28 pts XtremeOverdrive OC team Italy

Start up date

We need the official wallpaper

... and a better description about limitations (regarding cpu's to be used).

-//-

EDIT

-//-

Reminder from the preparation thread

ROUND 1 - Socket 7 (1997)

Mixed with Intel & AMD cpu's

(All cpu's must be 0.35 micron fabrication).

 

Desktop cpu's only.

 

Intel P5 architecture (Pentium MMX series)

AMD K6 architecture (Desktop K6 series)

 

Stage-1

CPU-Z Validation - Max CPU speed

 

Stage-2

SuperPI 1M

 

Stage-3

CPU-Z Validation - Percentage OC %

Hello guys.

I found the following problem today:

I can not save validation file (it also fills the system by default) with versions 1.83, 1.82, 1.81, 1.80 and 1.74 of cpuz with OS win XP (3 different versions) and win 2000 (2 different versions). With version 1.57 it saves correctly but clearly can not be validated.

Just came here to say I'm hoping this round is a succcess Although I don't have the hardware to compete I think OSIBS is a really great concept.

Hello guys.

I found the following problem today:

I can not save validation file (it also fills the system by default) with versions 1.83, 1.82, 1.81, 1.80 and 1.74 of cpuz with OS win XP (3 different versions) and win 2000 (2 different versions). With version 1.57 it saves correctly but clearly can not be validated.

yes , i have a similar problem , i can save the validation file , but he can not be validated due to a lack of information

all of BOT is all over the place like a dogs breakfast, do NOT expect anything to be right until its fixed properly, and then there will still be bugs in it to eliminiante, as far as im concerned all competitions should be put on suspension, explained the rules of hich and what they are, wallpapers, everything done right for once, until it is fixed properly, way less hassle for all concerned, how the hell can you expect to run a competiton/s when BOT itself isnt even running properly, or is that just too much common sense ???, im not trying to have a go boys but this is bloody ridiculous, all youre doing is creating more dramas for yourselves and everyone else with it !!!!

all of BOT is all over the place like a dogs breakfast, do NOT expect anything to be right until its fixed properly, and then there will still be bugs in it to eliminiante, as far as im concerned all competitions should be put on suspension, explained the rules of hich and what they are, wallpapers, everything done right for once, until it is fixed properly, way less hassle for all concerned, how the hell can you expect to run a competiton/s when BOT itself isnt even running properly, or is that just too much common sense ???, im not trying to have a go boys but this is bloody ridiculous, all youre doing is creating more dramas for yourselves and everyone else with it !!!!

I agree with you but we try to help moderators as we can. We know that the organization of the cup is really bad (lack of background, wrong description or conflicting rules, etc.). But if we do as @TASOS did (remember the limitations in the thread) I think it goes on and improves. I do not think moderators do not want to improve things, but if we help, we certainly do first and foremost.

If I remember rightly there was validation problems before today with socket 7 from memory I think it was done on trust or the bench could of been changed

There is a banner on the main competition page with a cassette radio I thought that would of been the background.

I say one of us ask Albrecht or Frederick

I am not sure if i remember correctly at the moment ... but we had some special cpu-z version for old systems.

Anybody tried with that ?

Short question Im in hurry:

Some sources say AMD k6 model 6 is 0.30µm other say 0.35µm.

CPU-Z itself says its 0.30µm http://hwbot.org/submission/1088820_coooo_cpu_frequency_k6_166mhz_(model_6)_270_mhz

Should we allow K5?

Do you guys agree that photo verification of the CPU together with the used motherboard is mandatory?

Made a quick Background here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8ds0b9/osibs.png?dl=0

Background looks Good.

Short question Im in hurry:

Some sources say AMD k6 model 6 is 0.30µm other say 0.35µm.

CPU-Z itself says its 0.30µm http://hwbot.org/submission/1088820_coooo_cpu_frequency_k6_166mhz_(model_6)_270_mhz

Should we allow K5?

Do you guys agree that photo verification of the CPU together with the used motherboard is mandatory?

I like the idea of Photo verification.

The K6's I have got are these CPU world says they are both .35um.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K6/AMD-K6%20200%20-%20AMD-K6-200ALR.html

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K6/AMD-K6%20233%20-%20AMD-K6-233ANR.html

Validation seems like the biggest problem at the moment because CPUz wont validate with them we cant submit it.

Hello guys.

