Go Back   OC3D Forums > [OC3D] Forum Teams > [OC3D] Benchmark Team
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #71  
Old 12-06-19, 04:18 PM
KingNosser KingNosser is offline
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Essex UK
Posts: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warchild View Post
change the link to [img] maybe?
I tried that obviously Idk is odd

ty for fix, the link I got didn't have the .jpg but it's handy info for another time

Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 12-06-19, 06:41 PM
hmmblah's Avatar
hmmblah hmmblah is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 4,650
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingNosser View Post
I tried that obviously Idk is odd
I fixed your post. What you need to do is open the link you posted, then right click on the image and copy link address. It will have a .jpg on the end of it:

https://i.imgur.com/VJIFlrP.jpg

Then you enclose that in img tags on the forum.
__________________
CaseLabs Mercury S3 | AMD 3900X | ROG CH8 Impact | RTX 2080 Super | 32GB DDR4 | 1TB NVMe
Acer Predator Z35P


Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 22-08-19, 09:58 PM
FTLN FTLN is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: France
Posts: 1,682
5421cb, Intel i9-9900K, 5.1Ghz, 2666MHz DDR4, Windows 10, FTLN

__________________

https://valid.x86.fr/6w9bi0
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 08-09-19, 02:06 AM
Thanos's Avatar
Thanos Thanos is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 41
MT
4697cb, Xeon E5 2683 v3, 3.0GHz, 1100MHz DDR4, Windows 10, Thanos

ST
284cb, Xeon E5 2683 v3, 3.1GHz, 1100MHz DDR4, Windows 10, Thanos




FWIW not seeing a difference in performance with or without fixes. If anything slightly better after patching.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 27-11-19, 06:31 PM
FTLN FTLN is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: France
Posts: 1,682
10797cb, 7980XE, 4.7ghz, 3200mhz DDR4, Windows 10, FTLN
__________________

https://valid.x86.fr/6w9bi0
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 26-12-19, 01:26 PM
RobM's Avatar
RobM RobM is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Durham
Posts: 1,550
Update
3655, Ryzen 5 3600, 3200mhz DDR4. Windows 10, Rob
__________________
ASUS ROG Crosshair VII wifi | Ryzen 5 3600 | Custom Loop | Patriot Viper Steel 4133 @ 3600 2 x 8Gb | Asus Strix RX 470 | Samsung 500gb nvme | Samsung 1Tb nvme | Samsung Evo 120gb ssd | Seagate Barracuda 1tb storage | Toshiba 1Tb HDD | EVGA 500w | Phanteks Entho Pro Tempered Glass | Windows 10 and Linux Manjaro
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 19-01-20, 04:37 PM
AlienALX's Avatar
AlienALX AlienALX is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 14,690
Hmm.

Thought I'd bring this up again as I moaned about it being inconsistent.

I was right, and I'll tell you how I know.

I timed a R15 run on my 14 core. I then timed a run on my 16 core. Sure enough the 16 core was faster. This wasn't just something I dreamed up, it was a thing. A noticeable thing.

Yet, the 16 core scored 200 points lower. I tried this in R20 and even though the 16 core is 200mhz slower the 16 core was still faster, yet, the score was lower.

So I thought O.K this is probably unique to me because I'm using oddball hardware.

Nope.

I watched a Jayz video and he had exactly the same issue. I've been watching his new build, and I think that led me to a TR review.

How can a CPU that renders a bench faster actually score less points? Surely the faster the better right?

So I call shenanigans, and I don't trust this bench further than I could throw it.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 20-01-20, 09:38 PM
Davva2004's Avatar
Davva2004 Davva2004 is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Nottingham UK
Posts: 1,158
MT 7062, ST 495, Ryzen 3900X at stock clocks cooled by a Kraken X42, Gigabyte X570 ITX mobo, 32gb GSkill 3600mhz, 2tb Corsair MP600
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 21-01-20, 07:40 AM
Warchild Warchild is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Norway, Oslo
Posts: 6,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlienALX View Post
Hmm.

Thought I'd bring this up again as I moaned about it being inconsistent.

I was right, and I'll tell you how I know.

I timed a R15 run on my 14 core. I then timed a run on my 16 core. Sure enough the 16 core was faster. This wasn't just something I dreamed up, it was a thing. A noticeable thing.

Yet, the 16 core scored 200 points lower. I tried this in R20 and even though the 16 core is 200mhz slower the 16 core was still faster, yet, the score was lower.

So I thought O.K this is probably unique to me because I'm using oddball hardware.

Nope.

I watched a Jayz video and he had exactly the same issue. I've been watching his new build, and I think that led me to a TR review.

How can a CPU that renders a bench faster actually score less points? Surely the faster the better right?

So I call shenanigans, and I don't trust this bench further than I could throw it.
I wonder if the weighting is being biased. Wouldnt be the first time we see that. Either that or its a genuine miscalculation. Perhaps their calculations per core are inaccurate leading to this lower score.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 23-01-20, 01:02 AM
Dicehunter's Avatar
Dicehunter Dicehunter is offline
Resident Newb
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 14,349
My ex 9900K which was overclocked to 4.80GHz vs my new 3950X using PBO in the bios to auto boost clocks, Quite impressed, Didn't do single core as I was just interested to see multi, I've seen people doing an actual overclock and getting well over 10k so I may try it later.

__________________
=AMD Ryzen 9 - 3950X + PBO - XFX 5700XT Thicc III Ultra @ 2100/1800=
If you think about it, VR is free unreal estate.....

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump










All times are GMT. The time now is 10:17 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.