DFI 875P-T @ 6Ghz

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-12-2004, 04:55 PM
meke

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelInside

Here you go:

Prescott PI
Northwood PI
Technical details of the patch

Everyone, sorry I got a bit pissed off. Fugger, great job done with O/C. Keep it up.

I patched the super_pi with the prescott_pi but unfortunately I got error and cannot continue.

is this normal?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...erPI/error.jpg
11-12-2004, 04:58 PM
Charles Wirth

No LN2. I picked up a new X800XT and I will put the PE bios on it.

Got lucky af Frys, they had the Visiontek X800XT in stock and it has 1.6ns ram and Rage Theatre chip on it.

Ill try not to crush the core this time ;)

My 3.8E E0 ES will be here monday but I will still get in some runs on the 3.6E E0 in the mean time.

Adding a 600w OCZ PSU to the mix

3.6E E0
DFI 875P-T
Visiontek X800XT modded
OCZ Powerstream 600w
OCZ Rev2 TCCD
OCZ DDR Booster

And just for the fun of it all I may abuse a BFG6800U as well.
11-12-2004, 04:59 PM
Charles Wirth

Meke if you are overclocked too far it will caugh up that error message.
11-12-2004, 05:30 PM
pik-ard v1.1

fugger i've heard bad things about the 600W OCZ, i've seen reports of a few poping... might wanna wait with that untill OCZ gets whatever problem it has worked out.

just a heads up.
11-12-2004, 06:11 PM
IntelInside

Impatient people should skip this post because it is going to be long...

Quote:

Originally Posted by chilly1

And in the original superPI is there any other code that is processor unique?

Original SuperPI is compiled for generic Pentium even without MMX.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kane

IntelInside has a point. If we can't use his SuperPI, because it uses SSE3, why should people be allowed to use HT in benchmarks? What's legal, and what's not? Personally I don't se it as a cheat. Don't know about you guys, but would be fun to hear your opinions. Oh, by the way, I own a AMD, so I'm not a FanBoy

You said it better than me. I agree 101%.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Pi is a touchy issue for most when it comes to version and optimizations. we had a version we trusted the result but had very poor ability show exact results. meaning that it did not break down to tenths or hundredth of a second.

As far as I know original SuperPI also does not show 1/10 or 1/100 of a second. So what exactly is your point here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xassius

as i have mentioned before...do we need DOOM 3 Prescott Version and DOOM3 Winchester Version?

I will answer this with a question -- If it performs better that way then why the hell not?

Example: Tomb Raider -- Angel of Darkness has 3 EXE files. One generic, one for Pentium 3 and Athlon (SSE), and one for Pentium 4 and A64 (SSE2).

It is also possible to produce single executables that run optimized versions of critical code paths depending on the CPU you have.

Or lets make it even simpler for you -- if you pay for expensive HDTV capable set will you agree to only watch regular TV program on it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEvil

I have no problem with people running it, just as long as it can be distinguished from "normal" super-pi.

Problem is that SuperPI should have been written in such a way that it uses the maximum potential of each CPU. Much like VirtualDub for example. Soon reviewers that fancy AMD CPUs will start using VirtualDub as a benchmark tool because Avery Lee has ported it to 64 bits and those who will then say "it is not fair, they must use 32 bit version" will be laughed at. It is inevitable that the tests evolve along with the hardware or they become meaningless.

SuperPI for example only uses FPU unit (floating point calculations). It could have been much faster if it had optimizations for MMX, 3DNow, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, x86-64, etc. Everyone would then be able test their maximal CPU strength -- that is what we really should compare. That is not favoring one or the other, it is just that everyone is using what he paid for.

Imagine two friends comparing the power of their cars. One has the engine with 4 cyl. and another one has the engine with 8 cyl. Should he disable half of his engine for the comparison to be fair? I don't think so. After all they are not comparing the same two cars much like we do not compare the same CPUs here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEvil

maybe its time for a new version of super-pi?

I would suggest taking FastPI43 and building upon that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEvil

Myself I want to see a video card calculate pi to 1m places..