I found the following problem today:

I can not save validation file (it also fills the system by default) with versions 1.83, 1.82, 1.81, 1.80 and 1.74 of cpuz with OS win XP (3 different versions) and win 2000 (2 different versions). With version 1.57 it saves correctly but clearly can not be validated.

Check 1,77 and 1,78 and see if validation still works for the old stuff. If not I would propose someone sends a mail to CPUZ (Franck Delattre)

Made a quick Background here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8ds0b9/osibs.png?dl=0

It's horrible. Make normal wallpaper and not those that are made in Word With a cassette tape recorder is much better Some problems at the start, why did not anyone check everything in advance?

If you don't like the wallpaper than plz don't participate... not putting any energy in sillyness... if you think we can pretest all compos, well you are dead wrong...

I configured the restrictions now. Had to re-organize some of the K6 and Pentium categories to reflect the 350nm restriction.

For this round allowed mobile CPU?

On Gigabyte GA-5AA i can save validation file with all vertions. With previous motherboard Soltek With Via MVP3 chipset i can save only with 1.57 version.

Anymore cheked version 1.78 for win 98?

For this round allowed mobile CPU?

Nope

Read post #1

I like the idea of Photo verification.

Me too

I believe that it should be obligatory

Anybody tried Aida ?

.... Some problems at the start, why did not anyone check everything in advance?

The validation "problem" is my fault.

You can blame me.

The validation "problem" is my fault.

 

You can blame me.

This is a community competition on which a lot of guys who have the systems agrred at making this a stage - let´s blame you and some people on top^^ - please note that on stuff like this you are mostly responsible for checking options yourself, all that want to participate. Simply take this as a fact from someone who has no reason to defend or blame

Not your fault Tasos.

<blockquote><span style="font-weight:bold;">GRIFF said: </span>Hello guys.<br/>

I found the following problem today:<br/>

I can not save validation file (it also fills the system by default) with versions 1.83, 1.82, 1.81, 1.80 and 1.74 of cpuz with OS win XP (3 different versions) and win 2000 (2 different versions). With version 1.57 it saves correctly but clearly can not be validated.</blockquote><br/>

<br/>

Check 1,77 and 1,78 and see if validation still works for the old stuff. If not I would propose someone sends a mail to CPUZ (Franck Delattre)

Checked but not work with soltek MVP3 board.

tomorrow i can chek vertion for windows 98.

<blockquote><span style="font-weight:bold;">GRIFF said: </span>For this round allowed mobile CPU?</blockquote><br/>

<br/>

Nope<br/>

<br/>

Read post #1

Ok.

<blockquote><span style="font-weight:bold;">macsbeach98 said: </span>I like the idea of Photo verification.<br/>

</blockquote><br/>

<br/>

Me too<br/>

I believe that it should be obligatory<br/>

<br/>

Anybody tried Aida ?

Tomorrow I try to install AIDA and Sisoft Sandra to see if they give us the most complete information even at the motherboard and ram level.

<blockquote><span style="font-weight:bold;">max1024 said: </span>.... Some problems at the start, why did not anyone check everything in advance?</blockquote><br/>

<br/>

The validation "problem" is my fault.<br/>

<br/>

You can blame me.

If we find the safe and reliable way it would also be useful for the next competitions. In any case, the photo is mandatory.

Made a quick Background here: <br/>

<br/>

<a href="http://https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8ds0b9/osibs.png?dl=0">https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8ds0b9/osibs.png?dl=0</a>

Sorry. but not working link.

<blockquote>Made a quick Background here: <br/>

<br/>

<a href="http://https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8ds0b9/osibs.png?dl=0">https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8ds0b9/osibs.png?dl=0</a></blockquote>

Sorry. but not working link.

solved

It's horrible. Make normal wallpaper and not those that are made in Word With a cassette tape recorder is much better

I'm with you on this one max !!!

I did propose for a live wallpaper for this OSIBS ... but they didnt listen.

Maybe if we can gather some votes , we can still make it happen.

Oh yeahhhh

This is it

https://www.youtube.com/embed/0g7KawdsVSQ

ok , ok , i'm joking

Quote wallpaper by TASOS.

show what you have prepared

Quote wallpaper by TASOS.

 

show what you have prepared

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8ds0b9/osibs.png?dl=0

so whats the background please , this or this ??, not confusing ??

http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/osibs_s4r1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8...osibs.png?dl=0

For this round allowed mobile CPU?

Good that you asked. I accidentally allowed it too. Should be fixed now. Anyone still seeing something wrong?

Guys make up your mind, in the general rules it says verification screenshot and pictures are required for each stage. I have to moderate this compo, if I apply the gen rules it will be no screenshot = no glory ?

