POST A COMMENT

16 Comments

Back to Article

  • mapesdhs - Monday, September 01, 2014 - link


    Re the Firestrike record, I can't help noticing the caveats shown on the
    3DMark result page; quote:

    1. Benchmark tessellation load modified by AMD Catalyst driver, result invalid. Check your
    video driver settings.

    2. Time measuring inaccurate. Results are invalid.

    3. System info is too old compared to the submit date of this result. Results submitted after
    november 2013 should have at least SystemInfo version 4.20.

    4. Graphics driver is not approved.

    Items 2 to 4 don't bother me so much, but item 1 is distinctly worrysome. The drivers
    should not be meddling with the tesselation mode used in the test.

    Ian.
    Reply
  • mapesdhs - Monday, September 01, 2014 - link

    To clarify what I mean btw, compare to result no. 2394676 on the 3dmark site,
    which employs four 780Tis. It has lower gfx/physics scores, a similar but lower
    overall score, yet a 20% higher combined score - how can that be? Very odd...

    Ian.
    Reply
  • Iketh - Monday, September 01, 2014 - link

    lol #2 doesn't bother you??? how do you think they determine the scores???? do you know what the S stands for in FPS? Reply
  • Ian Cutress - Monday, September 01, 2014 - link

    To answer:

    1) Normally records are set within a standard of rules. Futuremark doesn't allow modifications like this, even though it explicitly has the option in AMD Catalyst under performance. HWBot.org is often used more to ratify benchmarks because they allow Catalyst level of changes and the following:

    2) Happens more often than not on overclocked runs, although it only really matters for Windows 8 benchmarking where the internal clocks can be fooled. HWBot has banned Windows 8 for this reason.

    3) Due to detection issues with Systeminfo on the latest hardware, it does not always work and you have to find a version that does, or doesn't take 5 minutes to open/crash the system. Again, HWBot is agnostic to this FM applied limitation, because HWBot use CPU-Z and GPU-Z for hardware verification.

    4) Another symptom of using non WHQL drivers and FM's limitation. Most overclockers will use any driver that gives a better number, whether they are beta or not.

    In general, competitive overclockers use HWBot or CPU-Z as the overriding rule in absolute world records due to FM's limitations which can severely hamper world record attempts. Imagine overclocking live for a competition, and in the final run of the day the seemingly random 'Time Measuring Inaccurate' crops up in Windows 7, then for the result not to count.

    You could consider it being 'world record' by BDO or WDC, where in the world of Darts there are two awarding bodies. In overclocking, most competitive overclockers defer to HWBot/CPU-Z.
    Reply
  • mapesdhs - Monday, September 01, 2014 - link


    Thanks for the clarification! 8)

    Iketh, I wasn't bothered by #2 for the very reasons Ian mentions (already knew about
    the clock issue from chats on the FM forums).

    Ian.
    Reply
  • mapesdhs - Monday, September 01, 2014 - link


    One thing though, I'm still confused how fs result 2394676 gives a 20% higher Combined
    score. Don't get that at all. Any ideas Ian how that can be? Note the fps numbers for the
    tests show the same differences.

    Ian.
    Reply
  • MrSpadge - Monday, September 01, 2014 - link

    Yes, one might question the value of such records. What I'd rather see are energy efficient 24/7 number crunching setups. This implies voltages in the range of 0.9 - 1.1 V instead of the usual 1.3+ V for heavy OC. Personally I'm sticking to ~4.0 GHz at a little over 1.0 V with 22 nm Intel CPUs. Yet it would be intersting if I could save some more money by getting the same performance with e.g. an MSI Green mainboard upon my next purchase. Reply
  • Flunk - Monday, September 01, 2014 - link

    LN2 results are utterly pointless, the point of overclocking is squeezing extra performance out of hardware. If all you're doing while the system is running is keeping it running you're not getting anything out of it. I still think they need to add a 24 hour hands-off burn in test to every overclocking competition. It would keep the competition real and add suspense. As is this proves nothing, shows nothing and is pointless. Reply
  • ShieTar - Tuesday, September 02, 2014 - link

    So, running 100 m in under 10 seconds wearing shorts is pointless, because you can't run 10 Km in under 1000 seconds wearing street clothes? Good to know. Reply
  • wolrah - Tuesday, September 02, 2014 - link

    Yes it is pointless, there's not really any real-world applicability. That doesn't make it not fun to compete anyways, but in the end it's just a pissing contest.

    "Normal" levels of competition in most things end up benefiting the average user because something learned while pushing the performance envelope can often be translated to day-to-day use, like how racers learned to tame turbochargers and these days we have cars that'll do 30+ MPG while putting down 300+ HP from two liters.

    LN2 on the other hand is more comparable to Top Fuel drag racing. It comes from a motorsport where lessons learned on the strip made production cars better, but it's been taken to such an extreme that pretty much anything they do is irrelevant to anyone not also rebuilding their motors after every run.

    A machine that is technically the fastest at something, but requires a hardware configuration no one would ever run (4GB single stick) and a cooling system that only works unattended for a matter of minutes is not actually useful. It's nifty and more power to 'em, but means absolutely nothing to someone who overclocks to gain performance on things I'm doing in the real world.

    Show me the best performance you can get with a 24/7 cooling system and a realistic RAM configuration, then I'm going to be a lot more interested.
    Reply
  • Rajinder Gill - Tuesday, September 02, 2014 - link

    If you don't like this type if usage, the sensible thing to do would be staying away from any world record articles/news. There is a minority group that does this for a hobby - leave them be. Just focus your attention on 99% of the other MB coverage here that caters for people like you. Reply
  • twtech - Wednesday, September 03, 2014 - link

    I like the concept of trying to see what kind of overclocks you can achieve, but it's only impressive to me if I can imagine owning that system and playing a game at 250 fps or in tri-screen 4k eyefinity or something.

    There's a reason why top fuel drag racing is a niche sport.
    Reply
  • xixou - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link

    Totally agree. Reply
  • twtech - Wednesday, September 03, 2014 - link

    This would be more like pumping the athlete full of amphetamines, blood-doping etc. just before the race, having him run for 10s, and then sending him to the hospital afterward to keep him alive.

    Usain Bolt may not be able to run 1,000 meters at the same speed he can run 100 meters, but you expect that on any given day if he wanted to he could run 100m close to his record
    Reply
  • SanX - Tuesday, September 02, 2014 - link

    LN2 overclocking has little to almost zero practical sense even for hacks.
    Some small interest would be in water cooling overclock at almost 0C temperature. At least in Alaska or Rocky mountains this is still possible 24/7/365 and Canada and Russia for 24/7/180.
    Reply
  • Mikemk - Monday, October 27, 2014 - link

    It's possible 24/7/365 everywhere as long as you insulate the circuitry (and possibly use antifreeze cooling).

    It's also even possible to go 24/7 with phase change or cascade systems.

    In fact, if you have enough space, a liquid nitrogen generator could (in theory) be set up to pipe onto the LN2 pot, though I don't think that's ever been done.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now