Moose83 Posted October 22, 2012 Posted October 22, 2012 No AMD RAID EXPERT Tool;) Official allowed:) With Quadcore 9G VS, massman has allowed it;)
Yamunsa Posted October 22, 2012 Posted October 22, 2012 Human interaction: like change codecs, files , etc. in the benchmark ( like in the SO.) Any software: In computing a script, command file or batch file, commonly referred to barbarism script is a program usually simple. Sorry, but this is known to all benchers um... the use of batch files to change drive letter has been standard practice for quite some time by many and has been openly discussed. are we going to be done with the 220mb cap so no need for this sort of tweaking, limit speeds on general hdd & virus scan or permit scripting? If flashdesktops is a cheat that means every top global score is cheated, right? agreed. can someone explain where powertoy sits when compared to fd2? Forbidden Software or Hardware: * - software ramdisk (iRam is allowed) * - MFT Software * - ramcache software i've always taken fancycache as a total no go with the above rule but whats the go with rst? can we please have a clear / firm re-write of the benchmark rules as they are ambiguous and open to individual interpretation, even with this thread imo.
knopflerbruce Posted October 22, 2012 Posted October 22, 2012 Dont do this! Or it yust begins again... how staff should moderate it then by 800+ startup I know, it was just to clarify that the drive change thing is kinda forced upon the guys who bench, so there must be an "easy" way to get a valid result. if we don't allow drive changes we have to either remove the limit, or hardcode it to 220 if it's at 220 or higher. I think I explained a way to do that somewhere, but there's not enough interest from the guys who run this place to do it
Gluvocio Posted October 22, 2012 Posted October 22, 2012 well... this is a compromise not easy to adjudicate. Fortunately I began to use AutoHotKey 40 days ago. I'll delete last scores ( and don't post old backups ) I'm not together with decision because I think It's crazy to moderate this way, but I'm only a player, so I can decide only to play or not to play. as example, before Flashdesktops I already was doing more than 50k TW ... there are many way to enchance a subtest, TW is an example and I think FlashDesktop could be like LOD in 3D marks: Not allowed/not controlled. There should be made a Video during subtest(s) or 3dMark(s) to be sure it's not be used. Even if I don't fully agree this choice, I appreciate the courage to do it and the intemption to report this bench in this planet ( with 100k+ sandbagging scores we were going on the moon ) Decide you if delete or not my scores pre-AHK. I ask you only to let me C.P. Made during TeamCup. I'll ask you some question if it will not be explained enough clarely in next days Bye !
xXSebaSXx Posted October 22, 2012 Posted October 22, 2012 If you ask me, the bob tweak seems like a glitch - there's absolutely no reason whatsoever that doing what he did should give a huge boost. However, I'm open for arguments - if someone can actually prove that it does in fact increase the efficiency without glitching the bench, go ahead. I think that what Bob's tweak does is dump some sort of image cache out and then the test is run on "clean" cache... Not sure though.
