24 pts chew*

Where the download link for june challenge background? And why not a SDRAM category?

Yes. Where the download link for background?

I have benched some DDR1 and DDR2 memory and have some good results,but without background.

Please, give to us background...))

An interesting Competition... but i think the Benchmark Maxxmem is still a little bit buggy.

Anyway i should like to enter the contest.

Let the Battle begin. :-)

Oops ... the background. I knew I forgot something. Will upload tonight.

MaxxMem shouldn't be buggy with older (read: supported) hardware. I suppose there's no problem for the Thuban, but if there is, we'll just have to look for a solution.

Is There Any Prizes?

For Each Category?

No. This is about having fun.

So I Hope it will be great fun also where could we download the background?

OK Waiting For BackGround

Ok guys im getting into it have nice overclocking and we will see who would win

No. This is about having fun.

As always

But... shouldn't the points earned in the challenge be added to our personal profile?

Thanks

We already have one submition.

lol...dust off those old boxes guys

Background was added in the competition page

There seems to be some issues with the DDR3 stage ... trying to fix it right now.

Question Guys:

Can I Submit For 2 Stage?

Stage 1 And Stage 2 With 2 Rig?

I Have Two Rig And Can Submit For Stage One And Two

^^

As far as you use AMD's CPU you can submit with any system as you want.

You can submit in all three stages with all CPU

Ok Rich Guys Show More Rig

Just wondering... is this benchmark dependant on CPU speed? I mean... I run some sticks at 300x9, will I get a better score at 300x10, for example? I know I could probably try it myself, but i need to finish my exams first

Just wondering... is this benchmark dependant on CPU speed? I mean... I run some sticks at 300x9, will I get a better score at 300x10, for example? I know I could probably try it myself, but i need to finish my exams first

From my tests, had some improvement. (DDR)

Check the DDR submissions I matched DDR speed (258) from 2nd place, only (tRC) is different.

EDIT

Multi @9, I'd change HT ref, to equal DDR speed @258.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

In other words... I need some LN2 if i want to compete:D My exams are over soon, and I got a nice TCCD kit in the mail a few days ago - maybe I can get a decent score at least for DDR.

In other words... I need some LN2 if i want to compete:D My exams are over soon, and I got a nice TCCD kit in the mail a few days ago - maybe I can get a decent score at least for DDR.

Yes, LN2... hope some day feel the experience of it, it's hot in here (south of Portugal), room temp around 28ºC and no AC, ( a lot of fans bloowing the hardware)

All the best for the competition and exams, specially for the exams.

Yes, LN2... hope some day feel the experience of it, it's hot in here (south of Portugal), room temp around 28ºC and no AC, ( a lot of fans bloowing the hardware)

 

All the best for the competition and exams, specially for the exams.

TY. The exam will be OK, I need more luck for my new TCCD-kit:p

Just wondering... is this benchmark dependant on CPU speed?

correct!

also every little tiny sub timing you are able to lower, you will gain more and more points

I'll give it a shot with my UTT sticks as well as my TCCDs:D

Does all versions Maxxmem allowed, or only the latest?

Does all versions Maxxmem allowed, or only the latest?

http://www.maxxpi.net/pages/downloads/maxxmemsup2---preview.php

* There are no changes at the main benchroutine since initial release.

 

So your reaced results will be comparable, from v1.05 to all further upcoming releases.

I had to use v1.74 bcz 1.82 doesn't run on my M2N32-Deluxe, checket the task manager, and CPU-Z was heating all resources, and got stuck.

1000p on DDR2 is nice. Could it be because of the NB speed?

In my DDR3 testing, I noticed that NB speed made quite the difference.

1000p on DDR2 is nice. Could it be because of the NB speed?

 

In my DDR3 testing, I noticed that NB speed made quite the difference.

yes indeed does, I´m on DDR3 now, and was a good jump from IMC ~2900->3200 plus thigh timings on memory.

With better cooling is possible do hit 1100 marks.