It is possible to do that and the library for doing things on the GPU called brook is under development so expect to see things like that pretty soon. For comparison Geforce 6800 Ultra can peak at 40 GFLOPS as compared with only up to 6 GFLOPS in theory on currently fastest CPUs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeRed

This is going to make it very hard if not impossible to compare superpi scores, thus invalidating it as a benchmark.

benchmark(ing):
n., A standard by which something can be measured or judged
tr.v., To measure (a rival's product) according to specified standards in order to compare it with and improve one's own product.

Ok, lets see what makes up for a standard in a SuperPI case:

1. Calculation to a certain number of decimal places (usually 1 M)
2. Exact result
3. Time it took to complete.

If you are not satisfied with the above checklist then who will decide what additional rules should make the standard?

Someone could insist on other things such as:

1. Testing under Windows 98
2. Providing a list of running applications and services
3. Using same type and same amount of RAM
4. Using same chipset
5. Disabling Hyper-Threading if Intel
6. Using same amount of L1 and L2 cache
7. Starting the test after exactly x minutes of machine uptime after cold boot
8. ...

I exaggerated some points in the hope that you will see how stupid that would be.

As OPPAINTER said SuperPI sucks. Why? Because it only measures FPU strength which is almost irrelevant these days when most mainstream apps do not use FPU code but instead use optimized SSE and SSE2 code for calculations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xassius

excuse me...but why have you offically wrecked a benchmark many of us use?

That benchmark was meaningless anyway. See above.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xassius

by no means am I saying that enabling optimizations in a program is bad...it's just that enabling them in a Benchmark for COMPARISON purposes and NOT BEING ABLE TO DIFFER BETWEEN PATCHED AND UNPATCHED is really wrecking and destroying the purpose of superpi...

Original purpose of SuperPI was to calculate PI to certain number of decimal points fast and accurate. It was not intended to be used as a benchmark anyway. Face it. It is skewed. AMD has faster FPU and that is why it performs better in SuperPI. That doesn't mean that in general use Pentium 4 is that much slower. Not all apps use FPU in that way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by meke

I patched the super_pi with the prescott_pi but unfortunately I got error and cannot continue.

is this normal?

As FUGGER says it is probably related to you O/C-ing the CPU too high. Try lowering the clock a bit.

Just for the record, my SuperPI result is 42s @ stock 2.8 GHz.
11-12-2004, 06:22 PM
pik-ard v1.1

IntelInside, i think the problem is, is that its only been optomized for ONE type of processor, so far as i know, theres no SSE2 optimization, MMX, 3DNOW, etc... so optomizing a program that is widely used in a community for just ONE of the contenders is unfair. what would have made people more agreeable to your modification, is if you got togeather with people who had other types of cpu's, and created a version of superpi with optimizations for ALL of them.

the point is that the optimization is only an optimization for a certain processor type, which renders it uncomparable to other processors.

maybe you think it is useless, but thats only your personal opinion, many others think that it is a good guage of brute strength of a cpu.
11-12-2004, 06:41 PM
chilly1

NO not for a while yet.... need a 200L dewer for what I want to do.
11-12-2004, 08:22 PM
CodeRed

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelInside

...

Ok, lets see what makes up for a standard in a SuperPI case:

1. Calculation to a certain number of decimal places (usually 1 M)
2. Exact result
3. Time it took to complete.

If you are not satisfied with the above checklist then who will decide what additional rules should make the standard?

But that definition I could run pifast for 1M places and absolutely smoke any superpi score :rolleyes:
11-12-2004, 09:52 PM
Xassius

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeRed

But that definition I could run pifast for 1M places and absolutely smoke any superpi score :rolleyes:

;)

:stick: @ intelinside

Intelinside: if it was a crap benchmark anyway...why did you patch it? It's only crap in your opinion....

people are mainly using superpi to compare the same group of cpu's...like Prescott -> another Prescott...so patching it would skew results...since you cannot distinguish between the two...
11-13-2004, 12:31 AM
meke

OK there is no change but I make it run this morning.

it's still 14x275 = 3850 Mhz

probably stock cooler was too hot yesterday :D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...b275_patch.jpg
11-13-2004, 12:43 AM
ocmyface

i feel like a caveman :stick:

i get all excited when i can hit 2.3 on my desktop 2500+ barton...
11-13-2004, 08:04 AM
OPPAINTER

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

No LN2. I picked up a new X800XT and I will put the PE bios on it.

