PCMark05 , keep or remove from hwbot.

[Massman]

It's not that I don't understand WHY you're suggesting it, I'm just trying to point out that the overhead of implementing this outweighs the benefits. I'm not saying it's a bad idea .

[K404]

I disagree with the comments about tuning the 220MB cap wasting LN2. I "waste" LN2 getting my GPU up to speed, but it's just part of benching. Same with Copy-Waza.

[knopflerbruce]

I agree that it shouldn't be top priority atm, but it can't be THAT much work.

 

We don't have to recalculate exisiting subs, as they're all below 220mb/s, so those scores will remain unchanged. What you need is a box where people enter the XP startup score, then some stuff like if x > 220 [correction formula], else nada - and that's pretty much it I think. It's probably a bit more complicated "IRL", but compared to other things related to coding i can't imagine this is that heavy:p

[Doc.Brown]

THe problem is that you run an SSD without much tweaks, and you can get a very nice score removed because "oh, Xp startup is a tad too fast", which itself is silly. It might have been OK in ancient times, but today it's a joke. There's no OC related skill in crippling performance.

 

+1 :ws:

 

I disagree with the comments about tuning the 220MB cap wasting LN2. I "waste" LN2 getting my GPU up to speed, but it's just part of benching. Same with Copy-Waza.

 

When you push up your GPU or do a copy-waza you've got a better score after,when you try to stay under the cap limit it's for nothing

The spirit is to push hw over the limit to reach the better score as we can,not to be the best slowclocker.

[K404]

True I interpret all these things as "the things that are necessary to get a competitive, valid result"

 

In PCM05, the MHz are unaffected, the user just has to make part of the benchmark "run dirty" to drop the score. Software fix to a hardware "problem"

 

 

Anyway... I am not really "in" this conversation, PCM05 is not my strong point (but I don't want it banned just coz i'm too dumb to bench it well)

[xXSebaSXx]

+1 :ws:

 

 

 

When you push up your GPU or do a copy-waza you've got a better score after,when you try to stay under the cap limit it's for nothing

The spirit is to push hw over the limit to reach the better score as we can,not to be the best slowclocker.

 

 

Though I agree with you in principle; and besides the fact that I'd also prefer to have the cap removed, or at least a provision like knop suggests put in place... I also think that the cap can be viewed as an added challenge. It takes skill getting a setup that can easily do 1500+MB/s on startup to stay under 220. Some may argue that it is a matter of just finding out the size of the file to copy/paste, but that number will change from cpu to cpu and from motherboard to motherboard... So benchers will still have to "tweak" their setups to come just under the cap, but close enough to it to maximize their points from that sub-test.

If I ever get the sort of HW that would put me in the position to have to mess with file transfers to slow my storage setup down; I will look at that as a challenge rather than a hindrance.

 

[Massman]

Well, you can change the drive letter on the fly apparently. So, just hook up 2 SSDs to your rig in addition to your massive storage config and change benched drive from the 2 SSDs to your massive storage after XP startup finished.

 

No problem staying under 220MB/s

[I.M.O.G.]

Instructions for changing drives? That is a tweak which is mentioned but never described as far as I've found, and I've looked into it fairly well. When the benchmark window loses focus the benchmark aborts, so it would seem the change would need to be scripted or maybe hotkeyed - there is a trick to changing drives on the fly which isn't well known.

 

I will have to keep working on it, or keep struggling to pull down xp startup, unless someone cares to share? Seeing as how its only a workaround for the cap, it would be really nice if someone well informed has a tip for changing drives on the fly.

[Massman]

S_A_V documented it before

 

I used subst.exe (part of windows) and sleep.exe (can be downloaded from sleepcmd.com).

 

1. link virtual drive letter to xp-startup partition

2. run pcmark and choose virtual drive letter for hdd subtest in settings

3. run batch file to change virtual drive letter in background.

4. start pcmark benchmark

5. wait while benchmark finished

6. unlink virtual drive letter

 

Batch file:

1. wait XX seconds when xp startup finished

2. change virtual drive letter to general usage partition

3. wait YY seconds when general usage finished

4. change virtual drive letter to virus scan partition

[[GF]Duke]

This thread totally proves that this Benchmark should be withradrawn from the rankings. It is no longer a benchmark for the cpu.

[Mr.Scott]

Duke;152244']This thread totally proves that this Benchmark should be withradrawn from the rankings. It is no longer a benchmark for the cpu.

Yup.

[Hondacity]

many recent submissions and you guys think its worth removing. try benching it

[Mr.Scott]

many recent submissions and you guys think its worth removing. try benching it

I see you missed the point. Here it is again for you.

It is no longer a benchmark for the cpu.

[knopflerbruce]

it is. Whatever tweaks you have, you still need a good CPU. A fast CPU will give you a good scor,e and a slow one a bad score.

[I.M.O.G.]

Look at the first place rankings, they all have excellent CPU scores, and they are getting better constantly. The work mtech, Stevero, Gluvocio and others doesn't have anything to do with their skill overclocking CPUs?

 

The GPU clocks are pretty good as well, though not always stellar - they are better than most can do on air cooling, and are usually on SS or LN2. If you criticized the GPU clocks, your comments would hold more water.

 

Look at the storage performance, they are all using RAID0 and SSDs or hardware ramdrives.

 

Mr Scott, as someone with about 100 league points, and not a single rank in PCMark 2005 that is competitive globally - you quite possibly could be the least qualified person on HWBot to comment on the validity of this benchmark. Put some hardware together and actually try to do something with it, and I'd give your opinion more thought than the 15 seconds it takes to reply to your ignorant opinion on a benchmark you don't know anything about.

 

Those who want to complain about the benchmark, please refer to the other thread dedicated to that purpose - this thread is dedicated to sharing tweaks on PCMark 2005 for those who enjoy it. Why go to someone else's party just to crap on it?

 

Contribute if you know anything, or just quit trolling please.

Edited February 3, 2012 by I.M.O.G.

[Mr.Scott]

Mr Scott, as someone with about 100 league points, and not a single rank in PCMark 2005 that is competitive globally - you quite possibly could be the least qualified person on HWBot to comment on the validity of this benchmark. Put some hardware together and actually try to do something with it, and I'd give your opinion more thought than the 15 seconds it takes to reply to your ignorant opinion on a benchmark you don't know anything about.

Ah, but I DO know about it, pretty well actually. I just choose not to bench it.

It's no fun, which is why I bench, for fun. As for my points and qualifications, well, I don't recall anyone asking for your opinion of either. They're not the issue anyway, so you wasted your ignorant 15 seconds trolling somebody you don't know from a bag of beans. You must be proud.

Edited February 3, 2012 by Mr.Scott

[Christian Ney]

sigh

[Mr.Scott]

sigh

Sorry man, but he's an arrogant douchbag.

[Sweet]

I sigh too

[Christian Ney]

Sorry man, but he's an arrogant douchbag.

 

At least thanks for having edited your post, the first version was too rude

[SteveRo]

I see you missed the point. Here it is again for you.

 

Mr. Scott I disagree that pcm05 does not scale with cpu - it certainly does.

As for windows and storage tweaks - its part of the bench.

The same is true in other 2D and most 3D benches as well - there are some windows tweaks that you MUST do to be competitive for the top scores.

Bottom line is if you don't like to bench pcm05 then don't - easy answer.

Edited February 3, 2012 by SteveRo

[Mr.Scott]

Mr. Scott I disagree that pcm05 does not scale with cpu - it certainly does.

As for windows and storage tweaks - its part of the bench.

The same is true in other 2D and most 3D benches as well - there are some windows tweaks that you MUST do to be competitive for the top scores.

Bottom line is if you don't like to bench pcm05 then don't - easy answer.

