Game Theory - Core 2 E8400 (3.0Ghz) @ 5948MHz - 397sec 391ms wPrime - 1024m

[masterZ]

Great run!

Congrats..

[Farjam]

wow great work bro

[Schmuckley]

Nice!

 

[Dziarson]

Wow 1.9V I will try it , i was close You need my board .

http://hwbot.org/submission/2410875_dziarson_reference_clock_ga_ep45t_extreme_685.1_mhz

[TaPaKaH]

Could you please explain how you got 12.078s in 32M at 5949MHz?

That's a performance product of 71852 and I haven't seen anyone else on hwbot do less than 72808 on a Wolfdale 6M.

[.SouSHIanT.]

gR8 .... nice one with ddr2

[Schmuckley]

wuh uh..tapatalk callin shens

 

[Schmuckley]

In this guy's defense..his RAMS was frozen..

I gotta side with tapakah, though

[amirhosein]

@Sam : u'r question is unfriendly.can i ask question how u get best performance in 2D's when u have 200 or 300 MHZ Distance between u and 1st place or an other place? ? do u need example?

How ever 1 or maybe 2 month ago after conversation white u , around u'r huge eff .i listen to u'r advice and work on my skill i tweaked my own windows(Xp 64bit) this windows fastes than windows u give me a last year and fastes than Gxp and microxp .if broken u'r super pi record white 6.1 ,Do not be too surprised cause this windows have awsome eff in super pi .finally if u have Doubt i can share video of my 1st run wprime 1024 that resulte under 400 sec.and this record not be easy Obtained after 4 huors work and using +20L LN2

i think we are done

[TaPaKaH]

Your comparison with my Pi runs is not really valid. I'm quite sure that for any "example" you can come up with, I can find at least two or three other guys with similar efficiency at lower clocks. And this is exactly my point - your efficiency is far ahead of everyone else's. I'm in no way trying to say that this is impossible, but it's very unexpected to see from someone whose previous success came primarily from raw clockspeeds.

 

You don't need to put things on LN2 to demonstrate efficiency - in wPrime it stays pretty much the same as the benchmark doesn't react to lower RAM dividers and/or higher timings that change from air to LN2. If you can show that a time of 17.963s or lower is possible at 4000MHz (17.963 * 4000 = 71852 performance product) then you're going to get a lot less complaints from me and the other guys

[amirhosein]

this like wye celly +8.5 that nobody belive it until he upload the video.actually No matter, you have seen a performance like this or not.The important thing is I could get this performance and if Necessary i can do it again,u can see this valid video and pic :

 

http://uplod.ir/1x4bi10tvif0/VIDEO0002.mp4.htm this for 32

http://uplod.ir/fn4p7743z7u5/VIDEO0003.mp4.htm this for 1024

 

 

 

[Moose83]

Nice you beat Sam

[TaPaKaH]

I don't see anything on the video. You make wPrime runs with unknown CPU at unknown frequency.

Again, you don't need to run LN2 - 17.963s or faster at 4GHz on air is sufficient.

[amirhosein]

oh boy, r u kidding?

u'r behavior like loser child =))

i belive that conditions white ln2 and high fsb and mem ratio is very different white Air conditions.

my best try on air (ddr2) not better than 729xx and this eff is so enough for beating u(75309) white Ln2

Edited December 12, 2014 by Game Theory

[TaPaKaH]

Why should I be kidding? Don't you think it's natural to ask questions whenever someone claims a 1.3% (71852 vs 72808) improvement in efficiency over best cumulative effort of thousands of people over six years, especially in a very popular 2D benchmark? I am not asking you to reveal what this "secret" actually is, I just want to see confirmation that these runs are legit. So far there is none.

I think you will agree that LN2 does not make things faster on its own. So whenever you decrease the frequency from ~6GHz to ~4GHz while maintaining the same relation betwen CPU/FSB/RAM clocks and RAM timings, efficiency will remain the same. That is, if you were to run 445x9 with exact same RAM ratio, timings and performance level, you should get 12.078*661/445=17.941s (or a close time) if things are to make sense.

 

Also, let's keep personal offense out of this discussion.

[amirhosein]

actually my results tell somethings eles about this discussion and different between ln2 and air .

how ever here it is my best on air (72752) white different timings a little:

====================================================

 

after all about i Interested can u give me same proportion result for this u'r submition .let's begin white 3500 frq. plz show us no different between subzero cooling and air

http://hwbot.org/submission/2297068_tapakah_wprime___32m_core_2_q9550_(2.83ghz)_7sec_994ms

 

[TaPaKaH]

I see that you run slightly different RAM settings on your air run. What happens when you run single channel in 1:1 with PL15 like you did on LN2?

 

Speaking of my 37139 pp on Q9550, as promised, here is a run with 37073-37200 (depending on CPU speed wprime was actually ran at), here is another run with 37003, here is 37091 and here is 37196.

[amirhosein]

i asked prove u'r eff on 9550 but u give result from other guy's.

growing up sam , u said no different conditions between subzero cooling and air.comon prove yourself and shown same proportion result whit u'r q9550

 

[TaPaKaH]

You're completely missing the point of the argument. What I am trying to say is that noone on hwbot can come even close to your efficiency, this is why I find it suspicious and ask for a proof.

Please stop dragging the argument towards my Q9550 result - unlike your scores on E8400, it is perfectly in line with what is known to be possible.

[amirhosein]

tnx bro i get my answer ;D

i hope u keep trying for get same efficiency like mine

i belive u :lol