PCMark 04 Record

mozzartusm

Splendid
Sep 17, 2004
4,693
0
22,780
Heres another one for that im sure im going to get slammed for posting.
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm04=2963781 " target="_new">http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm04=2963781 </A>

This is the highest score in the ORB as far as I can tell.



Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> Owned!
TT 680W PSU
 

P4Man

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2004
2,305
0
19,780
woha.. this getting interesting again.. Maybe the stopwatch isn't quite as broken as I assumed ? Thats a first place by a *HUGE* gap. Common Mozzy, tell us what your secret sauce is :)

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
Is this repeatable? Maybe you have a system bug that's speeding sh<b></b>it up?

What about 3DMark01?

In all honesty, I'm still not believing your various records....I mean c'mon, you almost doubled the score of an Athlon X2 at about the same speed as your Prescott, using very similar graphics and HDD subsystems? I'm calling shens here, again. Where the error is, intentional or not, I don't have the slightest clue.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
Sorry Rick, but no 'sweet spot' is going to give a 180%ish boost over a comparably equiped system. Something else is up here.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
No 'sweet spot' is going to obliterate the WR, held by a similarly clocked DC A64, either.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

mozzartusm

Splendid
Sep 17, 2004
4,693
0
22,780
The one AMD thats on the leader board is a dual processor. PCMark 04 is a weighted in the Intel direction. Im surprised that your argument didnt include the other P4's. Keep on posting all the negative crap you wish, but this will be my last reply to you.

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> Owned!
TT 680W PSU
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
Wanna know why Intel USED to be favored? HT! Multitasking benchies are in PCMark04, A64s suck at multitasking. X2s don't. Anyway, a comparably equiped system scores 5500 (or the best one at similar clocks and similar GPU did--one or two with a 6800 did better at the same clocks), hence the 180%ish increase I alluded to.

Want the Intel WR? An 840EE @ 4.7GHz and a better graphics card barely breaks 9k. The guy who has the record is a member here, FUGGER, PM him if you'd like to see what he thinks of your score....

Cut out the false score crap--I don't know how you're getting these scores, but jeeze, look at comparable systems and just realize that your scores aren't representative of what your system is UNLESS you have some weird bug in your board enabling quad channel and other crap (lots of other crap, actually).

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

mozzartusm

Splendid
Sep 17, 2004
4,693
0
22,780
Maybe the stopwatch isn't quite as broken as I assumed ? Thats a first place by a *HUGE* gap. Common Mozzy, tell us what your secret sauce is :)
I am guessing that the stopwatch refers to something said in my memory post. I havent been back in this section nor checked that post again since my last reply. The memory results are being examined so until I get an answer one way or another I didnt see the point in stressing myself out anymore by reading anymore negative replies[/Vapor]

I have split my active cooled liquid between 3 seperate pumps and tanks. Ive also done alot of work on my MOBO. I used my infrared temp gauge to find any and all hot spots on the Mobo and have made modifications to all of these places. My temps while benchmarking are within 2-3 degrees +or- 0C. Im using a mixture of deionized water and blue ice so that the feezing point changes. As you can see in my sig, ive managed to take my RAM from DDR2 667 up to DDR2 800. I seem to remember someone[/Vapor] saying that they couldnt except my memory speeds unless DDR2 800 was in the mix. Im guessing that now that I have gone past DDR2 800 that it still wont matter.

This post as well as the last one is going to catch alot of negative comments. I noticed that the memory post was up in the 700's, im sure that the numbers are much higher in the other forums that I posted the results in. Im sure by now most people have made up their minds by now regardless of what I do or say. This score doesnt have a chance of sticking for more reasons than one. The sad thing is that if it doesnt it will probably be for the wrong reasons. Benchmarking in general has alot of issues that should be addressed, in particular competitive benchmarking needs some major changes. If you look at the Hall Of Fame in the ORB scroll down on the top 20 PCMark section and look for my other score. Its around 12th. If I wanted to sneak in undetected, I would have stopped with that one and saved the bigger score for a later date. Ive got the PRO version so I could have published at anytime.

