400MHz is a standard~
500MHz is history~
.
.
.
.
600MHz ~~ It's a new revalution of overclocking!!
http://img10.picsplace.to/15/600-pi.JPG
400MHz is a standard~
500MHz is history~
.
.
.
.
600MHz ~~ It's a new revalution of overclocking!!
http://img10.picsplace.to/15/600-pi.JPG
WOW. board modded/stock?
That's really Sick!!!:YIPPIE: :YIPPIE:
This has to be fake, i'm using F4d and can't even get my board past 310FSB, 400 won't evev post.
nice, e6200@x6800
Valid cpuz please :)
Valid Superpi please and as boble said, cpuz valid please
holy 965
The board was running at stock without any modification. Though the memory timings are kinda slow, by that's the trade off for getting such a high FSB clock..Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dower
Memory module used is Micron 512M pc2-6400U-555
As for your board.. what CPU and memory are you using??
please show some validated benchmarks!
Hmmm... nice photochop
there are lots of things wrong with that pics
superpi at 3600 should be around 14s, cpuz with memory info looks lighter and is this X6800 or e6200?
and this screen was made with boot not clockgen, that makes it even more wierd.
The First thing you have to do when you make a new "Revolution of Overclocking" is a Validation !!!! :fact:
I need more proof then this to believe it.
Until validation is :banana: record... :D
Gotta love these overclocks that give super Pi times that are higher than the ones you get with a cpu running 400Mhz slower...
bennefit of the doubt, but think its a frustrated person who couldnt get high fsb :p:
Even Pi validation is cut :p:
very convenientQuote:
Originally Posted by kiwi
LOOK AT CPUZ, the higher one ;)
If you refer to "Name: Intel Core Duo 6200" it's because he booted with multi = 6x...i think, well waiting for validation....Quote:
Originally Posted by Pumbaa
WFT :stick: My DQ6 has wall on 400MHz with E6600 stock multi. Drop multi give me hmmm 30MHz on FSB.
And You have FSB 600 :confused:
Link to cpu-z validation please :toast:
You should have posted that here
Altough it would be great if you could show us some sort of validation.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that this is a fake :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bromptoners
there simply is no validation (i will apologize if one does surface) But this is hoax brought on by the lack of ANYTHING to support us DQ6 ers while the ds3 ers get all the shiny new bios updates :)
guys.... just look at the SPi window. just below the menu and near the upper part of the scrool bar. notice anything?
regards,
karan
that's normalQuote:
Originally Posted by goldenfrag
nice to see a steping 6 rev B2 es chip lmao
edit: but seeing the later post it must be a bug.... sorry :clap:
That cant be true. I got 480 1:1 with F3a putting loads of Volts to eveything, Vmch and Vfsb, F4b didnt even post @ 380 for me...
I also say its a fake.
the left cpuz showing memory tag is completely differentn, different texture, different color, was screened on different comp, that the right ones.
Sad really when a 975 chipset with E6600 at 380fsb (3.33gig) beat you by more than 2secs in SuperPI?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookmomnobrains
LOL, OWNED!
nice try kid, but even the cleanest photoshop job never passes the Xtreme test by thoes who know what everything is capable of
and if 600 fsb was ever going to happen, it sure as hell wouldn't be on a gigabyte board... or without vmods for the matter
when such a significant point is reached with nothing but a screenshot, no one believes it, its as simple as that - validation via CPUz is all you need, and too bad you can't photoshop that ;)
Awefully slow time for that mhz and fsb speed.
Well guys, I guess I have some new benchmarks for you all. Whereas, there's some points I will have to clearify.
1) X6800 showing E6200, I found out it's a bug at CPU-Z 1.36. I've turned back to 1.35 and the readings are correct.
2) I tried summitting that cpuz.cvf file for validation with 1.35, and the site says that my CPU-z version is old. But when I tried using 1.36 cvf file, it says the system is not fully supported...
So.. I'm too wanted to get my results validated, as it's my first "world-record " (??) result. I'm quite excited about this, but who can help me contact the CPU-z guys??
Here's the new benchmarks I'd re-done again.. with CPU-z 1.35
http://img4.picsplace.to/img4/25/600-pi_2.JPG
Sandra 2007 CPU Benchmark_1
http://img4.picsplace.to/img4/25/600-sancpu_1.JPG
Sandra 2007 CPU Benchmark_2
http://img4.picsplace.to/img4/25/600-sancpu_2.JPG
Sandra 2007 Memory Benchmark
http://img4.picsplace.to/img4/25/600-sanmem.JPG
Lastly... the only photo editing software I know is "Paint" from Windows..
