Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 07/14/18 in all areas

  1. 24 points
    Start date will be the 5th of August till the 31st of October. Frederik is adding the stages in the competition pages Hardware list will be available soon, so you can start scamming Ebay and co, we tried to keep it as cheap and accessible as possible. Verification rules will be expanded versus the regular standard offical HWBot rules: CPU-Z tabs for CPU, Mainboard and Memory (+SPD for the memory stage) Verification Screenshots are always full screen, no removal of taskbar, no clipping,... Retail hardware only (also for motherboards) Competition Background must be visible To avoid the drama of last year, picture(s) of the RUNNING OC setup has to be added with each submission For all 3DMark benchmarks the latest Systeminfo has to be installed (have verification files at hand) Competition will be split in DDR, DDR2, DDR3 and DDR4 based platforms: DDR Stage 1: Pifast socket A (3 CPU submissions) STAGE 2: Wprime 32 Socket 754 Venice Core (3 CPU submissions) STAGE 3: GPUPI 100M Socket 478 Prescott 1024 core (3 CPU submissions) STAGE 4: SuperPi 32M Socket 939 (3 CPU submissions) STAGE 5: 3DMARK99 S478 & Geforce2 series (3 GPU submissions) STAGE 6: 3DMARK01 S939 & Radeon HD 2000 series (3 GPU submissions) STAGE 7: Aquamark3 AGP only (3 GPU submissions) STAGE 8: CPU-Z Memory Frequency Dual dimm (3 Mem submissions) DDR2 Stage 1: Superpi 1M AM2 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 2: Wprime 1024 Socket 775 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 3: CBR11.5 AM3 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 4: X265 1080P LGA775 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 5: 3DMark2001 Geforce 6 (3 x GPU submissions) STAGE 6: 3DMARK05 AMD CPU & Radeon HD 3000 series (3 x GPU submissions) STAGE 7: Unigene Heaven Basic (3 x Geforce9 submissions) STAGE 8: 3DMARK11 PHYSX TEST (3 x CPU submissions) DDR3 Stage 1: CB R15 S1366 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 2: SuperPi 32M AM3 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 3: X265 4K LGA2011 X79 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 4: GPU Pi 100M socket FM1 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 5: 3DMark03 Geforce 600 series (3 x GPU submissions) STAGE 6: 3DMark Vantage Geforce 700 series (3 x GPU submissions) STAGE 7: 3DMark11 HawaI/Tahiti cores (3 x GPU submissions) STAGE 8: 3DMark Firestrike APU FM2(+) (3 x iGPU submissions) DDR4 Stage 1: Geekbench 3 MULTI for dual core CPUs (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 2: Y-Cruncher pi-1B Quad CORE CPUS (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 3: CBR15 divided per core (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 4: PCMARK7 (3 x CPU submissions) STAGE 5: Aquamark3 AMD only (3 x GPU submissions) STAGE 6: 3DMark Vantage GPU Performance (3 x GPU submissions needed) STAGE 7: 3DMark 11 Extreme Dual GPU (3 x GPU submissions needed) STAGE 8: 3DMark Firestrike APU/IGP (3 x iGPU submissions needed) Remarks, feedback other thoughts are as always welcome
  2. 9 points
    One single thing? Give ycruncher points, it's an interesting benchmark that can run on an extremely wide range of hardware with a validation system and a developer who cares about security. In a broader sense, the problem with insecure benches like aquamark or 3dmark2001se is not that they necessarily are cheated, but that when someone puts a lot of effort into finding legit tweaks and gets monster scores other people will accuse them of bugging the bench or cheating - often without any sense of irony from either group. It doesn't matter if anyone is actually cheating - if everyone knows you *could* cheat that alone is a salt mine. On the other hand if those benches lost points it would REALLY fucking suck because there's not much else you can even run on the kind of ultra cheap old-ass agp cards that are good for getting into competitive OC.
  3. 7 points
    Sandbagging is just part of the game, you guys need to learn to push to the max and nothing else, if you're holding back or thinking a score is "good enough" then it's your own problem and nobody else's.
  4. 6 points
    In my example with the 2600 the score is shown in the ranking, that is what counts for me. No need to show the entire ranking ladder...