Steve, no dis-respect intended as you are most certainly a master at this bench, but in the other benches you don't need to basically construct your own OS using pieces of other OS's, or use batch files and sub-routines to switch drives for sub-tests to make them all work together for a decent score. That to me is a lot more than 'tweaking'. Not going on any more about this here. There's another thread for that. Besides, I'm obviously in the minority here anyway so there's no point in beating a dead horse. Enjoy your bench.

[[GF]Duke]

many recent submissions and you guys think its worth removing. try benching it

 

Dude did you actually just say that to me? It's the many recent submissions that prove this bench should not exist.

 

Or at least it shouldn't be classified under a cpu bench. It's not even close to being a cpu bench. Its an OS bench at best.

 

As far as scaling goes. Really. Come on. Gluvocio benched at 5354mhz. and scored 46898. I benched at 5712 mhz. and scored 40733. Wheres the scaling? Really i can see why you defend this bench so. It's your pride and joy. You do it well. But plz.

Edited February 4, 2012 by [GF]Duke

[SteveRo]

Duke;152517']Dude did you actually just say that to me? It's the many recent submissions that prove this bench should not exist.

 

Or at least it shouldn't be classified under a cpu bench. It's not even close to being a cpu bench. Its an OS bench at best.

 

As far as scaling goes. Really. Come on. Gluvocio benched at 5354mhz. and scored 46898. I benched at 5712 mhz. and scored 40733. Wheres the scaling? Really i can see why you defend this bench so. It's your pride and joy. You do it well. But plz.

 

Mr Duke, yes - fast storage and windows tweaks are important for top pcm05 scores but once you have that down - cpu/gpu clocks still rule just as in all the other benches.

[I.M.O.G.]

Duke;152517']Dude did you actually just say that to me? It's the many recent submissions that prove this bench should not exist.

 

Or at least it shouldn't be classified under a cpu bench. It's not even close to being a cpu bench. Its an OS bench at best.

 

As far as scaling goes. Really. Come on. Gluvocio benched at 5354mhz. and scored 46898. I benched at 5712 mhz. and scored 40733. Wheres the scaling? Really i can see why you defend this bench so. It's your pride and joy. You do it well. But plz.

 

3Dmark 2001 is classified as a GPU bench - however top scores have very little to do with GPU performance anymore. CPU performance is more important than the strength of the GPU, but more than that is knowing the tweaks and understanding how to apply them all successfully - in order to claim top global spots in 3DMark 2001, you have to have all your crap together and get one glorious run.

 

PCMark 2005 is similar. If you know all the tweaks (or most), and you understand how to apply them all successfully - its just a matter of using the right CPU and getting the most clocks you can out of it, having strong storage and getting the most out of it, supported by a reasonably strong GPU, and having everything in line at the same time in order to get that great score.

 

As for your 5.7GHz 40K PCMark 2005 run, these are the items holding you back:

- It is a good score, anything that I refer to as "low" means compared to top global scores

- 852MHz core is not enough to compete well globally. That is stock on a 5870, so you are at a disadvantage with your 5850.

- Your XP startup should be within 20MB/s of 220, 178 puts you at a disadvantage. 220MB/s is not hard with SATA3, you just have to have good control of your storage performance.

- Your transparent window score is low by 4K or so, so it puts you at a disadvantage. With your CPU and GPU speed, you could do 15K if common tweaks are applied correctly.

- 3D pixel shader is low, GPU core frequency is not high enough

- Web page rendering is CPU speed, you are missing tweaks here

- Graphics memory is ok, could be higher with better GPU mem speeds

- HDD general usage is low, you need stronger storage for PCM05 gen usage.

- Audio/video compression are good, could be higher if tweaks are applied correctly.

- Everything else is good

 

I hope this doesn't offend you.

 

If every CPU benchmark was just a matter of frequency determining the best score, then the only benchmark we would need to run is CPUz. I think we run different ones because they require us to optimize our systems in different ways to get the best score in each.

Edited February 4, 2012 by I.M.O.G.
Typo, meant 5850 not 5870