676 pts Australia

On request, the 10th anniversary will be a mixture of the stages from the previous Country Cups. aiming for 14 stages  in total

Pifast:  LGA1366 -  Bloomfield core (Xeons allowed) (4 scores)        
Wprime 1024:   AMD Deneb - (4 scores)
Superpi 32M  LGA771/775  - 7x multiplier - (4 scores) - Adapter allowed
HWBOT X265 1080P  AMD 1-3-4-5 cores - (4 scores)
BCLCK INTEL per mobo socket (socket 1151V2 = V3) - (4 scores) -  no adapters allowed
CB R15 CPU (Single core test) - (AMD only) (4 scores)
Y-cruncher 1B - per socket (4 scores)
 

3DMark06: AGP/PCI/PCIe/integrated & Hybrid GPUs - (5 scores) - desktop only
3DMark01 SE: Intel Integrated graphics - Sandy/Ivy/Haswell/Skylake/Kabylake & Coffeelake CPUs - (4 scores) - mobile allowed
3DMark 11 Performance - SLI or Crossfire - AMD FX Bulldozer/Vishera CPUs - (4 scores)
CATZILLA 576P AMD GPUs  & AM3/AM3+/4 CPUs --> win7 only - (4 scores)
Cloud Gate  GTX 470/570/670/770/970/1070 GPUs only - (6 scores) - NON Ti cards
3DMark Skydiver - (4 scores)
3DMark Firestrike Ultra - Dual GPU cards only - (4 scores)

Here's the 1920 x 1080P Competition Background

Was supposed to be dual gpu cards, ie 2 gpu 1 card. However with that the case can we not do timespy? Nothing pre gcn or pre Fermi can run it. Which gives a total list of dual gpu cards of Radeon pro duo (Fiji, Polaris, Vega), R9 295x2, Gtx 690, titan z, Gtx 590, HD 7990. Can we do a dx11 bench so we can allow a few more possibilities in an already scarce playing field of potential cards? 

Also for the 3dmark11 xfire stage on am3+, is it also allowed to use dual gpu cards for both? My plan was to use the same R9 295x2 for both if possible 

Nope one is sli or crossfire other stage is for single card with 2 gpus onboard... Will recheck for Timespy

Assuming skydiver will be open to all gpus eg rtx titan, 2080ti, 2080, titan v, etc, as is catzilla, as will the pcie score for 3dm06. And for 3dm03 will it be by socket (1151, 1150, 1155, etc) or will it just be 4 unique igps? (9900k, 7700k, 6700k, 6770hq)

Why don't you check the competition page plz

Thanks for the clarification Leeg.

question: for the cloud gate stage, are the Ti versions permitted? eg, 1070Ti?

On 10/26/2019 at 4:06 AM, jpmboy said:

question: for the cloud gate stage, are the Ti versions permitted? eg, 1070Ti?

In case you missed it, the answer per the design thread is no.

On request, the 10th anniversary will be a mixture of the stages from the previous Country Cups. aiming for 14 stages  in total

Pifast:  LGA1366 -  Bloomfield core (Xeons allowed) (4 scores)        
Wprime 1024:   AMD Deneb - (4 scores)
Superpi 32M  LGA771/775  - 7x multiplier - (4 scores) - Adapter allowed
HWBOT X265 1080P  AMD 1-3-4-5 cores - (4 scores)
BCLCK INTEL per mobo socket (socket 1151V2 = V3) - (4 scores) -  no adapters allowed
CB R15 CPU (Single core test) - (AMD only) (4 scores)
Y-cruncher 1B - per socket (4 scores)
 

3DMark06: AGP/PCI/PCIe/integrated & Hybrid GPUs - (5 scores) - desktop only
3DMark01 SE: Intel Integrated graphics - Sandy/Ivy/Haswell/Skylake/Kabylake & Coffeelake CPUs - (4 scores) - mobile allowed
3DMark 11 Performance - SLI or Crossfire - AMD FX Bulldozer/Vishera CPUs - (4 scores)
CATZILLA 576P AMD GPUs  & AM3/AM3+/4 CPUs --> win7 only - (4 scores)
Cloud Gate  GTX 470/570/670/770/970/1070 GPUs only - (6 scores) - NON Ti cards
3DMark Skydiver - (4 scores)
3DMark Firestrike Ultra - Dual GPU cards only - (4 scores)

artwork is nearly ready, thx heaps Matthew

Oh boy oh boy, almost time for my anual benching escapades

Let's go then (1080P competition background)

Thanks Alby!

In the competition background should've been Romanian flag on 2010. Not ranting just pointing a small error :)).

Good luck to everyone and have fun.

33 minutes ago, suzuki said:

In the competition background should've been Romanian flag on 2010. Not ranting just pointing a small error :)).

 

Good luck to everyone and have fun.

It is on 2010 though?

will change, thx for the hawkeye Suzuki

22 minutes ago, ObscureParadox said:

It is on 2010 though?

 

Both on 2009 and 2010.

16 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

Let's go then (1080P competition background)

 

 

A 10th anniversary logo , would look really great on this wallpaper !!!

Is for stage 6 the W-3175X allowed?

5 minutes ago, Bullshooter said:

Is for stage 6 the W-3175X allowed?

Is that a new AMD CPU?

Sorry, for Stage 7

Yes Bullshooter

well this is big news... 

22 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

Yes Bullshooter

To clarify this means xeons are allowed correct? or just w-3175x?

as long as it is ONE processor it's all systems go, I did not put any limitations for Xeons or such this time

3 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

as long as it ONE processor it's all systems go, I did not put any limitations for Xeons or such this time

its good you said ONE processor the sr-2 was calling  

So off the top of my head ideal lineup for that stage assuming you have access to the cpus is epyc 7742, w-3175x, 7980xe/9980x, 2990wx, e5-2699v4, r9 3900x. Should be a fun comp, don't often get to see the monster cpus in comps. Got me hardcore trying to recruit server admins lol

1 hour ago, Leeghoofd said:

as long as it is ONE processor it's all systems go, I did not put any limitations for Xeons or such this time

I also didn't see any limitation on ES or unreleased hardware. Does this mean AMD parts such as 2990X and or 3900 are legal?

I suppose it's an unwritten rule that ES parts are not allowed, but clarification is always good   

ES is always no go and unreleased hardware is not accepted. The hardware must be retail available at the start of the competition;, these products haven't hit the shelves yet.

You want me to add this to the compo rules?

34 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

ES is always no go and unreleased hardware is not accepted. The hardware must be retail available at the start of the competition;, these products haven't hit the shelves yet.

You want me to add this to the compo rules?

Historically competitions have always not allowed server/workstation parts so for the sake of clarity it would be good if the rules stated explicitly that they are allowed (eg "no restriction on server/workstation hardware") for the relevant stages.

Rule of thumb is that Xeons aren't allowed unless explicitly stated. May I humbly request you put "Xeons allowed" into the rules for Stage 7: https://hwbot.org/competition/CountryCup2019/stage/4805_y-cruncher_-_pi-1b_-_per_socket_-_6_scores Thanks!

1 hour ago, Leeghoofd said:

ES is always no go and unreleased hardware is not accepted. The hardware must be retail available at the start of the competition;, these products haven't hit the shelves yet.

You want me to add this to the compo rules?

 

Is it only current generation ES or is an lga1366 ES cpu allowed? 

Edit just found where it said no es. 

K added the server hardware allowed or not allowed to the stages

1 hour ago, Leeghoofd said:

K added the server hardware allowed or not allowed to the stages

Much appreciated, thanks.  That ycruncher stage is going to be pretty epyc to watch.

9 hours ago, mickulty said:

Much appreciated, thanks.  That ycruncher stage is going to be pretty epyc to watch.

Oooooof

On 10/31/2019 at 11:36 AM, mickulty said:

In case you missed it, the answer per the design thread is no.

yeah - must be cognitive bias   Bummed, Looks like there's only one or two stages I can participate in at this point.

