Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

hokiealumnus

Members
  • Posts

    337
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by hokiealumnus

  1. +1. Let's start a "ban Andre from using LN2" crusade! Oh, and Leeghoofd, I am quite secure in my standing at last place in Pro thank you very much. You should join me. Being a bottom feeder isn't so bad; you get used to the taste after awhile. :banana: EDIT - Zomg, I'm higher than Marc...PWNED! (I kid, I kid. About the PWNED part, not about the higher than Marc part. )
  2. Two questions, if it please the court. 1. The submission screen says retail hardware only. Does that apply to CPU or just unreleased memory? i.e. I'd like to submit with my ES 3770K + released memory b/c I'm not planning on purchasing a retail chip. Is that ok? 2. The memory clock submission - does it require a screenshot with a background? The validations are date-stamped; is that sufficient or do we need a screenshot to go with it? Obviously one can get a higher validation if they don't have to be stable enough for a screenshot.
  3. Woot! Thanks Don Dan, it's nice to finally be here.
  4. Works this morning for me too. I assure you it wasn't last night. Something happened; whatever it was is good, because it works, but something.
  5. Heh, I did not. When it wouldn't give me a frequency I desired (searching for max ambient, failing miserably), it was pulled in favor of a Z68 board that I knew would OC.
  6. Intel's ever-so-lovely new visual BIOS was happy at 2133 for me too. It wouldn't allow one MHz of bclk (literally...it didn't post with one MHz increase), but it did run 2133 MHz memory this time. It did NOT like the dividers above that and, like raising bclk 1 MHz, led to no POST. Hey, it's an improvement over the old Intel BIOS at least!
  7. That's what I'd wonder as well. This is the first I've heard of a cold bug, especially that 'high'.
  8. Just to clarify, has anyone seen an IB chip with a cold bug yet? I can't get away long enough to go to the LN2 store to pick up LN2 and try myself.
  9. Good lord that's a lotta threads. Bulldozer definitely sucks for floating point tests. If you run tests with multiple-core-optimized Integer calculation, that server would be insanely fast.
  10. Pretty much +1 to Leeghoofd. Oh, and... [ATTACH]1221[/ATTACH] :woot:
  11. Ahh, thanks. Should I delete-and-resubmit or just wait for the fix and eventual global recalculation?
  12. Can I get a little help with this one? The ranking didn't calculate properly, then when I tell it to recalculate I am met with "Failed to synchronize rankings: Failed to select a row." Points are few for this quick bench but they are points nonetheless.
  13. To you my man, to you. You're apparently the only one reading things into that. "Have a valid screenshot" does not = "verification file must contain everything that goes into a valid screenshot". If it did, that's what should be done...but it doesn't. Sure, you may think that's what it means. However, obviously from the HWBot staffers posting in this thread, what you think is not the intent. I'm going to cease posting now. There isn't any reason to get emotional over made up rules; I have enough stress to add this non-issue. :celebration:
  14. The rules, copied from the rule page: ...verification file saved and submitted. A valid screenshot (not inside the verification file!...just "have a valid screenshot") supplied. That's what they did. Nowhere in the rules for the benchmark does it say the verification file must contain those, just that they must have a verification file and a valid screenshot. They could be one in the same, or going by the rules they can be different. You are putting rules in there that don't exist rbuass.
  15. You're saying that he ran the bench, locked up the system, restarted and THEN took the screenshot? So how did he get the score to show in the heaven benchmark launcher? Are you implying he photoshopped CPUz & GPUz into the original screenshot? If so, to what end? The score is the same, he was able to save the .hwbot file to verify it. I just don't understand the reasoning here.
  16. This one from the OP: http://hwbot.org/submission/2261866_rsannino_unigine_heaven___xtreme_preset_(dx11)_4x_radeon_hd_7970_7423.98_dx11_marks does need to be removed; there is no memory tab. The other two in the OP are fine, there is a screenshot with all of the required info. Turrican already addressed the two ancient submissions.
  17. Not if you want to use a backplate...that little extra GPU power thingy would get crushed.
×
×
  • Create New...