trodas

It probably did not help much, as the HWbot wrapper works fine with the ATI Radge 3D Pro 128, yet fail miserably with nVidia Vanta LT. On same windows, using same HW - just swap the cards and it fail miserably. Therefore you need only the 16MB Vanta LT card and you can get that for free 2.54? Uhm... okay, I go there: http://sourceforge.net/projects/hwbotaquamark3/files/ ...and get it. Hardly there could be any improvements, but... I check it out. ...installing... Anyway, the Vanta LT is pretty sluggish cardie at best. Slightly downclocked to 56/56MHz it does only 194 marks in 3DMark 2001 ROFL! Back to v2.54 if the wrapper. 1 - it still created there files, marked in red, in the install directory where the install exe is started: Pretty much chaotic, huh? 2 - it still fail to run miserably, compaining about the "NON-DEFAULT SETTINGS" BS: 3 - including the log files, hope they helps. BTW, why this wrapper is getting bigger and bigger? PS. fixed my error claiming the card is Vanta LE, when it is Vanta LT. Oh, well..

I run the 2.53.108 with the "desktop" directory trick to make it work on non-english WinXP ... and hapilly I can submit the scores: http://hwbot.org/submission/2473240_trodas_aquamark_geforce_fx_5600_xt_9712_marks I only blame the poor HW recognition: ...but as long, as I can fix it by editing the submited score later, then all is fine. You hardly can expect the program to know all the weird HW you can run Winblows on... so as long, as the edit is fine, then I'm happy - except it can't run on Win2k, witch is _BAD_ speedwise. Easpecially on low-end systems like the Duron 750MHz, downlocked to 500MHz... GENiEBEN - I soldered some caps on my FX5600XT, so I give it a try in the Duron "750" machine at Aquamark. No O/C yet, but this should be insanely good O/C, because I replaced caps to polymer Nichicons and added caps and added 17pcs of 10uF SMD caps near the rams (soldered them ON the existing SMD caps! Real hardcore, since these are 0805 size - eg. 2mm long and 1,25mm wide pieces!!! Try stacking them while soldering!) and the card already show shocking potencial of O/C - something from 234MHz core to 375MHz rock stable! And the Hynix ram chips can go from 200MHz to 268MHz w/o any added caps or mods...! But at this point is my personal goals with this 5600XT card irelevant. What is relevant is the "manual" run. So, it will help you, when I get back the Vanta LT card and since then the wrapper will fail, to run the Aquamakr3 by alone, providing you the zipped Documents\Aquamark3 folder? That could help? I gotta do it then. If you want me to run anything more when the Vanta LT is present, then let me know Off to replace the FX5600XT to Vanta LT... PS: Vanta LT is back in the V266B Jetway mobo, all seems working. The HWbot wrapper did again fail to fork, complaining about "NON-DEFAULT SETTINGS" ... So I deleted the Aquamark3 folder in the documents and went for the original Aquamark3. When started, I choose the "Select measurment" (first option on the graphic page) and from the there choices I picked up the choice 1 - therefore 1024x768 and with 4x Anisotropic filtering. And this is working! I watching the Aquamark3 right now on the Vanta LT and it does work even with the default settings for the "1" option...! It is not very fast (frankly, about 2fps right now - it is sluggish at best) but it works! Interesting. The FX5600XT was a hell lot faster, lol. Will post the zipped wanted folder when it does finish the run. Aquamark3 run finished: (this is pretty sad, because with the wrapper it not work, w/o it it work just fine, even the Vanta LT is not exactly fast card, lol) Included the zipped folder - 1.5MB to 300k... hope this helps. Cannot wait for more testing to be done to fix the problem.

Get to score 80 by overclocking to 252MHz FSB (so 2MHz = increase of 2.5 points) ... so I tried 254 to get 1st place and failed, suddently the speed go down to score 78... Suxx, help!

Oh, using a commandline (used google for the part that IS visible) like this: unrar bench -cf=sse2r -cpus=1,4,8,12,36,48,56,64 test.rar ...give me 77.5 score! This is still lower that this should be, but definitively a improvement! ...but is not this cheating? And it there are something more that I should add to get the extra performance?

