Quote Originally Posted by KTE View Post
Before I could even begin to test that, I need high FSB which I can't get. I'm also not sure of what other tweaks he tried because I've not spoken to him. Is that the only tweak which made him get that v.fast time? Everything could make a difference and I know many of the "Super Pi" guys believe they should never give their secret away to anyone else which gives them an edge over another. If that's the case, then no one has any room to know everything of what OPB did unfortuantely, thus no replication.
Make sure to recheck the LSC value right before the run. When I was experiencing this, it was being reset to 0 automatically and causing low numbers.

Also try two different drives rather than two different partitions. It may help, it did with me.

I'm going to mess about more tonight to see what it can do.
superpi is not that mysterious and the best superpi benchers traditionally have always been Japanese (no pun intended to anyone else) and we all know how open Japanese benchers were and share absolutely everything and people match/beat them in efficiency now.

OPB has put up a CDT thread with those benches as examples of how much it impacts performance hence why i believe that is what was used but no matter how much i try i just cannot seem to do better than norm (best tweaks possible aside from those runs)

we've all been hammering it all hard and getting the times on the board with 32M challenge thread for example and no bencher has even done remotely close to 32M efficiency shown there....12m 39s 32M with cas5 and ~55x on RAM which absolutely amazing to say the least.

i've done some testing and it isn't making much difference. I am not saying it isn't possible but since it was shared one would assume that it would be possible to replicate or beat those times if you have 600MHz CAS4 on RAM compared to those runs right......i have CPUs capable of doing 600MHz FSB as well no worries but those times i am just scratching my head and wondering what's up.....it's a monster tweak and so far no one has replicated it. relative difference means nothing to me. I am interested in seeing those times or better times with same or better system configuration. I know that you and a couple of others have done a great job testing so far but it is hard to conclude a tweak works when you are producing numbers i can get without any tweaks

i don't have exact same system but that should not matter....if it did the runs could be bugged as you should be able to replicate it on any half decent system and i've got one i think