18 hours ago, mllrkllr88 said:

I also didn't see any limitation on ES or unreleased hardware. Does this mean AMD parts such as 2990X and or 3900 are legal?

I suppose it's an unwritten rule that ES parts are not allowed, but clarification is always good   

I think he means how amd es cpus don't show up as es in cpuz or on the ihs. 

I think something is wrong in the db or in comp settings for wprime, can't upload Phenom 980 BE even though it's deneb with 6mb l3  

Just to confirm lod is not allowed on any stage?

@yosarianilives Try to submit again with the 980be; I added the non 6MB ones too

@Splave you can use LOD in all stages besides the ones that need a VALID Futuremark link.

1 hour ago, Leeghoofd said:

@yosarianilives Try to submit again with the 980be; I added the non 6MB ones too

 

Thanks, it works now

I attempted to submit to stage 13 sky diver, it placed me out of competition into normal submit score mode.

Does this have to do with anything about valid 3dmark link?

By chance if it does, 3dmark to link hwbot credentials is giving back a failed username and/or password error.

Username 1BadMoJoe ... ok

password ... I may have forgotten it because it appears not to be correct, as linking 3dmark and hwbot credentials fail? 

Thanks Now It Works To link 3dmark and hwbot

I do have another problem though to "prepopulate fields by previous submission" error only within the competition.

the Prepopulate option usually does not work for competition entires.

stage 6 subs have to be per socket?

18 minutes ago, superpatodonaldo said:

stage 6 subs have to be per socket?

Did you try to sub a 3800x score or  a different am4 cpu?

@superpatodonaldo:

Nope, not intended like that, if teams can get only AM4s to rock could be nice, I hope single core AM3 or 3+ with higher freqs can be competitive as it's only the single core that counts

@Leeghoofd I'm going to be shooting myself in the foot here, but on the Deneb stage, as it stands the Phenom II X4 800's are currently listed as Deneb on the HWBot database when in reality they're actually Propus cores. Can I suggest removing them from the stage if possible. I don't think anyone has submitted with one yet but that's the only 4core Phenom CPU I currently own which is why I went to double check on here.

is it @Strunkenbold who is currently maintaining the database? I'm not sure.

Edit : Sorry to clarify, they are Deneb cores, but they're nerfed down with the L3 disabled which technically makes them a propus core. I suppose it's the same rule that applies to not allowing unlocked Athlon II X4's? Sorry to open a can of worms and complicate things.

Largely the same with a Callisto core which is a Deneb with two cores disabled.
I know it's a mess with all the different variations in play, if I'm not mistaken even an older Heka core unlocked is a first gen Deneb too so...... There ya go.

Better to go ahead and mention such now while it's still early in the game.

I'm fine with whatever we decide on as the best cpus are still squarely deneb cores. But it may be a good idea to say k10 4 cores or something like that so people can compete on basically any am3 quad core to up participation. If not like I said I don't think it will affect anything I'm doing.

This was one of the reasons I choose Deneb (6M), however it seems some CPUs are not in the right category. I can't fix the Database right now, how about allowing all Denebs, but no unlocking of the cores. Is that a fair proposal?

6 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

 but no unlocking of the cores.

Devils advocate here, what about unlocking cache? Denebs with 4m cache can be unlocked to 6m and denebs with no l3 can sometimes unlock l3.

no problem with Cache unlock, does the cpu name stay the same or changes too ?

CPU will probably change name to something weird because it;s the same process as unlocking cores. But proposal seems fair. Just thought I'd bring it up since I noticed it when looking through my tray of chips

38 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

no problem with Cache unlock, does the cpu name stay the same or changes too ?

10 minutes ago, ObscureParadox said:

CPU will probably change name to something weird because it;s the same process as unlocking cores. But proposal seems fair. Just thought I'd bring it up since I noticed it when looking through my tray of chips

Seems to not change, at least on the chip I unlocked cache for during TC dogpile https://hwbot.org/submission/4246059_yosarianilives_3dmark11_physics_phenom_ii_x4_810_4916_points

5 hours ago, ObscureParadox said:

@Leeghoofd I'm going to be shooting myself in the foot here, but on the Deneb stage, as it stands the Phenom II X4 800's are currently listed as Deneb on the HWBot database when in reality they're actually Propus cores. Can I suggest removing them from the stage if possible. I don't think anyone has submitted with one yet but that's the only 4core Phenom CPU I currently own which is why I went to double check on here.

is it @Strunkenbold who is currently maintaining the database? I'm not sure.

Edit : Sorry to clarify, they are Deneb cores, but they're nerfed down with the L3 disabled which technically makes them a propus core. I suppose it's the same rule that applies to not allowing unlocked Athlon II X4's? Sorry to open a can of worms and complicate things.

Ok I just checked cpu-world and saw that the 840 and 850 are indeed Propus and need to get fixed in the db. Thanks for the hint! 

But the rest of the 800 series has a L3 cache and are Deneb. 

I never understand why we make such restrictions though. I mean you can basically make a Deneb from all lower bin 45nm K10 chips. Why not allow them all? 

Only simple solution would be to disallow any unlocking of anything - Which is to say either it's a true Deneb by name or it's not.
Personally I'd love to run my 555 BE but by just saying no unlocking allowed would make things alot easier to know and resolve any "Can I use this" questions, would also make moderation alot easier too since the line of what is and isn't allowed is readily defined that way.

Rig pics required for all subs yeah?

4 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

This was one of the reasons I choose Deneb (6M), however it seems some CPUs are not in the right category. I can't fix the Database right now, how about allowing all Denebs, but no unlocking of the cores. Is that a fair proposal?

I think along with Deneb the unlockable heka and callisto named cores should also be allowed because when unlocked they are full quad cores with 6MB L3.

Edit: maybe allow unlocked propus as well if it's lucky enough to get full functioning L3.

There are plenty of native quad Denebs. Why complicate things with unlocking? Hard to know what's actually being run with CPU-Z name mangling... 

One score per user or I can submit multiple results for i.e. s775 stage with different cpus?

i see problems coming in this unlocked cpu situation if allowed ?

2 hours ago, TerraRaptor said:

One score per user or I can submit multiple results for i.e. s775 stage with different cpus?

One per user sir

For the unlocking part as long as we have maximum  4 cores and CPUZ/HWBOT picks it up as Deneb I'm fine with it

For stage 14 I feel like it has been answered but I can't seem to find where, do workstation cards like radeon pro duo (fiji/polaris) count as server hardware? I think they do but obviously if they don't that would make a big difference

fiji and polaris are not allowed. the rules for stage 14 as of now:

I added it to the rules, atm we are busy with the double account  thingy to figure out what happened there

Hey, what's the matter with you guys? An AMD Pro Duo (Fiji) has games graphics drivers and costs only half the money of a Titan Z. This is really unfair to lock out the Pro Duo (Fiji) every year, even though it was mostly bought by players, since it is only a double Fury X.

Not to mention it reduces the number of viable cards for Stage 14 to barely enough to cover it at all. And that's only if you're lucky enough to even find half the viable models. 

A Xeon for Stage 1 is also allowed and there is much more hardware. Don't understand the reason? Especially for Stage 14.

What about a Vega Frontier? It also has games graphics drivers.  Am I not allowed to run them in Crossfire with a Vega 64 in Stage 9?

That stage 14 , is a bit tough.

Dual gpu's (old gen included) are limited.

The ultra preset , makes the choices even less ... and you need modern and pricey or rare staff

Excluding the proffesional vga's , is somehow expected , but does not solve anything tbh.

K i'll open up again , but the first that nags about why is this card being allowed is getting a ban   you need only 4 dual GPU cards, 590, 690, 6990, 7990 also can run it right? Issue is that most look for the best performant setup, usually its more about getting the scores done , than have 2 high scores and 2 missing subs. It's Country Cup right?

Even HD 6990, 5970 can run it, although probably not very well. The real question is once we open up server/workstation cards does that also allow xeons as well? I know that 3175x isn't the way to go for AMD but in theory someone with  titan z may want to give it a try?