Moose83 Posted October 22, 2012 Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) I know, it was just to clarify that the drive change thing is kinda forced upon the guys who bench, so there must be an "easy" way to get a valid result. if we don't allow drive changes we have to either remove the limit, or hardcode it to 220 if it's at 220 or higher. I think I explained a way to do that somewhere, but there's not enough interest from the guys who run this place to do it You dont need drive change to limit startup;) Iometer is doing this fine or ATTO. And powertoys needs no discuss, its only an GUI for registry settings. Edited October 22, 2012 by Moose83
Crew Sweet Posted October 22, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) HWbot no is perfect, much less, moderate scores. We thought we were clear on many cheats and others may be discussed, (like change HDD), but we prefer a few overclockers angry and not the entire community saying this is a disaster and we allow many things without overclocking, it has spread in many forums in the world and should be remedied. No AMD RAID EXPERT ToolOfficial allowed With Quadcore 9G VS, massman has allowed it Not by now, because to allow this software must be allow ramdisk or ramcache with intel chips powertoys needs no discuss, its only an GUI for registry settings Fully agree, powertoy is a GUI, not a software or a script, powertoy not equal to F2D. Powertoy = GUI /// F2D = Software um... the use of batch files to change drive letter has been standard practice for quite some time by many and has been openly discussed. are we going to be done with the 220mb cap so no need for this sort of tweaking, limit speeds on general hdd & virus scan or permit scripting? By now 220 is the max in XP start up, nothing new about this i've always taken fancycache as a total no go with the above rule but whats the go with rst? can we please have a clear / firm re-write of the benchmark rules as they are ambiguous and open to individual interpretation, even with this thread imo. I regret not being more clear, my "English cheat" ( all staf suffers my English cheat ) is surely an obstacle, but we believe that the rules are sufficients, and there is no need to add every cheat in the rule, as these should be add every day, every day a new cheat. Perhaps, with more time the rules will be updated by youngpro (Pro) or Massman well... this is a compromise not easy to adjudicate.Fortunately I began to use AutoHotKey 40 days ago. I'll delete last scores ( and don't post old backups ) I'm not together with decision because I think It's crazy to moderate this way, but I'm only a player, so I can decide only to play or not to play. as example, before Flashdesktops I already was doing more than 50k TW ... there are many way to enchance a subtest, TW is an example and I think FlashDesktop could be like LOD in 3D marks: Not allowed/not controlled. There should be made a Video during subtest(s) or 3dMark(s) to be sure it's not be used. Even if I don't fully agree this choice, I appreciate the courage to do it and the intemption to report this bench in this planet ( with 100k+ sandbagging scores we were going on the moon ) Decide you if delete or not my scores pre-AHK. I ask you only to let me C.P. Made during TeamCup. I'll ask you some question if it will not be explained enough clarely in next days Bye ! Denys you are a very good and enthusiastic overclocker, with a great future in the sport, and certainly in this like other important benchmarks you will get excellent scores, this is for the good of everyone in the community, sorry my friend I appreciate the courage to do it Thank you Denys very difficult, but it had to be done, we appreciate this comment Apologies, my Spanish is better, sometimes by the way Important note: There should be made a Video during subtest(s) or 3dMark(s) to be sure it's not be used. Thats is one of the big problem in the future, too Edited October 22, 2012 by Sweet
Moose83 Posted October 22, 2012 Posted October 22, 2012 After teamcup the 12.8 driver was officially allowed. And ramdisk cant score this, ramcaching also cant.
Crew Sweet Posted October 22, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) Thanks to all members of the community and especially to Denys, Moose, and C. Ney (like overclocker, not by moderator ) for your support and understanding current issues. After teamcup the 12.8 driver was officially allowed. And ramdisk cant score this, ramcaching also cant. In PcMark'05 ? pre-AHK whats the go with rst? I dont know these abbreviations, can someone define ? what do mean ? So...i speak spanish or something else sometimes Edited October 22, 2012 by Sweet
xXSebaSXx Posted October 22, 2012 Posted October 22, 2012 Assuming Bob's tweak doesn't cause a bug. I never got it to work. What sort of gains do you see? If the gain is huge, then it's most likely a bug - if the gain is small, then it could be that a newly refreshed theme just works a tad better. I would see gains anywhere from 20% to 50% depending on drivers, OS, etc. I remember going from 9K on a 1090T+HD5670 to 20K+ just on Bob's tweaks... Adding the FD settings to that brought it up to 50K+ easy (and I don't even know the "good" FD settings that CherV and the rest of the guys use).