I'll try to get my results validated.. Here's the output txt file~~
----------------------
CPU-Z version 1.35
----------------------
CPUID Output
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of CPUs 2
CPU #1
APIC ID 0
Name Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800
Code name Conroe
Specification Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU X6800 @ 2.93GHz (Engineering Sample)
Family/Model/Stepping 6F6
Extended Family/Model 6/F
Package LGA 775 (0h)
Core Stepping B2
Technology 65nm
Instructions Sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4, EM64T
Features NX, VT
Clock Speed 3600.1 MHz
Clock multiplier x6.0
Multiplier range 6 - 6
Front Side Bus Frequency 600.0 MHz
Bus Speed 2400.0 MHz
Stock frequency 2933 MHz
L1 Data Cache 32 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
L1 Instruction Cache 32 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
L2 Cache 4096 KBytes, 16-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
L2 Speed 3600.1 MHz (Full)
L2 Location On Chip
L2 Data Prefetch Logic yes
L2 Bus Width 256 bits
:stick:
Bromptoners.... Nice to see a steping 6 rev B2 ES chip lmao :slapass:
edit: but seeing the later post it must be a bug.... sorry :clap:
If anyone is interested, the checksum from the first post is one of these:
B8C68D3A
B0C68D3A
B8C60D3A
B0C60D3A
The 8's and 0's are identical to that number of pixels...
t
edit: oops, the first char is a B lol
edit2: eh none of them verify anyways ... bogus shot? dunno ... I'm pretty sure that I'm right now...
Ok, since CPUZ isn't validating, now try PCMARK and get your ORB thingee online, that is the other way.
Well, at least Pi checksum is correct
taemun:
No, those checksums are not correct
Paint ROXQuote:
Lastly... the only photo editing software I know is "Paint" from Windows..
http://users.skynet.be/pt1t/1M_600X7_1,6v.PNG
wtf is goin on ? are these fakes or what?
Guess .... ;) ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ea6gka
Is this the same result? http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post1701062
:slap:
YesQuote:
Originally Posted by Dumo
No moded mobo and FSB 600 :rolleyes: :confused:
so it's no fake, but a stolen screen ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumo
sry about that... i was just way too confused ;)
great result.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiden Zero
it isnt coolaler ftp.
someone ban this guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pt1t
Yes the topic on Forum Coolaler :cool:
*Checks out other thread* :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiden Zero
*Scratches head* :stick:
*Comes back here* :coffee:
Now I'm really confused :shrug: :wierd:
ye, same here... :confused: :confused: :hitself:Quote:
Originally Posted by K.I.T.T.
e/: ok, just red coolalers post again... seems like the 600fsb are from a member of his board ;)
I can only get 527 :(
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=116156
I do not think its a fake. the low spi time is do too single channel being used, and that could also explain the high FSB. CPU-Z do show B2´s as ES sometimes....happent to a retail e6600 of mine as well:)
Actually no, they guy seems to be right after all, great result :toast:
Just posting as much info about setup as you can would be nice :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by i found nemo
without validation... it's NO WR. cpu-z verification, ORB verification... that's needed. Otherwise, waste of bandwidth. We've seen it ALL here before.
nice work
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=118694#Quote:
Originally Posted by charlie
Although it does say not fully supported...hard to say if it's legit or not.
I'm not going to make any judgements either way till proven otherwise :)
Where did Coolaer get the F4e bios from?????
heh, no need to all accuse the guy of photochopping-600Mhz might not be easily obtained but it's not exactly unthinkable.
Hopefully all this validation will get worked out, but it'd be one heck of a hoax as it is if he went through the trouble of photoshopping a bazillion pictures and submitting a hacked CPU-Z validation (even if it says not fully supported).
Question is: Is there exotic cooling of some sort on the NB? It's not really unfathomable to hit 600Mhz if you had exotic cooling rigged to everything lol.
seems legit.. post cpuz validation or orb thingy :)
holy crap relax everyone.... give him some time i'm sure he'll post it up
go to the ds3 bios thread here on xs and you will see numerous beta bios.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dower
600fsb = slow ?
this is my ONLY 485fsb 1:1
http://vic.expreview.com/attachment/1155826855.jpg
In order to reach 600fsb the timings on the northbridge must be very loose. Hence the low score (albeit even lower than i expected too).
Also, when he changes bios, his board revision goes from c2 to c1, is it a bios thing?