@Leeghoofdyoure right, 5970, 6990, 590, 690, 760 Mars can theoretically run Stage 14, but they're completely crippled by VRAM. 

It's just not a lot of fun benching those cards when no amount of OC will save them from starving on memory 

Plus, seeing something a little more exotic like a Pro Duo in the charts is just neat by itself. 

I'd make the distinction like ejunkie said, if the company supports it as a gaming/consumer card, it should be allowed as such. Something like Xeons are explicitly classified as server/WS parts by their respective makers, so they wouldn't be allowed still. 

39 minutes ago, yosarianilives said:

Even HD 6990, 5970 can run it, although probably not very well. The real question is once we open up server/workstation cards does that also allow xeons as well? I know that 3175x isn't the way to go for AMD but in theory someone with  titan z may want to give it a try?

Its limited to 4 cores...

54 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

K i'll open up again , but the first that nags about why is this card being allowed is getting a ban   you need only 4 dual GPU cards, 590, 690, 6990, 7990 also can run it right? Issue is that most look for the best performant setup, usually its more about getting the scores done , than have 2 high scores and 2 missing subs. It's Country Cup right?

Urgh mah gurd Alby, why we letting in these GPUs.....

Jokes jokes, but I do agree it's probably for the best

2 minutes ago, ground1556 said:

Its limited to 4 cores...

Not what rules say...

5 minutes ago, yosarianilives said:

Not what rules say...

Argh had the 3D06 stage in my mind

37 minutes ago, ground1556 said:

Argh had the 3D06 stage in my mind

Yeah, will be interesting to see what country has the best 7700k+RTX titan score for that one

2 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

K i'll open up again , but the first that nags about why is this card being allowed is getting a ban   you need only 4 dual GPU cards, 590, 690, 6990, 7990 also can run it right? Issue is that most look for the best performant setup, usually its more about getting the scores done , than have 2 high scores and 2 missing subs. It's Country Cup right?

Instead of opening the door to rare or pricey or professional vga's ... should we consider lowering the 3dmark preset , so that the more common dual vga's could compete ?

2 hours ago, Pewlayle said:

@Leeghoofdyoure right, 5970, 6990, 590, 690, 760 Mars can theoretically run Stage 14, but they're completely crippled by VRAM. 

It's just not a lot of fun benching those cards when no amount of OC will save them from starving on memory 

Fire Strike benchmarks are only available in the Windows editions of 3DMark.

⚠ Fire Strike tests are demanding benchmarks designed for high-end hardware. If your system scores less than 2800 in Fire Strike you should run Sky Diver instead.

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for high-performance gaming PCs and overclocked systems. Fire Strike is very demanding, even for the latest graphics cards. If your frame rate is low, use Sky Diver instead.

Fire Strike Extreme is designed for testing PCs with multiple GPUs (minimum 1.5 GB graphics card memory required). It raises the rendering resolution from 1920 ×1080 to 2560 ×1440 and improves the visual quality.

Fire Strike Ultra is a dedicated test for 4K gaming. It raises the rendering resolution to 3840 × 2160 (4K UHD), four times larger than 1080p. A 4K monitor is not required, but your graphics card must have at least 3GB of memory.

SkyDiver stage... GPU score or Overall score.  Currently, both are being submitted.

I'll open a poll Tasos, okay. Will close stage 14 for now. I just wanted it to be fully gpu limited and users, have been demanding dual gpu for a long time. 

@jpmboy stage is clearly defined as Gpu score.... 

Yeah, it's unclear to some participants.  Thanks.

And regarding stage 14, there are enough dual GPU cards out there capable of running Skydiver FSU for a Country Cup.  As you noted, it's not about getting the highest score, it's about getting four! ?

Opened a Poll regarding Stage 14, vote and make a difference (or not)

I thought country cup was about having all the highest scores? Have I been doing this wrong all these years?

Can someone point out what I am doing wrong, I highlighted the "1BadMoJoe has chosen to disable all rankings for his/her submissions", in the Ranking Position screen shot.

This also happen for the last score submission, I do not remember disabling anything.

The only thing you're doing wrong is entering the total score when you should only be entering Graphics Score

For that submission it should be 46625 instead of 31668

20 minutes ago, Bilko said:

The only thing you're doing wrong is entering the total score when you should only be entering Graphics Score

For that submission it should be 46625 instead of 31668

Thank you for the reply, hearing that the graphics score was to be used, created a bit of panic on all my history of potential under scores of the past...

I went to the rules to read that it states the benchmark score provided by the benchmark is the overall score.

Not the graphics only score as suggested, reviewing the video tutorial also uses the overall benchmark score and not the bigger graphics score as suggested to used.

yet my initial problem still is "1BadMoJoe has chosen to disable all rankings for his/her submissions", when in fact I have not disabled Ranking Position and my submission scores within the Country Cup 2019 and the scores are not being counted.

5 minutes ago, 1BadMoJoe said:

Thank you for the reply, hearing that the graphics score was to be used, created a bit of panic on all my history of potential under scores of the past...

I went to the rules to read that it states the benchmark score provided by the benchmark is the overall score.

Not the graphics only score as suggested, reviewing the video tutorial also uses the overall benchmark score and not the bigger graphics score as suggested to used.

yet my initial problem still is "1BadMoJoe has chosen to disable all rankings for his/her submissions", when in fact I have not disabled Ranking Position and my submission scores within the Country Cup 2019 and the scores are not being counted.

This particular stage is configured to use the Graphics (GPU) score, the rules that are on the main page for the benchmark largely apply with that exception.
Because it's not a benchmark ranking like the full Skydiver test is there's no point structure for it.

Everything is working as it's supposed to
It's the same for everyone that submits in that stage.

Ok thank you for the update. Now it makes since in the minor adjustment to the Country Cup 2019 skydiver score submission I am observing.

That my paltry score outside of the competition is not registering into the hardware Master/Global categories as expected.

11 minutes ago, Bilko said:

This particular stage is configured to use the Graphics (GPU) score, the rules that are on the main page for the benchmark largely apply with that exception.
Because it's not a benchmark ranking like the full Skydiver test is there's no point structure for it.

Everything is working as it's supposed to
It's the same for everyone that submits in that stage.

On 11/5/2019 at 8:38 PM, Leeghoofd said:

This was one of the reasons I choose Deneb (6M), however it seems some CPUs are not in the right category. I can't fix the Database right now, how about allowing all Denebs, but no unlocking of the cores. Is that a fair proposal?

Seem someone added CPU Core Deneb (6M) but never matched a real CPU to it. So it was actually empty and never used. I can create cpu cores with individual cache sizes though- if it was actually intended that way, no problem.

However for now, I renamed Deneb (6M) to Suzuka and matched those Opteron 13xx parts to it.
I also made Phenom II X4 840 and 850 a Propus.

On 11/6/2019 at 7:09 AM, Leeghoofd said:

For the unlocking part as long as we have maximum  4 cores and CPUZ/HWBOT picks it up as Deneb I'm fine with it

If we leave the limitation to Deneb and Suzuka, the only thing which can be unlocked is the CPU Cache and that wont make a difference with wprime. There are enough CPUs to choose anyway.

I mean hell, even Deneb and Propus is fine realistically for wPrime. I'm not asking for it to be changed now because it makes no difference one way or another to myself, but so long as you're not using Thuban you don't really have an advantage with Deneb vs Propus

Only one sub per user per stage as usual?

1 hour ago, jpmboy said:

Only one sub per user per stage as usual?

Correct 

@Leeghoofd

About stage 8 3dmark06 Vega 8/11 (ryzen x200G and x400G) how are considered?

Integrated or pcie?

e.g. https://hwbot.org/submission/4220661_stingeryar_3dmark06_radeon_rx_vega_11_26302_marks cpuz (mainboard) and gpuz mark as 16x pcie

@superpatodonaldo if you go to the Vega 11 page you'll see that hwbot considers it as integrated which most here would agree with. 

