strong for hdd and video

Calling BS. I have the board.

Unacceptable submission reported.

 

Test it yourself Scotty. w/ a Tualatin. Don't let your prejudice get in the way of common sense.

No prejudice involved. Your ram speed may indeed be valid, but without any verification other than basically your word, the submission is unacceptable. Everybody else has to have proof, so do you.

I'll check out your claim later. I do have a 1.4 Tualatin or two that will go.

i think it is easily acceptable. I have unstable pifast submission at comparable clocks of agp/pci - http://hwbot.org/submission/2302936_terraraptor_pifast_pentium_3_celeron_600mhz_188.82_sec (limited to cpu mainly). However, that setup should have been really stable for mem valid.

btw that pifast result is only achievable at high mem frequencies

TR, you don't need a CPU-Z validation for Pifast. You DO need one for ram speed in the comp. That was my only beef with the submission. If that rule is negated by the mods, I'll be sure to post up a much higher ram speed in the SDRAM class.

Can you try CPU-Z version 1.61.3 maybe? TR's board seems to detect the memory frequency correctly? http://hwbot.org/submission/2303096

@Massman, not same divder

 

The problem isnt cpuz version but cpuz itself. As far as I remember right cpuz doesnt report memory clock if divider is else than 1:1.

 

SetFSB does report it right though. Had the same problem with all my i815 motherboards.

Edited August 6, 201212 yr by Christian Ney

Zinggg!

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2443360

Fair enough Chris?

Edited August 6, 201212 yr by Mr.Scott

Except your not running it @ 66/100/33 Scotty. It shows just fine if I run 133/133/33. I'll try 1.61.3 Massman.

LOL that was my validation you linked may bad Scotty. Well anyway it won't pick up the freq. @ 66/100/33 like I said.

Your excuse doesn't even make any sense. Why would you run a divider on a ram clock contest? The object of a divider is to keep the ram in check while running a higher FSB, thus lowering the ram speed. If anything you should be running the 133's, just to keep the PCI bus closer to normal.

 

Who do you think you're trying to BS Austin, some noob?

B/C my CPU was maxing out @ 2000MHz/190FSB there fore I set it on a 66/100 divider allowing more headroom for the processor. Think about it for a second. Just run a Tualatin @ 66/100 and you'll see what I'm talking about.

@ Massman: same thing with CPU-Z 1.61.3 when 66/100 divider is set mem freq. is not picked up.

 

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2463841

 

same thing if any divider aside from 1:1 is set such as 133/100 here:http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2463847

Edited August 6, 201212 yr by OptyTrooper

I've already heard and seen enough. Bottom line is you have no CPU-Z validation and the rules state that you need one.

It's up to the staff. If this sub stays, you can bet I'll submit without a CPU-Z validation also. That's a fact.

Massman made the stage, so he should come in and solve this.

 

My personal opinion is that if it's possible to run 1:1 without a disadvantage in mem clocks, then that's a good solution to this problem. Too bad this platform is too old, even for me:p

I've already heard and seen enough. Bottom line is you have no CPU-Z validation and the rules state that you need one.

It's up to the staff. If this sub stays, you can bet I'll submit without a CPU-Z validation also. That's a fact.

Not like it would do you any good..

 

BTW I have a CPU-Z validation it just shows freq. unknown that's why i included SetFSB in the screenshot. To my way of thinking this is not different than using say ATI Tool to show GPU speeds when GPUZ does not pick it up. Which is acceptable and within the rules for 3D benches.

Edited August 6, 201212 yr by OptyTrooper

All boards on i815 do not show mem frequency if using devider different to 100:100 or 133:133 - no matter if you use Tuwee or Coppermine. However setfsb detects memory frequency correctly.

However, Opty, try to find 133MHz coppermine like 733/800/866 - all of them are able to reach 200 FSB.

So official ruling is that we don't need CPUz anymore? Just need to know if this sub is competition legal or not before submitting mine.

So official ruling is that we don't need CPUz anymore? Just need to know if this sub is competition legal or not before submitting mine.

Still waiting too brah.

What you fail to realize is SetFSB matches the FSB in both the CPU-Z screenshot AND validation so your random submissions without such still will likely not be allowed regardless.

Not trying to pick a fight or anything and I completely realize it matches, still no valid CPUz. You and I both were unable to submit Socket 7 scores on the P5A-B because of CPUz bugs with that board during the K6 stage of the November OC Challenge. Those submissions were deemed illegal despite all the proof you provided here. I want to make some subs without CPUz valids so I need to know if this is legal or not.

I understand and I remember that unfortunate incident. I am actually thinking about pulling my score to discourage others from cheating.

Franck and I will try to debugg cpuz on s370 this week end. Will let you know.