My opinion on verification for this round.

Photo of the system (motherboard used).

Close photo of the cpu used , with all markings visible.

Screenshot with wallpaper including all possible cpuid software (cpuz , aida , crystal cpuid or whatever).

More is always beneficial.

It looks like the bugs on socket 7 with CPU-Z have never been fixed. Its totally broken on VIA systems and only half working with aladdin boards.

The issue is that a specific CPU-Z version enabled detecting FSB clock on those systems. But everytime it just shows 100Mhz, despite that the actual speed is different. Therefore are most of those validations wrong. I guess we have some wrong CPU-Z results in the db.

You could try to make your verification with DMI=0 in the CPU-Z ini, which should fix the bug. But Im not sure if you still can validate your result.

But I guess its the only chance we have. Either this works or any stage involving CPU-z will be pretty pointless.

Version 1.83.0 with dmi=0 wprk fine and validate

Version 1.83.0 with dmi=0 wprk fine and validate

get bot working right then worry about competitions, pretty simple really !!!!

On 2/17/2018 at 10:42 AM, Strunkenbold said:

 

Good that you asked. I accidentally allowed it too. Should be fixed now. Anyone still seeing something wrong?

No P54CS please.

On 2/17/2018 at 1:59 AM, Leeghoofd said:

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqae2qjzg8ds0b9/osibs.png?dl=0

Please attach this wallpaper link to the competition page.

On 2/16/2018 at 5:01 PM, max1024 said:

 

It's horrible. Make normal wallpaper and not those that are made in Word With a cassette tape recorder is much better Some problems at the start, why did not anyone check everything in advance?

Wow, we OCers really are a privileged bunch. Out of all the things you could complain about you choose this?

On 17/2/2018 at 9:59 PM, GRIFF said:

Version 1.83.0 with dmi=0 wprk fine and validate

If this does not work well, set "PIO 2" mode for HDD

If so it will be more beautiful Wallpaper ? that'll do for each round.  

Can anyone have the Wallpaper without the text (Old School is Best School Season) I have the font this is to write the new not to differ in effects.

Nice work Alex. Quote this wallpaper.

For me R1 you have to put in the corner.

I want the Wallpaper without the font. to put the text in their place so as not to differ letters effects that apply the one who did the first Wallpaper.

20 minutes ago, alexmaj467 said:

 

cool for me

2048X1536

The entire the text a new.

I'm in my last big picture, the letters were not aligned well. If you decide to use these then I'll adjust to it pretty.

final / If will go will make with the second round and so on.

1280 x 1024 px in zip

1920 x 1200 px in zip

2048 x 1536 px in zip

GREAT WORK ALEX

Yeah , thank you Alex

I fixed at least 1000 pins over the past 2 days, this weekend i'll try figuring out the platform and how to bin pentium MMX

honestly guys, its a wallpaper, as long as its a wallpaper for the comp and everyone has it so all sub are legal...does it really matter that much !!!

5 hours ago, ozzie said:

honestly guys, its a wallpaper, as long as its a wallpaper for the comp and everyone has it so all sub are legal...does it really matter that much !!!

It definitely matters man. Everyone knows that ugly wallpaper = shit OC  

the rule that the frequency on the screen can be lower than the validate is valid? I can not make the screen with 372mhz on SS.

16 hours ago, TAGG said:

I fixed at least 1000 pins over the past 2 days, this weekend i'll try figuring out the platform and how to bin pentium MMX

my best 166 and 200 finish spi 1m at 133 * 2.5=333mhz  at 3.65-3.7V on air

6 hours ago, GRIFF said:

my best 166 and 200 finish spi 1m at 133 * 2.5=333mhz  at 3.65-3.7V on air

Thanks for the tip, for 3,7 i'll have to mod my board first, since the GA-5AX only goes up to 3,5V

@avalance from left to right 166 / 200 / 233 MHz one stack for each type

12 hours ago, yosarianilives said:

It definitely matters man. Everyone knows that ugly wallpaper = shit OC  

garbage

Quote

Thanks for the tip, for 3,7 i'll have to mod my board first, since the GA-5AX only goes up to 3,5V

What rev' do you have ?

if you'll do it can you please share me some pictures of it ? i'll be grateful for that

i have the 5.2

I have the 4.1 I'll share pictures and results of binning when I'm done

I have the 3.2.

