Bruno - Core i7 6700K @ 5000MHz - 1797 marks XTU

[Rauf]

I'm sorry but this looks like a bugged run. Like the ones that were removed from the skylake low clock challenge...

No way you can get 1797 for real with that mem speed and cache freq...

[Guest Sinebrychof]

This is bugged as rauf said, I had many of these.

[RULE]

The shame thing is this benchmark and hwbot who keep using this bugged bitch in low clock competition.

Bruno's score should be valid 'cause if u use bugged benchmark u'll get bugged score...

[Rauf]

Did a little testing tonight on the big board (XPower) on LN2:

All tests 5G/5G and subs which are really good for XTU:

1933 12-12-12:

 

2000 12-12-12: (lack of scaling is due to the big board not handling RTL as good as smaller boards and needs higher)

 

1933 12-11-11:

 

2000 12-11-11: (again higher RTL)

 

No way the run is legit...

[RULE]

You have my same issue. Bugged run come just with temperature above 0c, probably because trothling.

 

Inviato dal mio SM-A300FU utilizzando Tapatalk

[speed.fastest]

How is it bugged? How about 742 on i3 is that bugged run? I think if you can re run and get similar score then its not bugged run. But maybe im wrong.

Edited August 20, 2016 by speed.fastest

[OC Nub]

^ i was thinking the same thing, if you can consistently duplicate the score maybe it is not bugged ?

 

 

would a bugged run be like one freakishly high score out of many normal scores?

[Rauf]

It has been brought up before. When you run core or maybe primarily cache at its limit for being stable, especially on air or water cooling, you sometimes get slightly bugged runs which are way too high compared to the normal scores. It is normal to get around 5 points variance in runs, but when you get 20+ more points it is a bug as you cannot replicate it on a fully stable system.

[Xtreme Addict]

I am not sure why 5 GHz XTU on Skylake is so bugged. On Haswell it scaled with every timing and memory MHz... the limits were our memories, not the estimated score by program.

[Rauf]

It doesn't happen on cold, even with unstable memory. And it's pretty easy to spot. Hope the mods agree, but they have removed these types of scores before.

[Bruno]

Rule, I don't want to break any rules. If the score is bugged I accept it to be removed, but with solid proves.

I had a lot of 1775-1780, some 1785s and 1787s and at some point 1797 came up. All on H2O, no cold. Just by playing with memory timings.

It's no way to cheat at frequency with XTU, so if the app have bugs or issues, it should not be used in competitions. Or the rules should specify exactly what is the acceptable error range, because every benchmark has at least 1% admissible error.

[Lays]

Rule, I don't want to break any rules. If the score is bugged I accept it to be removed, but with solid proves.

I had a lot of 1775-1780, some 1785s and 1787s and at some point 1797 came up. All on H2O, no cold. Just by playing with memory timings.

It's no way to cheat at frequency with XTU, so if the app have bugs or issues, it should not be used in competitions. Or the rules should specify exactly what is the acceptable error range, because every benchmark has at least 1% admissible error.

 

 

You don't find it weird that you had lots of 1775-1785, than randomly one run at 1797?

 

Lol.

[RULE]

You don't find it weird that you had lots of 1775-1785, than randomly one run at 1797?

 

Lol.

So when we ban xtu from 5g LCC? 1800 is a random run due instability...

 

Inviato dal mio SM-A300FU utilizzando Tapatalk

[Rauf]

There is sufficient proof along with previous experience I think. Good that you answered and explained. Mods will decide.

[Bruno]

You don't find it weird that you had lots of 1775-1785, than randomly one run at 1797?

 

Lol.

No. Just as i sad, every benchmark has an admissible error range of at least 1%, and my score is in that range. If i would ahve got 1810+, that would probably be bug. But the scores in 1% range I think are fine, but it's not my decision.

 

Sent from my LG-D722 using Tapatalk

[Bruno]

 

 

 

These are clearly bugs, but 10-12 points more then "normal" (who defines normal anyway? How do you know that i don't know a nice tweak that gave me some boost?) it doesn't seem like a bug. Why can't be a lucky run?

[speed.fastest]

Is i3 742 bugged score or not? Thats a lucky run & everyone can do it, just like 6700K 5ghz, 1% difference ia very normal at any benchmark i think. Or anyone can explain why this bugged score and 742 is not bugged?

[Rauf]

The special tweak you mentioned is bs and you know it. Otherwise you can tell the mods and they will verify it.

 

742 run is 2 points more than normal run of 740 (739-741 is what you most get when trying for 742. Thats 0.27% more than normal run.

You get 1775-1780 at 5G and that mem speed, lucky run is 1885-1887. That's already 0.47% increase over normal run. 1797 is 1.1% above normal run.

[Elkim]

742 is also about lucky run. I don't think there can be a fair method to decide if it should or shouldnt be approved because there is no way to be 100% sure, that its abnormality.

 

Fair to be fair, if there is such a thing like this, then dont use the benchmark for comps, more for those where are prizes in cost of used car in stakes.