Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Vellinious

Members
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Vellinious

  • Rank
    maintenance bot

Converted

  • Location
    United States
  1. Not sure where the screenshot went..... http://imgur.com/XpNnbZ4
  2. I didn't have much time to look around, but found a couple of the test files they had helped me with. These look like pretty simple volt mods, and one with an LLC mod. I don't see any of the files with the adjustments to the timings...I think mostly we were playing with 390 / 390X timings... Pretty sure this is just a simple volt mod. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6zqzZ0qTCB5aURCTGowN00wSFk Looks like an LLC mod, probably with the same voltage mod as above. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6zqzZ0qTCB5ajUzWDlUX1RuRDQ No idea what this is. From the name, I'd guess stock bios, bios switch position 1. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6zqzZ0qTCB5bVpyWGhWTUozSWs That's all I could find....do with it as you wish. It really doesn't even matter any more. I'm done being upset over it. G'luck with your inquisition, I hope it goes well.
  3. Should...between 5 and 6, in that neighborhood, sure. Possibly more when you consider how the memory was cooled (kryographics block, active backplate and tgrizzly between the memory and the block), the memory type, amount, and memory timings. I spent hours in that bios messing with memory timings to give me the absolute best results I could muster. There were a few people that put a lot of hours in on that bios...and other's bios versions. So, will your memory deliver more fps going from 1450 to 1600? Don't have a clue....I can tell you that it's not really a valid comparison...there are too many variables. I'll dig around next weekend and see if I can find the bios file I finally ended up using. I'm sure I posted it in a thread or it's sitting in a PM somewhere.
  4. Nothing bugged during the run. No dropped textures, no black screens and no screen flashing. A few artifacts? Absolutely. I wasn't using any of the bios tricks to get higher frames (see the tools that used magic hex).... I ran nearly all of my benchmark runs between 1802 and 1846, because that's where it ran the best. It was an outstanding 8GB 290X that overclocked like no other Hawaii I had seen. I've been accused of cheating, and in the process, been cheated myself. In conclusion: eat me
  5. Good? Or not good? Doesn't matter...they've deleted the other submission already. /smh
  6. Best delete this one too....because I somehow, magically happened upon the same exact "bug", with a different driver version AND slightly different clocks. http://hwbot.org/submission/3362780_ I'm done here
  7. I'd like to hear it as well. I'm more than just a little peeved at this entire line of garbage.
  8. I don't even own that GPU any more. I sold it last spring..... This is some heavy handed bull.... I trust you scrutinize EVERY run with this much speculation, and biased opinion? Because, that's EXACTLY what this is..... Do what you wish...delete it, keep it, I guess it doesn't matter that much. Just know, that I know it's total crap. And I've told everyone I know about this thread. G'day to ya
  9. Graphics test 2 responds better to memory clocks? Even before I cranked the memory up further, and was running sub 1750, I was getting 71+ FPS on graphics test 2. There was something about the 8GB 290X that allowed for MUCH higher memory clocks than the 4GB version of the same card. Couple that with driver improvements when I was making those runs, and....there's a lot of the difference right there. I dunno who was running those tests in the graph you posted, but their GT2 frames sucked. Here's one I ran with the memory at 1750, similar core clocks and...WELL above 70 fps. AMD Radeon R9 290X video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7-5820K Processor,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. X99-A You're WRONG, man. Period. Go ahead and test it yourself. Run once with a normal overclock. Now, drop the memory down by 100 base. The variance is much larger in GT2, than it is to GT1. You're welcome.
  10. The run was done at 1307 on the core. There was no BUG. The screenshot was taken after I had returned the overclock to normal.....so GPUz is only showing 1000mhz. And you delete the score for that?! Even the 3D Mark link showed the clocks correctly. That's some ticky tack crap....and you know it. Rocket science indeed...
  11. WHY WAS THIS BLOCKED?! WHAT THE..... The clocks on the VGA details CLEARLY state 1310MHz on the core. The base clock in GPUz is reading 1000MHz. Unblock this. This is a legit run..."MATE".... TWO runs with identical scores, both above 1300 on the core and 1860ish on the memory. Result What's the problem
  12. I contacted Michael, and he had me submit it through Firefox. That seemed to work. That was probably after your post, though, so....who knows. lol Thanks for the help, sir.
  13. Tried with no http:, made sure there was no trailing spaces, no leading spaces....I did not try to remove the www, though. I might try that tonight, if nobody comes up with anything better. EDIT: Just tried it without the "www". No joy.
  14. I've attached the required screenshot, and the validation link, but it's not accepting it? I don't get it.....I keep getting this error. Help?
×
×
  • Create New...