I made the change to the card in order to adjust the voltage Vccio. For high fsb 135 or 140 mhz these cards need high Vccio, 3.8V in my case to make windows boot at 140 mhz.
The problem however is the cache that normally takes 115-125 mhz and only in rare cases more. Without cache, however, the result super pi 1m is bad.

14 hours ago, hyve said:

What rev' do you have ?

if you'll do it can you please share me some pictures of it ? i'll be grateful for that

i have the 5.2

10 hours ago, TAGG said:

I have the 4.1 I'll share pictures and results of binning when I'm done

You are both willing to take a risk , on a board you cant easily replace ???

2 hours ago, TASOS said:

 

 

You are both willing to take a risk , on a board you cant easily replace ???

 

What would I get from not risking it? Also it's not that hard to find a 5-AX i got two of them, unfortunately one was DOA (i get them from the scrap so you shouldn't be too surprised if it doesn't work) Plus I don't have 5-AAs since I never actively looked for them i might have just thrown them away again...

I can not do any validation on OCESPORT. I have a Pentium MMX 200Mhz processor overclocked to 297 Mhz. When I want to save my result, it always appears: "your submission is incoplete" ("Only use processors from the sub family"). But if I do the validation directly on HWBOT, it's OK (http://hwbot.org/submission/3797837_). I do not know how to solve this problem. Any error on OCESPORT?

7 hours ago, Jurin1388 said:

I can not do any validation on OCESPORT. I have a Pentium MMX 200Mhz processor overclocked to 297 Mhz. When I want to save my result, it always appears: "your submission is incoplete" ("Only use processors from the sub family"). But if I do the validation directly on HWBOT, it's OK (http://hwbot.org/submission/3797837_). I do not know how to solve this problem. Any error on OCESPORT?

Same for me with spi 1m

Somehow the cpu limitation was not working anymore, I resubmitted it and now it seems to be OK again

1 hour ago, websmile said:

Somehow the cpu limitation was not working anymore, I resubmitted it and now it seems to be OK again

Work well now

On 1 марта 2018 г. at 4:04 PM, GRIFF said:

the rule that the frequency on the screen can be lower than the validate is valid? I can not make the screen with 372mhz on SS.

Ideas?
 

On 3/1/2018 at 11:59 AM, yosarianilives said:

It definitely matters man. Everyone knows that ugly wallpaper = shit OC  

There's an easy fix: don't set the wallpaper until after you've run the bench

@TASOS Please enter the complete cup round list which was probably lost in the old forum. Thanks.

Its on this page Griff.

https://community.hwbot.org/topic/171301-osibs-season-4-design-thread/?page=5

1 hour ago, macsbeach98 said:

Its on this page Griff.

https://community.hwbot.org/topic/171301-osibs-season-4-design-thread/?page=5

 

Perfect. Thank you.

for round 2

1280x1024

1920x1200

So there are results which state dmi set to 0 but show 5x multiplicator plus fsb and valid? Are there magicians here? Any thoughts on this?

Well thats simple DMI=1 I had to rerun mine because I forgot to set it.

You know what to do Michael they cant plead ignorance its in the limitations on the competition page.

37 minutes ago, websmile said:

So there are results which state dmi set to 0 but show 5x multiplicator plus fsb and valid? Are there magicians here? Any thoughts on this?

I think he meant that he had to unset it because he couldnt get a verification else way.

If DMI would be off, CPU-Z wouldnt read the chipset Registers (which it reads currently wrong) thus showing FSB frequency. Its very likely bugged anyway, Multi is very high.

I also see many Subs not having a picture of CPU and Motherboard...

From my tests DMI = 0 allows me to save validated files and validate it online. With DMI = 1 it gives me a freeze launched cpu-z.
As for the photos of cpu and motherboards I would say this: if the cup from the beginning was well organized would be eliminated but with the poor initial organization I would say to take with the pliers this rule only for this round, I hope.

So practically we can guess or throw a dice if a result is valid or not? I removed a 1m because the screen was missing and nothing else, happy discussion about the results and you better pick someone for next round who moderates this, bc I have big doubts Albrecht will do it and I am out.

Why did my MMX 166 345MHz sbmission get removed from the comp? I ran DMI=0 provided pictures of board and CPU and even a video proving that this CPU is capable of 3x multiplier...

http://hwbot.org/submission/3804783_

Not that it matters for the ranking I just wan't to know why it was removed

1 hour ago, websmile said:

So practically we can guess or throw a dice if a result is valid or not? I removed a 1m because the screen was missing and nothing else, happy discussion about the results and you better pick someone for next round who moderates this, bc I have big doubts Albrecht will do it and I am out.

