Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums
The_Silver

The official Challenger 2019 Division VI round 1 AMD legacy thread.

Recommended Posts

This whole monitoring doesn't do much, except showing min/max temperature and min/max core clock at the time of taking the screenshot, basically displaying values in a finite period of time, which doesn't necessary match the time frame when the bench was running. So in other words, it doesn't really prevent cheating, unless it's obvious from the screenshot.

I guess everyone is playing fair, but that just came up in my mind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, I.nfraR.ed said:

This whole monitoring doesn't do much, except showing min/max temperature and min/max core clock at the time of taking the screenshot, basically displaying values in a finite period of time, which doesn't necessary match the time frame when the bench was running. So in other words, it doesn't really prevent cheating, unless it's obvious from the screenshot.

I guess everyone is playing fair, but that just came up in my mind.

Most of hwbot is based on trust, and the basis that the majority will play fair, overall it seems to work, so whilst you're not wrong, it's not a major issue in my mind :)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, I.nfraR.ed said:

This whole monitoring doesn't do much, except showing min/max temperature and min/max core clock at the time of taking the screenshot, basically displaying values in a finite period of time, which doesn't necessary match the time frame when the bench was running. So in other words, it doesn't really prevent cheating, unless it's obvious from the screenshot.

I guess everyone is playing fair, but that just came up in my mind.

Using my last sub as an example, I ran HWinfo and you'll note there is a "Clock" in the proggy's window with a time right next to it. That tells you how long the program has been monitoring the system and it would have to be for a longer amount of time than the bench result to be valid, mine shows about 35 seconds longer than what the bench itself ran for.

All I did was set everything up for Super PI with the bench already opened and ready to go, the very last thing I did was to open up the monitoring program before hitting "Start" for the bench. After the run was done, just opened up my CPU-Z's and took the shot.

E-Z-P-Z.

 

9590 Comp.jpg

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

Well we can open up the AMD Legacy stage too maybe for single CPU server CPU setups.

What do you guys think?

If it gets more people benching and the sockets used are the same as what's listed in the rules then I'm for it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Little vid I did, all pretty much same stuff as my current run Ive uploaded.....failed at loop 9 but can check my current run its pretty much same efficiency. I have nothing to hide and will post video if asked on anything :)

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, cbjaust said:

who is questioning your score man?

Hopefully no one mate, just thought I post it up to show my result is legit 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you've been doing good work on AM3 lately with SuperPi efficiency and it has paid off well right now. Good show.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if anyone interpreted my post the wrong way, it wasn't anything personal. It was totally unrelated to any score posted or any other post in the thread. 

@Bullant Your efficiency is pretty good. I have improved my score at same settings on new OS, still have to drop a second, but my good 1090T died. Will try the other one later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I can't force hwinfo to read core temps from my 960T + Cr4E so I used a sempron. :D Wich has good temp sensor reading but still writes 960T. :) I think with a 4500mhz core clock limit, we shouldn't be so strict with temps. Cpu ihs temp usually exists even in unlocked situations. Or simply leave temp restricition ? Don't think any type of cpus needs subzero cooling to reach 4500 mhz, however X6 phenoms will be chilled below zero I guess if restriction obsolete. :P

How can I adjust affinity for hwinfo on a sempron 145 ? :DDDD

Edited by Alpi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/6/2019 at 7:12 PM, Bones said:

Using my last sub as an example, I ran HWinfo and you'll note there is a "Clock" in the proggy's window with a time right next to it. That tells you how long the program has been monitoring the system and it would have to be for a longer amount of time than the bench result to be valid, mine shows about 35 seconds longer than what the bench itself ran for.

9590 Comp.jpg

I generally don't want to give cheaters any idea but I think it's pretty obvious how to get around this: 

  1. Complete bench at whatever temps/clocks you want
  2. Set competition legal temps and clocks
  3. open monitoring and add some bullshit CPU load like another Superpi so the CPU utilisation stats look fine
  4. Let monitoring run for the amount of time the bench ran for + 35 secs or whatever
  5. Close the second Superpi and take your screenshot
  6. Profit $$
Edited by unityofsaints

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2019 at 10:24 PM, Bullant said:

Little vid I did, all pretty much same stuff as my current run Ive uploaded.....failed at loop 9 but can check my current run its pretty much same efficiency. I have nothing to hide and will post video if asked on anything :)

 

 

lovely cpu, board temps bully , especially at 24 c ambient

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ozzie said:

lovely cpu, board temps bully , especially at 24 c ambient

Yeah was quite hot in the room at that time ahah....4200 rpm fan help 🙂 its cooled off here now tho I've not done much oc 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Btw, what is the temperature sensor we're not allowed to drop under 0?

Because it's physically impossible that my CPU is at 1-2°C when the chiller is set to e.g. 10°C.

Real CPU temperature is like 3-4°C higher, which in my case is temp sensor #2 and #3:

Is it ok if I use HWInfo which e.g. doesn't show that "Core #1 - #2" temperature, but something else (have to test first what it shows)?

image_id_2166353.jpeg

Edited by I.nfraR.ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all know how poor AMD sensors work at low temperatures compared to high temps so I know for a fact the temperature will be fine. But just to cover yourself why not just up the temperature by around 2-3c to ensure that the sensor won't bug below 0c, your CPU should easily do those clocks with only 2c more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There's not much difference between "ambient" or current situation with temp set at 10°C on chiller. It still can boot those clocks, but the lower temperature helps stabilize 3.6GHz uncore.

What would help though is if I drop the "real" temperature to e.g. 2-3°C, which might actually help up the CPU-NB one notch.

I can control it down to 3°C (with a step of 1°C) which is the minimum of the chiller. From that point going down is "full-on" mode with bypassing the temp sensor of the chiller.

So, by design, I still would fit in the competition restrictions, unless I override it manually. That's why I asked if it is ok to use HWInfo in case it shows something else (like on Bones' screenshot). He's using a FX, though.

I completely understand the sensors are not reliable, plus there is difference in motherboards implementations as well.

Edited by I.nfraR.ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surely using a chiller is not positive ambient temps

if your forcing the temps down with a chiller is that still classed as ambient? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 033Y5 said:

surely using a chiller is not positive ambient temps

if your forcing the temps down with a chiller is that still classed as ambient? 

There are enough people with rads in buckets of ice or hidden chillers that they would pass as ambient cooling that it's easier to say positive temps instead of saying a specific cooling method.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...