PCMark05 Tweaking Thread

[bob80]

Firmware optimization and type of flash make the difference too, not only controller.

Another example: Crucial C300 based on the same controller as m4, but it can't touch m4 speeds.

 

You're right...is like the videocards, the gpu could be the same but the reference can't be overclocked as well as the non-reference

 

I'm still having an issue installing the Intel RST. I'll try to connect the hdd on the marvell controller and set it in AHCI mode...

[I.M.O.G.]

Bob80: I think i got it now. That tweak is using resource hacker, or similar tool, to alter shell32 (the windows driver library for customization, like hacked theme files and stuff). We haven't gotten a ruling as hwbot staff was just investigating, but that seems like what is going on? Not sure what I think about that, seems kinda like changing out codecs or something.

[bob80]

That tweak is using resource hacker, or similar tool, to alter shell32 (the windows driver library for customization, like hacked theme files and stuff). Not sure what I think about that, seems kinda like changing out codecs or something.

 

I don't think so...

I haven't changed the shell32 libraries

 

Is much simpler thank you think, is the only thing I can say.. I'll provde a validation asap.

[I.M.O.G.]

Can't blame a guy for guessing. You did have shell32 on your desktop.

[bob80]

It isn't needed for achieve this trasparent windows score.... I found the trick with Gluvocio "for error"

 

Maybe a day It'll be explained... what do you think about Steponz's score ?

[I.M.O.G.]

I think its interesting - either a new tweak or an exploited glitch. Scoring higher on a subtest than anyone in the top 20 is just reason to look closer, nothing against steponz or you for figuring it out or pushing further - thats a good thing. Someone should help hwbot staff (or massman at least) understand how its done as much as possible, so we know if its a tweak worth investing time on, or if once the tweak is understood its not going to be permitted in the rules. Often times submissions slip through though that aren't valid, so personally, I try not to invest much time on tweaks that I don't know for sure if they are accepted.

 

I think this transparent window score and the 50+/60+ web page rendering scores are the only submissions right now which aren't fairly well understood. Only gluvocio knows how to do 50+ on web page rendering, and mtech 60+ on web page rendering (other than youngpro who has done 100+ on XS but not submitted to hwbot, because he was using a different browser - most don't know gluvocio's or mtech's trick for 50/60 however EDIT: Sav submitted a 56 web page score yesterday too now)

 

EDIT2: I also think the high SSD-based virus scan scores are interesting. Sav just posted a 1200+ virus scan yesterday using 2x SSDs from onboard RAID0. That is higher than the actual disks are capable of, and is done through ramcaching of onboard raid software. Ramcaching software is disallowed in the rules, but these submissions are being allowed - not sure where the line is drawn on ramcaching software. These scores are getting the same virus scan performance of hardware raid cards with onboard RAM, but its done through software.

Edited February 13, 2012 by I.M.O.G.

[bob80]

I think its interesting - either a new tweak or an exploited glitch. Scoring higher on a subtest than anyone in the top 20 is just reason to look closer, nothing against steponz or you for figuring it out or pushing further - thats a good thing. Someone should help hwbot staff (or massman at least) understand how its done as much as possible, so we know if its a tweak worth investing time on, or if once the tweak is understood its not going to be permitted in the rules. Often times submissions slip through though that aren't valid, so personally, I try not to invest much time on tweaks that I don't know for sure if they are accepted.

 

I think this transparent window score and the 50+/60+ web page rendering scores are the only submissions right now which aren't fairly well understood. Only gluvocio knows how to do 50+ on web page rendering, and mtech 60+ on web page rendering (other than youngpro who has done 100+ on XS but not submitted to hwbot, because he was using a different browser - most don't know gluvocio's or mtech's trick for 50/60 however EDIT: Sav submitted a 56 web page score yesterday too now)

 

EDIT2: I also think the high SSD-based virus scan scores are interesting. Sav just posted a 1200+ virus scan yesterday using 2x SSDs from onboard RAID0. That is higher than the actual disks are capable of, and is done through ramcaching of onboard raid software. Ramcaching software is disallowed in the rules, but these submissions are being allowed - not sure where the line is drawn on ramcaching software. These scores are getting the same virus scan performance of hardware raid cards with onboard RAM, but its done through software.

 

At least I can explain my tweak to Massman I'm sure he'll understand that this isn't cheating...But I don't know why every time a new tweak is discovered we have to call it cheat

 

It happened also with the Gluvocio 35k page rendering...now everyone know this tweak and is perfectly allowed.

 

When everyone will know my tweak it'll be perfectly allowed.

[Gluvocio]

Mr I.M.O.G what is the matter ?

[I.M.O.G.]

I'm not sure why you ask, nothing is the matter though. Bob80 asked me what I thought of Steponz's score so I explained - I think its interesting, but there are multiple scores which are similar in nature, so I mentioned those as well. I was just replying to his inquiry - I don't know why he's using the C word as I clearly didn't.

 

I called steponz's score a new tweak or exploited glitch - I don't know how to do it, so those are basically the options. I didn't call it a cheat, bob80 called it that, and maybe he took the wrong implication from my statements.

 

When I called the other types of scores not well understood, that is all I meant - I didn't mean they weren't legit. They are just exceptional, with only a few players understanding how to do them currently.

[bob80]

I'm not sure why you ask, nothing is the matter though. Bob80 asked me what I thought of Steponz's score so I explained - I think its interesting, but there are multiple scores which are similar in nature, so I mentioned those as well. I was just replying to his inquiry - I don't know why he's using the C word as I clearly didn't.

