September 30, 201510 yr Just to be clear - the original plan was ~ 800 hours. Just after loop 17 I figured it may not be good enough, so I decided to slow down even more. That is the reason for much slower final three loops.
September 30, 201510 yr Nice Has this benchmark got a bug when you have to change time/date every 23:59:59 hours?
September 30, 201510 yr You had it right, I would beat that, if I had the time. I have to speed things up, so it finished just recently. But not I cannot submit the score...and it is still faster that yours (only 781h...) ... Well, I shuld have started sooner, lol Congratulations! As long, as the calculation is valid, no-one can complain!
September 30, 201510 yr Nice Has this benchmark got a bug when you have to change time/date every 23:59:59 hours? No.
September 30, 201510 yr I dont get this, what the point to run benchmark like this? with cpu load.....no logik. minimum cpu-z valid is ok, but this is stupid idea.
October 1, 201510 yr At least it findout the bugses. I mean... why this score of 781h is rated same as havli? He got 950h, so... not exactly comparable. http://hwbot.org/submission/2992627_ (yes, in the morning I finally managed to submit it)
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.