Guys, I do wonder, what are the "right" UCbenchmark commandline settings, because at 2750MHz I got just (by default commandline "unrar bench test.rar") score 58.9. While JimmyFox got 77.9 at lower clock - 2700MHz and about same CPU (S939 Athlon 64 vs S969 Opteron 148): http://hwbot.org/submission/2464619_jimmyfox_ucbench_2011_athlon_64_3700_san_diego_77.9_mpt_score So, a 2750MHz / 1000MHz HTlink / 229MHz rams at 2.5-3-3-7 1T yield score 58.9. Yet a 2700MHz / 810MHz HTlink / 225MHz rams at 3-3-3-8 1T yield score 77.9?! WTF! I believe that there IS something wrong and maybe the commandline is the answer...? Therefore I do wonder, what are the precise commandline for that much improved results

I would vote for the M$ VC6, as NET Framework is used to inject trojans. Since v2 the injection works... See there: Features: 100% FUD 0/35, NEW! File binder that supports any filetype and only executes once., Icon Changer, NEW! Fake error message, Startup w/Custom Startup Name, Scantime and Runtime, 32 and 64 Bit Compatible, .Net File Support, Builder needs .Net Framework 3.5, Encrypted files need .Net Framework 2.0 Moose83 - And since when you need so called "security" on benchmark? (or benchmark machine for this case) Either you did not trust the wrapper (then no OS version will save you) or you can still use WinXP SP3 or whatever you damn well please to have your "security." No one is forcing you to use Win2k or any other OS you want. But on the other hand, I did not see as good idea to force users to use WinXP SP3 for Aquamark3 HWbot benchmark, when the original works well on Win2k SP4! So the suggestion is about not forcing users to use WinXP SP3. You can still use any OS and have your "security" you want. And as I demonstrated above, hacking tools require NET Framework and Win XP (mostly with higher servicepacks). No W2k support, so... go figure. And not ask me where I get this - and be absolutely sure that I will not using such things - mainly because I like to run W2k (ok, typing this now on WinXP SP3 (grrrr) because of WOT )

It should be mentioned or fixed, that the wrapper need WinXP with somewhat higher servicepack. I used it with WinXP SP1.0a (czech win) and get this error when attempting to start it: After installed WinXP SP3 (czech win) and added the "desktop" folder (as I described there: http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?p=285574 ), it works just fine. The original worked well on Win2k SP4 I would be inclined to thing that the OS requirments of benchmarks should NOT be increased. Especially on old HW is XP SP3 notably slower that Win2k SP4.

Okay, at first it looked as HWbot issue that one cannot submit the benchmark no matter what one do... It just turned out to be a heap of wrapper problems complexively cummulated Still there IS a HWbot bug, because the submited scores aren't counted for the aimed achievment... so... I do believe that the 16MB Vanta LT can't handle even 1024x768 in 32bit anyway... gotta test this. Will do when I put up the old testing machine on bench again. ATM I play with friend Asus mobo... You seems to bundled the CPU-Z or something like that, that would greatly help for more precise clock detection. And the bios thing is corresponding with my findings - that wrong the V266B handle unlocked Duron 750. 1400MHz for it is sure a WR, but somewhat people keep insisting that 5 x 100 is actually 500 and not 1400, as the bios says For quite obvious reasons I would get on the bios side at this :celebration: Aquamark's bug thread? Ok, gotta add there something

Well, given that I can underclock the ATI Rage Pro 128 card rather well and give that I submited quite a few HWbot Aquamark3 runs: http://hwbot.org/submission/2468375_trodas_aquamark_geforce_6800_gt_agp_22195_marks http://hwbot.org/submission/2468840_ (415 - ATI Rage Pro 128 -default) http://hwbot.org/submission/2468900_ (416 - ATI Rage Pro 128 -default) http://hwbot.org/submission/2469012_ (409 - ATI Rage Pro 128 98/116MHz) http://hwbot.org/submission/2469216_ (386 - ATI Rage Pro 128 68/82MHz) http://hwbot.org/submission/2469217_ (374 - ATI Rage Pro 128 57/68MHz) ...then I would say that it does work for me now (unless I want to use the nVidia Vanta LT, that it is)... As for the fix, then go to your C drive, then to the directory "Documents and Settings" and then there are the subdirectories of "Administrator", "All Users", "Default User" and then there is the directory of YOUR profile (unless you are administrator, then go there). In my case, there is directory "trodas" ... now go into it, create IN IT the directory "desktop" and THERE the HWbot wrapped Aquamark 3 will save the scores Easy. What problem you have with it? IMHO it is quite clear that the wrapper is not ready for localized windows. It all fail, then install english WinXP Enjoy!

Underclocking a bit (no more PowerStrip allowed me yet) to 98/116 - and 409 marks http://hwbot.org/submission/2469012_trodas_aquamark_rage_pro_409_marks Now how to get lower... Oh, found the way. Now working on around 60/80... we see where this go.

http://hwbot.org/submission/2468840_trodas_aquamark_rage_pro_415_marks 415 Aquamark 3 marks with stock settings give ATI Rage 3D Pro 128 with 32MB videoram.

