Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


max1024 last won the day on September 5

max1024 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

51 Excellent

About max1024

  • Rank
    grunt bot


  • Location


  • Interests


  • Occupation


  • realname
  1. is hwbot.org down?

    This is a provocation LOL!
  2. Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    I took two days (do not look at the language barrier, it exists I know it, although not all recognize this) to understand everything and I can say that I completely agree with everything written above Strunkenbold. This topic can be discuss endlessly, but it is need to Do something. I do not know who now runs HWBOT, but I would like it to be independent people who are not in any teams. Either they are, but do not have any complaints from all users. It would be good to strengthen cultural discipline as well, open off against insults within this forum and start by bringing the rules for tests into order. This problem about the error in CPU-Z showed that it’s do not have to hurry to press the "Delete" button. For very old processors with a free multiplier, CPU-Z will never determine what kind of model it is, the multiplier can also be erroneous, but often (though not always) the final clock frequency is displayed correctly. The degree of trust is also important, I do not think that most users want to deceive others, in the first place they deceive themselves. To start moving forward I propose to create a separate page on the forum and there to discuss problematic issues. Here is my example. Video cards that do not support 16-bit color get points in 3DMark2001 SE. Look for an example on Voodoo3 3000 AGP. My suggestion is to make an exception for this test for this test, since it is not physically possible to pass the test in 32-bit color, but leave the rest of the rules unchanged.
  3. Real frequency: FSB 66.0 Mhz x3.5 = 231 Mhz
  4. Real frequency: 3.5 x 100 Mhz = 350 Mhz
  5. Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    Do no delete posts above, next post i'll write in english. So you see that language barrier exist and influence on whole situation, which i wrote upper about.
  6. Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    This topic received a fairly wide response, a lot of dissatisfied with the overclokers, some even left their teams. It is sad. All the below written will reflect the collective point of view of Overloekers from different teams, I just summarized the information. Question 1. Why do people start to write on the forum only when the administration blocks their results and why they do not read the forum regularly. Answer. The main problem is the language barrier. Not everyone is fluent in English and has to spend considerable time translating text with the help of translators. Text information in a foreign language is not instantly perceived. That creates a lot and highlight the most important information and translate it is not for everyone. (Try to read personally foreign forums) Second, the difference between time zones and the specifics of each work. Not everyone can hang at the forum all the time, someone comes there once a day, someone once a week. Among the overclockers there are a lot of people who, due to their profession, can not be constantly connected to the Internet. Many overclockers wrote to me that they do not go to the forum on the above mentioned problems, they just do overclocking and spread the results. I hope I understandably wrote the reason with the help of an online translator, why things are in a number of cases just like this. I apologize if something was not completely correct. 2. Culture of communication. During the discussion in this topic was written a lot of bad. Some users allowed themselves outright rudeness and unprintable replicas. This is very embarrassing. The rules of decency are the same in all countries and continents. Often, there is no due respect, not all oveklokers for 18 years, there are people who are no longer young and have exchanged the 5th dozen - show respect. This topic is read not only overclockers but also news editors of specialized sites, as well as representatives of companies of component manufacturers. This behavior has a bad effect on the reputation of the entire oveklokerskogo community, which clearly does not benefit anyone. Insults are not permissible in principle, for this you need to give a ban. We call for a normal discussion. 3 Order. If you go to the link http://hwbot.org/article/about_us, you can see that the links do not work, the information is outdated. The news is also not updated, but it's half the trouble. The trouble is in the rules, screenshots and much more than that. Propose 1. State the rules in a new edition. Make a link to them on the main page. 2. Do not use new rules that will affect old results. 3.All questions that in the future will affect the change in the rules to notify everyone of the news on the main page and make a mailing to all users by email and in private messages on the forum. 