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=118694#
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=118694#
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=118694#
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=118694#
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=118694#
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=118694#
One for each person STILL asking for CPUZ validation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarlet Infidel
The phrase loose as a goose comes to mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by CPU-Z Validation
And thats just the ram timings. I was referring to internal chipset timings.
are the people jealous or something when they say, "DURRR THIS CANT BE REAL!" He even sent validation!
this could be real BUT you should know that CPUz validation can be faked............would be a tad harder to do so with ORB..........................
if this is really correct BIG applause :)
i think the slow pi times are from the slow ram timings, and probably some loosend chipset timings...
it's also running single channel and 512MB stickQuote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
it's not THAT unbelievable really
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
i agree, it tough, but a good cpu and a decent 512 stick might make it alot easier.
i think ,maybe a bug here,but bug can be a wrQuote:
Originally Posted by Btrice
Hey can u post some pics of your setup?:p:
it is certainly the first board to do this and congrats on that but you have to understand the skepticisim people. you don't show up here claiming world records without clean validation and by clean i mean community recognized standards such as a valid CPU-Z and/or ORB. the OP now knows what happens when you don't come packing the right gear. if you have all the proof anyone could ask for, there are no questions.
we have been trained by other losers here claiming things that weren't true to never trust anything until validation can be shown, proven, and repeated...it is that simple. don't cry wolf without teethmarks...
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3oh6
read the thread before you insult someone, hes got validation and a valid pi checksum
why do i bother...thanx for your input mate ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
again and i quote from my first post...
i thought i was simply stating that there is definitely going to be skepticism when you don't have the right proof and it is understandable. that is is, that is all. insult??? draw me a map because i am lost my firend...Quote:
Originally Posted by 3oh6
Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage_guitar
It's not listed! :slapass:
sorry for my english, but i don't understand...
first post i see the motrherboard rev. is c2 but in the next screenshot the motherboard rev is c1
does he test two different motherboard?
All world record in here are jealous of him. Give him a bravo!! :toast:
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoner
your right it does say C2....
hhmmm i dont think i recall seeing anyone else with screenshots saying Rev C2...
glitch in cpu-z ?
if this is real (im starting to believe) then congrats!! awesome work!
With the addition of validation I am compelled to render my apology. Great OC man!
with stock cooling,very impressive
:toast:
With stock cooling, stock board with no mods. I fully understand the super loose timings and only running single channel but its still pretty damn freakish. I wonder what fsb he can achieve with a retail 6600 or 6400.
So what is the final verdict on the validity of his results?
Who Cares!!!
Very clever way to get the most FSB, funny nobody else thought of one stick all loose timings with a 6X multiplier. It was right in front of everyones noses but nobody else thought of trying it, salute and congrats on being the first to succeed.
I still dont buy it...
any questionable OC, is not a WR to me, and most likely never will be.
theres just too many if, ands, or buts, with this one.
wow you guys are slow check this out from coolaler's thread his pic is from here
http://img10.picsplace.to/15/600-pi.JPG
no lets see this guys pic is from where now
http://img10.picsplace.to/15/600-pi.JPG
am i the only one that noticed this?
no way in hell 2 systems with the same timings and speed are going to do the exact same time for a superpi run.
why is it both check sums for coolaler's and this guys superpi calcs are the same?
hell all the SS's in this post are from the same location as coolaler's.
coolaler's SS"s are in the first post
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=114600
then see this guys post here
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...4&postcount=34
VOTE BAN
YES=F1
NO= you have no option for NO!
coolaler didnt get that record. its the same because its the same guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilsizer
if i press F1 i get mozzilla fire fox help?:mad:anyway drop it guys. if it is fake he is only fooling himself;)
didn't know thatQuote:
Originally Posted by serious1
guess i'll hit No option and see what happens heheh
Mmmm...and if OPB/Macci/OPPainter/Coolaler etc were to rock on here with the same "evidence", everyone would believe?Quote:
without validation... it's NO WR. cpu-z verification, ORB verification... that's needed. Otherwise, waste of bandwidth. We've seen it ALL here before.
Guys, give him a break. This place is really full of so-called extremists when it comes to overclocking, yet mostly 1-2% of people on this site has really taken things to the extreme. Sad really to see the face of this wonderful forum change :(
Thing is, we all become so important to ourselves, we believe we are God's gift to the overclocking scene - when, in reality, it has nothing to do with us!
It's all about how lucky you are to get very good yield hardware.
Anyone out there with a few braincells can learn a few tricks on how to benchmark, and tune a system - it's nothing.
You are as good as your hardware allows you to be - because you are no1 or no2 or something doesn't make you a god, or someone special - just someone very fortunate to be receiving good hardware ;)
So, let's all tap down on those egos and allow someone else a little "respect" if and when applicable?