It's a shame that even when you spend a lot of time and energy to try to cheat proof a comp people continue to find ways.

Why not apply that energy to just pushing your hardware legit.

It blows my mind. 

For me in this cup there are no people who cheat. there are no prizes or middle money. and thank goodness we know each other now.

I also don't think that someone is intentionally cheating. Yet the problem is that CPU-Z bug. Actually you don't even think about there could be something wrong. 

I added the photo verification rule very early. Afaik there was only one participating at that time and that was GRIFF. His Submissions are correct, so actually everyone's else submissions should be correct too. 

Submissions without DMI off will be blocked. Those simply can't be trusted. And moderation team will not have the time to decide on every single submission if it is legit or not. Hardware categories will get cleaned from bugged results once new CPU-Z is out. I'm in contact with Franck Delattre and he already has a fix. Unfortunately it comes too late for us. 

Photo verification is a reasonable thing for those old hardware. I actually wanted a shot showing the markings of the CPU together with the motherboard. Unfortunately there were again some subs who didn't follow this rule. I handle this gracefully. But subs not showing any detailed CPU picture will also get removed from the comp. 

@Strunkenbold Sorry about not combining the CPU and the board in one picture, I thought the CPU picture was purely intended so that other participants could see the batch...

I'm still not sure why my 345MHz submission was removed from % OC but not from max freq though...

Max freq submission:

http://hwbot.org/submission/3804788

% OC submission:

http://hwbot.org/submission/3804783_

I had it submitted in both stages as you can clearly see from the 11 comments on the %OC one

Might have something to do with the database beeing messed up, I submitted the max freq later...  If none of the mods removed it please add it to the competition again

It was a fun comp well done everyone

The next time Socket 7 is used though no CPU frequencies its just too much drama with the validation benchmarks like SPI, Wprime and say Cine 2003 would be better.

For this round , the percentage % stage , went wrong , cause of the cpu-z bug , especially on non-Ali chipset boards.

The good thing , is that Strunkenbold's move , contacting Franck Delattre about it , will provide us a better cpu-z for future use.

I thank them both (Gregor and Frank).

As a sidenote , just to laugh a little ... imagine all of us to have picked an other proposal for OSIBS (use of older 486 systems)

Personally i feel sad about making a bad choice for this stage ... my goal was to have fun and not cause trouble to participants and moderating team also.

Although i dont think anyone had the intention to cheat in this round.

I would have expected more of a cpu variety (regarding AMD K6's) in this round , but it seems that most of us played safe with Intel MMX , instead of experimenting with the AMD's.

Perhaps this round needed some more time ... cause of the general situation of Hwbot , the past weeks.

Anyway ...

I  am also sad , because my GA-5AX went bad during testing ... and now i have to try and fix it (if it's possible) or replace it (even harder).

My other board , a FIC , Via chipset , was constantly reporting 1X multi only (whatever Intel MMX cpu i used) and i chose not to present any scores , cause they looked weird.

Congrats to all participants ... and see you all in next round !!!

Have fun !!!

14 hours ago, TAGG said:

@Strunkenbold Sorry about not combining the CPU and the board in one picture, I thought the CPU picture was purely intended so that other participants could see the batch...

I'm still not sure why my 345MHz submission was removed from % OC but not from max freq though...

 

It doesnt really matter if you use a 200 or 233 MHz CPU for max OC. But it matters if you use a 166 or 233Mhz CPU for % OC. Therefore the requirement for the CPU picture verfication is higher.

I had the Feeling that some of you didnt notice that Ali boards are affected too. Im sorry, but those get moderated too IF they are Max or procentual OC related.

http://hwbot.org/submission/3764887_kotori_superpi___1m_pentium_166mhz_8min_18sec_537ms

Im done moderating. Im sorry for everyone which result got removed. 

@Gumanoid
Please pay attention to the CPU picture rule next time.

On 02.03.2018 at 9:54 AM, TAGG said:

I have the 4.1 I'll share pictures and results of binning when I'm done

can you load pictures with vmod for this mobo (ga-5ax r4.1) pls?