Got lucky af Frys, they had the Visiontek X800XT in stock and it has 1.6ns ram and Rage Theatre chip on it.

Ill try not to crush the core this time ;)

My 3.8E E0 ES will be here monday but I will still get in some runs on the 3.6E E0 in the mean time.

Adding a 600w OCZ PSU to the mix

3.6E E0
DFI 875P-T
Visiontek X800XT modded
OCZ Powerstream 600w
OCZ Rev2 TCCD
OCZ DDR Booster

And just for the fun of it all I may abuse a BFG6800U as well.

Get some 3D scores up on the orb, lets see what that bad boy will do at 6gigs.

OPP
11-13-2004, 08:36 AM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

No LN2. I picked up a new X800XT and I will put the PE bios on it.

Got lucky af Frys, they had the Visiontek X800XT in stock and it has 1.6ns ram and Rage Theatre chip on it.

Ill try not to crush the core this time ;)

My 3.8E E0 ES will be here monday but I will still get in some runs on the 3.6E E0 in the mean time.

Adding a 600w OCZ PSU to the mix

3.6E E0
DFI 875P-T
Visiontek X800XT modded
OCZ Powerstream 600w
OCZ Rev2 TCCD
OCZ DDR Booster

And just for the fun of it all I may abuse a BFG6800U as well.

3.8E ES is :cool:
11-13-2004, 09:01 AM
IntelInside

Quote:

Originally Posted by pik-ard v1.1

IntelInside, i think the problem is, is that its only been optomized for ONE type of processor, so far as i know, theres no SSE2 optimization, MMX, 3DNOW, etc... so optomizing a program that is widely used in a community for just ONE of the contenders is unfair. what would have made people more agreeable to your modification, is if you got togeather with people who had other types of cpu's, and created a version of superpi with optimizations for ALL of them.

Using SuperPI as a benchmark which is faster on AMD because it has faster FPU is unfair.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pik-ard v1.1

the point is that the optimization is only an optimization for a certain processor type, which renders it uncomparable to other processors.

I do not agree. Why don't you run it on 386 or 486 then? Because it most likely won't run due to the program being optimized for Pentium CPU.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pik-ard v1.1

maybe you think it is useless, but thats only your personal opinion, many others think that it is a good guage of brute strength of a cpu.

NO IT IS NOT A GOOD GAUGE.

It only stresses FPU and because AMD has faster FPU it can only appeal to AMD owners as a good gauge because they end up as a winners.

But let me warn you, especially the owners of 64-bit AMD CPUs amongst you -- Microsoft wrote in the latest Driver Development Kit that legacy FPU code is not going to be used in Windows XP 64-bit. Only SSE, SSE2 will be used throughout the operating system, drivers and applications. Even their latest 64-bit compiler included with DDK (the one that will be part of Visual Studio .Net Whidbey when it comes out next year) does not produce FPU code anymore. You should find another benchmark which will measure SSE2 performance. Last time I checked even FX-55 was not ahead of Intel when it comes to SSE2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeRed

But that definition I could run pifast for 1M places and absolutely smoke any superpi score

No you could not because we were talking about SuperPI and not about PiFast. PiFast uses entirely different algorhitm for calculation while even patched SuperPI doesn't change the way PI gets calculated. It is much like Formula 1 optimization -- you can tweak the engine as much as you want but it doesn't make any sense to compare times of two engines on two different tracks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xassius

people are mainly using superpi to compare the same group of cpu's...like Prescott -> another Prescott...so patching it would skew results...since you cannot distinguish between the two...

Is it? Last time I checked many people were comparing Intel and AMD CPUs (even in this thread) and that doesn't sound like the same group to me.
11-13-2004, 09:19 AM
macci

Quote:

Using SuperPI as a benchmark which is faster on AMD because it has faster FPU is unfair.

Useing a benchmark that runs better on AMd than intel is unfair? would it be unfair to use a benchmark that runs better on intel than AMD also? dont you think that Doom3 for instance is a very unfair benchmark too since it runs better on AMD? 3dmark2001 too! ;)
And for your Information SuperPi does NOT run all that much better on AMD.
for your viewing pleasure.