Crew Sweet Posted October 22, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) Since this moment, we started cleaning the database PCMark'05. -First step , the submission upload in the last 72 hours. We will try to make a clean clinic and has few errors as possible, apologies to all community by the mistakes that may occur by the staff of moderators. better a few guys angry that the whole community shouting Actualization post In the last 72 hrs. I had to block seven (7) submissions from three (3) different guys, but six (6) different subs. of six (6) different overclockers are absolutely right, including one of Turrican. Each draw their own conclusions. Edited October 22, 2012 by Sweet
Crew Sweet Posted October 23, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) With more time, we continue with all the submissions of PcMak05, a little every day. who use the cheats listed from now, will be punished accordingly Edited October 23, 2012 by Sweet
IanCutress Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) I noticed one of my scores got blocked, and came to this thread. I have all the best intentions, but I hate to say that this thread is very flawed. Please accept Sweet that this is not an attack on you. I do not want this to be a negative on you. People who know me will know that I am consistantly methodical, hardworking and scientific in my analysis. The following is merely a comprehensive and thought out consistently of what is happening, and it has all the best intentions written throughout. To start, it sounds as if Sweet written the OP of this thread of his own accord without discussing with the admins. I know English isn't his first language, but there's almost nothing to the thread even if it is done as per what has been said in the admins. It doesn't explain the situation fully to those who do not know. It doesn't offer a full and comprehensive solution to the problem. It doesn't provide any guidelines whatsoever on how to deal with it, and what will be done in what sort of timeframe. This is compounded by the fact that Sweet does not understand the tweaks or edits, or has been following the PC05 story. This has been clear multiple times during this thread: ----- i) "Originally Posted by Sweet: Flash Desktops is the first REAL TIME "virtual" desktop manager - Overclocking is real not virtual, then Flash 2 Desktop is "not allowed" answer) This is a gross misunderstanding of what FD does. The way FD is used in PCMark05 is not the intended functionality of the program, so if you go and *copy stuff off the website* (very important), then you will not understand how it is used. F2D is not used as a virtual layer - as CherV has said, and I quote: Originally posted by Cherv: http://hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=174545&postcount=346'>http://hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=174545&postcount=3462. The better way is a registry tweak which I am using. My best score is 100K but sometimes out of focus and benchmark aborted. 3. The fastest way is download a program called "Flash Desktop 2" , run setup. The way FD is used is essentially as a registry changer but with a timer. Much in the same way we can use a timed program to limit or change the number of cores in a 3D benchmark (or pass the grammar test in PC04). If FD is removed, then registry tweaks are removed. Wholly and forthwith. That also means LOD and D3DOverrider are removed from all other benchmarks as well. FD is *not* used as a virtual environment modification - it is only used as a bit of software that changes the registry on the fly. This makes the following quote null and void: Originally posted by Sweet:Here in Hwbot, we do overclocking right in a real storage system like Hdd, ssd, revodrives, and more, but this is real, like a processor or mainboard or a real windows install in the storage. ----- ii) "Originally posted by Sweet: When the screen goes blanck in 3D, its a bug or something else, not a software, instead it would be a cheat in 3D if anyone use a software" answer) This is again not understanding what FD does. FD edits the registry - it detects windows with a certain name and resizes them and changes color. This is just a larger scale Bob80's tweak (more later). In essence this means that FD 'does not cause a black screen' - the windows are there, they are still being processed, but they just can not be seen. I repeat, this can be done in the registry without FD. If the windows were not there, the score would more than likely be 100x higher, not 2-4x. ----- iii) "Originally posted by Sweet: Guys, its easy, enforce rules that are from 2008 and do not ruin a benchmark #no human interaction or software or change codecs or files in Benchmark#, and this will always be so." answer) "Interaction" is the key word here. There are lots of 'interactions' we do - the big one being the mouse moving tweak. Or this could be extrapolated - using the word 'interaction' also applies to adjusting CPU clocks on the fly using onboard tools or software (ROG Connect). If no human interaction is allowed, then no mouse movement tweak, no adjusting cores on the fly, no adjusting CPU speed on the fly. This also means no changing drive letters on the fly. This can also be applied to the rule regarding changing files in the