Quote Originally Posted by LordEC911 View Post
How is that a question?
The answers to this question...

So now you're comparing a crash caused by an erratum with one caused by a crappy PWM?
...are yes or no. And why if you like. You haven't answered it yet.

Quote Originally Posted by LordEC911 View Post
I read where the OP supposedly has this HUGE sample of cards that crash... whoops that was only 2 cards.
In this thread I read where 3 people had a problem even getting the app to work and another 2 people that have a "problem card" but it worked just fine.

Some of us like numbers and statistics to base our claim. Others like to jump to conclusions.
Some of us use our little and insignificant brain to think about why ATI has capped FurMark, which is a less demanding application than this one, because it burned a few cards' PWM. Then we wonder about what will happen when we test this thing in more cards, like it happened with FurMark. The same people said back then bah, this application can't be right. It was so right that ATI capped it. What a surprise. However, right now it's just a conclusion indeed.
I've tested it in my 4870 and it FAILS. Let me ask you another question (will you answer this one?): will you admit the cards have such problem when ATI caps OCCT in a future driver release like it will probably happen?

Quote Originally Posted by zerazax View Post
Until the OP is willing to release the source code, then you can't claim ththe cards are failing because the program was proper. Since the OP is unwilling to release the source code, no logical conclusion can be made that a piece of hardware is failing due to PROPER software. I quote:
Anybody can. Why? Because the same cards that fail the test at default clocks pass it with 0 problems if they're underclocked. This has been proved too in this thread several times by the author you don't want to believe. Or did you miss it?