AMD vs. Intel has nothing to do with the fact that your patch is not very much liked among certain overclockers..
11-13-2004, 05:40 PM
IntelInside

Quote:

Originally Posted by macci

Useing a benchmark that runs better on AMd than intel is unfair? would it be unfair to use a benchmark that runs better on intel than AMD also? dont you think that Doom3 for instance is a very unfair benchmark too since it runs better on AMD? 3dmark2001 too! ;)

Obviously you didn't understand me. Let me put it this way. If your favorite football team has strong attack but weak defense will it be better than other teams because of that? SuperPI result for itself doesn't mean a $hit. There are other benchmarks that can test numerous aspects of a CPU and not just FPU unit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by macci

And for your Information SuperPi does NOT run all that much better on AMD.
for your viewing pleasure.

I would like to see them compared at stock clocks and not with some insane O/C using LN2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by macci

AMD vs. Intel has nothing to do with the fact that your patch is not very much liked among certain overclockers..

Those who don't like it do not have to use it, But they should not offend the patch nor the author because of that.

I really hope that the serious O/C community for which I have great respect will find some better benchmark.
11-13-2004, 06:04 PM
Xassius

Intel Inside's opinion: Super PI sucks...let's ruin it even more by making an indistinguishable patch!!!!

If you don't like it...doesn't mean other people don't like it and you don't have to ruin it for them.
11-13-2004, 06:39 PM
chilly1

a what if, what if the optimization is nothing but the use of an internal memory handling option that requires a single instruction set to operate, would the optimization be merely a correction of a deficient program>
11-14-2004, 01:08 AM
Hallowed

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelInside

Using SuperPI as a benchmark which is faster on AMD because it has faster FPU is unfair.

NO IT IS NOT A GOOD GAUGE.

It only stresses FPU and because AMD has faster FPU it can only appeal to AMD owners as a good gauge because they end up as a winners.

So, by your definition, 98% of todays games are poor gauges of performance because AMD is faster?

If Intel were faster would it be an appropriate gauge of performance then?

Your patch functions as a crutch. It assists the needy. A true benchmark has an equal challenge / test / load on all parties. And thats all there is to it.
11-14-2004, 04:43 AM
xsky

@Fugger
Did you have any issues getting the dfi to work with those temperatures. I've good contact and the cpu is cold but the board won't boot
11-14-2004, 05:04 AM
blinky

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelInside

Using SuperPI as a benchmark which is faster on AMD because it has faster FPU is unfair.

cry me a river dude,

life is unfair,

theres plenty of benches that love intel more than amd, no one complains, they jsut use intel for those
11-15-2004, 12:31 AM
UNKNOWN

Get Ready: P4 Up To 6.5 GHz

Hi Guys,

I’m on my way to reach 6.7GHz full info & pictures will be available soon, and who knows maybe a video :) :D

Congratulate for all the scores which you ALL have achieved

See you soon.
11-15-2004, 12:45 AM
charlie

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN

Hi Guys,

I’m on my way to reach 6.7GHz full info & pictures will be available soon, and who knows maybe a video :) :D

Congratulate for all the scores which you ALL have achieved

See you soon.

Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!
OOOhhh that's soooooo mysterious sounding! 6.7 huh?
11-15-2004, 12:46 AM
Xassius

NICE unknown...what CPU 3.8 E0 Engineering Sample? What Mobo?

regardless... 6.7Ghz would be plain sweet....(not that Fugger's 6.3Ghz isn't) :)
11-15-2004, 06:27 AM
blinky

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN

Hi Guys,

I’m on my way to reach 6.7GHz full info & pictures will be available soon, and who knows maybe a video :) :D

Congratulate for all the scores which you ALL have achieved

See you soon.

r u in Dubai or Abu Dhabi?
11-15-2004, 06:35 AM
Crankster

Pin that mans IP, we've got a loner on our hands :D
11-15-2004, 12:19 PM
Charles Wirth

The 3.8E E0 ES came in ths morning.

3.8Ghz @ 1.2v stock

Lets hope the DFI supports it without having to swap processors in order to bios flash...

I will hope to max out around 6.66Ghz 351FSB
11-15-2004, 12:40 PM
meke

I tested again on 225*18 = 4050 MHz

The Super PI comes to 31 Sec.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...fsb225_x18.jpg

I connect to a chiller today and the water was 7C, but I cannot make the cpu drop under 40C.