Yes - mostly because L1 and L2 caches run at core speed

If I not mistaken, the IMC in the S939 CPUS is running always 1:1 with the CPU frequency, which means that increasing the CPU frequency also increases the IMC frequency.

Not always. you can choose a different CPU:RAM divider if i remembered correctly

Ram != Imc

If I not mistaken, the IMC in the S939 CPUS is running always 1:1 with the CPU frequency, which means that increasing the CPU frequency also increases the IMC frequency.

Correct, but for S939, another factor must got our attention, HT Link frequency. Doesn't afect scores as IMC's does, but have influence too.

Squezze them all...

Another thing I notice, doesn't matter much the number of cores in use, results are identical.

What about L3 cache? i think it makes the maxmemm to run slower or not?

What about L3 cache? i think it makes the maxmemm to run slower or not?

Yes, it does. I can confirm, by comparing my Phenom II 955/965's with Athlon II/Sempron results.

Thanks aGeoM!

one other think we have to consider is the use of 32 or 64 XP,Vista or Win7. I am checking some myself.

higher fsb is better than multi for black edition's and vista is better than win 7 .I have not try xp yet

OK... HOLIDAYS! Maybe I'll look for my 939 drive straight away to test some sticks.

OK, My PC5000 OCZ sticks are very good based on the memtest results, I could run 2.5-3-3-7-1T at 3.1v and... 326Mhz:D (tested one pass through test 5, that's the toughest one AFAIK) - I wonder if this particular test likes frequency over timings, if so maybe I should use these instead of my VX kit:)

I'll try in windows when I find my bench drive, it's somewhere in my mess

Edit: 2.5-4-3-7 335Mhz with 2 errors Too afraid to go any higher on the voltage for just quick testing, so I'll leave it at that I have more sticks to try. And... still onthe Expert, I bet they can do slightly more on the Venus:)

Ok guys don't waste your time on ln2, NB does not play a major role in l3 less cache chips on ddr II.

Pic in a bit when i shut this system down.......running 32m on athlon chip with ddr II O_o

check this out, the math is not adding up, wheres my boost from NB with l3 less cache cpu

http://chew.ln2cooling.com/athlon%20II%20255/LN2/maxmem2.jpg

Frosty shot for kicks.

http://chew.ln2cooling.com/athlon%20II%20255/LN2/IMG_2633.jpg

Ok guys don't waste your time on ln2, NB does not play a major role in l3 less cache chips on ddr II.

 

Pic in a bit when i shut this system down.......running 32m on athlon chip with ddr II O_o

I didn't say that, it's important but not the major, Maximum Latency read does.

I didn't say that, it's important but not the major, Maximum Latency read does.

very well aware of MRL, at best it got 30 points not 300.

very well aware of MRL, at best it got 30 points

yep how far did you go... 55..52 maybe.

Check my new score DDR3

yep how far did you go... 55..52 maybe.

 

Check my new score DDR3

40?

40?

Here is the full timings

yah thats not the problem , the problem is apparently this bench is useless and bugged apparently with l3 less cpu's.

It's rather obvious that there's no way in hell that that sempron will beat a phenom in anything mem intensive other than this bench much less intel in ddr II.

yah thats not the problem , the problem is apparently this bench is useless and bugged apparently with l3 less cpu's.

 

It's rather obvious that there's no way in hell that that sempron will beat a phenom in anything mem intensive other than this bench much less intel in ddr II.

I don't know about programming, and at some point you are right, does not make sense, but maybe... L3 is much slower than L1 and L2, and the program calculates the access time based in the 3 caches, making the score lower in L3 cases. Hopefully I also have here an 965 Phenom II, and we can test this "bug" theory. Until now what I notice is using lower MLR in conjunction with the other settings have showing an constant growing in scores.

BTW what is your default MRL at NB>4000?