10 hours ago, cbjaust said:

@superpatodonaldo if you go to the Vega 11 page you'll see that hwbot considers it as integrated which most here would agree with. 

I know that is listed as integrated but I'd like to know how it is considered in that stage, due to cpuz and gpuz report

Vega 11 is not a " Legacy GPU"  - launched 2018.  But yeah, with GTX 1080 and RTX 2080 subs I can see that this stage needs more definition.

That Stage is not entirely Legacy GPUs, otherwise PCIe without any restrictions would not be in there right?   It's a mix of the proposed stage from previous cups with an added flavor to be able to use the latest and greatest

Not sure why GPU-Z shows Vega 11 as PCIe but it's literally on the same silicon as the CPU and 100% shares system memory so I don't think anyone will argue about it being an iGPU.

BTW I really like the design of the stage... even if the PCI part is really annoying for me personally.

2 hours ago, mickulty said:

BTW I really like the design of the stage... even if the PCI part is really annoying for me personally.

I mean as long as you get a strong 2080ti/titan score as long as you get a pci score I think you should be good.

Although I think anyone who's started researching for PCI score will have seen that it doesn't necesarily matter the core used that much anyways as PCI is very limited and if you have to convert from pcie to pci to pcie it has a disadvantage over just pcie to pci conversion.

You can run PCI GPU in PCI-X board, perhaps it will be somewhat faster.

2 hours ago, havli said:

You can run PCI GPU in PCI-X board, perhaps it will be somewhat faster.

Cpu still matters for 3dm06 too though. AFAIK lga 1156 is the newest board with native PCI. Which non native PCI should have a fairly impact and be especially made worse on the newer PCI gpus as they are not native PCI either so you'd be using a bridgechip to go from pcie on the core to PCI on the slot, then back to PCIE from the slot to the chipset. I did some math and even with the best possible cpu score the cost to graphics score from running non native seems to be too much for overall score.

May find an older platform like 775 may still beat 1156 if there's no way to OC the PCI bus on any 1156 or 1366 board.

No need to OC PCI when you can run it at 66 MHz in the PCI-X slot. 775 boards with PCI-X definitely exist and I think 1366 too.

4 hours ago, havli said:

No need to OC PCI when you can run it at 66 MHz in the PCI-X slot. 775 boards with PCI-X definitely exist and I think 1366 too.

But isn't pci-x only for server. So you'd only get it on server grade boards which would fall under "No server HW allowed"

Just to play devils advocate

Well, I consider myself retired from overclocking... so I don't really care what is considered server and what isn't. ? But as long as you run C2Q or Core i7 in these boards, it should be desktop enough.

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P5K_WS/

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P6T_WS_Professional/overview/

18 minutes ago, havli said:

Well, I consider myself retired from overclocking...

Seeing this saddens me.

You are always welcome at W9 Havli.

And everywhere else for that matter. Speaking only for myself, I know I sure learned a heckuva lot from observing havli at work over the years.

On 11/16/2019 at 10:17 AM, Leeghoofd said:

That Stage is not entirely Legacy GPUs, otherwise PCIe without any restrictions would not be in there right?   It's a mix of the proposed stage from previous cups with an added flavor to be able to use the latest and greatest

ah - I get it, no restrictions, but the team needs one (and only one) of each, AGP, PCIE, PCI, hybrid and integrated socket... one for each "buss" type.  yes?

12 hours ago, jpmboy said:

ah - I get it, no restrictions, but the team needs one (and only one) of each, AGP, PCIE, PCI, hybrid and integrated socket... one for each "buss" type.  yes?

Correct, although I think we all know that the only score that matters is pcie as long as the other scores show up because of the large difference in score. So if someone can run 7700k/7740x+RTX titan for that stage would give their team a large advantage.

So devils advocate since I just got the dumbest idea for ycruncher stage, assuming we can make sure it's only on a single socket is renting time on like an azure server allowed? Cause you can rent those by hour and at that point even an e7 8890 is kinda affordable

I know this is an edgecase "Well the rules don't say a dog can't play baseball..." type of question, sorry in advance

1 hour ago, yosarianilives said:

That moment when not sure if serious or not... 

Renting a cloud server would just be bad faith, and not the 'fair play' people are expected to engage in.

57 minutes ago, mickulty said:

Look, honestly you keep coming up with crap like this and all it does is make something for mods to have to deal with.  What I do truely want is for you to stop one way or another.

Renting a cloud server would just be bad faith, and not the 'fair play' people are expected to engage in.

I can see how my questions are seen as pestering, however you above all people should know my career background is mainly where my attitude of constantly asking for clarification comes from. 

I work in an industry that is heavily procedure and regulation bound. In short if there is any doubt in if it's procedurally or regulatory correct you stop work until its remediated or clarified by a governing body. On top of this my job within this industry is entirely based upon procedural and regulatory compliance. In short I'm used to asking "is this correct" a lot. So if the "procedure" is not clear you ask the "governing body". 

Is it more fair to only allow people who have connections to run scores on Rome or allow someone without connections to pay $20 to run an equivalent server chip for a few hours. I can say that personally I have very little invested in running competition benches on cloud compute hw, but not everyone has ties to a server manufacturer for hft. 

One benches hardware that one has in his possession, we don't rent stuff to get a score...

Just the thought alone already makes me wonder how many rules you need to be bullet proof according your mindset dude. OC is already plagued by an abundance of rules due to similar rule bending mindprocessing. Just let it go and stop over analyzing things, you already have to do this at your work, don't do this in your free time

So because of Yosarianilives or however it’s spelt completely relevant but unnecessary for people to even concoct, server hardware still allowed?

Yep on request server hardware was allowed for Y-cruncher stage, but no renting cloud servers plz.

How did JPM suddenly become the threads OP??

1 hour ago, Leeghoofd said:

Yep on request server hardware was allowed for Y-cruncher stage, but no renting cloud servers plz.

Thanks, this is the yes no answer I wanted. Mick made it way more complicated than it needed to be. 

1 hour ago, avalanche said:

Dude you need a holiday. Toss up some comp scores & don't stress 

Going somewhere warm for Thanksgiving holiday next weekend hopefully that helps. For scores I drop as many as I can and I help team mates get as many as they can but I there's only so many people I can bench with since we don't have a nice meet like you aussies do

3 hours ago, yosarianilives said:

Thanks, this is the yes no answer I wanted. Mick made it way more complicated than it needed to be. 

Bringing ethics into it is "more complicated than it needed to be"?  Jesus christ dude...

5 hours ago, ObscureParadox said:

How did JPM suddenly become the threads OP??

it´s a pity stage 8 is not legacy because one good 2080Ti is more worth then all other results together.

i´d limit the stage for example to gpu up to DX10 or more than 10 years old

1 hour ago, Luebke said:

it´s a pity stage 8 is not legacy because one good 2080Ti is more worth then all other results together.

i´d limit the stage for example to gpu up to DX10 or more than 10 years old

It sucks for those wanting to push legacy hw but it's also nice to have less scores to worry about. Overall I'm divided on the issue for how I feel.

However, this competition has been going on since nov 1. It is absolutely too late for people to ask for rule changes only clarifications imho, especially when there was a planning thread open for more than a month for people to ask for stages to be changed. It would become stage 14 2.0 where people demanded change, their was a vote, nobody could agree, and finally the fact the competition had been going for 10 days already led Leeg to make the correct decision and change nothing.

16 hours ago, Luebke said:

it´s a pity stage 8 is not legacy because one good 2080Ti is more worth then all other results together.

i´d limit the stage for example to gpu up to DX10 or more than 10 years old

I honestly like stage 8.  It's certainly fairly asymmetrical but I don't think that makes the other platforms irrelevant, especially as I'd expect most competitive countries to have a good PCIe score.  If anything I wish it was unrestricted for PCIe to make it easier to get that score, but ah well.