Ill make one more comment to the AMD people. If your going to discredit the scores, do it for some reason other than the one my friend Vapor has used. The benchmark itself is a terrible one to compare the two platforms (Intel and AMD) performance. The only AMD in the top 20 is a dual processor. Everyone knows that AMD is a superior platform and the fact that this is the only one in the top 20 should tell anyone that the benchmark does not show a true picture of the performance difference between the two. The first thing I did after publishing the score was to report it to the future mark team. Im an unknown in the benchmarking world so I dont expect for the score to stand. The interesting thing is going to be how they handle some of the other scores that I have found to be even more suspect than mine. One thing is for certain, if your known you dont get questioned even when some things about your setup make no sense at all when comparing them to your score. Basically its a members only club, and you better make sure your membership is good otherwise you dont even get the courtesy of having your results truley considered.


Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> Owned!
TT 680W PSU
 

mozzartusm

Splendid
Sep 17, 2004
4,693
0
22,780
Vapor, you get so aggrevated just at the thought of me posting something like this that you fail to see that there is much more to this than the damn scores. I have a big issue with the groupie crap that goes on in this industry. The benchmarks that I have been using seem to be way off base with what they claim to be measuring. I know that this score isnt going to stick. I never intended for it to. What im interested in is the response that it will get from the people that control that forum. There are a pile of benchmarks that dont add up when you compare them to the system specs. Im not challengeing the people running the benchmarks, im challenging the people who design the benchmarks. I told myself that I was through replying to you because its so obvious that you cant stand the thought of some nobody like myself doing anything above average. You were gunning for me the first reply that you made to my other post and that hasnt changed one bit. I dont know what is valid and what isnt when it comes to the results. At what point do my results become invalid? Thats what I want to know and I also want to know why anyone should be confident that the reviews that we read are worth even taking the time to read them. You seem to have alot of confidence in what some say but until I have a reason to beleive that the test that all of this is based on are accurate I just refuse to take anyones word for it. You keep on hating all you care to, thats your problem and you can deal with it. Im going to keep right on doing the same thing, and if that means that I can help force some accountability into the mix then that alone is worth all of the negative replies that are thrown at me. You asked if this was repectable. I would say yes its very repsectable when your willing to sacrifice the individual for the bigger picture.

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> Owned!
TT 680W PSU
 

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
Crashman (who did a review for Tomshardware recently, the x800 review) would probably help you out in regards to benchmarking

-------
<b>It's a man's obligation to stick his boneration in a women's separation; this sort of penetration will increase the population of the younger generation.</b>
 

FUGGER

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,490
0
19,780
No idea how you can claim that score as legit.

dual core EE @ 4.9Ghz and a dual core X2 on LN2 below you...

pull it down before they ban you

<A HREF="http://www.xtremesystems.org" target="_new">www.xtremesystems.org</A>
 

mozzartusm

Splendid
Sep 17, 2004
4,693
0
22,780
I read through the 04 "Fake Cheat ...." section in the ORB so I know that based on what ohter people witrh similiar systems have run up against that the score wont stick. AS far as getting banned, I didnt do anything to alter or change the score in any way so why they would ban me for doing nothing more thatn running the test that I paid doesnt seem quite right to me. They will take it down if soone enough if they already havent done so. All I want is for someone from futuremark to talk to me about the test and either explain to me at what point my scores arent valid and how its determined. Ive seen a bunch of scores in other categories that couldnt have been correct so it seems to me that they need to come up with a solution thats more definitive than the one they use now. Not that it will make a huge difference, but i was running different speeds, settings.... than what the ORB listed.

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> Owned!
TT 680W PSU
 

FUGGER

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,490
0
19,780
Posting scores is one thing but if you are running some form of speed cheat to obtain results then that would be cheating.

Just notify futuremark about the bug. Contact info is found on the site.

<A HREF="http://www.xtremesystems.org" target="_new">www.xtremesystems.org</A>
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
When did I say DDR2-800 was necessary for those speeds? I believe I said DDR2-1200 at TIGHT timings were necessary for your 11500MB/s, who knows what is needed for your 16000MB/s.

As for this score--there's no way it's real. The benchmark has favored P4s for a very good reason, a large part of the score is in multitasking, something that should be benchmarked, which A64s simply aren't good at. Now there's the X2, which will alleviate that problem for the A64s (as well as boost the other aspects of the benchmark to varying degrees).