4.Review all links to downloadable benchmarks (some do not work). 5. Make a list of all the errors in the tests so that any newcomer can see in the example of the same SR-2 what can be done and what is not. 4.Democracy, Help and a way out of the situation. Democracy should still be, in conditions of dictatorship and the imposition of opinions of individuals on the interpreted rules, in general, nothing good will come of it. More precisely, it did not work out as many overclockers were simply disappointed in this project, but not everything is lost. Everyone can make mistakes from this, no one is immune. Yes, decisions must be made, but it is better to discuss them in advance, notifying everyone of this. To facilitate the task of establishing order in the database, it is possible to call for volunteers from among the recommended users to grant them the right to adjust the results. Only the correction of minor errors without the possibility of removing it? I think that there are people who want to help.
  7. Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    I carefully read all your arguments and want to say the following. I've tried almost all the sockets, chipsets and processors since socket 3 and I can say that the final FSB frequency depends on the mass of factors such as the actual capacitor power, the degree of their wear, the current that is applied to the main elements of the board including the cloker, the temperature that acts on the elements of the motherboard. As a result of these and other physical processes, FSB often "swims", even in real time. The deviation from the set frequency by jumpers can exceed 1 MHz. I think many are aware of how from the "tired" motherboard in addition to squeeze out extra performance. For those who do not know, I tell: need to give a good load on the processor, running a benchmark. As a result of increasing the voltage at all nodes of the system, the FSB will also be tightened, depending on the physical state of the components of the motherboard and even the used power supply, which can deliver different currents along different lines, both to the large and to the smaller side. Somewhere such a method reduces performance and the FSB fall sdown, even downt the limit. CPU-Z in some cases just creates a load on the processor. As a result, from 66 MHz, you can get 67 MHz or even 65. All my results are in this corridor. This is the normal behavior of old systems. If you look at the result of other utilities such as AIDA 64, NOBODY knows the algorithms for changing the CPU frequency of this and other utilities, and there are no guarantees that they are not subject to the same errors as certain versions of CPU-Z. Therefore, one should not assert anything without knowing the exact Facts. I understand that Antinomy also owns the information, but let me refer to the opinion of one person is not reasonable, there is still logic, physics, mathematics and what only the creators of programs and processors know. And if the frequency as you write differs by 0.5 MHz, is this a Bug? This stupid frequency, as I wrote above, can be different at any moment of the time, and a competent OVERCLOCKER who knows 100% of the behavior of his old components will make the right decision to increase this frequency by different methods. Bug is when exhibited 150 and shows 450, for ALL of the my results, the measurement error does not reach even 5 MHz. If you say there is not 500 and 495 MHz, different tests have different load, who wants to do better - will take the next FSB stripe. As for the application of rules, laws and so on. I consulted today with lawyers and that's what they told me. In civilized, democratic countries, when adopting a new law or rule, this law has no inverse legal force. In jurisprudence, there are cases when, when adopting new rules and laws, its validity extends to legal relationships that arose before the adoption of the law. In such cases, the civilized and democratic norm is the indication of all aspects and terms from when the new legal relations will affect the old order. Typically, such situations arise when one law is canceled, and the second has not yet entered into legal force and for this period (for this period) when the old law does not work, and the new one has not yet been adopted, the retroactive rule on legal relations arising in the past . In this case, in advance in the mass media, this information should be published in public access. What I see here, no news on this fact was published on the main page of the site, no information came to the email. The present edition of the rules still applies, no transitional periods are observed. From the point of view of common sense and the law, such actions are simply not legal, not democratic. If you follow such logic, then the first idea is to delete ALL results from Cinebench 2003-R15, where the screenshots close the visible part of the screen. But this is not done. Further it is necessary to delete all results without screenshots (which were