I see 295 x 14 and 235 x 18
but cpu is damn hot.

SL7J9 Malay cpu needs serious cooling, may be ln2 for benchmark :(
11-15-2004, 12:41 PM
dutchman.pt

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

The 3.8E E0 ES came in ths morning.

3.8Ghz @ 1.2v stock

Lets hope the DFI supports it without having to swap processors in order to bios flash...

I will hope to max out around 6.66Ghz 351FSB

Go...Go...Gadget! :D :banana: :toast:

6.66Ghz (666...the evil number...muhahaha) would be amazing. :)

May the force be with you. :toast:
11-15-2004, 01:08 PM
olfen

bring out the beast of that:D
11-15-2004, 01:39 PM
Clew

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

The 3.8E E0 ES came in ths morning.

3.8Ghz @ 1.2v stock

Lets hope the DFI supports it without having to swap processors in order to bios flash...

I will hope to max out around 6.66Ghz 351FSB

Wait a second... 3,8ghz at 1,2v is rather impressive...
Is the stock voltage on that particular ES sample 1,2, or is it just you that have managed to get it to run at that voltage? :slobber:
11-15-2004, 02:13 PM
Charles Wirth

http://processorfinder.intel.com/scr...ALL&CorSpd=ALL

First sighting of the SL8 series
11-15-2004, 02:24 PM
detonator

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

http://processorfinder.intel.com/scr...ALL&CorSpd=ALL

First sighting of the SL8 series

I smell a new WR;)
11-15-2004, 03:59 PM
Charles Wirth

2 Attachment(s)

Here it is, getting new bios from DFI very soon to support the 19x multiple.

Im stuck on 18x for the moment.

Take a look at the second screen shot, notice the voltage ;)
11-15-2004, 04:02 PM
CTKP

Man Fugger, thats insane! I can't believe how little voltage it is taking to get such nice clocks

Quote:

Originally Posted by detonator

I smell a new WR;)

I'll have to second that :D
11-15-2004, 04:03 PM
ed.howell

Great Job Fugger!!!! :toast:

Is that voltage an error in CPU-Z?
11-15-2004, 04:28 PM
Charles Wirth

Its off by a little bit. Might be around 1.2v

btw, new version of CPUZ 1.25v available.

getting stuff lined up for benching 3D while I wait for new bios.
11-15-2004, 04:52 PM
death metal

Wondeful fugger...that's really insance OC at low voltage!!!!
11-15-2004, 05:22 PM
ed.howell

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Its off by a little bit. Might be around 1.2v

btw, new version of CPUZ 1.25v available.

getting stuff lined up for benching 3D while I wait for new bios.

WOW
That is crazy low voltage for that overclock.

GREAT JOB!!!!!
11-15-2004, 06:25 PM
beau_zo_brehm

holy :banana::banana::banana::banana: fugger, that's badass!! keep it up
11-15-2004, 11:18 PM
burnout

http://xtremesystems.org/forums/atta...chmentid=19498

:eek:

this is a reading bug, isn't it...

:slobber:

awesome!
11-15-2004, 11:47 PM
STEvil

How do they perform clock for clock with earlier revisions?
11-16-2004, 12:00 AM
Hilppa

How about finally doing some SuperPi 8M (unpatched) benchmarks?! :slobber:
11-16-2004, 12:01 AM
zakelwe

I get a very good feeling with this 3.8 rev E chip, Intel have definitely tweaked it for the extra 200MHz over the 3.6.

Shame there is not a 20 multiplier on the BIOS so only the cpu would be the limiting factor.

Regards

Andy
11-16-2004, 12:07 AM
death metal

fugger, please, bring out the benchies ;)...
11-16-2004, 12:07 AM
zakelwe

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelInside

Those who don't like it do not have to use it, But they should not offend the patch nor the author because of that.

I really hope that the serious O/C community for which I have great respect will find some better benchmark.

If working out Pi using all the available features of the chip was important to you then why did you not make your own Pi calculator / benchmark instead of making this patch ?

What did you gain by altering SuperPi ? Are you so enamoured by it's interface and options that you could not bare to stop using it, so had to make the patch ?

You're trying to appear the hurt party in this but I do not think you are innocent as you seem.