Thx

EDIT

Run MaxxMEM w/Phenom II 965 @ same settings as before w/ Sempron, only Ganged was active didn't notice until I opened CPU-Z, but shouldn't be the problem:

EDIT 2

Played w/ NB, now @~3700 and lowered MLR to 43, tRW-TO and tRW-WB to 5:

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

What's the conclusion of it?

conclusion is bench is bugged and your MRL is alloiwng you to go very low for whatever reason. On ddr II board max lowest is 52 atm

conclusion is bench is bugged and your MRL is alloiwng you to go very low for whatever reason. On ddr II board max lowest is 52 atm

I'm on DDR3, and yes 52 is the lower I got booting at 9x on DDR2, and you can lower your MLR too, just configure lower NB in Bios and you will see. eg. 7x or 8x

Just send a mail to the coder of the application. Hope he knows what's up.

This looks to be a problem of unsupported architecture. We had the same issue when the Gulftown appeared.

Just send a mail to the coder of the application. Hope he knows what's up.

 

This looks to be a problem of unsupported architecture. We had the same issue when the Gulftown appeared.

Hi, I already used 3 CPU's and 3 board's, Athon II X2 250, Sempron 140 and now Phenom II 965, boards are ASUS M2N32-Deluxe WE bios 5001, ASUS M3A79-T bios 1203, and ASUS Crosshair IV Formula bios 903.

Still playing NB and MLR and the last score is 1862.7 picture in a minute. LOL

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[EDIT

http://cid-8828d15347fc782f.office.live.com/self.aspx/.Public/HWBOT/959l1730^_dc5501cc^_MaxxMem2.save

It could be something that isn't optimized for L3 cache in the code. Even so, a benchmark result isn't necessarily a good representation of real world performance.

I bet there are cases where HT actually harms performance as well, but it's not a bug:p

I'm on DDR3, and yes 52 is the lower I got booting at 9x on DDR2, and you can lower your MLR too, just configure lower NB in Bios and you will see. eg. 7x or 8x

Yep o know how to bring MRL down but if you rasie NB again with the tighter MRL = frozen screen

Ok, no tweaks settings from BIOS, NB @ 7x:

Tweaking NB, from 7x to 10:

No freeze, no reboot, just CPU-Tweaker to change NB, you have to open twice for new NB be accepted: open CPU-Tweaker -> change NB -> apply -> exit; then open-> chage some subtiming -> apply -> exit.

Run MaxMEM

Massman......there is more than meets the eye here still.

NO MRL.

MRL

BTW just figured it out........It's like a speed hack in 64 bit win 7 apparently.....

Cpu-z shows NB applies on the fly in windows........so does cpu twkr.....but in vista 32 score says otherwise.........will take a you tube of it

Also it's doesn't actually change NB in bios.......and now my OS thinks i'm at 2700 NB.

Just do the NB tweak, heres my last one NB @ 4700, when asked to reboot press [Cancel] and then reopen CPU Tweak.

MLR is at same 44 in the 3 cases, no change.

Yes i see that..........are you on LN2?

If No do you really think your at 4700 NB?

Do you really think it's applying?

no it isn't so therfore its an exploit of some form?

There is no exploit, just do what I say and you will see, only now testing an Black Edition I can go over 10x in NB w/ CPU Tweak.

Here's the last one, this time I set in BIOS NB@ 6x to force lower MLR (39) and then changed NB as I explain to you to 14x.

For some reason I don't know MaxMEM is acting as if I was at 4700, but results are consistent.

EDIT

Well, Why not go for extreme NB speed 30x...

the problem is GEO if your not understanding is your not actually at that NB speed you think you are.........Windows/or maxxmem however thinks you are .

Combined with the low MRL with the NB speed windows thinks you have it is impacting the bench.......call it an exploit or call it a cheat but your NB is not applying I am looking in bios.......it's not applied.........I'm in vista 32........although it says i'm at 2700 NB right now vista 32 is not tricked and performance is that of 800 NB which is what is set in bios

You would find that it would be impossible to run that tight an MRL at XXX NB speeds

Regardless of how you get it up whether that be an actual ability to raise via software.....which most boards can't do.