lost when moving the database). We want to establish the same order? Using the same approaches? If the administration intends to introduce NEW RULES, first publish these rules for ALL. Write a date from which these rules will apply and which versions of programs or tests to use for each family of processors. It will be fair to all. Old results, as the results without screenshots or closing the windows of programs leave as is. There will still be many attempts to establish more than one record and the existing results will be improved, but there is no need to touch, then a lot of energy, energy and time were spent. As for the help, I am ready to help in identifying and correcting the wrong results. I often look through the old results and see as much garbage. In a series of cases, which can be corrected by replacing the Mhz by Ghz, or by moving the comma several characters back. Write to me in PM I do not refuse help.
  8. Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    I have been following all the rules since 2007, and I can not understand why the rules are different for all and the criteria by which these rules are established and applied at different times in different ways. In this case, they have not yet answered my results specifically what is wrong with them. Just "wrong" does not suit me.
  9. Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    Hey, did you ever click on my results? Which monitor or GPU? At least read carefully and look at the links above. Enough already to write the general phrases, it's time to think carefully and to conclude that this or that system could work at the frequency or not. We are not discussing the resolution with the GPU, although this is also an important issue, and SPECIFIC results. Wake up.
  10. Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    Who is the LAW? I remember the movie "Judge Dredd" and the famous phrase of Sylvester Stalone: "I'm the Law!". It seems to me that the games of the Gods are not relevant here. ... blah blah ... I talked with a friend and we took it and decided that it turns out that some results are not valid. Wow! And not all, but some selective ones, and only a few people know this universal secret. Apparently those who decided so (and decided immediately for everyone) have exceptional knowledge in ALL old HW, and everyone else was sitting and drawing screenshots and photos of their results. They made stands, freezed the processors and everything for the sake of making a FALE?,... it is fundamental! All benching at a certain time, not tied to the versions of CPU-Z. What version of cpu-z acted at the time of filing, this one was used, so it was relevant at the time of filing and only it could be accepted for validation. I can say that ALL of my results are real, and are obtained by putting jumpers and settings in BIOS and corresponds to what programs shows! I look and I can not understand everything logically we take a multiplier of 3,5 multiply by the bus 100 we compute 350. Or is there another mathematics? Well, let the other, apparently some believe that 2 + 2 is five, but then explain how on the motherboard without the possibility of overclocking, having a pair of Pentium 2 MMX 233 get any other numbers except those close to 233? In fact, I have 231 MHz. I understand if that CPU-Z showed 587 MHz, then you can still dream about how such figures were obtained, but 231 on a motherboard that has a bus at 66 MHz and is no longer capable. With two 233 MHz processors, OMG we get 231 MHz - no words, to those who made the decision to delete. http://hwbot.org/submission/3372942_max1024_cpu_frequency_2x_pentium_mmx_233mhz_231_mhz I'm also for this! But first you need to also think about it, No? This is not the word of a real overclocker, who thinks about his colleagues in the shop. Football is a team game, we all are the Team, if in the future you want to see one player on the field, please go on. In the past, this is not the only case and many overclockers are not satisfied with this state of situation. It may be instructed that many will go away deleting their accounts, I do not think that the Team of like-minded people will be better off.
  11. Frequency detection bug with old Socket 5 CPUs

    I'm NOT agree. 1. http://hwbot.org/submission/3331215_max1024_cpu_frequency_pentium_mmx_233mhz_350_mhz It's normal result 100*3.5 = 350 Mhz under -35C, or may be you think that my Super Pi1M on 350 also fake? http://hwbot.org/submission/3331220_max1024_superpi___1m_pentium_mmx_233mhz_6min_32sec_134ms I'm on the HW bot more then 10 years and nkow about old HW all. 2. http://hwbot.org/submission/3457688_max1024_cpu_frequency_embedded_pentium_mmx_266mhz_500_mhz Read this via google translate https://overclockers.ru/lab/print/82458/retrokloking-world-fastest-pentium-mmx or may be AIDA 64 and other soft also have a BUG? [/img] And other my results. I look Strunkenbold at this issue formally, not understanding the situation, but it would be worth it. It is very sad to see such a lack of competence.