You also have to remember if it was 100% legacy, people who don't like legacy stuff would be upset.  This way it's two scores on modern hardware (PCIe and IGP), one on oldish hardware (hybrid), one on properly legacy hardware (AGP), and then whatever weird stuff the PCI score is.  Everyone gets to play and the cries of "why legacy in country cup" are quieter.

I was actually looking at some theoretical combos for stage 8, and I don't think just having a really good 2080Ti score is sufficient to guarantee winning the stage.

Looking at the 2080 Ti scores for 3DMark06, it looks like the top score is 77,446, followed by 74,928, and those are with 8-core CPUs, so I'd imagine with the 4-core limitation, scores would only be lower. Having a good Vega 11 score for integrated graphics score seems like it could bring in somewhere around 24k points (or somewhere in the 20k range with other integrated graphics (and I'd have no idea how the Vega M's would do, since there are no results with them yet)). Then a team could add another 9-15k from an AGP card (because there's already a couple submissions at around 12k and 15k). Being able to bring in close to 35k points from just integrated and AGP could potentially overcome a high 2080Ti score, I would imagine. And I'm not even really sure what the hybrid category is (is it just an AMD APU crossfired with a select dedicated cards?)... I feel like it's still balanced enough that it's not just a "how has the fastest 2080Ti" stage. If anything, it's more likely going to be a battle of the teams that can muster really any PCI card, since they're realistically only going to be adding a a few thousand points anyway...

@mickulty: the problem is not, that i would prefer legacy pci-e hardware, the problem is, modern GPU´s make way more points so the results of legacy GPU nearly does make no difference. the relation is disproportunal. if our team had a very good 2080Ti i could run my 3850 easily @ stock to beat macsbeach98´s team (btw very nice work macsbeach98). that´s a pity to me...

just my two cents worth...

4 hours ago, Luebke said:

@mickulty: the problem is not, that i would prefer legacy pci-e hardware, the problem is, modern GPU´s make way more points so the results of legacy GPU nearly does make no difference. the relation is disproportunal. if our team had a very good 2080Ti i could run my 3850 easily @ stock to beat macsbeach98´s team (btw very nice work macsbeach98). that´s a pity to me...

just my two cents worth...

Lets have a look at the last time there was a "GPU socket" categorie and look at #1 and #2...

https://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?ids=2467844,2468072,2468323,2462342,2468134

https://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?ids=2468318,2468259,2448048,2450594,2468354

And, for better comparision, the full results.

https://hwbot.org/competition/country_cup_2013/stage/1157_3dmark03_(legacy)

Looking at this even the PCI score could end up relevant this year... Back then if Germany would've had a higher score in PCI they would've beaten Australia in that stage... So shut up with "the old stuff is irrelevant". If we only focus on the 2080 Ti score, there is no way we are winning that stage even if we have fillers...

2 hours ago, ground1556 said:

Lets have a look at the last time there was a "GPU socket" categorie and look at #1 and #2...

https://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?ids=2467844,2468072,2468323,2462342,2468134

https://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?ids=2468318,2468259,2448048,2450594,2468354

And, for better comparision, the full results.

https://hwbot.org/competition/country_cup_2013/stage/1157_3dmark03_(legacy)

Looking at this even the PCI score could end up relevant this year... Back then if Germany would've had a higher score in PCI they would've beaten Australia in that stage... So shut up with "the old stuff is irrelevant". If we only focus on the 2080 Ti score, there is no way we are winning that stage even if we have fillers...

I'd agree, but I'd also say while all scores are important you can't win that stage with weak pcie whereas you can have one other score be mediocre and maybe still win. So personally I won't try any harder than my current weak agp score if my team doesn't have a strong pcie score. 

Can't post a Hybrid score to Stage 8 as the stage is set up to limit to 1 core, whereas the database (sensibly) sees it as 2 cores.

Cas has fix pls?

Renamed it to Dedicated single core GPU cards only to be used

58 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

Renamed it to Dedicated single core GPU cards only to be used

Brilliant, it seems to work now, thank you!

Is it possible to add a Nvidia GT 520 PCI to the hwbot database? I can only find the PCIe version.

https://www.zotac.com/us/product/graphics_card/gt-520-pci

Thanks.

31 minutes ago, e_junkie said:

Is it possible to add a Nvidia GT 520 PCI to the hwbot database? I can only find the PCIe version.

https://www.zotac.com/us/product/graphics_card/gt-520-pci

Thanks.

added, but plz provide a gpuz screenshot to fill in the correct specs

I didn't read through all of this, so this may have already answered. Stage 10 is divided by CPU socket. So Mobile chips can be used. There are some fancy Chinese CPU creations, having a mobile chip on a shim for LGA socket. It's basically a form of BGA to LGA adapter. Running a mobile chip in a desktop motherboard can yield some slight advantage, especially if you plan to run them under cold.

But technically those are custom creations and thus are actually falling under the retail available hardware rule. On the other hand, the CPUs itselfs where retail available. It's just the shim that was created by third party and they are available to anyone who can organize the shipping from China. I just want to double-check that, hence I ask.

https://m.intl.taobao.com/detail/detail.html?id=601707837844&spm=a21wu.9600033.recommend.1&main_itemid=569787869219&go_item_id=601707837844&pvid=e873a56b-b808-4a4c-a86e-19b08e3f2a48&utparam={"x_object_type"%3A"item"%2C"x_object_id"%3A601707837844}&scm=1007.20269.110938.1002003000000001

Just now, Strunkenbold said:

I didn't read through all of this, so this may have already answered. Stage 10 is divided by CPU socket. So Mobile chips can be used. There are some fancy Chinese CPU creations, having a mobile chip on a shim for LGA socket. It's basically a form of BGA to LGA adapter. Running a mobile chip in a desktop motherboard can yield some slight advantage, especially if you plan to run them under cold.

But technically those are custom creations and thus are actually falling under the retail available hardware rule. On the other hand, the CPUs itselfs where retail available. It's just the shim that was created by third party and they are available to anyone who can organize the shipping from China. I just want to double-check that, hence I ask.

https://m.intl.taobao.com/detail/detail.html?id=601707837844&spm=a21wu.9600033.recommend.1&main_itemid=569787869219&go_item_id=601707837844&pvid=e873a56b-b808-4a4c-a86e-19b08e3f2a48&utparam={"x_object_type"%3A"item"%2C"x_object_id"%3A601707837844}&scm=1007.20269.110938.1002003000000001

as cool as they are, the few I've seen in the wild so far were usually ES chips - thus not viable for comps. IF you find these with retail chips the question applies off course.

1 minute ago, ground1556 said:

as cool as they are, the few I've seen in the wild so far were usually ES chips - thus not viable for comps. IF you find these with retail chips the question applies off course.

I ordered such a CPU earlier this year, cause I have friend working in China, and luckily received a non ES one. 

Granted half of those ordered CPUs are ES chips.

Pretty sure it was explicitly allowed earlier while broadwell is not allowed for some reason despite being less rare and more retail available than 4980hq which has similar performance but I got enough hate for this argument already... 

Thank you very much. I have a picture attached to my ZOTAC GT 520 PCI. Is that okay? The memory manufacturer and the size may vary.

39 minutes ago, yosarianilives said:

Pretty sure it was explicitly allowed earlier while broadwell is not allowed for some reason despite being less rare and more retail available than 4980hq which has similar performance but I got enough hate for this argument already... 

Got a link to this discussion?

1 hour ago, Strunkenbold said:

Got a link to this discussion?

It's distributed through the planning thread, I couldn't find anywhere where it was explicitly allowed on second look. I mentioned that it seemed allowed enough times without it being explicitly denied is the closest it seems. But most of the discussion is people yelling at me for suggesting that 5775c should be allowed because 6770hq and 4980hq is so my asking if mobile is allowed mightve been lost in that. 

20 hours ago, e_junkie said:

Thank you very much. I have a picture attached to my ZOTAC GT 520 PCI. Is that okay? The memory manufacturer and the size may vary.

That's not the PCI version. Or is GPU-Z detecting the interface wrong? 

14 minutes ago, unityofsaints said:

That's not the PCI version. Or is GPU-Z detecting the interface wrong? 

It's detecting the interface wrong. Happens with HD 5450 DDR2 as well. Just look at a random score for any of the other semi-modern PCI GPUs, they all show up in the same way. Try finding a score where its showing up differently

That's because basically all modern "PCI" cards are actually native PCI-e at the chip level, it then hits a bridge chip to bring it to PCI protocal. Which is part of why any non native pci board will score terribly as you essentially are converting from pcie to pci then back to pcie using 2 bridge chips. To the driver it would probably only see the pcie bus that the bridgechip provides as the bridge chip probably never talks to the driver.

2 hours ago, ground1556 said:

It's detecting the interface wrong. Happens with HD 5450 DDR2 as well. Just look at a random score for any of the other semi-modern PCI GPUs, they all show up in the same way. Try finding a score where its showing up differently

Ok fair enough but how do you stop someone subbing a PCI-E card as PCI? Rigpics not even required this year. 

Riva should detect pci I think

On 11/25/2019 at 2:26 AM, yosarianilives said:

It's distributed through the planning thread, I couldn't find anywhere where it was explicitly allowed on second look. I mentioned that it seemed allowed enough times without it being explicitly denied is the closest it seems. But most of the discussion is people yelling at me for suggesting that 5775c should be allowed because 6770hq and 4980hq is so my asking if mobile is allowed mightve been lost in that. 

I red now through the 8 pages of the design thread. Yeah, you didn't really receive any answer to your question. So I think the intention was, to only allow non eDRAM devices. I guess Alby wanted to see a high megahertz competition between different gens of k processors, and he especially wants to see some haswell action. So that's why, no broadwell allowed because they share the same socket 1150. But Intel integrated stuff is really complicated, having tons of different IGPs with strange names and CPU sockets.

I remember the the i7 4770R, which is by definition of intel a desktop CPU, but bga and quite rare and expensive. I think properly tuned this can maybe eliminate the need of a ivy bridge score. And also other high end iris plus laptop parts could possibly see an advantage over ivy. It all depends on how much you can push ivy IGP under LN2.

Back to my initial question, based on my theory above, the Chinese CPU creations aren't allowed in the comp, correct?

I mean the theme of this comp is if it's not explicitly disallowed it's probably allowed. And so if the socket that it's registered in on the db is allowed and the arch is allowed I don't see any reason it wouldn't be allowed but leeg would need to confirm.

@Leeghoofd can you check if there is a socket on the GT 520 PCI? The card is not found in the 3DMark06 ranking under PCI. Thanks a lot.

3 hours ago, yosarianilives said:

I mean the theme of this comp is if it's not explicitly disallowed it's probably allowed. And so if the socket that it's registered in on the db is allowed and the arch is allowed I don't see any reason it wouldn't be allowed but leeg would need to confirm.

When did anyone say that was the "theme of the comp"?

It's an attitude some people take and push, no more than that.

4 hours ago, e_junkie said:

@Leeghoofd can you check if there is a socket on the GT 520 PCI? The card is not found in the 3DMark06 ranking under PCI. Thanks a lot.

fixed it

7 hours ago, Strunkenbold said:

Back to my initial question, based on my theory above, the Chinese CPU creations aren't allowed in the comp, correct?

Nope , Retail hardware only, sorry

6 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

Nope , Retail hardware only, sorry

Does this mean that a retail mobile chip that's been put on one of these adapter substrates would be allowed and just not one that registers as ES? Or does that mean all mobile chips on desktop boards are considered non retail?

desktop cpus on desktop socket motherboards and mobile chips on mobile socket motherboards, no adapters for this stage, will add it

37 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

Nope , Retail hardware only, sorry

It's good to have this clear now, before someone makes a sad face at the end of the comp.

What about mobile chips in mobile sockets on desktop boards? Along the lines of an Aopen i975Xa-YDG, for example?

previous comments only referring to the igpu stage Deadthings. if its a mobile CPU in a mobile socket it's fine, but no mobile CPU in a desktop socket....

Can I get an admin to look at this post for stage 5, I see the score at the bottom as a submission but did not update USA score.

https://hwbot.org/submission/4290625_jiccman1965_reference_frequency_p6t_se_159.97_mhz

Thank you

On 11/27/2019 at 4:42 AM, mickulty said:

When did anyone say that was the "theme of the comp"?

It's an attitude some people take and push, no more than that.

he always pushes and takes, hes got more moves than a kid in a lollie shop that keeps annoying the shit out of his mum , i want this i want that, here have this then, no i dont want that, i want the other one ?

@Leeghoofd Notice a bug in the configuration for ref clock stage, lga 1151 v1=v2 is not working. Haven't checked other countries but team USA has both a z270 and a z370 score counting towards our total. https://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?ids=4291784,4293088,4272691,4271794

it is impossible to configure, I have to edit this manually and keep the best score for the socket

Hello. Could anyone clarify if there is any division by socket for stage 6 (R15)? 
If no, same question for CPU (eg. 3600, 3600x, 3700x, 3800x would be ok for this stage?)

4 hours ago, yosarianilives said:

@Leeghoofd Notice a bug in the configuration for ref clock stage, lga 1151 v1=v2 is not working. Haven't checked other countries but team USA has both a z270 and a z370 score counting towards our total. https://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?ids=4291784,4293088,4272691,4271794

There are a bunch of non-lga 1151 subs by other teams.

15 hours ago, Shik said:

Hello. Could anyone clarify if there is any division by socket for stage 6 (R15)? 
If no, same question for CPU (eg. 3600, 3600x, 3700x, 3800x would be ok for this stage?)

No socket division, CPU needs to be an AMD, that's all. Remember it is the single core bench that needs to be run

14 hours ago, MetalRacer said:

There are a bunch of non-lga 1151 subs by other teams.

Euh, it's either 1151V1 or V2 , for this stage it counts as the same socket, so yes you need 775, 1156 1366 and such sockets to complete

On 11/24/2019 at 5:50 PM, e_junkie said:

Thank you very much. I have a picture attached to my ZOTAC GT 520 PCI. Is that okay? The memory manufacturer and the size may vary.

On 11/25/2019 at 8:35 PM, TerraRaptor said:

Riva should detect pci I think

So I'm thinking over how the driver seems to handle seeing a PCI card with a bridge chip as just a PCIE card, and it makes me wonder purely hypothetically could you bypass the bridge chip at the hardware level and go directly to PCIe with essentially the PCI or AGP bus hanging to the side as almost a vestigial bus. While I don't expect or plan on seeing this during the comp it could in theory be possible and would raise the question of if it's even still an AGP or PCI card since you've bypassed the PCI/AGP portion of the card. I'd think at first it would be like a cpu adapter where the cpu is still treated as it's original socket, but you're not converting from AGP/PCI to PCIE, you're preventing a conversion from PCIE to AGP/PCI. 

But if we say that bypassing the pcb level adapter makes it no longer an AGP/PCI card then can we even say it was a AGP/PCI card to begin with as it's just an adapter built into the card to go from PCIE to the intended bus in basically the same way the interposers for mobile haswell chips bring them to desktop sockets.

I suppose this has no relevance to the current comp anymore,especially since nobody is going to risk a rare gpu to try this myself included, but reading back through the discussion kinda brought up a head twist.

I REPEAT, THIS IS NOT A LOOPHOLE GOD DAMMIT! SO PEOPLE DON'T FUCKING CUSS ME OUT FOR THIS SHIT

2 hours ago, yosarianilives said:

So I'm thinking over how the driver seems to handle seeing a PCI card with a bridge chip as just a PCIE card, and it makes me wonder purely hypothetically could you bypass the bridge chip at the hardware level and go directly to PCIe with essentially the PCI or AGP bus hanging to the side as almost a vestigial bus. While I don't expect or plan on seeing this during the comp it could in theory be possible and would raise the question of if it's even still an AGP or PCI card since you've bypassed the PCI/AGP portion of the card. I'd think at first it would be like a cpu adapter where the cpu is still treated as it's original socket, but you're not converting from AGP/PCI to PCIE, you're preventing a conversion from PCIE to AGP/PCI. 