Benchmark. If so, then I guess we should never use the 64-bit patch for Aquamark. Or ever delete the direcp.dll. Or rename Aquamark.exe. This is more nitpicking on the actual words in the rules. No interaction = no mouse movement. Or otherwise we are just cherry picking excluding clauses (which should all be written down). ----- iv) "Originally posted by Knop: If you ask me, the bob tweak seems like a glitch - there's absolutely no reason whatsoever that doing what he did should give a huge boost. However, I'm open for arguments - if someone can actually prove that it does in fact increase the efficiency without glitching the bench, go ahead. Assuming Bob's tweak doesn't cause a bug." Answer) Technically Bob's tweak is neither a glitch or a bug, but rather a flaw in windows. There is an issue in windows when certain windows are open and themes are changed - some non-visible post processing options are not adjusted for programs already open. So when the screen is locked with PC05 open in the different theme, some of those post-processing features of the old theme stay in tact. This is why the benefit disappears when the benchmark is quit and reloaded. Flaw with Windows rendering and processing, rather than glitch or bug. ----- v) "Originally posted by K404: The user is changing nothing in Windows, they are merely using a feature of Windows as it is designed- changing desktop appearance." answer) Technically Windows is being changed. But much in the same way that the registry can be changed. Windows has software to change the theme, but that is essentially an advanced registry editor, like PowerToy or Flash Desktops. ----- vi) "Originally posted by Knop: On a side note, if IE registry settings makes you unable to use the browser, isn't it also reasonable to say that this indeed bugs out IE9? I mean, it's about opening a webpage, but if IE9 refuses to open a webpage at all, how can anyone say that the test runs as it should?" answer) To run under different settings and to bug out are two different concepts to grasp. Adjusting the IE options to make it unreadable (Javascript off, images off) are just running as different options, and I bet that some people somewhere in the world have one of these options changed like we do. So putting them altogether is a bug? No, a bug is a coding error that could be exploited. All we are doing here is adjusting our IE. ----- vii) "Originally posted by Strunkenbold: Actually we're bugging the test with running it with Vista/7 as there was no Aero when pcmark05 was developed and than we trick it again by running Internet Explorer 7,8,9. In both cases calculation gets done which was not intended by the devs." "Only thing we do here is restrict "super tweaks" but we're still not run the bench like it was intended. And I fear this isnt even possible today." Nice point, well made. ---- vii) "Originally Posted by Sweet: -Well, virus scan is too hight, 2460.21 MB/s You use something like ramcaching ? -Not by now, because to allow this software must be allow ramdisk or ramcache with intel chips -In PcMark'05 ?" This is a big flaw in this whole situation. If Sweet is taking charge (which it seems he is), then he needs to understand *beyond a shadow of a doubt* what is possible before going after scores or posting what is right and what is not. As he seems to be the top admin overlooking the situation, any post he makes could be considered part of the rules. As we know, rules rarely get updated on the main site, so sources in the forums are usually pointed to. In my mind there is only several people who can really know what is going on under the hood. Genieben and Pro are the main admins, with Glucovio, CherV, Moose and Topdog as regular users. The rest of us are left scratching our heads most of the time, and it does not help if the Admin is as well. *Please please please* reorganise this situation to be perfectly clear. Nothing less will do unfortunately. But apparently clear-cut rules are often not a top priority at HWBot I dont know these abbreviations, can someone define ? ^^ The point I am making. ----- viii) "Quote by Sweet: Powertoy = GUI /// F2D = Software" answer) You misunderstand what a GUI is. Powertoys is software that edits the registry, and FD is software that can be also used to edit the registry, but on a timer if needed. I will reiterate what CherV says to make this point *perfectly crystal clear for everyone* Originally posted by Cherv: http://hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=174545&postcount=3462. The better way is a registry tweak which I am using. My best score is 100K but sometimes out of focus and benchmark aborted. 