i don't see 800x600

 

i assume he's using the default resolution though

 

Check the verification link

i assumed he did use 800x600..jody's a good guy thats for sure

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=899141

 

This system cannot get 84k at these clocks.

e8400@4400MHz

4890@1100/1200

this is a crossfire setup not single 4890...

also take a look at the texel pixel fill rates...1060MHz 4890 get those fill rates...

http://www.hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=32830&postcount=486

Nothing happened yet.

Some goes for this one, which was mentioned by u22 (thx ) in this thread. I reported it already, too. See, neither I open threads for trivial requests as so much other guys do immediately (and get an answer asap unfortunately...), nor I annoy moderators somewhere else. But this official modest way leads to nothing and I have no idea what else to do.

?

First, I'm not sure if I'm right with this so I don't mean any offense to 3oh6 and if it's not a problem that's fine.

 

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=860974

 

PCMark05 default resolution is 1024x768, his res is 800x600. Does a lower res give a higher score in PCM05 like 3DM?

 

I have tested this tonight, a number of tests score a lot higher.

 

Can this be blocked please? I am sure it is an honest mistake by Jody.

 

Another one: EDIT: reported the normal way

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=900564

Edited September 21, 200915 yr by r1ch

I have tested this tonight, a number of tests score a lot higher.

 

Can this be blocked please? I am sure it is an honest mistake by Jody.

 

Another one: EDIT: reported the normal way

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=900564

 

Read this:

http://hwbot.org/benchmark.application.info.do?applicationId=9

Where did you see the rule about "standard resolution" for PCMark 2005?

Many people posted results with 1280x1024, 1024x768 etc...

And the difference is not so high between 1024x768 and 800x600: about 50-100 points from my tests.

It says default settings, which is a fixed resolution (1024x768)

Why do you think 1024x768 is the default PCMark settings?

It is not possible to set resolution in PCMark 2005 - it will be changed automatically for each subtest.

For example, it will be changed in any case to 1024x768 for Transparent Windows.

In other case - what do you think, all those results with resolutions <> 1024x768 should be blocked too?

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=819478

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=892295

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=859879

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=813496

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=833129

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=784934

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=765995

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=857324

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=860974

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=868734

Why do you think 1024x768 is the default PCMark settings?

It is not possible to set resolution in PCMark 2005 - it will be changed automatically for each subtest.

For example, it will be changed in any case to 1024x768 for Transparent Windows.

In other case - what do you think, all those results with resolutions <> 1024x768 should be blocked too?

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=819478

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=892295

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=859879

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=813496

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=833129

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=784934

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=765995

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=857324

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=860974

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=868734

 

Allright, I thought that was the "only" default solution:p I'll let some more experienced PCMark mods decide what's right or wrong here.

I`m still interested - what HDD subsystem you use - Raptor 150Gb + 3 I-Rams RAID0?

________

BEAUTYXDOLL

Edited May 13, 201114 yr by NeoForce

Raptor 150Gb as system drive (not in RAID0) and 3xGigabyte I-RAMs for PCMark 2005.

Please compare my result with others obtained with I-RAMs:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=813496

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=765995

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=784934

That`s OK.

Thank you.

We all know PC Mark 2005 is very strange test.

Sorry for being too suspicious. BTW - Great result, gratz.

________

Cheap Double Tactical Shotgun Airsoft 350 Fps

Edited May 13, 201114 yr by NeoForce

you can see that on the screen he uses 2 cpus for that wprime run.

Interesting... When I look at the screen shot I see one core one thread, and the screen shot is not complete... ??? If I had known the submission was made with two processors I would have never made this post

 

Thanks for the clarification Turrican.

the p3's are only 1 core/thread, but it's a dual cpu system.

yeah, but the field where "processor #1" on the cpu-z tab is, is "white". it's a dual cpu system.

 

for example look on that screenshot here, what i mean.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=657987

Edited September 27, 200915 yr by Turrican

two results but with the even RAM, gpu, motherboard and CPU.

 

validation poster the same day

 

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=880136

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=876424

 

 

 

http://www.hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=32830&postcount=486

Nothing happened yet.

Some goes for this one, which was mentioned by u22 (thx ) in this thread. I reported it already, too. See, neither I open threads for trivial requests as so much other guys do immediately (and get an answer asap unfortunately...), nor I annoy moderators somewhere else. But this official modest way leads to nothing and I have no idea what else to do.

I mentioned this stuff in this thread over four months ago including several reminders and didn`t get a single word as an answer until today. So even if it would be my fault and my whole concern would be so wrong that I should actually feel ashamed, you could atleast teach me so. But this is very disappointing.

 

Edit: And by the way the Pentium 4 505 isn`t Paxville, which is claimed here. Dual-core-Xeon CPUs for socket 604 had Paxville cores, but Pentium 4 505 have Prescott ones.

Edited October 15, 200915 yr by Hyperhorn

Guys, here is a valid result, posted in the wrong category... Celly 370 instead of sandiego 3700+, as cpuz says

 

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=787436

Edited October 18, 200915 yr by |ron

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=719200

Check this 7600GS result. No cpu-z, gpu-z. Settings are hidden by result screen. This is obviuosly not 7600GS DDR2.

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=632592

 

score seems very high for such low CPU

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=689288 - wrong category. The result is of a socket 478 CPU, but in a socket 423 category

pretty common mistake, but was validated, so couldn't use the golden bell

Guys, here is a valid result, posted in the wrong category... Celly 370 instead of sandiego 3700+, as cpuz says

 

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=787436

 

I see that knopflerbruce has already tried to do something, but nothing changed...

fix0red! I rule

 

Wo! sure you were waiting for my post:banana:

Thanks

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=641935 - no cpu-z, gpu-z screens. Too high score for such clocks.

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=641935 - no cpu-z, gpu-z screens. Too high score for such clocks.

 

May be a SLI run. SM3 is a bit high for single card

I believe these scores are from a card with a lower spec cards bios....

 

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=875314

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=875315

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=875317

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=875320

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=875323

 

Shaders are wrong. Shaders on a 7600LE are as shown..

 

 

Those shaders in those benches are from a higher card, the 7600GS, 7600GT or the 7650GS. The guy in question has a 7650GS benched in his profile.