Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

varachio

Members
  • Content Count

    291
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by varachio

  1. Hi Mate, indeed, some of us never sleep... We wish good luck to our fellow Madshrimps Team!
  2. Strange thing, I was surfing in hwbot.org database in the afternoon Greece time (before 12 hrs or so) looking for hd6870 results, when I jump into the discussion about new revision (R8? Classic?). So in this discussion I found the link for the new revision and I follow the link as I was curious about how looked out(https://uat.hwbot.org). I logged in and everything were smooth, descent speed, results browsing OK, but no pictures at all and forum not accesible - the only negative I noticed. Then logged out and tried to continue the database search - huh!!!! No responce from hwbot.org and error on Chrome browser. I thought it was me, but as it seems is something general. Luckily that this forum link works. Varachio
  3. varachio

    [WTB] Rare Adapters

    P5E64 WS EVO exists here. she is at working condition, lately tested with an e6400. able for cold post with fsb 603, for some reason not able to work with setfsb software. This is the main reason I give it, since I have a second one board already. in case you are interested, pm me. varachio
  4. SC4: DDR4 - PCMark 7: Can I use 6950X cpu? Or 5820K? Sorry if I am asking again but so far I do not seen that kind of question or answer.
  5. Hi, to everyone. Bug report and sorry if I repeat it but as far as I read from the previous posts nothing relevant found. So, its about "venice" core stage. wprime 32m bugs and reverts with errata scores. In my case, with cpu speed of 2805 gave me once a score 23.156 sec while the correct score should be 55+ sec or so. If you are not look the monitor during the bench and you do something else and you come back after a while you are surprized If you look the monitor you notice that in e.g. 38% program exits the bench and records the result of 38% as final. This can potencial give "bugged" scores undetectable if this will happen during last calculation loop and will have 2-3 seconds better score. At the moment I see no issue with the uploaded scores, so may this happened only to me, so, everybody be aware. Videos and screenshots from my side are available if you need them.
  6. Need it. Keep it for me. Let me know shipping cost to greece to proceed with exact payment. More info with pm. Varachio
  7. Option 1 or even option 2 for me is not a problem... I can accept both as fair.
  8. Dear All, Nothing to fight about here. We are all know more or less the same things. We pass from the same stages/issues. Let me give you an additonal input here: Do we all agree that when all three cpu-z tabs opened the system very often freezed or restarted? My system was able to run all benchmarks rock solid stable @ 840 speed but when i opened the 3rd cpu-z, my system 95% would freezed or restarted. ( I wrote this comment at my Spi submission as I was not able to save the 840 speed spi result) I assume that many of us faced the same issue. I am right? or it was just me facing this issue? Did we followed the rules or we just overlooked them because were not convenient / easy? Rules where there and where clear. As I said before, I do not suggest to delete / block any scores at this stage / leave them as is this time. Next stage let's be more specific, more accurate, more strict and more fair.
  9. Clock generator is recognized acually but... no changing by 1Mhz increments, and jump from 105Mhz to 112Mhz fsb even if it will be possible probably would freeze the system instantly... I tried but once applied the new freq. nothing happens... fsb remains the same...
  10. I like to remind you that at round 1 other VALID submissions - including mine - deleted because was not in accordance 100% with the rules. This time I read carefully and submitted my results according the rules. So I included a valid screenshot for the cpu-z speed that submitted. Personally for the cpu-z stage I do not think that we should be so strict and delete any scores this time - the ones that have no screenshot - despite the fact that this will bring my score even higher. Let's be more carefull and strict next round. This is my suggestion.
  11. I agree that fsb 66 and multi 5 is clearly a bug. This is not my case. I noticed that bug during tests after fsb 83 ( fsb 95 & fsb 100) and thus I did not submited a higher bugged or a higher unvalidated speed close to 330-350 that I had because I do not like someone to remove my scores or accuse me for cheating. But my result shows picture of MMX233 cpu and the cpu multi in this case is 3.5 Fsb 83 is a piece of cake on this board even for an amateur. I will not debate / insist anymore on that. I give up! It 's not worth trying to prove that I am not an elephant. Thanks for the reply anyway.
  12. I read briefly the posts above... I must ask you unfortunately from my side , why also my submission removed. The multi is correct (Cpu 233/66fsd=multi 3,5) , the photo is there, the fsb (83 speed) is the correct, the screenshot is there, everything visible and clear, so what is wrong? http://hwbot.org/submission/3795358_ I could submit a score of 330 speed but i could not succeed to validate it (cpu-z validation reverted always with rejected), so i prefered to keep the validated lower score and now is blocked as a result? I really not get it. valid = valid Not valid = Not valid And I declare my result AS VALID!
×
×
  • Create New...