3. The fastest way is download a program called "Flash Desktop 2" , run setup. ----- ix) "Orginally posted by Sweet: who use the cheats listed from now, will be punished accordingly" answer) Please please please post a list of the exact tweaks being used, with a yes/no alongside each of them. Genieben has already posted a list of some of them in his wrapper thread. Otherwise the community is still being handed vague overall guidelines. We need something solid, something to be seen. --Overall-- A lot of the reasons given for banning tweaks are perfectly legal for other benchmarks (using programs to interfere with how fast the benchmark is run), or are not understood by the admins (Adjusting IE, or Virus Scan on AMD RAIDXpert, or Flash Desktops 2 is a registry editor with hotkey/timer). I implore the HWBot staff to clear this up once and for all. And I feel that explanation will only be sufficient if Genieben or Pro delivers it. Again, I apologize to Sweet - I know English isn't your first language and this is not meant to be a post towards you. I want what is best for the community, and having detailed knowledge of the underlying benchmark is needed to deal with the issue. And as has been mentioned before, a lot of these scores can be obtained a quick way, or via the registry. If you can edit the registry for 50-100K+ TW, 120+ WP/s and a large text edit, being able to tell the scores apart will be impossible. Especially if the admin doesn't know what is going on exactly. This will make moderation untenable. PCMark05 is a badly written benchmark. The only way to cure most of these scores would be to wait for Genie's wrapper. This would offer two scenarios: 1) Stop all PC05 submissions until the wrapper is complete. The wrapper will either include some tweaks by default, making sure everyone is at the same level, or be able to remove tweaks out of the equation. OR... 2) It's time to remove PC05 from points. Make it a tweakers benchmark First and foremost I'd love it if other admins chipped in that thread with explanations. I'd also like to hear from MM/Rich as to what is going to happen. Much praise for everyone keeping the HWBot community alive and full of vigour. If I need to explain any of my points in a different way for non-native English speakers, please let me know PS. I never even got FD to work properly. I failed hard on that one. Edited October 23, 2012 by borandi
Crew Sweet Posted October 23, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) You use TE cheat, this is "not allowed" and We ( and I know this cheat !!!) know this cheat Edited October 23, 2012 by Sweet
IanCutress Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 You use TE cheat, this is "not allowed" and We know this cheat I wasn't referring to my scores. Rules have changed, I accept that. We all do. Goal posts can move continuously (ever worked on a scientific research project?!). But please read my post thoroughly. It seems like you have missed the point entirely. Nothing has been set in stone here. Nothing has been formally presented in an official manner to determine what is right and what is wrong. All we have had is vague reiterations of rules which are cherry picked and in direct contradiction to 'legal' tweaks. It doesn't help if the one laying down the hammer is not too concerned with his own understanding of what certain tweaks are or how they work. This is very clear throughout this thread.
Crew Sweet Posted October 23, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) It doesn't help if the one laying down the hammer is not too concerned with his own understanding of what certain tweaks are or how they work. This is very clear throughout this thread. If you dont understand the problem of PcMark, you dont understand our point, and this post is a attack to me. Maybe for you I'm a bunny, useless and does not know anything, BUT HONEST, This is HARDWAREbot NOT SOFTWAREbot. Thats all. I will not answer such comments, the PCMark05 be clean or nothing. You can send pm to Pro, with this comments, but not attacks or insults towards me. Anyway I'm commenting on what you said in the staff ( all staff) and Pro and GENiEBEN read this post And Yes my English is a real cheat Edited October 23, 2012 by Sweet
IanCutress Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 If you dont understand the problem of PcMark, you dont understand our point, and this post is a attack to me. Maybe for you I'm a bunny, useless and does not know anything, BUT HONEST, This is HARDWAREbot NOT SOFTWAREbot. Thats all. I will not answer such comments, the PCMark05 be clean or nothing I respectfully request that you do not put words into my mouth. To suggest I start calling people names is offensive and defamatory. The post is not an attack on you. I repeat. The post is not an attack on you. I do not make attacks on people. I request and urge clarity from the system from the top level. PCMark05 be clean or nothing Please be consistent in your reasoning, and write a list of what exactly is legal. If you want a 'clean' benchmark, then we need a wrapper that installs an unalterable virtual machine. No SetLOD. No mouse movement. You are declaring you would like a fine line between legal and not legal. At the minute, all we have is a grey field. Some tweaks can be done legally one way, but not legally the other. The main example here is CherV, which I quoted twice in my post. Making it clean is one thing, but honesty is another. I am very honest, but I am also not afraid to speak my mind. Without regularity or clear instructions, this is going to be a minefield of heartache for benchers and moderators alike. My comments are all perfectly valid. I have provided explanation and quotations necessary to ensure we have a full debate about this issue. I would like to have that debate. In order to debate, we need a dialogue to which the goal is that community is served best. I only want what is best for the community.
