is not the Radeon RX Vega M GH a discrete GPU?

11 hours ago, jpmboy said:

is not the Radeon RX Vega M GH a discrete GPU?

I made this argument to leeg before the competition started - it is on the same package as the CPU, but is connected with PCIe 3.0 x8 (over EMIB rather than the motherboard but still) and exclusively uses its own HBM rather than system memory.  The only IGP-like thing about it is the shared power management.

Apparently it's allowed, and we get a lot of people with different hardware on /r/overclocking so we easily found a user willing to bench it competitively.  As a result, however hard you OC no-one without Vega M will be able to touch our score for that stage.  I think Skull Canyon NUCs start at $700 for the OC locked Vega M GL version (DDR4 SODIMMs sold separately), have fun.

Alternatively since afaik no-one has gone out and bought one for the comp I'd still totally support them being retroactively banned.  We have to take advantage, if we don't someone else will, but it's not how I wanna win stages.

I know this may sound dumb but someone will always try to read between the lines. The Y-Cruncher bench has the CPU listed as "Use 4 Cores in Total". This would imply that you can use an 8 Core CPU BUT disable 4 of the Cores.

9 hours ago, MaddMutt said:

 someone will always try to read between the lines. The Y-Cruncher bench has the CPU listed as "Use 4 Cores in Total". This would imply that you can use an 8 Core CPU BUT disable 4 of the Cores.

Don't read between the lines then.

I don't see that implication at all.

[Quote] I made this argument to leeg before the competition started - it is on the same package as the CPU, but is connected with PCIe 3.0 x8 (over EMIB rather than the motherboard but still) and exclusively uses its own HBM rather than system memory. The only IGP-like thing about it is the shared power management. Apparently it's allowed, and we get a lot of people with different hardware on /r/overclocking so we easily found a user willing to bench it competitively. As a result, however hard you OC no-one without Vega M will be able to touch our score for that stage. I think Skull Canyon NUCs start at $700 for the OC locked Vega M GL version (DDR4 SODIMMs sold separately), have fun. Alternatively since afaik no-one has gone out and bought one for the comp I'd still totally support them being retroactively banned. We have to take advantage, if we don't someone else will, but it's not how I wanna win stage[Quote] only asking as I did not know if they are acceptable or not. Good going, I hope OCN can find a couple of users with the RX vega M. :thumb:.

It is listed at HWBOT as integrated GPU... so hence why it is allowed for this stage... but again Team Cup is not won in one stage

 

For the below, disabling cores has never been allowed, in contradiction to unlocking cores

 

21 hours ago, MaddMutt said:

I know this may sound dumb but someone will always try to read between the lines. The Y-Cruncher bench has the CPU listed as "Use 4 Cores in Total". This would imply that you can use an 8 Core CPU BUT disable 4 of the Cores.

Edited September 3, 20186 yr by Leeghoofd

Windows 10 Not allowed?? I thought that had been fixed.

depends on the benchmark and CPU used

What is going on with the links to the 3dmark Vantage submissions that have already been made by teams? I try to view submissions by clicking the overall score and it only says "There are no submissions." So far it seems to be the case for any team that has all 3 submissions. The permalink brings up a Bitly "page not found" message. Is it only me or is this the case for others trying to view it as well?

thx for the report, @richba5tard

 

Not sure why but TeamMLGs 3rd R15 run has not been taken into account, still says we need one more score even though the sub is listed at the bottom of the page!? 

Richbastard is investigating the CB bug, vantage is solved

SC4: DDR4 - PCMark 7: Can I use 6950X cpu? Or 5820K? Sorry if I am asking again but so far I do not seen that kind of question or answer.

Edited October 14, 20186 yr by varachio

17 hours ago, varachio said:

SC4: DDR4 - PCMark 7: Can I use 6950X cpu? Or 5820K? Sorry if I am asking again but so far I do not seen that kind of question or answer.

Any consumer DDR4 platform should be fine

5 hours ago, unityofsaints said:

Any consumer DDR4 platform should be fine

Thanks!

Any update on cinebench per core rankings?

@Leeghoofd@richba5tard Any progress on this? I know for example that my 6.36 ghz 7350k r15 results of 711 (355.5 per core) is not being applied to our score while a 5.2 ghz 6700k r15 result of 1176 (294 per core) is. Hopefully this ranking is sorted by end of comp.

i have the same issue for team MLG on my 7350 score

I got the heads up by Frederik that some of your teammates also benched similar CPUs, overruling your sub,

 

Plz email Frederik for an exact detailed description who submitted what at frederik@hwbot.org

thats not the issue Leeg. we are two members who have submitted 7740 x results. meanwhile i have also submitted a 7350 score that per core is higher than all. but as the overall summary score is higher the per core score is not considered.

I have sent message to fredrik

 

Hi,

 

for Team MLG this is the situation on the cb 15 team cup socres on ddr4.  I first submitted the I3 7350 K score which has 311.5 points per core.

 

http://hwbot.org/submission/3936715_matsglobetrotter_cinebench___r15_core_i3_7350k_623_cb

 

the 7350 is a 2 core thus 623/2 = 311.5 points per core

 

 

When dragon soop submitted his i7 7740x score of 1168 my 7350 score was kicked off the table despite that my score is higher per core..

 

http://hwbot.org/submission/3946409_dragon_soop_cinebench___r15_core_i7_7740x_1168_cb

 

the 7740x is a 4 core thus 1168/4 = 292 points per core

 

currently within the team we thus overall get a 6.5 point or so lower average score than we should have and it is the difference to gain one slot in the Cb15 scoring.

 

 

Thanks otherwise for a great competition. I really enjoy the team competition.

Regards,

 

Matsglobetrotter

 

we just tested this in r/overclocking, @unityofsaintshad a low 7350k sub and @yosarianilives has our high one that is not counting, unity deleted his sub and so far no change, i believe perhaps it is specific to 7350k subs and the algorithm is not dividing the 7350k by 2 as it should as its a dual core CPU and thus its getting tossed out by anything that is a quad core or above?   

The other possibility i notice is that this stage is taking into account for some reason the cpu architecture codenames perhaps as there is no sub with multiple scores in the top 3 with the same arch, exception being kabylake-s(7700k etc) and kabylake-x (7740x) this would also explain why both our team (r/overclocking) and MLG are encountering the issue as both of us have 7700k subs that beat out the 7350k sub 

16 hours ago, Matsglobetrotter said:

thats not the issue Leeg. we are two members who have submitted 7740 x results. meanwhile i have also submitted a 7350 score that per core is higher than all. but as the overall summary score is higher the per core score is not considered.

if u haven t tried: delete your 2 scores and resub the highest 7350, by retyping all the info. Do not use a previous sub info, which can m,ess up things around

23 minutes ago, bolc said:

if u haven t tried: delete your 2 scores and resub the highest 7350, by retyping all the info. Do not use a previous sub info, which can m,ess up things around

I have deleted my scores. I cant delete another members scores and even if i resub my 7350 now it will not be shown, no score recount happens as the issue persist on the competition machine