 

I called steponz's score a new tweak or exploited glitch - I don't know how to do it, so those are basically the options. I didn't call it a cheat, bob80 called it that, and maybe he took the wrong implication from my statements.

 

When I called the other types of scores not well understood, that is all I meant - I didn't mean they weren't legit. They are just exceptional, with only a few players understanding how to do them currently.

 

So, I misunderstood your statements.... I'll explain the tweak to Massman and I'll provide a validation link .... and everything will be fine

[Sweet]

When everyone will know my tweak it'll be perfectly allowed.

 

 

I send pm to you, please explein me this tweak (by pm please), I will comment this tweak at the staff of moderation.

 

I promise to answer the result of the discussion with the others moderators right here,. but no how to do this tweak

 

Regards

 

Edit: more and more complicated is the PCMark, right ? (joke, only joke, please, dont take it bad)

[S_A_V]

I also think the high SSD-based virus scan scores are interesting. Sav just posted a 1200+ virus scan yesterday using 2x SSDs from onboard RAID0. That is higher than the actual disks are capable of, and is done through ramcaching of onboard raid software. Ramcaching software is disallowed in the rules, but these submissions are being allowed - not sure where the line is drawn on ramcaching software. These scores are getting the same virus scan performance of hardware raid cards with onboard RAM, but its done through software.

 

Write-back cache is standard functionality of many software, comes with both on-board and discrete RAID-controllers. Intel RST, AMD RAIDExpert, Promise WebPAM, etc. It is already used for ages for PCMark scores, way before someone discovered third-party caching software like Fancy Cache or Super Cache.

There is a big difference between that two types of software with caching ability.

Third-party software can use so much RAM for cache that you want, and it gives you performance very close to RAM Disk driver (if have enough RAM installed).

"Bundled" software that comes with hardware not allow you to specify amount of ram for cache and don't have "mirroring partition" feature. You can only enable or disable that option. And if enabled it gives the same boost no matter how much system RAM you use - 4 Gb or 64 Gb.

[I.M.O.G.]

Write-back cache is standard functionality of many software, comes with both on-board and discrete RAID-controllers. Intel RST, AMD RAIDExpert, Promise WebPAM, etc. It is already used for ages for PCMark scores, way before someone discovered third-party caching software like Fancy Cache or Super Cache.

There is a big difference between that two types of software with caching ability.

Third-party software can use so much RAM for cache that you want, and it gives you performance very close to RAM Disk driver (if have enough RAM installed).

"Bundled" software that comes with hardware not allow you to specify amount of ram for cache and don't have "mirroring partition" feature. You can only enable or disable that option. And if enabled it gives the same boost no matter how much system RAM you use - 4 Gb or 64 Gb.

 

Thank you SAV, very informative.

[bob80]

Validation kindly provided by Gluvocio

 

http://3dmark.com/pcm05/3139063

[xXSebaSXx]

I made this video for mr. I.M.O.G.

 

enjoy it

 

 

I have watched this video about 20 times trying to see if I can spy some hint as to what the tweak is. Can't figure it out.

I'll keep trying... I truly enjoy the hell out of seeking these things out.

 

Might it have anything to do with DWM in the registry?

[bob80]

No registry, no codecs, no drivers.... nothing of this things

 

p.s. it works also with old hardware: http://hwbot.org/submission/2253898_

 

Before the transparent score was 23xx

[xXSebaSXx]

No registry, no codecs, no drivers.... nothing of this things

 

p.s. it works also with old hardware: http://hwbot.org/submission/2253898_

 

Before the transparent score was 23xx

 

Oh wow! You've got me very confused now. It looks like there are some sleepless nights waiting for me... My OCF team mates can tell you how obsessive I am when it comes to PCM05.

[Sweet]

No registry, no codecs, no drivers.... nothing of this things

 

p.s. it works also with old hardware: http://hwbot.org/submission/2253898_

 

Before the transparent score was 23xx

 

Thats true, No codecs , no drivers, nothing wrong in this tweak, I have already informed all staff, i dont try by now, but i think it is a clean tweak.

 

Thank you Bob80, I see in you a very good and correct overclocker

 

Sw

Edited February 15, 2012 by Sweet

[I.M.O.G.]

Congrats on the tweak guys! Thats going to really rock the rankings.

[SteveRo]

Congrats Bob and Denis! Imog is right - this is going to shuffle the rankings for sure!

[I.M.O.G.]

So as I was scrambling frantically to figure this out today... I failed. However I did find vento1's score from like 2 years ago, where he did like 34K transparent windows... Seems he stumbled on this, and its laid dormant since! He mentioned it on benchtek, but didn't give anything away.

[der8auer]

I will test this tweak later today to confirm it but at the moment it looks just like a realy nice tweak and I agree on Sweet's post

[bob80]

With the correct hardware yes .... For now I haven't very good hardware, I am doing some WR with notebooks

[xXSebaSXx]

This damn tweak has become the bane of my existence... I've done so many runs of that sub-test looking for it that I fear I may be starting to dislike the bench all together. I need to find this thing before it ruins PCM05 for me.

[S_A_V]

Damn 34K transparent windows...

I only know how to run transparent windows without mouse moving and default mouse settings (all my pcmark05 runs done without mouse tweaks), but it gives me only the same scores that others can do with mouse tweaks. Unfortunately my way to tweak transparent windows, when combined with mouse tweaks, gives not better scores than when both method used separately.