I didn't manage to voltmod the GPU Voltage because the FB pin is directly connected to Vgpu out, tried it by adding a resistor between vgpu out and FB and by adding a voltage divider between 5V and GND with FB inbetween, both didn't work, also the controller has a internal voltage refference and the maximum voltage you can program via VID pins is 3,5V anyways. The VCCIO mod is easy, just add a 10K ohm VR between the two outer Pins of LX8383A(voltage regulator above the BIOS battery)

3 hours ago, TAGG said:

I didn't manage to voltmod the GPU Voltage because the FB pin is directly connected to Vgpu out, tried it by adding a resistor between vgpu out and FB and by adding a voltage divider between 5V and GND with FB inbetween, both didn't work, also the controller has a internal voltage refference and the maximum voltage you can program via VID pins is 3,5V anyways. The VCCIO mod is easy, just add a 10K ohm VR between the two outer Pins of LX8383A(voltage regulator above the BIOS battery)

@Remarc For cpu voltmod need desoldering pin FB and Vsen from pcb, solder these pins together and at the center pin of a 1k trimmer. another trimmer pin solder to the GND and the third last to the Vcore

 

Which pin do you mean by Vsen ? Do you mean Ifb?

7 hours ago, TAGG said:

Which pin do you mean by Vsen ? Do you mean Ifb?

Excuse me: VFB and VREF. Checked at HIP6004, HIP6021, RC5051 and another

I just checked my Pentium MMX 166Mhz today and the maximum multiplier I could get was 3,5x. Interesting, my 200Mhz MMX just had a maximum of 3,0x.

I also tried to reproduce scores who claimed they had DMI disabled, yet CPU-Z still displayed FSB and Multiplier. At least on my Epox MVP3 and 66Mhz FSB, setting DMI=0 completely prevents the bad behavior. So I dont know what they did.

The 166MMX has to be dated earlier than week 40 to be unlocked mine is week 28 I would guess an early 200MMX would be probably unlocked to 3.5 too. If I tried 4 x multi with the 166 it reverted to 133mhz.

On the ALI chipset GA-5AA  setting DMI=0 takes away bus speed, multi and bios info in mainboard tab I couldnt say with the other chipsets.

I say next time socket 7 is involved just make it benchmarks SPI, Wprime, Cine 2003 or similar and not CPUz validations. Frequency validation is not really a benchmark anyway.

Thanks testing this also on Ali. 

Just from reading different sources in the net it indicates that 3,5 is Max and only applies to early samples. I can not give a technical explaination but I do think it depends on the internal wiring of some pins of the CPU, thus setting a multi of 4 and up doesn't do any difference because it would need another pin which the MMX completely ignores. In the end it's just another proof that those CPUs cannot get fully unlocked and every result with high multi was CPU-Z bugged.

With my first runs with DMI=1 that I had to redo I did SPI @ 115x3=345 but CPUz showed 100x3.5=350 with DMI=0 it showed 345. I did CPU frequency @ 100x3.5=350

I seen the sub you are talking about 66x5 there is no way that any of them can do 5x multi it could of been set at anything and I wouldnt believe the CPU speed either it was probably thereabouts but wouldnt of been accurate DMI has to be off in CPUz

I read briefly the posts above...

I must ask you unfortunately from my side , why also my submission removed.

The multi is correct (Cpu 233/66fsd=multi 3,5) , the photo is there, the fsb (83 speed) is the correct, the screenshot is there, everything visible and clear, so what is wrong?

http://hwbot.org/submission/3795358_

I could submit a score of 330 speed but i could not succeed to validate it (cpu-z validation reverted always with rejected), so i prefered to keep the validated lower score and now is blocked as a result?

I really not get it. 

valid = valid

Not valid = Not valid

And I declare my result AS VALID!

19 hours ago, varachio said:

I read briefly the posts above...

I must ask you unfortunately from my side , why also my submission removed.

The multi is correct (Cpu 233/66fsd=multi 3,5) , the photo is there, the fsb (83 speed) is the correct, the screenshot is there, everything visible and clear, so what is wrong?

http://hwbot.org/submission/3795358_

I could submit a score of 330 speed but i could not succeed to validate it (cpu-z validation reverted always with rejected), so i prefered to keep the validated lower score and now is blocked as a result?

I really not get it. 

valid = valid

Not valid = Not valid

And I declare my result AS VALID!

Because of the above mentioned CPU-Z bug all results displaying FSB and multi are potentially bugged. These runs where made with DMI=1. The rules of comp explicitly stated that DMI must be off. Your submission violated this rule thus was removed from the comp.

We are in the bad position that we can't trust those specific CPU-Z submissions, even if the validator says it's valid. We have enough submissions in the database who proof that the validator verified even bugged results. Sadly this means I can't accept your result even if it may be completely valid and got verified.

I told Franck about the problem of the verification. I hope he has a fix in some days ready.