ludek Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 Hi everybody. It's not a HWBot submission but CPUz valid. I just want to ask is this score fake or possible? LINK According to HWBot database: LINK No one did even more than 2.3 GHz, and the suspected valid is 4GHz What do you thing people? Quote
ludek Posted October 4, 2015 Author Posted October 4, 2015 No. I think it's a normal regular guy, not OCer. It's very interesting and my friend will maybe write an email to AMD. CPU-z says +300 % OC on 1.14 V ?!? I remember how much effort cost me to do +230 % OC year ago on s478. LINK It required vCPU mod, vNB and vMEM by zombie 8800 GTX power section, good mems, extreme cooling. I know that's Intel, but come on... Quote
Nifir Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 This is simply OC at AMD laptop. This is result for our Polish contest and I asked my team if it's really a valid score. In the meantime, I managed to find a few videos about that processor family: Quote
ObscureParadox Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 (edited) it's fake, it was a bug with PSCheck I think it was, basically you could set the states and in CPU-Z it would state that it was overclocked, however run a benchmark and you'll see that the speed hasn't changed at all. @topdog I'm sure has a link somewhere where he had his laptop CPU at 8GHz using the same method. I've reported this score before for being fake but it wasn't taken down, so hopefully it will be removed this time because it is completely bugged Edit : Just read first post again, and noticed it was taken down from the rankings. Edited October 4, 2015 by ObscureParadox Quote
Nifir Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 Ok, everything is clear now. I asked this guy for bench after OC and this is result of it: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/29408495/zrzut.PNG You can compare with the rest of HWbot scores: http://hwbot.org/benchmark/superpi_-_1m/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_2409&cores=2#start=0#interval=20 Quote
trodas Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 SuperPi 1M with time 1m 5sec .789 is too slow for a 4GHz CPU, even with low IPC effectivity. Obvious fake confirmed. Quote
Nifir Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 It worse then other C-60 with 1GHz http://hwbot.org/image/761688.jpg Quote
ObscureParadox Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 No. I think it's a normal regular guy, not OCer. It's very interesting and my friend will maybe write an email to AMD. CPU-z says +300 % OC on 1.14 V ?!? I remember how much effort cost me to do +230 % OC year ago on s478. LINK It required vCPU mod, vNB and vMEM by zombie 8800 GTX power section, good mems, extreme cooling. I know that's Intel, but come on... What if I told you that I didn't mod the board once for 260% Quote
ludek Posted October 4, 2015 Author Posted October 4, 2015 (edited) What if I told you that I didn't mod the board once for 260% Haha that is shocking I have to tell that vNB by ZOMBIE gave me about 20-25 MHz if I remember correctly. 1Min? What a crap CPU, come on... This is similar performance like well OCed Pentium III (oldschool OCers aim in sum 1minute if is there not privy person reading). ///EDIT/// Yeah the best method to validate overclocking is to run a good-known benchmark like SuperPI 1M or more (best is 32M of crs). Similar thing like mine "fake-SDRAM-282-score". SuperPI dispel doubts Edited October 4, 2015 by ludek Quote
ObscureParadox Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 Well I'll be giving it a go this summer again, cold nb didn't help either so I'm not sure if I was NB limited or other, might have just been a CPU limit. Problem with the board is that there are no holes for the NB pot to go in, you just have to sit it on top and hope it doesn't fall off Quote
Guest harrynowl Posted February 18, 2016 Posted February 18, 2016 brazos tweaker? not a real score. bug. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.