Regards

Andy
11-16-2004, 12:20 AM
death metal

Quote:

Hi Guys,

I’m on my way to reach 6.7GHz full info & pictures will be available soon, and who knows maybe a video

Congratulate for all the scores which you ALL have achieved

See you soon.

I'd like to download the video, woot...
11-16-2004, 01:09 AM
UNKNOWN

P4 6.5GHz is HERE....

Hi Guys,

these are the First Pics...

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg

Still not able to break 6.5 GHz :confused:

by the way yesterday i got the new P4 570 3.8GHz...

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc2.jpg

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc3.jpg

if the PICTURE doesn't appear copy these Links:

www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg
www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc2.jpg
www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc3.jpg

New Score Soon...

i'm in Dubai Blinky...

Have a nice day...

MB ASUS P5AD2 Premium
Kingston DDRII 1GB
GeForce 6800 Ultra PCIe
11-16-2004, 01:16 AM
Detract

Linkies arn't working.
11-16-2004, 01:19 AM
death metal

nope...even copy paste wont work...
11-16-2004, 01:31 AM
Crankster

Well said Zakelwe, well said.
FUGGER that is S I C K!
11-16-2004, 01:35 AM
burnout

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc3.jpg
damn high voltage for stock clocks...
11-16-2004, 01:48 AM
Xassius

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN

Hi Guys,

these are the First Pics...

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg

Still not able to break 6.5 GHz :confused:

by the way yesterday i got the new P4 570 3.8GHz...

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc2.jpg

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc3.jpg

if the PICTURE doesn't appear copy these Links:

www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg
www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc2.jpg
www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc3.jpg

New Score Soon...

i'm in Dubai Blinky...

Have a nice day...

MB ASUS P5AD2 Premium
Kingston DDRII 1GB
GeForce 6800 Ultra PCIe

I'm a pessimist...but P5AD2's currently have trouble scaling above 290FSB...(unless I am wrong cos I don't own one...)

say you got 300FSB and 19x multi for that 570...you get....5700mhz :confused:

How did you get such a high fsb on that motherboard? new bios?
11-16-2004, 01:50 AM
Xassius

OMG OMG 466mhz FSB!!!!

on that p5ad2?!?!?!?!! what mods? bios? need info now :)

that's one UBER overclock IF it is true...
11-16-2004, 02:29 AM
bias_hjorth

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg
Nice photoshop job eh`? :D

Somebody plz. check cpu-z code. (looks for a moderator)
11-16-2004, 02:50 AM
UNKNOWN

Quote:

Originally Posted by bias_hjorth

http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg
Nice photoshop job eh`? :D

Somebody plz. check cpu-z code. (looks for a moderator)

hey if you think these are photoshop, i really feel sorry for you...

you need to think again when you watch the Video Soon...

take care...

have a nice day...
11-16-2004, 02:52 AM
Xassius

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN

hey if you think these are photoshop, i really feel sorry for you...

you need to think again when you watch the Video Soon...

take care...

have a nice day...

still haven't answered my question....HOW did you scale that p5ad2 that high of an FSB??????!?!?!???!?!?!?
11-16-2004, 02:57 AM
death metal

unknown, on this link: http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg

why do you have "9" above (between) M and h of "Mhz" under "Core Speed"...
11-16-2004, 03:03 AM
Xassius

Quote:

Originally Posted by death metal

unknown, on this link: http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg

why do you have "9" above (between) M and h of "Mhz" under "Core Speed"...

huh? I don't see much :)
11-16-2004, 03:06 AM
UNKNOWN

Quote:

Originally Posted by death metal

unknown, on this link: http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg

why do you have "9" above (between) M and h of "Mhz" under "Core Speed"...