Believe me I am 1000% keen on the way MRL works and it does not work the way you think it does.

I suggest just my 2c that you clock your NB from bios and redo your results

I would dump win7 64 bit as well

As for me I'm all done with this comp till admins clean this mess up.......

the problem is GEO if your not understanding is your not actually at that NB speed you think you are.........Windows however thinks you are.

 

Combined with the low MRL with the NB speed windows thinks you have it is impacting the bench.......call it an exploit or call it a cheat but your NB is not applying I am looking in bios.......it's bot applied.........I'm in vista 32........although it says i'm at 2700 NB right now vista 32 is not tricked and performance is that of 800 NB which is what is set in bios

Now I know it's not possible my system is running at NB 4700, I booted many times at NB +3000 with sempron and Athlon, meanig 9x or 10x multis.

Both x86, x64 Win7s applied the NB setting in CPU-Tweaker, the first time I didn't realise what was triggering NB. Only with time I realised that setting NB first and then the timings, MaxMEM was performing faster. Found max NB, then was just playing with sub-timings, far from my mind to be cheating or something similar.

But you can duplicate my fiddings, just do the NB tweak, with multi-core, set affinity to one core.

Now I know it's not possible my system is running at NB 4700, I booted many times at NB +3000 with sempron and Athlon, meanig 9x or 10x multis.

 

Both x86, x64 Win7s applied the NB setting in CPU-Tweaker, the first time I didn't realise what was triggering NB. Only with time I realised that setting NB first and then the timings, MaxMEM was performing faster. Found max NB, then was just playing with sub-timings, far from my mind to be cheating or something similar.

 

But you can duplicate my fiddings, just do the NB tweak, with multi-core, set affinity to one core.

I could duplicate it but it's not legit....

I suggest you go back and do some legit results with booted NB multi now that it's quite clear that software was bugged.

If there was an actual program like AOD which may work on some boards on the fly.....you would find the inability to lower MRL just as if you booted it

Just some FYI, I can't duplicate what your doing in vista 32.......so admins may want to look into an OS designation for the remainder of this comp

Uhhh... I don't get this, is the benchmark just reading some parameters and determining the score based on that, or does it indeed measure some sort of memory performance?

Uhhh... I don't get this, is the benchmark just reading some parameters and determining the score based on that, or does it indeed measure some sort of memory performance?

I'm guessing a little of both......anything can be speedhacked though and thats preety much how the bench is reacting.

Gay bench. Needs to get canned IMHO.

Needs a fix, the bench itself looks cool:) But i bet there will be some sort of message tomorrow, but I'll leave that to the "big guys" when they wake up in 6-7 hours.

Jus for the record: alot of 3dmark versions are bugged as well, "bugged high, bugged low" - we've all heard that a few times. Time to remove them from the bot, so we're left with am3 + vantage perhaps?

Needs a fix, the bench itself looks cool:) But i bet there will be some sort of message tomorrow, but I'll leave that to the "big guys" when they wake up in 6-7 hours.

 

Jus for the record: alot of 3dmark versions are bugged as well, "bugged high, bugged low" - we've all heard that a few times. Time to remove them from the bot, so we're left with am3 + vantage perhaps?

I say we just bench the original 3d mark what was it 3dmaxx something or other?

I could duplicate it but it's not legit....

 

I suggest you go back and do some legit results with booted NB multi now that it's quite clear that software was bugged.

 

If there was an actual program like AOD which may work on some boards on the fly.....you would find the inability to lower MRL just as if you booted it

well.. chew, I'm not submitting results, any more, only here, with the intention of clarifying whats happening, CPU-Tweaker allow you to change NB freq, CPU-Z reads, MaxMEM acts as if NB is setting at that speed. You can see by looking to all my results that, in some I raise NB and CPU voltages bcz I was convicted that NB was running at that speed, and since I reached 10x limit I went HT ref route. AOD it's a fine tool, but if you change values there, like NB or HT and some in the memory page, it sets in BIOS to AUTO, insted os MANUAL, and we have to redo all the settings, HT Ref and some voltages...