But if we say that bypassing the pcb level adapter makes it no longer an AGP/PCI card then can we even say it was a AGP/PCI card to begin with as it's just an adapter built into the card to go from PCIE to the intended bus in basically the same way the interposers for mobile haswell chips bring them to desktop sockets.

I suppose this has no relevance to the current comp anymore,especially since nobody is going to risk a rare gpu to try this myself included, but reading back through the discussion kinda brought up a head twist.

I REPEAT, THIS IS NOT A LOOPHOLE GOD DAMMIT! SO PEOPLE DON'T FUCKING CUSS ME OUT FOR THIS SHIT

https://xkcd.com/2129/

31 minutes ago, mickulty said:

https://xkcd.com/2129/

If you want to make it relevant then just look at the question as "Should we treat non native AGP/PCI as AGP/PCI". Which if treated like cpus the answer would be no, as when cpus run non native sockets (771 in 775, 479 in 278, haswell bga on lga 1150, etc) they get treated as the native socket not the one which they were actually run on.

However historically this has not been the case for non native gpus, personally I think they should be left as AGP or PCI if that's the out of the box configuration as at this point it would piss off too many people to change it to the native socket. But are they really any different than lga 771 cpus that have the pad mod soldered on and edges cut so they fit into a 775 board with zero modifications? Or the haswell chips with the conversion from BGA to LGA soldered on?

13 hours ago, yosarianilives said:

If you want to make it relevant then just look at the question as "Should we treat non native AGP/PCI as AGP/PCI". Which if treated like cpus the answer would be no, as when cpus run non native sockets (771 in 775, 479 in 278, haswell bga on lga 1150, etc) they get treated as the native socket not the one which they were actually run on.

However historically this has not been the case for non native gpus, personally I think they should be left as AGP or PCI if that's the out of the box configuration as at this point it would piss off too many people to change it to the native socket. But are they really any different than lga 771 cpus that have the pad mod soldered on and edges cut so they fit into a 775 board with zero modifications? Or the haswell chips with the conversion from BGA to LGA soldered on?

Retail hardware is treated as a 'black box', and post-retail modifications aren't treated as changing what the hardware is (this also goes for unlocking 6950s, 290s, furies, X800 Pro VIVOs etc even if the unlocked 290 is 'effectively' a 290X in basically every way).

The real peculiarity is the BGA to LGA chips, there might be a case for them getting their own hardware category if "dodgy ebay/aliexpress seller" can be counted as "retail", whereas currently it seems to have defaulted to them being treated as a socket adapter with added convinience.

41 minutes ago, mickulty said:

Retail hardware is treated as a 'black box', and post-retail modifications aren't treated as changing what the hardware is (this also goes for unlocking 6950s, 290s, furies, X800 Pro VIVOs etc even if the unlocked 290 is 'effectively' a 290X in basically every way).

The real peculiarity is the BGA to LGA chips, there might be a case for them getting their own hardware category if "dodgy ebay/aliexpress seller" can be counted as "retail", whereas currently it seems to have defaulted to them being treated as a socket adapter with added convinience.

That's a fair stance, which also brings up the question of the "semi professional" chinese companies that make the permanently modded to lga 775 server chips although that probably will be left cause it's would be way too confusing with rankings.

But ig to go back to my original question, if I mod an AGP or PCI to be natively PCIe it would have a huge advantage, especially on PCI but it would still be an AGP/PCI card because that's how it shipped retail.

How about people just buy retail products, and just run the freakin things like they are designed to. No modding, no stuffing around. Plug the damn thing in, press the run benchmark button and stop complicating shit that shouldn’t be complicated. Jeeeeeebus 

4 hours ago, KaRtA said:

How about people just buy retail products, and just run the freakin things like they are designed to. No modding, no stuffing around. Plug the damn thing in, press the run benchmark button and stop complicating shit that shouldn’t be complicated. Jeeeeeebus 

Yes, agreed people should buy retail products and run them they way they were meant. At stock. 

what a load of garbage, if people did that there would be no comps here at all would there,

5 hours ago, avalanche said:

Capital letters writing that way is kind of like swearing/ talking loud to get your point across.

Moderators like computers too. Lets not spoil the fun enjoyment for them. 

Carry on you mad buggers.

Message wasn't for him

Good evening,
two days ago I played around with the igpu of an i5 4670k for the 2001SE stage and uploaded the result:
https://hwbot.org/submission/4296298_

However while it shows up as being in the country cup, it does not seem to influence my countries (germany) score for this stage and the result does not count for it.

I tried uploading it two times through different paths and Bilko also tried removing and readding it (thanks again) with not much success.

I would like to know why it is not showing up and if I can do anything in the future for this to not happen, if possible I would also like to know if this is to be expected when i will sub for other stages that i will try to submit for in the coming days.

Thank you in advance and have a nice december yall

Your team already had a sub with HD4600 by Digg.de. This score was, also higher than yours, hence why HWBot won't include your submission in the ranking. I removed Diggs score from the compo so your score counts now

Oooh alright, thank you And yeah my score is pretty bad because I only had single rank sticks at hand ?

@Leeghoofd please could you add AMD Radeon R7 (512 Shaders) + HD 7750 Dual Graphics?  Alternatively AMD Radeon R7 (512 Shaders) + R7 250 Dual Graphics could be changed to AMD Radeon R7 (512 Shaders) + R7 200 Dual Graphics to encompass the 7750 option as GPU-Z thinks they're the same, and it could be difficult for users to pick the right one because of how long the name is...

EDIT: Ignore my ramblings about name length, it actually shows up fine, dunno what I was thinking

@mickulty, which APU is that from? The HD 7750 is not listed in the CPU World page but there is reference to it in the comments of that page working with the A8-5600K.

Also there is a thread here with more requests...

7 hours ago, cbjaust said:

@mickulty, which APU is that from? The HD 7750 is not listed in the CPU World page but there is reference to it in the comments of that page working with the A8-5600K.

Also there is a thread here with more requests...

That's with a 7860K.  It's not listed anywhere but "just works" without any messing around.

What's the deal with the number of scores for 3DMark06 LEGACY GPU? It says "TOP 5 AVERAGE". But no country has any more than 4 scores yet. And when I subbed my score for United States, which already had 4 scores, it kicked @jpmboy's score off the list. Leaving 4 scores still. So how does a country ever get 5 scores on the list? And...NO...his score was with a GTX 1070 Ti, my score is with an RX Vega 64. So that's not it. This makes no sense. Am I missing something?

44 minutes ago, MrGenius said:

What's the deal with the number of scores for 3DMark06 LEGACY GPU? It says "TOP 5 AVERAGE". But no country has any more than 4 scores yet. And when I subbed my score for United States, which already had 4 scores, it kicked @jpmboy's score off the list. Leaving 4 scores still. So how does a country ever get 5 scores on the list? And...NO...his score was with a GTX 1070 Ti, my score is with an RX Vega 64. So that's not it. This makes no sense. Am I missing something?

PCI, AGP, IGP, Hybrid and PCIe. Germany is missing AGP, Italy PCI for example.

13 minutes ago, ground1556 said:

PCI, AGP, IGP, Hybrid and PCIe. Germany is missing AGP, Italy PCI for example.

Ahhhh...I see. So United States is still missing PCI. Hah...PCI...Hybrid...what a joke!

Soooooooo...pretty much NO country is going to be able to get a top 5 average score. Since PCI and Hybrid are ridiculous...

4 minutes ago, MrGenius said:

Ahhhh...I see. So United States is still missing PCI. Hah...PCI...Hybrid...what a joke!

