Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Worth investigating?


Recommended Posts



Celeron 347: 8398MHz! (FSB: 365!!!)


Celeron 356: 8312MHz


Celeron 352: 8228MHz


Celeron 360: 8169MHz


Celeron 365: 8065MHz





All submitted in the space of a few weeks, from random batches no-one else has success with. I no longer believe in his scores. There were......25? people in the netburst 8GHz club, then this guy comes along with all these scores?



i3 540: 280.7 BCLK??


The bigger problem: this guy might have found a way to hack CPU-Z validation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bigger problem: this guy might have found a way to hack CPU-Z validation.


Brute attacks on 1400b files will eventually end up successfully :)

Out of curiosity I've also snooped the Online Submit button, it's a basic query of username+email+rawcvf.

Edited by GENiEBEN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Franck from CPU-Z said he also thinks this guy is hacking CPU-Z, waiting for Samuel to be back so they can find out how to catch him. Atm there seems to be no way to prove it 100 %.


Haha awesome. So far I've looked into it and it's base64+gzuncompress, haven't had much time to go deeper but it can't be good.


They need AES or something else :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still struggling to see how he alone can suddenly have so many chips that are so much better than everyone elses and to get the MHz in one boot.... it's hard to argue with video evidence.


Hacked CPU-Z itself? SetFSB? or somehow..... legit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Actually it's "only" 166 MHz better than duck`s Netburst record, so I wouldn't dramatize that by blowing the numbers up. ;p Remember that Andre Yang is the CPU-Z record holder with a gap of 292 Mhz at the moment and I think nobody questions his score seriously. (Yes, Zambezi is quite new and you can't compare the values directly, but what I want to say is that it is in fact possible to achieve legit records with quite a gap.)


Some ideas to prove the legitimacy: Trusted overclockers who managed to achieve 8 GHz numbers with Netburst-CPUs in the past could get the chance to work with the same processor(s). Benchmarks like Super Pi 1M from start to finish together with CPU-Z on a video also would be an indicator of the supremacy of wytiwx`s CPUs.


Did wytiwx tell accidentally how many Netburst CPUs he has access to? If there are hundreds of Netburst chips from a fresh source (not Ebay, maybe a Chinese sale platform or bankruptcy items) I don't think it's that unlikely that a very limited amount of them is good for the clock frequencies we see now.


It's a difficult situation: One the one hand a proper CPU-Z validation fullfils all needs requirements for a legit Hwbot score on the other hand it's surprisingly one overclocker seems to exceed the limit (or what we thought it is) of an exhausted architecture so easily with several CPUs and we remember that the way CPU-Z clock readings work were changed when Windows 8 were released at the end of 2012, what led to incorrect values in some cases not a long time ago.

Edited by Hyperhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. :D I've seen the video you uploaded and der8auer posted and it is fine in my book (but doesn't include a benchmark). If such a video exists it would be useful to include it here.


btw to point that out: I'm not calling for actions here, rather I wanted to share my point of view on this topic as an interested observer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...