But when I pull the Vanta LT and put there a ATI Rage 128 Pro with 32MB of videoram, then suddently, the HWbot Aquamark3 works! Is not that ironic? Mainly because it ATM looks notably faster to me, peaking at 4.4fps... That suxx. Also the textures are weird, sometimes they are just not there... and blue landscape is visible, lol. There should be a quick bug fix for the Vanta LT (and perhaps all affected 16MB only "3D" cards... (still, there are previous results with only 8MB of videoram (ATI Rage: http://hwbot.org/submission/2163180_christian_ney_aquamark_rage_pro_496_marks - that could NOT BE POSSIBLE with the wrapper enforcing something that these low-memory cards cannot handle...) PS. writing too fast - with the Dynamic Occlusion Culling test it average at 0.2fps, witch is somewhat low (oh, spoke too soon, large vegetations render - 0.1fps LOL ... that means one frame per 10 seconds - a slow even for a slideshow )

Proof that Aquamark3 alone work on nVidia Vanta LT w/o a problem.

Bump for working Aquamark3 on Vanta LT! (when I run it alone, it WORKS!)

Bump for some fix!

rhino challenge accepted

Still no-one awareded me for being best overclocker ever? Come on, guys. Duron 750 at almost 3.5GHz - now that is overclock :banana: Could it be, that the wrapper is... wrong? Nah! That can't happen! I will defend it to be right with all my life Anyway, HWbot Aquamark (v2.53.108) is impossible to make it run at nVidia Vanta LT card. Even when the resolution for Winblows is stripped down to 800x600x16 (for some reason, there is no 256 colors option?!), it just report the "non-default settings" and that it is. No way to run Aquamark for me Included all the debug I can - these files ended up elsewhere they should, but whatever. The DMI output is impossible to get, it report error and that it is. No output... That, of course, suxx bad. Especially when I find out, that the Vanta LT at 100/125MHz score reached (manual run in HWbot Aquamark v2.26) only 167 marks (way, way bellow 1 000, Turrican! ) ...and I did not yet start underclocking! In fact, I may allow himself even some OVERclocking Dunno, tough, how that work out, because someone strip the poor card of the only two caps that are on her - it still works w/o them, but I actually added first cap already and when I gather the second, it will be soldered in too, right away - it looks like this: ...yet the 330uF input (3.3V on it) cap for the GPU voltage regulator is gone as well, as the output 470uF (2.5V on it) cap filtering the voltage that goes into the GPU. So my overclock will be probably quite limited, lol. (as the first and second, I will go for Nichicon polymers d6.3 radial caps, as under these SMD caps are actually holes and places for d6.3 mm classic radial caps, so a 560uF 4V Nichicon S8 (d6.3) RS80G561MDNASQJT was soldered on the input and 1200uF 2.5V Nichicon S8 (d6.3) RS80E122MDN1JT will get soldered on the output, when I get it ) I'm surprised that someone ask money for that card, ROFL: http://www.ebay.fr/itm/NVIDIA-Vanta-16-AGP-VGA-ATX-video-card-TVCS-1201-/261166894804 http://www.ebay.it/itm/IBM-25P4058-NVIDIA-Vanta-16-16MB-AGP-Graphics-Card-LPB-/300742967421

Version 2.26 - OMG I want to claim a couple of WR now :D My Duron 750MHz is running at 3579MHz - cool - yet still getting ZERO score :D Beat that, suxxkas! That is amazing! :nana: That happens when I hit the "auto" ... when tried the manual version, then Aquamark is running w/o a glitch (!) - once again, Aquamark is fine, the wrapper seems to be the problem. It is pretty slow on the Vanta, tough. But I can underclock it a bit, 100/125MHz seems to be more that plenty, there is actually even some frames being drawn on the screen, that is too fast (lowest limits in Forceware v45.28 drivers are 20/30MHz, witch is more "enjoayable" )