IanCutress Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 Anyway I'm commenting on what you said in the staff ( all staff) and Pro and GENiEBEN read this post Thank you. If you would like to include any of those comments in the public domain, please feel free to do so. We would love to hear what comments you have to say.
Crew Sweet Posted October 23, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) 1) Stop all PC05 submissions until the wrapper is complete. The wrapper will either include some tweaks by default, making sure everyone is at the same level, or be able to remove tweaks out of the equation. OR...2) It's time to remove PC05 from points. Make it a tweakers benchmark I only agree to this, and really do not care what You have hinted about me, or Directly by mentioning That Sometimes I wrote everything and manipulating my words,. But for every insinuation about me and my skills (which are thankfully few) justice will be done with a lot (too much) overclockers who have used this benchmark using the hardware and not cheat of software. There are only 7 or 8 guys who have used these cheats and many more overclockers who complain about this indiscriminate use. And Yes, i blocked the subs. upload in the last 72 Hrs. all by TEXT EDIT . bat (script)this script amending temporary files of benchmark Only I to do this, Text Edit is a tweak not allowed, this is a Cheat undoubtedly. Lo que pienso en Español, mi lenguaje nativo : Si escribieramos en español, te aseguro que no podrias manipular mis comentarios como un chico, vos lloras como una chica lo que no podés sostener como un tipo grande. I dont know these abbreviations, can someone define ? ^^ The point I am making. In my language, abbreviations are different than yours, sorry but if not defined or write the entire word many like me, do not know what you're talking about. Yes English is not my native language, but I can understand the concepts if written correctly, i'm not the only one that write or read cusi cusa the english Edited October 23, 2012 by Sweet
IanCutress Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 I only agree to this, and really do not care what You have hinted about me, or Directly by mentioning That Sometimes I wrote everything and manipulating my words,. I have never manipulated your words. I quote you directly. If you disagree with what you say yourself, then that is up to you. There are only 7 or 8 guys who have used these cheats and many more overclockers who complain about this indiscriminate use. And Yes, i blocked the subs. upload in the last 72 Hrs. all by TEXT EDIT . bat (script)this script amending temporary files of benchmark Only I to do this, Text Edit is a tweak not allowed, this is a Cheat undoubtedly. I will say again, just in case it was missed. I have no issue with you blocking the subs I made. I have an issue with your use of words, from an understanding viewpoint. The tweaks have to be declared officially invalid. You have declared that this is a retroactive rule, taking into account all previous submissions. Until that point it was declared, it was still a tweak being discussed. The word cheat implies malicious intent. There was no malicious intent. The rules have been made such that it is now illegal to use the tweak. Have I used the tweak since I found out it was declared illegal? No. But there is *NO* list of what tweaks are allowed, or specifically what tweaks are not allowed. Out of the known tweaks, there should be a simple yes/no list. What will it take for an official, clear cut, yes/no list? I want clarity, consistency, and honesty above all else. With one thing being said, and then something else being said, people can get easily confused. Is it that hard to be succinct and affirmative? There was an easy way to sort all this from the beginning of the thread, with said list. Having reiterations of vague rules with numbers of exclusions is downright complex and confusing. This is compounded by the fact of understanding all the current tweaks in circulation (such as AMD XPert, which was previously discussed elsewhere) or the ongoing recent history with this benchmark. Having been given a chance to ask (and answer some questions), I feel it is only bringing up more issues. However, I like the opportunity to debate, as long as points are taken on board from both sides.
