Quote Originally Posted by poke349 View Post
It's probably a bug in the validation itself - probably being too aggressive with anti-cheat protection. But unless I can reproduce that on a machine that I have access to, I can't fix it.

Hardware errors don't give that message.

When a hardware error occurs, one of 4 things can happen:
  1. Crash or BSOD - just to state the obvious...
  2. y-cruncher catches the error, corrects it, and moves on. Validation will still fail. (see picture below)
  3. y-cruncher catches the error, is unable to correct it, and prints an error message.
  4. y-cruncher does not catch the error, and it tells you that the digits don't match at the end.


The sanity check error that it gave you can (but not always) show up under the following circumstances:
  1. Either the system clock or the BIOS clock has been tampered during the computation.
  2. The program has detected an abnormal frequency* - possibly caused by time-slowing cheats.
  3. The binary has been tampered with.
  4. The base clock or the FSB has been tampered with.**


*Note that speed-step and any CPU throttling/power-saving feature does NOT trigger this. (I've made sure of that.)
**This is an unwanted side-effect of the anti-cheat protection. As a result, SetFSB and similar tools may not work as they may trigger a sanity check error.
That 5200+ machine has been priming all night, and is still going with no issues. I had also passed LinPack (OCCT) and other stress-tests run on it, so it certainly appears to be stable.

I have just run this on my netbook again @ 2.08GHz, and it runs a LOT quicker, but I get the validation error as SetFSB is used to overclock. I will post the results later, at work on a dumb-terminal atm so cant.

Thanks for putting the time an effort into making a great program, I will continue to use this as my benchmark for speed of CPUs/OCs