More Aquamark wrapper fails: 1 - does NOT WORK AT ALL on nVidia Vanta card. Claim "non-default settings" even I repeatedly freshly installed it on FRESH WinXP SP3 (really crappy Win) and refuse to do anything. While it is true, that 16MB of videoram is rather poor and maybe lowering the desktop resolution could help a bit, it still should work or say that there is not enought videomemory, not this BS message about "settings"... (see screenshot bellow) 2 - does WRONGLY DETECT CPU SPEED - it claims my Duron 750MHz is running at 1400MHz. I want to claim WR (Duron 750 is currently at 1376Mhz http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/duron_750mhz/ ) so I clearly want the 1st place Of course this is BS, I actually underclocked the Duron to 100x5 and 500MHz is the real true speed: Validated: http://valid.canardpc.com/v0y2h3 On a bit of defense to the poor wrapper it should be mentioned, that the 1400MHz is exactly the speed my cofused Jetway V266B mobo is reporting on post, lol. Yes, it do report 1400MHz too. Dunno where this come from, but it is wrong. In some overclocking cases it report on the same 750MHz Duron over 2GHz clock, so clearly I want the WR there :celebration: 3 - installing HWbot Aquamark on czech Windows to D:/Aquamark3 directory lead to quite a bunch files ending up in root D: drive directory: Not exactly clan... ...so I probably have to look out for the v2.26, as this is unbearable. Wish me luck

Yep, but it is just not there. It would be helpfull if anyone told me, that the file name is bunch of randon numbers, but ending .hwbot (mine 22195.hwbot ) No one seems to catch the drift. Whatever. I figured out what went wrong. It is the localization of directories. The HWbot wrapper not only w/o good reason bumped the requirments for Aquamark to WinXP (and likely higher that SP1.10a version, tested on SP3), but also make Aquamark bench useless, because it try save the file into WRONG DIRECTORY! And the directory is not existing, therefore it did not saved the file at all (how about requester where to save it, when failure happens?!) ... Using Internals Filemon I get the information, that it correctly go to the "Documents and settings" then to my profile "trodas" and then it try the "desktop" directory and that is where fail happen. The name of the directory is changed in localized Winblows to "Plocha" (in case of Czech version, dunno what it is in Hungarian or others)... Therefore when I created the directory desktop, then the score get saved and everything (okay, almost everything, because HWbot insisted that my mainboard is "AMD" when it is Jetway, lol, but that is fixable by editing the submited score later, so...) is fine now. Bottom line - that is why Windows use these "special" pathnames - to ensure, that no-one is trying directly access certain directory, because such program fail on localized Windows with different pathnames... Oh, well. Find and fixed the bug! Score submited: http://hwbot.org/submission/2468375_trodas_aquamark_geforce_6800_gt_agp_22195_marks ...and in the submission is the failure forever visible: :nana: I was under the impression that I'm requred to create the screenshot like this: ...with some CPU-Z validated infos: http://valid.canardpc.com/pymi3v ...but I was wrong again

DirectX 9.0c is installed by default on WinXP SP3. The benchmark RUN, that is fine: What to do AFTER the run is a mystery. There is NO file saved on my desktop. I would kinda notice that... Maybe it need some libraried THEN (and only then) and did not say it? Could be... but there is NO error... so I'm kinda clueless where the file is saved. Could you please provide the name of such file???

Bump for any suggestions on how to made Aquamark submission?

Bump?

Oh that... the description imply that the benchmark run should take over 6 hours, witch cannot be true. As slow graphic card goes, then this is not really a problem And yes, the wrapper is known to require WinXP and later. That is why I installed the damn WinXP But how to get the most need file? ("This benchmark requires a data file. Please upload the saved benchmark result.") Please advise. Verification datafile - Mandatory for submissions Witch datafile? Where I get it? It refuse every file the benchmark produced?! Aquamark banch submission failure

Hmmm, maybe you could point him out to this thread, because while it is possible that I screw something up, I still believe that it should be working well Regardless, could I get some recommendations about how to sucesfully submit the Aquamark test? Because when I even installed the cursed WinXP SP3, then I would like to have the result (currently, the fastest Duron 750 run is like 13k marks ( http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/duron_750mhz/ ) while even with very safe clocks I can do 21k - no wonder, higher CPU clock and uncomparable 6800 GT to GeForce 3 ... ) I also wonder, how to setup the Aquamark to be forced to draw every frame or something like that, so the benchmark will took the longer time - http://hwbot.org/achievement/802_ Before it was easy to submit Aquamark result: http://hwbot.org/submission/2163190_christian_ney_aquamark_savage_4_241_marks http://hwbot.org/submission/2163180_christian_ney_aquamark_rage_pro_496_marks http://hwbot.org/submission/1054919_christian_ney_aquamark_prosavage8_ddr_1577_marks http://hwbot.org/submission/2413489_christian_ney_aquamark_rage_128_1041_marks ...but when the HWbot www page does not accept the html output file, then what now?