Soooooooo...pretty much NO country is going to be able to get a top 5 average score. Since PCI and Hybrid are ridiculous...

Hybrid is very interesting, I'm glad of the excuse to take a proper crack at it to be honest.  PCI looks interesting too.

8 minutes ago, mickulty said:

Hybrid is very interesting, I'm glad of the excuse to take a proper crack at it to be honest.  PCI looks interesting too.

I'm not saying they aren't interesting. What's ridiculous is to have a competition stage including/requiring them...due to their rarity. Like I said...I doubt any country is going to be able to get a top 5 average score. Which makes stage 8 pointless. Or...even if they do...it makes stage 8 less a benchmarking comp...and more a rare hardware collecting comp. Which is...stupid. To say the least.

Welcome to hwbot competitions haha

2 hours ago, MrGenius said:

I'm not saying they aren't interesting. What's ridiculous is to have a competition stage including/requiring them...due to their rarity. Like I said...I doubt any country is going to be able to get a top 5 average score. Which makes stage 8 pointless. Or...even if they do...it makes stage 8 less a benchmarking comp...and more a rare hardware collecting comp. Which is...stupid. To say the least.

What do you mean there was a few PCI cards made and not real early ones and you will be surprised how many show up with them.

They have been required before today and Germany, Canada and Ukraine have got subs with PCI already.

loving the insight in things...  iust bash to bash guess...  

2 hours ago, macsbeach98 said:

What do you mean there was a few PCI cards made and not real early ones and you will be surprised how many show up with them.

They have been required before today and Germany, Canada and Ukraine have got subs with PCI already.

Ain't no room for logic and reason around here!

stage 5 is allowing for 2x 1151 submissions

can you plz fix if we are only allowed one 1151 sub for that stage

8 minutes ago, ProKoN said:

stage 5 is allowing for 2x 1151 submissions

 

can you plz fix if we are only allowed one 1151 sub for that stage

Already been asked, basically the comp engine doesn't allow it so they will be manually removed. Probably after end of comp

wow, wish it could. thanks for the heads up. seems pretty particular on what it allows you to sub, not sure why there is an exception here

hopefully the moderation team can remove our redundant sub. please and thank you. @Leeghoofd

https://hwbot.org/submission/4288016_hilderman_reference_frequency_z170a_xpower_gaming_titanium_edition_300_mhz

Sub removed Prokon

Thank You

I think we can all agree that was one of the toughest CC comps ever, worthy of being 10th anniversary.

Well done all who participated, and thanks to all the organisers.

Shout out to the Aussie boys, another great Adelaide get together, and well done on all the time , effort and expense put in by all.

Shout out to Asus for the support in Adelaide too.

Now we can all catch up with our sleep and normal lives haha.

Happy New Year to all for 2020.

Well done USA.

wait
lol. 

Actually well done to Italy & Germany.
And Carl. 

Thanks Carl. 

This competition was hard, and intense, in Italy we built a strong group, we learned a lot, we laughed a lot and we also pushed a lot to keep the bar raising, I can't be more happy and proud for being part of this great team.

I want to thank the Germans, for their hard work and for battling with us since the beginning, this is for me the real spirit of competitions, do your best and get surpassed, set up the hardware again and push harder, trying to squeeze more points over and over again, until the end. Well done!

I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed by the "last minute win", we all knew that it was coming, but honestly,  what's the point of staying in the shadows until the last hours of a competition? Especially when you have great clockers, join the game, have fun with us, or the perception is that you are just interested to grab the gold medal and run away, when the main goal here should be to actually challenge each others for a couple of months.

Congratulations for your first place,  but I would have preferred to congratulate you for having fun with us and winning the comp.

Last but not least, a big thanks to the organizers, this is an enormous amount of work on your shoulders, and not an easy job to do to make this works, so again, thanks!

I wish you all a Happy New Year, full of good benching sessions and success ?

Max

Happy New Year for all)))))

Happy New Year all,

very strong scores all around, Always amazing to see some old records getting obliterated again. Very strong lineup for some countries. 

Back to daily biss now, first cleanup of the house, dishes, iron my face and then moderating.

Happy New Year everyone

Congrats to everyone who participated and to the Aussies for ruling another CC #unexpected  

4 minutes ago, FireKillerGR said:

Happy New Year everyone

Congrats to everyone who participated 

Greece did very well for only the few guys that benched. You have to be happy about that.

Congrats to the Aussies, Well done

Thanks Hwbot staff and mods but more importantly all who participated. I know many people are very passionate.

Biggest shout out to my fellow Canucks. Some of these guys showed some incredible determination and Hard work.  I was part of a great team. Thanks for the inspiration Team CANADA

Had loads of fun, Looking forward to the next one.

P.S Jumper man...your new country is waiting for you

Congrats to the winner Aussies !!!

Many thanks to the Hwbot staff !!!

Congrats to all passionate people who "fought" with whatever they had in hand !!!

CU all and even more in next CC !!!

Half way the moderating, some missing backgrounds, covered benchmark settings or missing CPUZ tabs, same stuff another year

15 hours ago, Hardware_Numb3rs said:

I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed by the "last minute win", we all knew that it was coming, but honestly,  what's the point of staying in the shadows until the last hours of a competition? Especially when you have great clockers, join the game, have fun with us, or the perception is that you are just interested to grab the gold medal and run away, when the main goal here should be to actually challenge each others for a couple of months.

Congratulations for your first place,  but I would have preferred to congratulate you for having fun with us and winning the comp.

ohlookitsthiscommentagain.jpg

Get organised, get benching. We had fun, real sad if you didn't. 

17 hours ago, Hardware_Numb3rs said:

This competition was hard, and intense, in Italy we built a strong group, we learned a lot, we laughed a lot and we also pushed a lot to keep the bar raising, I can't be more happy and proud for being part of this great team.

I want to thank the Germans, for their hard work and for battling with us since the beginning, this is for me the real spirit of competitions, do your best and get surpassed, set up the hardware again and push harder, trying to squeeze more points over and over again, until the end. Well done!

I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed by the "last minute win", we all knew that it was coming, but honestly,  what's the point of staying in the shadows until the last hours of a competition? Especially when you have great clockers, join the game, have fun with us, or the perception is that you are just interested to grab the gold medal and run away, when the main goal here should be to actually challenge each others for a couple of months.

Congratulations for your first place,  but I would have preferred to congratulate you for having fun with us and winning the comp.

Last but not least, a big thanks to the organizers, this is an enormous amount of work on your shoulders, and not an easy job to do to make this works, so again, thanks!

I wish you all a Happy New Year, full of good benching sessions and success ?

Max

Dude, some of us were still benching on the last day.

i finished at 5am my time or 6 hours before the comp ended, but couldnt hold back sleep.

We had concerns that some of our scores werent good enough

Congrats Kangaroo bro's, always love seeing you guys slay everyone proper

And huge thanks to Albie, none of this would be possible without you.

8 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

Half way the moderating, some missing backgrounds, covered benchmark settings or missing CPUZ tabs, same stuff another year

Thanks Albie - hopefully you got a break for New Year ?

1 hour ago, bob(nz) said:

Thanks Albie - hopefully you got a break for New Year ?

Not a chance bro,  this is not done yet and already something else popped up to raise my blood pressure ? Wished I was back at the top pool in Vietnam doing some salto's 

39 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said:

Not a chance bro,  this is not done yet and already something else popped up to raise my blood pressure ? Wished I was back at the top pool in Vietnam doing some salto's 

Haha - wouldn’t be a real competition without drama and controversy ? have one of these ? it should help ?

A Happy New Year to everyone!

Congrats to Australia for winning the CC (same procedure as every year ?). And thanks to Italy for the hard battle! Great work! ?

Happy new year, guys!

Congratulations to Australia and Italy! ?

Thx all for the great participation, a handful of new records, on old hardware is always amazing. 

Congratz to the winners; Australia and the runner ups Germany and Italy. 

are there competition points awarded for CC? Also a reminder about TC19 points...