  5. 5 points
    Deadline ? I think most are aware that a good programmer can break any benchmark out there. Even the wrapper equipped ones. However does that lead to any responsability affiliated to HWBOT? HWBot needs to do a post on benchmark security or integrity? Really? Honestly no idea what some people have been drinking but I want a jerrycan of that moonshine to keep me trying to run this place... IF everybody runs the benchmarks as they are designed to be without e.g. any downclocking, pulling cables or changing the benchmarks settings we would not have all these rules and bugged scores. I would even dare to claim that the users are more to blame than the site that hosts the scores in it's "special way" If Matt can design a wrapper for eg the Cinebenches/Wprimes that would be cool and I would be happy to donate to make these 2D benchmarks more bulletproof. XP is going down anyway, so if you can make it compatible from Win7 and up, it would be perfectly fine for futureproofing these legacy benchmarks
  6. 5 points
    DDR4 platforms and no Titans as mentioned before, the stage will be Vantage GPU performance, to have a wider variety of benchmarks and to rule out them super expensive 7980XE CPUs. X99 with DDR3 is hard to find I guess Frank, so yes it is LGA2011 only. And no Xeon CPUs DDR4 Stage7 is limited up to maximum of 2 GPUS, no limitations there besides no server CPUs. So e.g. Titan V can be used (but it doesn'"t work in SLI so they can only use one card) Guys there are 8 stages per memory type, a team cup is not lost if you can't compete for the top spots in one stage. Team Cup always has been about benching on a huge variety of platforms, but it seems I just can't win and please everybody.
  7. 5 points
    Nope, turn auto hiding off... if I can manage a proper CB verification at 1280*1024 you should be able too Yes, there will be single Xeon CPU and AMD Opterons allowed in the mix with some of the older hardware stages
  8. 4 points
    If we want to attract new people we should have bulletproof benchmarks that work on the latest OSses.. sadly we are limited to a handfull that are RTC bug free... Thanks for Intel for adressing it, no thanks to AMD for not giving a fuck. Nothing evolving in this hobby besides the hardware, hence why we need 6 different OSses to get the best performance per benchmark. This alone frustrates new users, as they all bench on 8.1 or 10. Only Futuremark moves on , the rest is... About the hardware cost, things are getting ridicilous and I even suggested a 10 core limit on the newer gens of CPUs. Many 3D benchmarks have become in fact 2D benchmarks. No more LN2 on GPUs as the CPU takes control of the total output. Is that benching ? Maybe it is in your book, in mine things have become way too easy. Do you need to pull out a soldering iron each time? nope but grabbing points and winning certain competitiions have never been easier. If we would allow 7980XE and Titan GPUs to rule in the DDR4 stage , would that attract new blood? I beg to differ from many of the haters in this thread. Open up to cheaper and more challenging hardware... it is not just about points and WRs.... I can assure you Country Cup will be a similar format as it was too easy to claim the victory, since you only needed a few recently modern good CPUs to trash the rest. Unless you want to design the competition with me. Ex-admins approved of the current format as it is versatile and it will be challenging to hit the top spots in each stage. Thanks Yousarianlives for a nice recap on what Team Cup should be.
  9. 4 points
    You don't attract new members by raising the cost of entry. You do it by having a strong community that they want to be a part of. When I first got active on hwbot it was because of rog comp last year and I happened to have a platform that I could contribute for the r/oc team, which comes from an active community that I was a part of. I tried to do some solo competitions after that comp ended last year and what I found is that solo benching sucks. The only competitions that I have any fun in are the team competitions because of the community and working with my team to find the best hw and how to best take on a given bench. Most importantly I enjoy actually being able to contribute to a team, if the cost of entry was $5k in hw upfront I never would've gotten into this hobby. Ever. If the cost was $150 in hw that's actually fun to oc I wouldn't mind if it was worth "scrap" when I'm done because x299 would also be worth "scrap" when I'm done with it. "Renting" hw to bench is no fun and shouldn't be the requirement to be competive in a competition. Making a single stage all out (DDR4 Stage 7) is fine because you can still be competive while absolutely losing that stage, but you shouldn't make it multiple stages that are lost. If someone like jpmboy only has fun benching new stuff that's fine, that's why there's a bunch of varying stages and it's a team comp. You work with your team to fill the stages you don't feel like benching or don't have the hw for so that you can fill all stages. Of course you can't have all the stages you want (I'd have loved have seen 1155 show up at all in this competition) but perhaps you'll see that the competition is about benching about 2-3 stages and relying on a team for the rest. If you complain about this being a disadvantage for "weaker" teams then maybe you don't understand the point of a team comp. Why do you think team au wins country cup every year when if you do the numbers of golden hw USA should never lose, ever? It's because they're a fucking team and they bench as one. Teams that don't bench as a team won't win team competitions.