For the record, I have numerous times being in the top 10 in the open class on the Orb, with my own money, and hardware bought from Resellers.
Does that make me someone special? Nope, not at all. Just lucky to have some funds to invest in a hobby I luv.
Can mostly ANY person on this forum be as good as the so-called Greats?
Well, give us the cherry-picked hardware, and let's see, shall we then. I would say yes, all that mostly distinghuish no1 from no50 is good hardware, and funds. Not knowledge.
I bet there is the opportunity for the Dinos22, Eva2000's, heck quite many guys all over the world to be No1 with right hardware.
Damn, it's nothing special. The hardware may be, but not us as individuals - there's many, many overclockers in this world that can step into no1 today given same support with privileged hardware/bioses etc.
So, as a request, before judging this record, give the guy a break, shall we? Allow him the same time and courtesy to come up with results, before flaming/banning etc.
These actions are usually as a direct result of those that feel insecure in their own knowledge, and abilites - just because you can't do it, or whoever is no1 can't do it, doesn't mean the original poster can't.
Just a bit of food for thought.
:flowers:
I agree with you MrBean.
peace out.
why the hell would he be banned? coolaler even said himself he posted that same thing on his website??truth hurts i guess?
mr.bean
while your post does make some good points (it's all about the silicone+persistance+skill baby :D) you fail to realise that these forums are based on trust and respect. So when you do see someone like macci or fugger and many well respected members here post something even they go through the lengths of providing those details requested. It's not a big deal if you have nothing to hide. Even if fugger was to show up with a 600MHz screenshot like this and no further details i would not doubt him as consequences of lying on these forums are far greater than short lived reward such as a W.R. and other extraordinary claims. Members that have been here for a long time value their place in the community to the extent that they would never cheat and if they did they know very well what will happen in return.
New people with 1 post count showing up for a W.R. or some extraordinary claim are not new here so a certain degree of scepticism is healthy as long as it doesn't become a sledging match. It's childish and stupid of people to simply say others are jelaous. I had my doubts about this as there was no decent amount of info available to prove the claim beyond reasonable doubt. Now that we do have a CPUz validation and checksum this certainly looks more believable. I did make a note that faking CPUz is easily done and checksum can be arranged at certain clock speed to fit this....................so that's why many people are still a little doubtful that's all. If the thread starter put enough effort to join XS, create a thread, do all the screens so far than why not do the others people have asked him. It's not a big deal.
I'll give you an example when i was first putting out a thread with an unlocked 11xmulti on Opteron 146. I knew there were other threads and people not believing that so i made damn well sure i answer every question and do whatever people ask of me..........it wasn't a big deal. Look at that thread link and see how simple questions from people like S7 resulted in really long replays.............i had nothing to hide. People probably didn't doubt me too much as I've been very active here but I felt it was necessary to provide info required regardless. Imagine how different that thread would have been if i created another logon and created the first thread which just had the screenshot and that's it
I was wondering the same thingQuote:
Originally Posted by vintage_guitar
You all act like he's the new guy to your school and gets all the attention from the girls...then you get jelaous and want to kick his ass:stick: :slapass:
Hey Dinos22,Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinos22
Even though my postcount is very low, I have been a member of this site for quite many years :) Just haven't been that active over here, as there are many sites to browse/reply etc.
I am well aware of the "requirements" of some of these sites, but just recently the face of overclocking has started to change all over the world, with many newbies to overclocking making big inroads into territories usually the playground of more established names.
I have myself been in the top 10 numerous times, when the Macci/Fugger/OPP/Shamino's etc were very active, I have always enjoyed decent competition, and took what most guys presented at face value.
It will be very difficult to bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: an accomplished overclocker, and I have seen no evidence from the original poster of that intent.
In actual fact, I think with a good yield chipset, running single chan mem, at dividers, it may very well be feasible, even quite believable.
I would believe that clock, because for one simple fact - look at what his SuperPI time is, and start doing tests yourself with single chan mem, and reverse-polate your times with what dual-channel setup would give you at certain speeds, dividers, etc, vs single-channel setup.
Then quite a few will discover that indeed his times tie up with clocks and single channel.
Sometimes all that's needed is a little thinking.
My point is that this is becoming an increasing unfriendly place, with too many spectators waiting to play referee.
But yes, let's hope this is just a phase, and that we would be mature enough to accept, and understand when someone has accomplished something special, like in this case, and that we can give credit.
Sometimes you don't need all the proof in the world to accept a record like this, all you need is to use the gray matter so many claim to have an excess of :)
Not aimed at you, just in general.
Kind regards,
MrBean.
congrats :toast: