Here's a sub 11 min when I was warming up my CPU after LN2 benching....
Not a well tweaked run and these Windows are my 3D windows..... :)
http://www.hipro-tech.com//images/hi...38_3923MHz.png
Printable View
Here's a sub 11 min when I was warming up my CPU after LN2 benching....
Not a well tweaked run and these Windows are my 3D windows..... :)
http://www.hipro-tech.com//images/hi...38_3923MHz.png
Wow buddy, that's blistering fast!!
well, that's like Zeus said :)
Did you putted that much Vcore on purpose to speed up the cpu ? or was it just a need for anyreason ?
No, I just left the VCore as is for warming up the CPU after the LN2 benching...No particular reason for that... :)
George great work man :up: Care to share your CW file size with us (we already know your way of CW :D, unless you have changed it), even with a PM ? :)
And ToyTen thanks a lot for your tip :up:
Hope that my advice helped you a bit :)
trrd 2, tras 15, twtr 15...at 980MHz.......O.oQuote:
Originally Posted by hipro5
Nah for some people it's really easy :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Gautam
tRRD ain't hard, at least with most D9GTRs.
tWTR is relatively tight up there, George is probably using strikingly high voltages again :p:
tRAS 15 is quite good, only a few kits can do 32m at DDR3-1950+ at these timings.
Altough these subtimings are tight as can be, it gains very little in 32M from my own experience.
And, like said, it will take some volts to get there, not eveyone is brave enough to exceed 2,2V on DDR3.
But yes, it sure looks cool! :clap:
http://cfile209.uf.daum.net/original...49609ED634E0A0
Core I7 4460Mhz sub 8m~ :D
Nice one :up:
Hi to all, I hope to get something into 9.xx soon... :brick:
Many thanks guys for the tips in the thread and to monteboy for SpiTweaker -
so far helped me lose about 8-9 seconds from my untweaked times for 599x7.5 :)
Memory is 2x1 CS3222271 800mhz (D9JNL), and not good with vDIMM higher than 1.90V (set). Using 2.01V here.
I also used:
XP32 SP2, maxmem 600, large system cache, page file disabled, core 0 affinity,
realtime priority, 1 hard disk (2 partition), SPiTweaker 1.0 as shown.
http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/q...4_10m00x_1.jpg
I included this failed run (with a few tighter sub-timings) as it's 1.5s
ahead of the other 599x7.5 run at Loop 21. No finish yet though.
http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/q...8_77714_2F.gif
3599.9......Kemo..............12.58.389.....9X400 .....500mhz.....5-5-4-15....8/10...P31
http://i42.tinypic.com/2w38bvp.jpg
Nice run :) Keep 'em coming ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
A couple tips though ;) I suppose that C is your SuperPi partition ... on that one keep the page file at stock value ;) Set the page file in your empty partition (apparently E) 384-384 or 512-512 ... Try using CW file size 1024MB, or 1896MB, from C to E (from SPi partition to empty partition) ;)
Also try Maxmem = 640MB, it should work for you better ;)
Today I tried some CW file sizes, at around 1.3GB, and for sure had some nice results :yepp: ... 'Still gotta test more though, so that I'm ready before I report back again ... :)
@kemo Your run is TOO slow man ... Something's weird going on there ... Why is your E8400 running with only 1 core enabled ? :confused:
With no tweaking at all you should get into 12.59.xxx category with less than 3400MHz ... A well tweaked run @ 3600MHz is about 12m ... ;)
Hmmmmmm..........NO e-mail notifications again....... :(
I used 3072GB sharp (1024x3)... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by George_o/c
.........and I ALWAYS work with 2.25VDimm in my rams.... :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by George_o/c
Thank you George_o/c :) - and I will follow your advice....
I have been running Spi from the second partition as it seemed faster, and for some reason more consistent with Loop times.
When I run Spi from the C partition, initial values are 0.5s faster, but alternate loops run slower/faster, and always finish slower*
Something else not right perhaps ?
(EDIT 07 Jan: *not always slower - added new screenshot below)
Despite my current CW/partition setup, I hope that 597-8*7.5, with the tighter memory timings,
will be fast/stable enough to get 9.59.x
something else which might be of interest: 500x9/1:2/CL8, with CL8/tRD6 running on 200 strap :)
Not so close as my 599x7.5, but not too slow for CL8 on an Intel chipset.
Don't know if 9.xx is achievable for me at 500x9/CL8 - another 3 seconds is quite long,
and this time is already 10-12 seconds faster than my untweaked time.
http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/q...816_10m03x.gif
I can't go lower than these timings so far, though trying tRAS 12 instead of 16 worked ok
(tRAS 8 booted from BIOS but killed performance).
Not sure how much tRAS 12 is the reason for the faster run but no slow down as with tRAS 8.
I will try 8-8-6-12 next time.
http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/q...812_10m02x.gif
EDIT 07 Jan:
Might not be a direct comparison as now back on 0403, but this run was correctly using 'C' as SuperPi partition.
However, SPiTweaker settings still same as above; i.e. Spi partition now 'incorrectly' set as 'D' and empty as 'C'.
Quite hopeful now for this clock to hit 9.xx (just a personal goal) - will now try Tweaker / maxmem settings as George_o/c suggests.....
BTW, cannot run 8-8-6-12 - fails before initial value at any vDIMM.
http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/q...812_10m01x.jpg
I think I can reach sub 9mn with 3905-3910 by lowering CPU ratio and increasing the rest :). Despite it, it should be possible with 3880-3860MHz under cold to fix Uncore near 4600MHz
http://www.jmax-hardware.com/ftpjmax...mn-3920MHz.JPG
[/quote]
Nop , it is not slow at all , i am using 2X2GB PC6400 CL6 kit that retails for less than 50$ , that is the highest memory clock i could get , try running @500mhz 5-5-5-15 and you will see what i mean and for that Single core it comes from a special XP (92MB total) version that shaved me 16s from my regular SP3 , but it has no paint no Print screen and many other essentials messing , if i can get a 600MHZ 4-4-4 kit i am pretty sure that i will shave more than 50 SecondsQuote:
Originally Posted by George_o/c
Here is my Un-tweaked run with regular 24/7 XP SP3 (13:41)
http://i44.tinypic.com/2h3q5ia.jpg
4492.3......cheapseats..........9.59.391...7.5x599 .....958mhz.....7-7-7-14....5/8...X48
(maxmem 600 / LSC / Page file disabled / realtime priority / 1 HDD / Spi partition 'C' / Empty 'D' / SPiTweaker as shown)
now to try some other Tweaker / maxmem settings.......:)
http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/q...7714_9m59x.jpg
(sorry for the double post)Quote:
Originally Posted by 3oh6
after posting my 9m59.391 run, I found this.....:eek:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=152
3oh6's finish time and checksum are the same.
I have two other 9m59.x runs at the same CPU clock - should I post one of those too ?
Thanks for any advice :)
Best i can do without copy wazza (just can't get it to work heh)
sub 9min cpu air cooled
http://fileshosts.com/intel/DFI/DFI_...8m55s297ms.png
sub 8min cpu air cooled
http://fileshosts.com/intel/DFI/DFI_...7m54s375ms.png
Hi guys,
I'm benching my i7 and trying to do sub10 and sub9...I'm working on sub10 actually, but i have no idea of what's good. Any help ?
I have only 2x1 Go, but i think my resulsts are not too bad, i'll try with 3x1 Go this week end :p
Thx
4650.5......bluto..........9.57.485...7.5x620 .....930mhz.....8-7-7-24....2/3...X48
-e8400 eo on air
-600maxmem,largesystemcache,no pagefile ,realtime,killed lots of services
http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/7955/95732mnw6.jpg
rhâââaaa just couldn't make it under 544 fsb !!
:D:D
3264.5......ToyTen...........12.59.860.....6x544.1 .....906.9mhz.....7-6-5-16....3:5...X48(RE 0401)
XP32 Pro SP3 nlighten'd, 167Mo,
CW file of 1,2Go moved from C:/ -> D:/ then backwards,
maxmem 615,
swap: min value: 2mo / max value: 2046mo,
some 35 sec to see the system cache grow and stabilize itself,
http://images1.hiboox.com/images/020...156cdc2172.jpg
I love this game:toast:
Hi everybody .
This is my first post on this tread . I want just compared for my first test . I'm working on tweaks . Size of CW , swap ( or no :) ) and maxmem .
4045.5......redratamd...........10.59.672.....7x57 7.9.....866.8mhz.....7-5-5-14....2:3...P45 ( F3j )
- Gigabyte EP45T Extreme ( no research for the quickest bios )
- 2 x 1024Mo Crucial Value PC8500 ( D9GTR inside :D )
- Strap 400 ,that's the real value : 866.8
- XP 32 SP3 lighted by me
- pi.exe on C: ( hdd windows )
- CW file of 3Go copy C:>D: , D is an other disk
- Swap of 512/512 on D:
- maxmem 600
- Just 5 services
- LSC + Disable paging + Systems pages + High priority + minimize window
10min59.672 on P45 Gigabyte
Next try on Asus .
stoopid fast setup...you have that RE singing like a young man in front of the feds.Quote:
Originally Posted by hipro5
and the gauntlet has been laid down for sub 8 min which most should be able to do on air...this should be the battle category with everyone able to compete. nice way to get the party started ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dsjjang
yup, those numbers look bang on, nice run :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by jmax_oc
it is slow. for 45nm, regardless of memory used, it is slow. make sure LSC is enabled and keep working/tweaking...there is plenty of room to improve.Quote:
Originally Posted by kemo
hahaha, i have never seen that before. i guess the checksum is solely based on the time? no real need to post other 9m59.x runs if they aren't any faster than the one posted.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
i don't know what to say George, your handicap (inability to get CW working) baffles my mind. platform after platform it doesn't work for you which clearly means it has to be OS related but i am stumped.Quote:
Originally Posted by eva2000
one of the best out there...that and 01/AM3, i have been spending far too much time on both. nice run BTW...isn't that the best when your trying to squeeze that last tenth of a MHz :DQuote:
Originally Posted by ToyTen
big update done which will be followed by my first couple i7 results later tonight. not sure i am going to be able to squeeze past that 4460MHz 7m59.x time Dsjjang has put up with this current setup. i still might be leaving a bit short with CW so perhaps more work is needed there...but 3x2GB kits of memory smoke 3x1GB at the same clocks, first thing i have figured out with i7 :up:
yeah it's weird and i even moved to winxp pro sp3 as well!
Yap, Core I7 is really 32m monster~
sub 8m isn't hard without sub zero cooling~
party started~ :D
hopefully i get that DFI board soon and i will do up my current 32M OS on that board and send you an image with a screencast of my process...i am interested to see if your setup at the same settings is simply tweaked to already include the benefit of CW...if that is even possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by eva2000
oh it's started, and i just paid my cover at the door...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dsjjang
i7 965 (3836A287) 22 x 202.5 (boot at 202.5*22) // Chilly1 SS
EVGA X58 SLI (SZ1C) // bone stock
Ballistix 2x1GB PC3-16000 CL9 & G.Skill HZ 1x1GB PC3-12800 CL7
BFG GTX 280 OCX (no drivers)
Seagate 7200.9 80GB SATA2 (3GB partition for OS / 4GB partition for SPi/page)
Ultra X-Pro 750W
WinXP Pro SP3 (custom nLite'nd job)
4454.8MHz SPi 32M = 7m 59.906s
click for full size including memset...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...2_4455-1sm.png
i was simply looking to top your time Dsjjang so there may be a better combination, but i should be working so i can't play with it all night. i7 is definitely a blast to run 32M with. i still have to get the hang of what memory can/can't do though...and dammit we need to be able to adjust memory timings in Windows already. recovery POST from timings on this EVGA isn't always pleasant and sometimes requires the whole CMOS clear shuffle...plenty of that for the time above ;)
I thought you could already tweak timings in WIndows - using that OC tool thingy (sorry been outta the game since Nov)
so far nothing can change timings in Windows on X58, everything is locked as far as i know. E-LEET is just for adjusting voltage and FSB/CPU-Multi/PCI-E.Quote:
Originally Posted by T_M
CPUTweaker ?
^^ yeah it works most of the time!
Quote:
Originally Posted by T_M
so new beta's do allow timing changes? nice...he needs to update his web site :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Harshal
thanks Tim :up:
doesn't work for me on DFI X58Quote:
Originally Posted by 3oh6
you sure ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Harshal
nlite'd all my os and have LSC enabled by default along with some registry settings already set so yeah out of the box i don't do much tweaking wise.... CW for me can be 0-3s faster but it ain't always consistent - maybe cause i don't use ramdisk/eram ???Quote:
Originally Posted by 3oh6
maybe it's the way i have my drives partitioned ? (lots of partitions)
my CW right now on i7 is good for about 6 secs and is as consistent as it was on my old C2D setup with ERAM. i don't use ERAM anymore so that's definitely not it. i don't think partitions is the issue though, but you never know :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by eva2000
My first contribution to this thread. P45 is not very fast.
3960.3......CryptiK..............11.58.532......9 x 440.....586.7mhz.....5-5-5-15....3/4...P45
http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/i...z11m58532s.jpg
Looks good EVGA X58~ :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by 3oh6
I have wait DFI X58~
That selling delayed in Korea~ :(
CPU : Core I7 920 3838B079
M/B : ASUS Rampage II Extreme (Bios 0903)
RAM : GSkill PI Black PC3 12800 2g x3
VGA : Radeon HD2400Pro
PSW : Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W
Cooler : Thermalright Ultra EX True Black + Delta 38T Fan
OS : Windows XP SP3
http://cfile203.uf.daum.net/original...4969BE92C5789B
I have an improved run.
3900.1......CryptiK..............11.58.140......7 x 520.....624.0mhz.....5-5-5-15....5/6...P45
http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/i...z11m58140s.jpg
nice doing DDR2/P45 proud :)Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
so i should be aiming for 6 seconds faster with CW... is that with maxmem or same 6 secs with or without maxmem ?Quote:
Originally Posted by 3oh6
i've managed to push 9m 00.453s at 3945mhz with 1038mhz 8-8-8-20 which is an improvement I guess.
http://fileshosts.com/intel/DFI/DFI_...9m00s453ms.png
Now that i have decent watercooling on my NB i wanted to give Performance Level 8 another try.
Had to set 1.76Vnb bios (could have been lower but didn't try) AI clock twister to light and most important, NB skew to 100ps delay.
This really helps 32M times:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...b123586MHz.jpg
Didn't have much time to tweak some more but it's a nice start. :)
That's a nice sub 12 ;)
GG Zeus
here is my first 32m next run I will have ram at 1900mhz and fsb up a little higher , some settings I still have to tweak I really dont know if this is a good run I never do 32m.
http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/8625/32mhe6.jpg
Not trying to be rude here but you're actually missing the point of this thread, it's not doing the best 32M time you can get, it's about using the lowest CPU speed to enter a certain time zone, like just under 12 minutes for example. ;)
Next time try to move all windows closer to each other and crop your pic please, some of us us small monitors. (like me :p:)
Give it a bit more cpu speed, some more memspeed an try to hit sub 11 minutes. :up:
no dude dont worry your not being rude its just this is what I run my cpu at 24 /7 I will try sub 11 though thanks
Ok so heres my sub 11 run I know I can do better
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/2...tter32mpt1.jpg
My first participation here. Spending time on tweakig is quite useful :D
Everything on radbox Intel, and i should test it again with 3x1 and 2x1...But this was just to experience tweaking.
3915......Benji Tshi..............8.59.953......27x145......1015mh z.....8-7-6-16....2/14...X58
http://images1.hiboox.com/images/020...efa46ddaa8.jpg
3488......Benji Tshi..............9.59.922......24x145......1017mh z.....8-7-6-18....2/14...X58
http://images1.hiboox.com/images/020...6b64e2729d.jpg
Now, i have to mount my waterblock on i7 and try sub8 :yepp: That's the best category it seems
update : my 965 sucks...Or perhaps it's too hot under stock cooling Intel, but I can't try sub8 with this setup...
Very good scores Benji Tshi :up:
Your work pay now . :clap:
Thanks :p:
But, even if my scores are not too bad now, under LN2, my i7 sucks...:(
I have to improve my CW because it gives me juste 3-4 seconds better, i'm so far of 6 seconds that other ones are talking about :shrug:
3557.8......ToyTen....11.59.422.....6x593 ....948.7mhz.....7-6-5-16....5/8...X48 (RE 0401)
http://images2.hiboox.com/images/020...b17ea302c6.jpg
11.59.422
Can't you do sub12 with lower clocks ??:yepp:
32m is sooo much better on I7 its ridiculous
Sill running dual channel :(
Best I can do for sub 9 (well for know anyhow)
8m 59s 531ms i7 940 3983Mhz Dual Channel 8-6-6-21 1038Mhz DDR3
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/4...983mwc5.th.jpg
As it turns out I can do better.
8m 59s 750ms i7 940 3939Mhz Dual Channel 8-6-6-19 1027Mhz DDR3
http://img76.imageshack.us/img76/770...939msn7.th.jpg
Fun game you guys have got going on here.
Another update for 9 minutes time zone:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...sub10m4476.jpg
http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t...llen/10m59.jpg
Any good:confused: I guess we won't know until some more get posted up :)
I think it could be done with lower clocks, but as i never try it, i can't be sure of anything...
Yeah, based on the other brackets comparing the best Penryn to i7 runs...looks like if I got some better memory speed/timings, I should be able to it at around 3100MHz...
Memory is not so bad, 960 C7 is funny. My i7 don't even want to hear about C7 :D
Try to work on timings, and find a better ratio bclk/uclk/ram :yepp:
I'll try sub 11 with you to see how it goes, because sub 8 is impossible for me with stock cooling :p:
7m 59s 531ms i7 940 4516Mhz Dual Channel 7-6-5-18 981Mhz DDR3
http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/7...6mhzrc1.th.jpg
3896......Benji Tshi..............8.59.765......28x139......974mhz .....8-7-6-18....2/14...X58
http://images1.hiboox.com/images/030...d62beaa65f.jpg
I think i can do better with another ratio bclk/ram :)
My fuc*ing i7 don't want 4.5Ghz :mad:
Can't even try sub8...
4469.9......cheapseats..........9.59.954...7.5x596 .....954mhz.....7-7-7-14....5/8...X48
Nice runs Zeus :) - wish i had so much time to spare in 9.xx
I think this is about the last point that i can sneak in ahead of you :p: - and maybe not for long.....;):D
(maxmem 600 / LSC / Page file off / svchost closed (lost XP theme) /
1 HDD / 2 partition / Spi 'C' / Empty 'D' / Realtime / Core 1 / SpiTweaker as shown )
seem to be less stable with maxmem over 600 and/or paging on, so stayed with 600 and page file off.
managed some slightly better sub-timings though, which was just enough :)
http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/q...14_9m59x_1.jpg
Very nice job cheapseats, first you can't get below 10 minutes and now you're kicking my @ss. :D
I will give 9.xx minutes another shot soon. ;)
Hey cheap, couldn't let this happen off course... :D
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...10min44618.jpg
Haha now I see I should have done better, these recent scores aren't in the list. Nice scores Zeus and Cheapseats. I will be back!
You got me this time for sure Zeus ...... i'm too slow for 595. Hope you can go lower though. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus
mrcape, 4469.9 v 4470mhz ! thanks for not kicking a man when he's down ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcape
Heh, it's a fun little challenge.
I need to tighten my sub-timings esp. trfc. Not sure how you guys can do this on 403 bios, I had a hell of a time with that one. My sticks are D9gts are you guys using gts or gtr?
Just keep trying cheap, everytime i thought i couldn't get it better i managed to shave off a little.
As long as i haven't taken over topspot i know it should be possible to get a better result although it might take some very good ram.
Seeing i almost got a second to spare, with a better balanced copywaza i'm sure i can go down another MHz for FSB.
Tried tras 15 but it errored, like Write to Precharged Delayed anything lower than 17 gives an error.
Maybe more voltage will solve this but at 2.21V i'm a little reluctant to try really. :D
Mr Cape, seems like we were running 32M simultaneous this morning without knowing, lol.
Great run!
Wow, I don't have so much time lately and on top of that experiencing some wild (:D) internet problems but I gotta say, lot's of great scores guys ! :clap:
Keep up the good work :up:
//EDIT Toyten, you got a PM man, regarding that nice nLited setup :)
e8600 7.5 x 592.9
Thermalright Ultra-120
Asus Rampage Extreme (0401)
G.Skill HZ 1x1GB PC3-12800 CL7
Evga 9800gx2, no driver
Raptor 150GB SATA2 (3GB partition for OS / 4.5GB partition for SPi/page)
Corsair HX1000
WinXP Pro SP2 (non nLite'nd)
Blue Theme
CDT
http://www.movement-radio.com/32mxs3a.png
e8600 7.5 x 590.9
Thermalright Ultra-120
Asus Rampage Extreme (0401)
G.Skill HZ 1x1GB PC3-12800 CL7
Evga 9800gx2, no driver
Raptor 150GB SATA2 (3GB partition for OS / 4.5GB partition for SPi/page)
Corsair HX1000
WinXP Pro SP2 (non nLite'nd)
Olive Theme
CDT
http://www.movement-radio.com/32mxs3b.png
OMG, mrcape, that's frikkin fast man! :up:
awesome new runs and timings mrcape :up: - roughly how much of the extra speed came from the timings, compared to your 4470mhz run ?
BTW my CS kit is JNL, so my timings won't get much better, I can just about do tRFC 64 at 950mhz but really nothing else will go any lower.
Zeus, appreciate the encouraging words m8 :). plan is to start again with my OS and work through from scratch with the CW etc.
Memory is failing too many runs at 950mhz to be able to test for better/worse 'technique' or settings, so 10.xx timezone will be more reliable.
Thanks guys, it was fun. :)
Cheapseats, yes, ALL of the extra speed came from the Gskill HZ GTS and it's ability to run fast at tighter timings. Tweaks didn't change at all. I used the Ballistix BL2KIT12864BE2009 kit for the 4470 run. When that hit a wall I popped in the HZs and that was that. It allowed me to go much tighter with trfc.
All I could do at this point is use a thin OS and reg tweaks.
Has anyone try Adata G 1333 yet? I think it's a good memory :D
http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/5...2m8phc6lv9.jpgPHP Code:http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=485467
http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/673...hc67615gf2.jpg
Completely wrenched out my sys to squeeze that tiny bit, man that took some effort. :(
Could not touch mrcape's scores but manged to shave 10MHz off:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...Msub104451.jpg
Mind you, this is just my 24/7 windows install, i had to set AI clock twister from light to moderate to get there. :D
Untill i find new tweaks that will help to improve my scores i'm done with sub 10 minutes. (i think)
nice one Zeus :up:
hehe .....same time and checksum for you and mrcape :up::D
just curious, but did you run any lower vNB than 1.7x ?
i've been running CT moderate + tRD8 with 1.63-1.65V. I suppose some extra for GTR/S ICs + tight timings, but seemed a big difference for vNB.
and thanks mrcape for the answer 'all' . just hope i can find GTR/GTS sometime soon...
FYI guys - vNB=1.6 (in bios, 1.58 everest) Vmem=2.07-2.12V depending on the run. I tried up to 2.2vdimm, 1.67VNB with the Ballistix to see if it could run tighter, but that didn't help.
Nice one Zeus! I bet a clean install would make a slight difference. At this point though guys, it's really all so close. I'm going to these mems for cold benching from now on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
Thanks buddy ;)
Well, didn't really try low Vnb, set it to 1.76V which translated to 1.73V in windows. I don't know if i could do with less, haven't tried really as i wanted to be safe.
Temps were only 32ºC with watercooling so no worries there.
I hate it when a run goes well and looks like it might make it and then just hangs or errors somewhere halfway.
Thanks man.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcape
My CSX Diablo's are GTR and i gave 'm 2.21V for those runs.
Yeah it's close but at some point beating the score above you seems an impossible task.
What i found out is that when the intial value is low, the finishing loop after the 24th loop is significantly lower. So whenever the intial value sucks i simply stop the calculation and start over again.
Comparing cheap's runs to mine you can see his 24th run is 9min 39 seconds but he still manageses under 10 minutes because his initial value is very low.
My initial value sucks and therefore i need to be at 9min 37 to crack 10 minutes. At 9min 38 i cannot break 10 minutes.
It's just an observation but i have no idea how to obtain a low initial value.
I'm thinking about making a harddisk dedicated for SuperPi, this over half a year old windows install is just not good enough for this stuff. :D
I was getting crazy low initial values with the ballistix, and when the drive was fresh. Then again, as i went to lower freq, starts times were all 7.0+ and came back to beat similar scores in later loops.
Not sure if this adds much to what's been said on initial values, as its really just an example of the same thing :yepp:
The main points of interest (i hope) being a reasonably direct comparison between the the two different levels of initial values, as seen in posted 9.xx runs.
the two runs (599x7.5 - links below) also show two distinct patterns for how all the 9.xx runs seem to behave at certain points in a run (initial value / Loop 1 / Loop 24 to finish).
the only (intended) difference between the my two run setups was running SuperPi from either 'C' (windows) partition, or 'D' (empty) partition.
SuperPi in 'D' (599x7.5 - 10m00.047s)
http://www.xtremesystems.org/FORUMS/...&postcount=412
typical 9.xx 'Pattern 1' : high initial value 6.9-7.0s / < 28s Loop 1 / 21-22s finish stage
dami1stm / Zeus / mrcape (GSkill) runs look like this
Superpi in 'C' (599x7.5 - 09m59.391s)
http://www.xtremesystems.org/FORUMS/...&postcount=419
typical 9.xx 'Pattern 2' : low intial value 6.4-6.5s / > 28s Loop 1 / ~ 20s finish stage
3oh6 / ToyTen / youngpro / mrcape (Ballistix) runs look like this
In my case, running SPi from a different partition to windows somehow produces Pattern 1 (high initial values etc), but running Spi from 'C' (windows) partition, produces Pattern 2 (low initial values etc). It's not just initial values that change from Pattern 1 to 2 - Loop times are also differently spaced between the runs, and are not comparable loop by loop.
my compared runs so far, show Pattern 2 (low initials) to finish slightly faster overall, and for me, faster by at least the difference between the Pattern 1 and 2 initial values (0.5-0.6s)
The difference is small as measured here, but neither qualifying 9.xx run of mine was fast enough using the 'slower' alternative. (high initial values and Pattern 1) ;)
You guys are really good at this and your systems are very fast, really nice work :up:
This is my first sub 11 min run ever :) Got a new e8400 and it's much better than my old C0. Nothing special efficiency wise but I was happy to go sub 11mins.
4374.2......CryptiK..............10.59.172......9 x 486.....607.5mhz.....5-5-5-15....4/5...P45
http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/i...2s43742MHz.jpg
Hey Cheap, it's still a mystery to me as I've run all from a separate partition and have had 6.4 - 7.1 starts. Also, my best PP run in this range started with 7.062.
Just some more data to make you go hmmm. The only way I could gauge whether to kill a run was to compare it to runs that looked similar to my own in the same range from other users. If mine was ahead in more than half of the loops after ten loops I'd let it go. If it looked dead even, or it was alternating (I'd win a loop, then they), I'd go by whichever was winning the alternate loop by more.
11.xx - 11.59.625s - 3555.6 - 6x592.6
e8600
Thermalright Ultra-120
Asus Rampage Extreme (0401)
G.Skill HZ 1x1GB PC3-12800 CL7
Evga 9800gx2, no driver
Seagate 7200.12 SATA2 (3GB partition for OS / 4.5GB partition for SPi/page)
Corsair HX1000
WinXP (Nlited)
Silver Theme
CDT/maxmem 600/reg tweaks
http://www.movement-radio.com/11xx32mxs.png
Is this thread dead or what lol.
