantage is not entierly bad: http://hwbot.org/submission/2943404_ ...considering the 1st place is only by 6 marks ahead and need 400MHz higher CPU clock (+DDR2 at 528MHz) ... or I get better scores, because I run all the tests and have reg v1.2?

If you run all the scores, it took me a little over 1h. Kinda long, yep Plenty of videos and dogs pictures. Maybe this should be rather named Dog's mark?

My first PCMark Vantage submission: http://www.uloz.to/xcBzRmX8/pcmark-vantage-results-x64-pcr

nerealisticky dokonala tela en

Terrible image... We can't have nicely looking images, can we? Any why the hell is the "sample image" all over it?

Wrong image, Christian. That is the ultra - two molex power connectors, better heatsink...