  10. 4 points
    Will do... nobody spotted this till the first one subbed with the Ti
  11. 4 points
    Awesome event! It was great meeting everyone, and getting to do some benching at the same time. Special thanks to funsoul for organizing the venue and sponsors, and steponz and Lochekey for running the competition. And of course, thanks to Corsair for sponsoring the event. Hope to see you all next year!
  12. 3 points
    There are ways around the "too easy" factor that we've done in previous years - just setup certain cards only - if you pick older gen, then you have to mod them, which I'm all for. For me personally? learning the right OS for the benchmark and all the tweaks are PART of the benchmark process, if a benchmark was set clocks and press start, how boring! I'm fine with a 10c limit on stuff for comps, but I do like when there's a full out stage, which i think is good for vendor promotion as well. Is the hwbot asana still open for collaboration for the CC stages Albrecht? (looks like yes but cancelled from march 2019)
  13. 3 points
    Cost of buying an old system with a bunch of CPU's to test = $150 Cost of buying 1 Titan V = $3K It's not really a fair comparison is it really..... I'm sure you'll get a lot more out of an old system and learn a lot more too. I would suggest more new users buy older gear to be honest as it gives them a cheaper platform to learn on.
  14. 3 points
    I checked ebay.de and can find multiple 3000-3200 and 3400 S754 Venice cores costing between 5-20 euros...
  15. 3 points
  16. 3 points
    No need for. Asrock Z390 OCF incoming ;)
  17. 3 points
    Seems like the sannity checker fixed it.
  18. 3 points
    We wont be missing it thats for sure been waiting for it.
  19. 3 points
    dude if it comes to it I'll ship you a 5450
  20. 3 points
    my processors have the following optimal temperatures for bench: 3400+ newark + 5 ÷ + 7 3700+ newark -10 ÷ -12 (unfortunately killed him, otherwise I would have competed with Pete and others) Turion ML37 -7 ÷ -9 CABZE preferred batch
  21. 3 points
    In recent months consumers have seen Samsung based DDR4 prices steadily increasing and there seems to be no light at the end of the tunnel. However, I am happy to report to you today that there is hope. In the overclocking world, Samsung B-Die based memory modules have become ubiquitous with tight timings and high frequency. The market demand has grown exponentially for B-Die memory because of its many advantages, but the downside to this is the constantly increasing prices. Teamgroup Inc. decided to meet the demand of this market by launching their Dark Pro line of memory which appears to be a budget conscious memory module based around highly overclockable Samsung IC’s. While not all of the memory in the Dark Pro lineup may not be equipped with the coveted B-Die, I have confirmed that my test kits do indeed use it. You may not be familiar with them, but Teamgroup Inc. is not a new company. They were founded in 1997, and they have been a top contender in the memory market since the days of DDR1. The dark pro lineup offers a few different choices to meet your demands, all are certified XMP 2.0. For the purposes of this research project and review, I will be looking at the kit of memory that is confirmed to be Samsung B-Die. While other modules in the lineup may be highly overclockable and extremely efficient for gaming, my objective is the maximum overclock potential. Therefore, he kit of memory I will be looking at today is the DDR4 3200c14 kit, which runs XMP 2.0 timings of 14-14-14-31. Teamgroup Inc. Dark Pro Lineup: Packaging is often an overlooked element to a finished product, but it shouldn't be. The packaging is just a delivery mechanism to ship the product safely, but it also serves as the first impression of quality. We have all opened products with cheaply made packaging and whether you acknowledge it or not I believe that it has an effect on the first impression of the product. The Dark Pro packaging does not disappoint. While it is incredible simple and effective, it does lend a feeling of quality. The heatsink design and look is incredibly subjective, but one thing is certain, when you hold the memory in your hands you get the feeling of quality. It has weight and the overall fit and finish feel excellent. On a personal level I strongly dislike anything RGB. I think the memory should be neutral and blend in to the system without standing out. I think the the Dark Pro modules fulfill that requirement perfectly with the predominant color being black and the highlight colors being either gray or red. They blend into the system and allow you to focus lighting efforts in other places. Dark Pro in Red With just a small flash of red, they blend in nicely with almost any system. Here you can see then paired up with the ASRock X299 OC Formula. The overall objective is memory overclocking for benchmarking purposes. Many of the benchmarks