IanCutress Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) Lo que pienso en Español, mi lenguaje nativo : Si escribieramos en español, te aseguro que no podrias manipular mis comentarios como un chico, vos lloras como una chica lo que no podés sostener como un tipo grande. I find this extremely offensive. There is no need for this, especially from administrators. I find this insulting and confusing that as a business HWBot would approve of this mentality being projected. If you wish to publicly call out my integrity or honesty, please do so. Nothing is stopping you in this regard. Edited October 23, 2012 by borandi
Crew Sweet Posted October 23, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) To start, it sounds as if Sweet written the OP of this thread of his own accord without discussing with the admins. Are you sure about this comments ?, You have exceeded your writing I only do what is agreed in the staff, Why you know this or write this stuff ? Why you accuse me of taking alone the decisions ? Of course all this stuff are have been discussed in the staff , Massman approved to be blocked all submissions of the last 72 Hrs. with any tweaks illegal if you dont want the word "cheats vii) "Originally Posted by Sweet:-Well, virus scan is too hight, 2460.21 MB/s You use something like ramcaching ? -Not by now, because to allow this software must be allow ramdisk or ramcache with intel chips -In PcMark'05 ?" Sweet say : Well, virus scan is too hight, 2460.21 MB/s You use something like ramcaching ? Moose say : amd raid eXpert Sweet say: Not by now, because to allow this software must be allow ramdisk or ramcache with intel chips Moose say; but this is allowed Sweet say: in PcMark05 ? Thats is correct without manipulation , and in spanish that i write not offensive but a strong way to answer what you imply in his words, like in your native leguage Edited October 23, 2012 by Sweet
IanCutress Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 Regarding that point, if you were part of the PCMark scene, you would have read this thread that came out of the Team Cup (you remember, the large team event): http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=49082&page=7 Please read page 7-10, especially the top of page 10. My issue is that person overseeing all of PCMark05 should know that these discussions take place. It would help for clarity.
Crew Sweet Posted October 23, 2012 Author Crew Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) I read this page now, but takes a time, again my english is is very slow. Edit: Yes i read this at this moment, and today i dont Blocked subs with this driver upload results today by Moose, Because there is no staff desicion to block this,I only write in the staff that if we allow raid eXpert AMD, we must also allow ramcache or ramdisk in Intel chips The RAID expert Software use ram for caching. This is the same like areca cards do. In this point why not use ramcache in Intel Chips ? After some testing, it seems the driver is not really bugged, but some of the caching options just boost the PCMark subtest score. You can try this out yourself. The 12.6 drivers only allows 512bytes sectorisation whereas 12.8 supports 1K, 2K and 4K as well. The results with RAID set at 512bytes is the same on 12.6 and 12.8; it's only when you go to 1K, 2K or 4K that you have a performance boost. So, the scores of Vapor are valid. It does give some food of thought for the PCMark05 benchmark in genera, though. Edited October 23, 2012 by Sweet
I.M.O.G. Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) Sweet, RAID expert uses RAM for caching. Intel Matrix Storage manager can do the same thing. However with AMD RAIDXpert, there's a bug with changing sector size that makes pcmark05 wig out and scores go through the roof. I mentioned this in the pcmark05 tweaks thread, as a teammate of mine had found the glitch months previous, but never submitted it because the scores were out to lunch - he knew it wasn't right to submit, so no one on our team ever used the tweak. Once I mentioned it though, other people started looking into and using it, and Massman tested it as well. Moose's statement that RAIDXpert is the same as Areca cache isn't 100% accurate in my opinion. RAIDXpert's use of system cache, with tweaked raidxpert settings, absolutely crushes anything the Areca RAM cache is possible of scoring... So basically, with 2x cheap RAID0 SSDs and the right RAIDXpert settings, you can trash a $5000 Areca 5x RAID0 storage setup. It's coo-coo. You can change sector size on the areca's as well, and you don't get the crazy boost - its an exclusive feature/bug of raidxpert. I don't know why Massman stated it wasn't a bug. I think it seems clear things wig out when you change sector size in raid expert, no longer producing "realistic" storage performance. Just posting to share my perspective on my experience running this stuff. ALL: please don't take offense, just my opinion on the raidxpert topic. (Also, I sold my big storage setup, and exited the pcm05 scene - I don't think I stand to gain anything either way, but am glad to see efforts are being made to restore faith in the pcm05 rules) Edited October 23, 2012 by I.M.O.G.
Recommended Posts