About you Vista x86, you have to do the right steps to NB get read by MaxMEM, and I'm not sure but all AM2+ and AM3 board can change NB On the Fly w/ CPU-Tweak.

Any way be legit or not, using a software tool to change settings, I will remove my DDR2 and DDR3, for you please, not because I consider I was cheating or using exploids witch I was not, just used a tool in some cases required as validation (MEMSET/CPU-TWEAK) like any other tool (SPI Tweaker, A64Info, K10STAT, etc) you/we use to do your/our benchs.

well.. chew, I'm not submitting results, any more, only here, with the intention of clarifying whats happening, CPU-Tweaker allow you to change NB freq, CPU-Z reads, MaxMEM acts as if NB is setting at that speed. You can see by looking to all my results that, in some I raise NB and CPU voltages bcz I was convicted that NB was running at that speed, and since I reached 10x limit I went HT ref route. AOD it's a fine tool, but if you change values there, like NB or HT and some in the memory page, it sets in BIOS to AUTO, insted os MANUAL, and we have to redo all the settings, HT Ref and some voltages...

 

About you Vista x86, you have to do the right steps to NB get read by MaxMEM, and I'm not sure but all AM2+ and AM3 board can change NB On the Fly w/ CPU-Tweak.

 

Any way be legit or not, using a software tool to change settings, I will remove my DDR2 and DDR3, for you please, not because I consider I was cheating or using exploids witch I was not, just used a tool in some cases required as validation (MEMSET/CPU-TWEAK) like any other tool (SPI Tweaker, A64Info, K10STAT, etc) you/we use to do your/our benchs.

Yah not saying you actually knew what was happening, however it's very evident now.

I raised NB with cpu-TWKR to and cpu-z verified it....but it's not real thats where issue lies. Not your fault. You thought it was actually improving your score.

Now that you know however best to redo results

Yah not saying you actually knew what was happening, however it's very evident now.

I raised NB with cpu-TWKR to and cpu-z verified it....but it's not real thats where issue lies. Not your fault. You thought it was actually improving your score.

 

Now that you know however best to redo results

LOL... was really improving my scores, the score was obtained by the benchmark, some how it was reading all settings both CPU and memory and calculating from there.

I'm deleting all scores now. You are already in first.

Ouh, this looks bad. So basically, you're changing the NB clock in windows (which is impossible since change NBclk needs hard reboot) and all application read that it's set like this, so you get an unreal score.

Good catch!

Ouh, this looks bad. So basically, you're changing the NB clock in windows (which is impossible since change NBclk needs hard reboot) and all application read that it's set like this, so you get an unreal score.

 

Good catch!

Well, only with Phenom II I realise the "unreal" score before I used the M2N32, with that board NB was set by default to 8x max, so on CPU-Tweak I could change NB 8x to 10x by Apply and Cancel on Reboot message, after many trials, to level the NB default of the Sempron/Athlon II, as we know are locked to 10x.

The "exploid" as chew called, only begans when I was forced to proff that the results are legit, changed board to M3A79-T and later cpu to Phenom II, with unlocked NB first 11 then 12...14 and at last 30.

I removed all my scores now.

Just submit a few scores ... too bad I apparently killed ALL of my DDR2 boards.

how did you manage to do that?

Just submit a few scores ... too bad I apparently killed ALL of my DDR2 boards.

If you wan't I can make you feel better with my death toll

OCZ booster ( might be salvagable with some soldering work )

9800 PRO ( no clue, blew out a trace in AGP slot )

939 x2 3800 instadeath at 3.3vddr

DVD rom connected to system when card popped ( my guess is feedback through 12v rail )

Persistance pays though, finally got some ddr benching in.

how did you manage to do that?

I did it in the past because I overclock