today can benefit from both increased memory speeds and tighter timings. With this kit of memory, the XMP is already incredibly efficient combining both high frequency and low latencies. However, my goal is to take things one step further and find out the percentage of gain I can achieve in benchmarks from purely memory overclocking. To evaluate the performance I will use Geekbench 3. This type of benchmark is purely 2D calculation based, there is no graphical processing element so it's a great analytical tool to evaluate memory performance. Specifically speaking, “Geekbench 3 features new tests designed to simulate real-world scenarios. This helps make Geekbench an invaluable tool to determine how your current computer (or your next computer) will handle your tasks and applications.” (quote taken from www.geekbench.com) There are two main areas of usage I want to address with this review. In the first part I will look at what can be accomplished using the absolute maximum voltage. According to the XMP 2.0 certifications, the absolute maximum allowable voltage is 1.50v VDDR. Anything above this will void the warranty and potentially kill the memory. In the second part of this review I will evaluate any potential gains to be had from driving MORE than 1.50 VDDR. In some situations there can be substantial gains in frequency and latency by driving up to about 2.10v VDDR. Note: I have been overclocking DDR4 just about on a daily basis with over 2.0v and there has been no detrimental effects to the CPU, MB, or memory in over a year of hard use. That being said, it will most certainly void any warranty. Both of my test systems are not contained within a case, they are open air test rigs. This gives me the flexibility to quickly change configurations and run exotic test setups without being constrained to a computer case. The ambient air during the testing was right around 80-85F. Dual channel memory test system CPU: i7 8700k Motherboard: ASRock Z170M OC Formula (Modded to allow Coffee Lake CPU’s) Memory: 16GB Teamgroup Dark Pro DDR4 3200Mhz Power Supply: Seasonic 1200W Platinum PRIME Graphics: 9400GT (I use a very basic GPU for 2D testing) Storage: OCZ Vertex 2 (64GB) Cooling: Custom water with 2x360 radiators OS: Windows Server 2012 R2, 64bit Maximum memory: Restricting the memory seen by OS to 1.8GB (Required for CL12 tests) Dual channel memory test rig Quad channel memory test system CPU: i9 7940X Motherboard: ASRock X299 OC Formula Memory: 32GB Teamgroup Dark Pro DDR4 3200Mhz Power Supply: Seasonic 1200W Platinum PRIME Graphics: 9400GT (I use a very basic GPU for 2D testing) Storage: OCZ Vertex 2 (64GB) Cooling: Custom water with 2x360 radiators and Kingpin cooling T-Rex for subzero testing OS: Windows 7 Embedded, 64bit Maximum memory: Restricting the memory seen by OS to 4.3GB (Required for CL12 tests)+ Quad channel memory test rig For each platform I will examine the overclock potential under various conditions as described above. However, I thought it would also be interesting to look at how Geekbench responds to increase in memory speeds. Looking at score improvement with only memory overclock is not just a curiosity, it's a real world representation heavy load daily functions. High End Desktop: X299 Platform, Quad Channel Test 1: XMP 2.0 (Stock Voltage) Score: 58568 Test 2: 3733 14-14-14-31 (1.50v or Under) Score: 59314 Test 3: 3800 12-11-11-24 (Under 2.1v, Actual = 1.85v) Score 61665 Mainstream Desktop, Z170 Platform, Dual Channel Test 1: XMP 2.0 (Stock Voltage) Score: 29986 Test 2: 3733 14-14-14-31 (1.50v or Under) Score: 30432 Test 3: 3733 12-11-11-24 ((Under 2.1v, Actual = 1.80v) Score 31537 Below is the calculations showing percentage gain of overclocking memory I used this memory when I overclocked my i9 7940X with Liquid Nitrogen. I was curious to see if I would be able to achieve any noteworthy increase in memory overclock potential with the CPU under LN2. In this particular case, with X299, I was not able to increase the memory overclock potential. It should be noted that gains from LN2 CPU should be more noticeable with the Z170 platform, but at this time I have yet to test that configuration. Here is the quad channel system in the process of running some LN2 tests I have spent a fair bit of time testing other memory modules with both X299 quad channel and Z170 dual channel. In the quad channel configuration, the Dark Pro kit of memory is on par with the best DDR4 available on the market today. I have compared them to quad channel kits that exceed $650 and the overclock potential is exactly the same, this is really quite impressive. However, in the dual channel configuration, with Z170, they do not have the same overclock potential. With other memory modules, testing in the same Z170 MB/CPU configuration, I have reached 4133 CL12 vs Dark Pro 3733 CL12. As I have shown above, the real world gain in performance from memory overclocks beyond XMP is really not practical. The maximum performance I was able to achieve was about 3.5% but this required voiding the warranty and severely limiting the life of the hardware. I highly recommend this memory for quad or dual channel configurations. The overclocking potential in Quad channel is really quite impressive, right in line with the absolute best. If you are a power user who is using subzero cooling for highly competitive extreme overclocking in dual channel mode only, then perhaps this memory is not for you. At the time of this review, you can purchase a 16GB (2x8) kit of this memory on for $210.00 Pros: Overclocking Potential, Design, Price Cons: Not on par with the very best B-Die when used in Z170/270/370