9???? i can't see it....
11-16-2004, 03:12 AM
UNKNOWN

Believe it Or Not

Dear All,

Believe it or Not, because i don't care, and i will not win anything, at the end its just a fun...

have a nice day...
11-16-2004, 03:12 AM
Xassius

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN

9???? i can't see it....

please...unknown answer my question or we'll deem your overclock as fake :p: j/k

How did you scale the FSB on that P5AD2 of yours that high?
11-16-2004, 03:13 AM
Xassius

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN

Dear All,

Believe it or Not, because i don't care, and i will not win anything, at the end its just a fun...

have a nice day...

my money's on a fake... :(
11-16-2004, 03:23 AM
UNKNOWN

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xassius

please...unknown answer my question or we'll deem your overclock as fake :p: j/k

How did you scale the FSB on that P5AD2 of yours that high?

use BIOS ad2p1000.063 ....

have a nice day...
11-16-2004, 03:25 AM
cpulloverclock

I'm skeptic...

very... too
11-16-2004, 03:28 AM
Xassius

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN

use BIOS ad2p1000.063 ....

have a nice day...

doubt it UNKNOWN.....

no one has gone that high or even close on a i925/i915 board. What voltage on the NB?

Any benchmarks? What cooling?

any pics of the system?

putting "have a nice day..." at the end of every post seems to perpetuate skeptism....but that's just me :)
11-16-2004, 03:34 AM
kiko

re:

why your cpu-z icon of the first pic is not the same of your third one?
That (1° pic) is not cpu-z 1.24 version according to icon.

Ciao
11-16-2004, 03:35 AM
MightyOne

Wasn't there something about CPU-Z reading the Multi wrong? That would make it 18x363 instead of 14x466 - still hard to believe, though ... ;)
11-16-2004, 03:41 AM
cpulloverclock

I'm asking cpu-z frequency checker to franck if he has it
11-16-2004, 03:44 AM
Xassius

and all of a sudden....the links to the screenshots are DEAD for me :(

something smells fishy......and it's not UNKNOWN's armpits (hint hint...photochop) :)
11-16-2004, 03:47 AM
death metal

here is the original image I downloaded, this is not edited since i am afraid re-uploading and re-editing might happen...

Original Image: http://sleektech.nl/~dm/temp/misc/unknown.bmp
11-16-2004, 03:49 AM
death metal

notice the "9" under his "THE UNKNOWN" mark ;)....
11-16-2004, 03:57 AM
Xassius

Quote:

Originally Posted by death metal

notice the "9" under his "THE UNKNOWN" mark ;)....

now I see it :)

Unknown still hasn't got any benchmarks or what type of cooling...etc

bound to be LN2...which doesn't last very long...but still lack of pics/video/benchies?

In one post...he told us that he doesn't care if we believe it or not? If I had just gotten 6.5Ghz on my prescott...I'd be very excited!!!! unlike UNKNOWN :p:
11-16-2004, 04:12 AM
ablaze

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Its off by a little bit. Might be around 1.2v

btw, new version of CPUZ 1.25v available.

getting stuff lined up for benching 3D while I wait for new bios.

FUGGER, do share the beta bios with the rest of us 875P-T users once you receive it! :toast:
11-16-2004, 04:12 AM
Karnivore

1 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cpulloverclock

I'm asking cpu-z frequency checker to franck if he has it

Results of CPUZCheck, seems the screenshot of his CPU lives up to his name, literally :D
11-16-2004, 04:19 AM
cpulloverclock

weird Cpu-z 1.24 gives the vcore, normally with a DDR2 config the vcore doesnt appear...
11-16-2004, 04:20 AM
cpulloverclock

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karnivore

Results of CPUZCheck, seems the screenshot of his CPU lives up to his name, literally :D

a faker... ahahaha betrayed by himself :banana4: :rolleyes:

and http://www34.brinkster.com/tbc2004/P45/tbc1.jpg ??
11-16-2004, 04:26 AM
burnout

could a mod please clean up here, this is annoying...
11-16-2004, 04:28 AM
saaya

2 Attachment(s)

its bs... :rolleyes:

come on, i didnt need the cpu check tool to know this was a fake... im mean how obvious is it that its a fake if some unknown weirdo that nobody knows pops up and claims a 466fsb for a board that is known to not go above 300fsb :rolleyes:

not to mention the lack of ANY details or benchmarks results...
i guess unknown has a 2.8ghz and not 3.8ghz pressie and a load of complexes because of his slow system ;) :D

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...chmentid=19512

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...chmentid=19513
11-16-2004, 04:33 AM
meke

wow
11-16-2004, 04:58 AM
zakelwe

Somehow I guess we will not see the Unknown again to amuse us with his antics :(

The only thing now is to guess his age, I would say 8 or 9 .