No time to clock these days...I'll be back soon, probably with E8600 :up:
mrcape, really impressive 11.xx run :up:. Beats mine (not posted) by more than your 9.xx runs do.
some problems here.... cross-linked files and bad sectors after using Memset save option with CL6 timings. Forgot to delete save before setting 950mhz/CL7 in the BIOS...:nono:
my new XP install and image of the old one, are both slower so far by 1-3 seconds in 9.xx :clap:
Did you quick format? Got any other drives to try?
I just set up a few drives for LN tomorrow, got to remember to do 8.xx on the way down.
mrcape, sorry for the late reply :) i have a couple of other disks, but I could only get low initials with the 320GB samsung - and no low initials at all now. The slow new XP install is on a new samsung disk, and the OS image i also mentioned is really a full partition copied over from another disk, so the existing system partition is deleted first. Not sure if it's good way to do it - just easy. The OS + partition i used for my posted runs was copied from the same original.
I'm going to wipe my raptors with dban and reformat. One was goofing around today when i was beating on it. I had a nice 8.xx but I deleted it by mistake! I need a better e8600, 822a435 would be nice.
Anyway here's a 7.xx -
http://www.movement-radio.com/32m7xx.jpg
Very well tweaked run mrcape :up:
Thanks jmax_oc. Now I need either a cherry e86 or an e87 to add the freq to the mix.
No more updates? Where's 3oh6 gone?
Soon i will make some entries in the amd class i hope. :)
I bet he's trying to improve his way of tweak on i7 :D
3482.9......ToyTen.............9.59.812....21x165. 8 .....995.1mhz.....8-7-6-18....2/12..X58
http://images4.hiboox.com/images/060...79a91aa8ee.jpg
1,55vQPI/2,1vDDR cpu under water(at 22°C)
I didn't tweaked subtimings in BIOS yet too used having felix's awsome log...(who said chronicle-addicted to facility ? :p: )
XP sp3 nlightened of my own,
615 maxmem on a 15Go partition WD(74Go 16Mo), still gotta try some other OS I got from Hellas ;) just to lasy George :) I don't forget, besure of it :up:
And here is a 8min T_Z:
3900.5......ToyTen.............8.59.641....21x185. 7 .....928.7mhz.....7-6-5-17....2/10..X58
http://images4.hiboox.com/images/060...3714ea235f.jpg
Core i7 940 on water with help of open window to 3C outside temps. Bios set at 7,6,6,18 software reads 22?
Very nice MrCape. I have similar set-up minus your tweaking skills so maybe you can help me. Sub 8min 32M has been so frustrating and cost me liters of ln2. Everytime I pass 24 loops around 7m58sec and the window comes up saying calculation done my pc freezes. Done this to me about 5 times. What do you think I should look at adjusting first. I was at 6.15ghz 2.02v/5:8 cas7Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcape
7.xx & 8.xx Category
M/B: ASUS P6T Deluxe (BIOS:0703)
M/B Bed: V-TEC ARC Bed Rev.3.3
CPU: Core i7 Extreme 965 (3836A767)
CPU cooling: Alphacool NexXxoS XP Silver Socket 775
Chipset Cooling: stock + FAN
Mem: A-DATA DDR3-2133X 1GBx3
VGA: MSI NX7900GTO 512MB PCI-EX
HDD: Western Digital WD360ADFD (AHCI)
PSU: SilverStone OP1200
OS: Windows XP SP3
Remark: 2 Core set by BIOS
7.xx
http://homepage2.nifty.com/NewBeetle...59s968_44G.png
8.xx
http://homepage2.nifty.com/NewBeetle...8_39G+temp.png
Really nice NB-san ;)
I have seen your thread about AData and i was praying for you to don't try LCC 32M :D But now, i'm defeated...I'll try to go under 3894 this afternoon ;)
Jody, I was just going through the second post, re-calling some really fast runs I've seen there, and noticed that in 10.xx category, in hipro's run (3923MHz 10.59.xxx) you accidentally wrote that he was using an X58 motherboard :D He's using a pretty normal Rampage Extreme X48 :up: