Massman Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 i don't see 800x600 i assume he's using the default resolution though Check the verification link Quote
Hondacity Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 i assumed he did use 800x600..jody's a good guy thats for sure Quote
arslankurt Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 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... Quote
Hyperhorn Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 http://www.hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=32830&postcount=486Nothing 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. ? Quote
r1ch Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) 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, 2009 by r1ch Quote
mtech Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 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. Quote
knopflerbruce Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 It says default settings, which is a fixed resolution (1024x768) Quote
mtech Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 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 Quote
knopflerbruce Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 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. Quote
Crew NeoForce Posted September 22, 2009 Crew Posted September 22, 2009 (edited) I`m still interested - what HDD subsystem you use - Raptor 150Gb + 3 I-Rams RAID0? ________ BEAUTYXDOLL Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce Quote
mtech Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 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 Quote
Crew NeoForce Posted September 23, 2009 Crew Posted September 23, 2009 (edited) 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, 2011 by NeoForce Quote
Crew Turrican Posted September 27, 2009 Crew Posted September 27, 2009 you can see that on the screen he uses 2 cpus for that wprime run. Quote
Crew Turrican Posted September 27, 2009 Crew Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) 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, 2009 by Turrican Quote
Blackwarriors Posted October 6, 2009 Posted October 6, 2009 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 Quote
Hyperhorn Posted October 15, 2009 Posted October 15, 2009 (edited) http://www.hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=32830&postcount=486Nothing 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, 2009 by Hyperhorn Quote
|ron Posted October 18, 2009 Posted October 18, 2009 (edited) 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, 2009 by |ron Quote
TerraRaptor Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 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. Quote
K404 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=632592 score seems very high for such low CPU Quote
Crew Antinomy Posted October 26, 2009 Crew Posted October 26, 2009 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 Quote
|ron Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 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... Quote
|ron Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 fix0red! I rule Wo! sure you were waiting for my post:banana: Thanks Quote
TerraRaptor Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=641935 - no cpu-z, gpu-z screens. Too high score for such clocks. Quote
komadyret Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 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 Quote
Dualist Posted October 31, 2009 Posted October 31, 2009 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. 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.