Jump to content

Featured Replies

2 hours ago, Sparky's__Adventure said:

Impressive clocks! Do GDM Off, tRAS 21, and tRC 29 all not work for you? You may want to try higher fclk or unlinked. Is this a bugged run?

? ? 

Memory Latency 42079
10.3 ns
Hi it is not a bugged run I just found goods parameters to have the best results, no I optain the best performance with theses settings it is because I give it to the community
  • Crew

one does not jump from 11K to 18K in memory score without bugging the benchmark... Provide the maxmem setting plz ?

I hope you don't believe that your parameters allow you to beat scores with the same hardware clocked 500-700Mhz higher...

It is just the ryzen 5000 architecture, there is only 2 thinks to optain this low latency, find the good core and limitate the amount of ram
it is just the optimisation of this benchmark not a bug, you can try the same think : 1G ram, desable SMT and put the affinity on the core 2 ...
  • Crew

Well perform a test,  change maxmem to 1.5GB & re-run, afterwards set 2G maxmem & re-run. 

For me this is common sense something to grasp something is not right. Either the Top 5 in that ranking suck monkey balls or you are too darn good...

maxmem.png

ok I m going to do a 2G and a 1.5G score with the 5600x and the 5800x can you remove my scores GB4 single of this two processors please

Does not always show 1000mb either. Tested just now. 

 

Capture009.thumb.png.8991c15f59fd16a7ccb6b87d742e0c46.png

This is the third biggest safedisk. Looks fine

image_id_2415103.jpeg

6 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

Most logic step might be to remove globals sadly...

Reason we have Mat and benchmate. Loop hole wizzards are gonna loop hole

estimate 25% of top scores 50. 1000mb done.

I'm down to 10K scores. You have x4 naughty boys so far ?

  • Crew
7 hours ago, endpunkt said:

This is the third biggest safedisk. Looks fine

image_id_2415103.jpeg

Reported this exact score back in November due to the insanely low latency, was told it was fine and a tweak
Keep said he wanted to reproduce score sometime but did not want to share the tweak

Edited by Gunzi

2 hours ago, Gunzi said:

Reported this exact score back in November due to the insanely low latency, was told it was fine and a tweak
Keep said he wanted to reproduce score sometime but did not want to share the tweak

At this stage that one clears.

It's look for obvious ones first 1000mb done

_____________

https://hwbot.org/submission/4731907_kansaï_geekbench4___single_core_core_i9_11900k_9358_points/

When I was running my processor. I'm looking at this score, mems are at 4900

Does not mean it is a bad score like some of the others. It's extremely fast + fast timing. BUT.

Done 1000mb. Even 2000 max mem it may not run. That is the point, not equal to others doing bench correct

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...