  22. 3 points
    I have updated the download page on overclockers.at to reflect the situation on HWBOT better. Let me know if that helps.
  23. 3 points
    Can't believe the SF3D pot is still there at this price. By far one of the easiest pots for CB / CBB prone CPUs.
  24. 3 points
    I waited a bit before replay, i usually read everything also if i don't take part in the discussions i'm watching you In 3 pages no one have mention how much is our fault this situation? yes i'm talking also of myself as we should be shame of ourself 'cos as a community we sucks hard fellas. If you like something why you wanna try to kill it? I really can't understand where this auto-destructive attitude come from. Is really come the time where we need to put our personal interest aside and start think as a community, otherwhise can close everything and go golf like old cucks. What i love of hwbot is the database where i can compare my score with other people from all around the world. Don't care really much about boints no more, basically boints for me are cancer, i prefer work hard in just some scores and make it properly. So now i should say what i would change but.... @richba5tard i really wanna know what's your plane for the future. I mean you build this and i assume u care to keep it alive. Sadly i believe the only way to keep overclock alive is to burn hwbot from the ground and start over, probably move database in another more active community like overlcok.net or something like that. Seems people have no problem to pay an annual amount of money for have something smooth to play with, so i'd start from there. I know this might be painfull for you but really now are we talking about life or death for hwbot. This are my 22cents, I know we can sort things out and make something better than before, just please stop to suggest a point system at your advantages, we are lucky that a lot of this kind of people left so we can make what will come even better than before.
  25. 3 points
    Compliments for all and expecialy for Macsbeach for great work.
  26. 2 points
    The reasons why I am publishing this right now: 1) I have first talked to benchmark vendors (including Intel) and they know about these problems, yet they do nothing. 2) HWBOT knows about this, yet there isn't even an official statement on the current state of benchmark security. 3) I've shown this on the HWBOT forums and nobod really cared To sum it up: Nobody cares when actually everybody involved should. Benchmarks can't be taken seriously in their current state. There are not enough security measures implemented, the way timers are used is unreliable and the concept of handling results and hardware information is just plain wrong. I can go into details if anybody is interested. Additionally every benchmark developer is on it's own to implement the necessary "features" above. That leads to inconsistent quality/reliability of the benchmarks and their results. This was made pretty clear after the time skewing debacle and the mess it has left. But also smaller "attacks" have followed like the Nehalem dual socket phenomenom where people really believed that those old Xeons were world material. These problems hit hard because old benchmark versions have to be excluded from ranking or legacy benchmarks get more difficult to moderate. All that leads to trust issues among overclockers, especially new ones. And that's totally understandable because even I am coming across GPUPI results that I can't comprehend. It's not only about cheating but about trusting the mechanisms of the benchmarks, the hardware information gathering and the timers. So we compare the peformance of hardware with benchmarks that are not built with reliability in mind. Even with GPUPI 3 I am right now only chasing problems, not preventing them in the first place. So what needs to be done is a uniform mechanism for timing, result handling and hardware detection that all benchmarks can use. The validation logic needs to be transfered to the submission server as well, so decisions for result exclusion can be done at any point, even for the past. So why am I showing this? Because things need to be taken seriously from all sides and have to be changed for the better.
  27. 2 points
    pretty simple isnt it as far as im concerned--- its called a Teams Cup for a reason, if people dont know what a Teams Cup means by now they shouldnt be in it
  28. 2 points
    I'm not sure how barring 4K setups from a single DDR4 stage levels the field... not everyone keeps 10+ year old PC parts/components around and also "attend to" places like HWBOT. More importantly when the majority of stages involve old/obsolete equipment, how does that attract new users/enthusiasts? Rather than exclude very-HEDT from all stages to level the field, a few temperature or frequency limited stages would do the same. (yes, I do have some old stuff running 24/7, but that stuff has a day job ) Anyway - no worries Leeg, we all thank you for putting the Team Cup together, and for dealing with... well, us! Figure this will bring a smile to anyone:
  29. 2 points
    Stage 7 is all out with max 2 GPUs, if your team can manage the hardware list you mentioned, good for you you might secure top spot with 50 points in the pocket. Now if you think all teams can manage it I think we would agree to disagree. Is that unfair?, Maybe or maybe not as they can only use their superexpensive gear in one stage. Now you talk of allowing them too in other stages Wow that's super contradicting to me... I don't get all this nitpicking on some stages, Team Cup is not about 1 stage to complete,
  30. 2 points
  31. 2 points
    Wish I had your luck looking, I only saw one desktop Venice period and a pair of Sempy's as said earlier. Never said they coudn't be found, only that between the three named models this won't be so easy for everyone to have a decent shot at getting one if they need to based on what I saw when I was looking. If the other two models were included that would make things much easier to at least get what one would need to compete and add variety to the mix.
  32. 2 points
    I agree with Bones There are very limited choices of Venice core cpu's on 754 , when asking for 3 different cpu. Lets add Newcastle and Clawhammer. You could even ask for one result from each core , that way. 1 Venice - 1 Newcastle - 1 Clawhammer
  33. 2 points
    Noted a Venice core is stated for Socket 754 - Would probrably be better if the more commonly found Newcastle or Clawhammer were included too at least. Venice chips for 754 aren't as easy to find as the other two cores. Not saying they can't be found, it's more of going with what's easy to find and get for cheap. I've looked today and saw only one Venice, all the rest being either Newcastle or Clawhammer chips with a couple of 3300+ Semprons in the mix - Clearly a Sempron just won't cut it for the comp regardless of what core it's based on. Of the two additional chips a Newcastle would be the best choice overall if anything else for overall availability and price.
  34. 2 points
    Some pics n' vids. Day 2 opener: https://www.facebook.com/stefanc.besterman/videos/1819135754840643/ Day 2 Competition start: https://www.facebook.com/stefanc.besterman/videos/1819513821469503/ Comp x265-1: https://www.facebook.com/stefanc.besterman/videos/1819521004802118/ Comp x265-2: https://www.facebook.com/stefanc.besterman/videos/1819525494801669/ Comp Semi-final: https://www.facebook.com/stefanc.besterman/videos/1819530968134455/ Competition final: https://www.facebook.com/stefanc.besterman/videos/1819939618093590/ Unfortunately, a lot of my vids have disappeared from fb (First time live streaming so likely user error). Hopefully others share more, Corsair will be putting out a few at some point. Thanks again for everyone who made it this year! -Stefan
  35. 2 points
  36. 2 points
    You can stay in my spare bedroom
  37. 2 points
    Sandbagging is part of the game a lot of people do it. Why put your best score up early you are only putting a target on your back for the other teams to beat. Get over it🙂
  38. 2 points
    You guys are all preaching to the choir about sandbagging. Leeghoofd and the madshrimps are the KINGS of sandbag mountain
  39. 2 points
    Staggered subcategory end dates works as an anti-sandbagging measure too and isn't as much of a pita as your suggestion.
  40. 2 points
    Only the setup running the specific hardware mentioned in the description... if you guys do team benching sessions, plz add some extra pics of the event to avoid any discussions
  41. 2 points
    After a couple crazy weeks, finally starting to catch my breath. The party was (imho, of course biased hehe) excellente!!!! Nice venue, good staff and everything went nicely. Great to see the regular crew again and meet quite a few new faces! We accessed the room around 5pm Thursday for setting up, hanging out and other fun things. Friday open benching was a blast. Sadly (but fortunately for us), Joe spent the day (most of the weekend actually) starring in Corsair videos, prepping x299's for the competiion and generally hanging out answering questions. Saturday's competition (planned by Joe and refereed by Lochekey) was awesome! 1-on-1 double elimination action with nice Corsair ram and AX1600i psus, Intel 7940X's and EVGA Dark boards. It was a long comp and it came down to yosarianlives and aerotracks in the final. aerotracks powered through and took the big win. Congrats to both for some great benching and thank you to Joe and Lochekey for planning and delivering a great competition! Enormous thanks to Corsair and the team (Colin, Henry and Joey) for sponsoring this event for the 3rd year running!!! Really appreciate everything they've done for us! Thank you for bringing all the great Vengeance LPX 4400 and psus!! Also, thanks out to Intel for the tastey cpus and Jakob at evga for the badass Darks! Will add some pics here in the coming days, hopefully others will, too. Here's the fb page: https://www.facebook.com/events/1071523912999632/ Thanks again to everyone who attended! You're what makes this awesome. Please share your subs and any cool pics! -Stefan
  42. 2 points
    [quote] You jump started the thread , making it the official bonus round thread ... and you dont have any answers ? Just questions and remarks ? Since you decited to open up this thread , why not prepare a basic description in your opening post ? What's this bonus round for ? Which is the hardware allowed ? What are the stages ? Wallpaper ... and so on. Have a look at the other official round threads of this season. [/quote] Why the moderators do not track the beginning of each round and in a timely manner do not create a discussion with a description, a wallpaper, etc. I needed a wallpaper since there was a little LN2 and it was necessary to get basic results.
  43. 2 points
    http://picx.xfastest.com/nickshih/asrock/Z17MOCF7.51E_CFL.bin.zip Core selection fixed 1/2/3/4/5/6 all available now instead of 1/2/3/6
  44. 2 points
    Nice work, especially funsoul and steppy
  45. 2 points
    Great event! Thanks corsair, evga, Intel for sponsoring the event, couldn't have it without you
  46. 2 points
    Still in the making will be ready right after the challengers are done
  47. 2 points
    http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/143b/ http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/g41m_p34_ms_7592/
  48. 2 points
    The thing with points is they provide a way for legacy stuff to have some kind of meaning, providing instant context. Without them only the latest top-end stuff will matter because that's all people care about, and that makes XOC a lot more exclusive and hurts the community. HWbot is alive. This would be death.
  49. 2 points
    you dont even need matt's hax to do the simplest BS possible. Saving the screen shot then apply as background, then put in any processor you or GPU you want open the cpu tab and take another screenshot on top of it. This ruins all no validated benching and I honestly think its more common than people think in HW benching. IE run a vantage with a 5870 and then save only the score window. Set that picture as the background reboot with your ln2 4870 and you have the Worldrecord without even benching congratulations. Atleast with a wrapper or systeminfo there is an extra layer of security even if its not offically supported it will say the card name in the link that was used. Its also not uncommon for ln2 benchers to save the screenshot of just the score immediately incase CPUz causes a system crash. Then you can just apply as background and open your cpuz with slow mode enabled flip off quickly save and good to go. Atleast in this case the bench is actually run at the reported frequency. (Dont be distracted by the cute baby he has since grown into that massive head if you were concerned ) Matt's fixes are a great starting point to the future of secure submissions, hopefully he finds a place that takes him seriously. TLDR: Screenshots are not secure and we need better validation than that
  50. 2 points