Regards

Andy
11-16-2004, 05:31 AM
Counter-Strike

WOW :toast: ThÄƒÌng FUGGER rÃ´Ì€i :banana:
:slobber: :slobber: :slobber:
11-16-2004, 05:52 AM
UNKNOWN

Get Ready.....

Ok Guys, you can say whatever you want, and I can say whatever I want.

Guys I’m liar, cheater, and faker whatever you want to say… but get ready, because I’m sure all of you will be shocked…

Just wait and see…

Guys please forgive me for bothering and for making all of you think hard…

I Really feel sorry for you…

Enjoy your time, and have a nice day…

Best regards,
11-16-2004, 06:12 AM
mrlobber

Quote:

Originally Posted by burnout

could a mod please clean up here, this is annoying...

I second that. There's not even much fun in it.
11-16-2004, 06:38 AM
blinky

lame.....

if u check the screenies, the first one doesnt even have an SPD tab, and the second does, signifyng theit different versions of cpu-z, but theyre magically both 1.24

so lame... not even funny
11-16-2004, 07:21 AM
bias_hjorth

haha go ahead "unknown" ;)

Anyway this thread has now 122k+ views :D
11-16-2004, 07:23 AM
Pejsen

Quote:

Originally Posted by bias_hjorth

Anyway this thread has now 122k+ views :D

Wich is certainly Xtreme! :D
11-16-2004, 08:51 AM
FallenAngel

:grr: I feel sorry for him, I hate cheaters :explode:
11-16-2004, 09:10 AM
Skeet

I think it's funny, course I hadn't read thread until now. :P
11-16-2004, 09:21 AM
charlie

:rotf:
11-16-2004, 09:25 AM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

The 3.8E E0 ES came in ths morning.

3.8Ghz @ 1.2v stock

Lets hope the DFI supports it without having to swap processors in order to bios flash...

I will hope to max out around 6.66Ghz 351FSB

you serious 3.8GHZ at 1.2v nice :)
11-16-2004, 09:31 AM
Skeet

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

you serious 3.8GHZ at 1.2v nice :)

Now if only my A64 would do 3.8GHz so I could brag to you guys about it....
or wait a minute..:wierd:
11-16-2004, 12:25 PM
nordik

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=19540

'grads fugger :toast:
11-16-2004, 01:12 PM
OC_newbie

The Unknown you need a girlfriend bad...:ROTF:
11-16-2004, 01:39 PM
Bennah

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN

Ok Guys, you can say whatever you want, and I can say whatever I want.

Guys I’m liar, cheater, and faker whatever you want to say… but get ready, because I’m sure all of you will be shocked…

Just wait and see…

Guys please forgive me for bothering and for making all of you think hard…

I Really feel sorry for you…

Enjoy your time, and have a nice day…

Best regards,

I dont care if you do 'shock' us. Your a cheat at the end of the day.

Back to FUGGER's results. Truely amazing :slobber:
11-16-2004, 01:46 PM
Skeet

By his post I think it sounds like he's coming back..maybe under another alias? :rolleyes:
11-16-2004, 01:46 PM
OC_newbie

I agree FUGGER's results are very real and xtreme!!! :slobber:
11-16-2004, 01:57 PM
kakaroto

Someone is jalous :)

Why are you putting this C R A P in this topic!?!? You think this is funny? He pal I don't give a @#$ what you post, but this is very and very lame of you. :grr:

http://sleektech.nl/~dm/temp/misc/unknown.bmp

psst, you betraded yourself :cool:

Quote:

Ok Guys, you can say whatever you want, and I can say whatever I want.

Guys I’m liar, cheater, and faker whatever you want to say… but get ready, because I’m sure all of you will be shocked…

Just wait and see…

Guys please forgive me for bothering and for making all of you think hard…

I Really feel sorry for you…

Enjoy your time, and have a nice day…

... no words to say...

ONTOPIC:

two overclockers in the netherlands are gonna play with LN2 as well. Hopefully just succesfull as Fugger. :D
11-16-2004, 03:01 PM
Charles Wirth

Banned Unknown

No warning for him.
11-16-2004, 05:09 PM
charlie

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Banned Unknown

No warning for him.

good job!

FUGGER found a "floater" and FLUSHED "UNKNOWN"

C

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page