Anyway, what wrong reasons are there for taking down your score? It's not legit in any form. Comparable systems are getting a third of your score and MUCH superior systems are getting a little more than half. Your 12th place score should also be taken down (*upon further inspection, it was taken down*) as there is no way your system can get that score legitimately.

As for me comparing Intel and AMD, whatever....your score obliterates the Intel records (which is pratically identical) comprised of faster dual-Xeon systems and significantly faster PDs. Frankly, saying that everyone knows that AMD is the superior platform is just bullsh<b></b>it, it's simply not for many tasks and if everyone did know its overall strength, don't you think they'd have the dominance in market share?

As for the members only club, go for the single P4 (non-EE) record all you want, you might be able to get it with some LN2. But the people at the top simply have the better boards, memory, and, most importantly, CPUs. Buy those parts, and you're a 'member.' You want use to consider your results? Tell us how you got them and why they should be considered even though their a good 180% larger than that of a comparable system and obliterate the WR?

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
Ive seen a bunch of scores in other categories that couldnt have been correct so it seems to me that they need to come up with a solution thats more definitive than the one they use now.
Show me the scores and what you think is wrong with them...you might be right about some scores (no doubt there are some up there that aren't legit in addition to youurs). I think that if you even submitted a score that was at 6000 with your system (in that exact same setup), it wouldn't be legit...5500 is just about the max with your setup.

Not that it will make a huge difference, but i was running different speeds, settings.... than what the ORB listed.
Actually, this does make a difference and flashes a BIG RED SIGN TO SOMETHING BEING WRONG. It tried to measure your settings at it failed....that's a sign of something if you ask me.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

P4Man

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2004
2,305
0
19,780
I agree with pretty much everyone in this thread :)
Seriously, those numbers are way too high to be valid, but something is up when more than one app reports such numbers (sandra and PCmark). Now both Sandra and PCmark are being distributed by Madonion I thought, maybe they share some code as well ?

Anyway, here is what I would do: run memtest86. Benchmarking the system at the fastest settings that will pass memtest testing might give us a better idea. If it doesn't pass memtest, God knows what these apps are reading. If it still achieves such miracle scores while passing memtest, well, then I'm curious as anyone whats up. I'd still kinda doubt you found some DDR2 holy grail of performance though, since its not likely any setup would exceed by far what is possible even in theory, but at least it gets interesting then..

Moz, can you tell us what you achieve using memtest stable settings ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
 

jmwpom3

Distinguished
Mar 3, 2005
329
0
18,780
if everyone did know its overall strength, don't you think they'd have the dominance in market share?
plain and simlple... NO. There are lot's of examples of inferior products DOMINATING the markets of superior ones. (just look at beta vs. vhs) While I know that's a completely different thing, it does illustrate my point. The market share shows POPULARITY not SUPERIORITY. People buy what they know, what they're used to, and what the masses TELL THEM TO. I don't play the benchmarking game, don't have the time. But, just because something seems to good to be true, doesn't mean it is. Usually, but not always. Try looking to WHAT produced the scores instead of WHO. I would think you would be better to find out how to reproduce them instead of how to discredit them.

I'm not really on either side of this argument, but I don't like the taste of anyone saying it can't be done because it hasn't been done before. That's just very defeatist thinking.

<font color=green> AMD- Intel's choice for Best CPU manufacturer </font color=green>
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
Trust me, if everyone <b>knew</b> that AMD were better, it would have the market dominance. Just ask the average Joe who makes the best CPUs, they'll say Intel. They also go out and buy Intel because they 'know' it's better and because they have been better for all of eternity and the bigwigs at Dell say that they'll only sell Intel because they 'know' that Intel is better.

Yes, it does seem too good to be true because it demolishes exactly equal systems and systems that are much better--did no one else bother to notice the scores of comparable systems? Did anyone else notice Mozzy's comment how those weren't his system specs? A benchmark is a benchmark for a reason: predictable inter-platform scores. Period.

And who the fu<b></b>ck do you think you are accusing me of targetting Mozz? I'd do this to anybody reporting this score with that system. Just because he has a pattern of TWO markedly-off scores, does not mean I'm targetting him. If I wanted to target him, I'd accuse him of not hitting 5GHz or not hitting DDR2-800...neither of which are particularly difficult to do, frankly. I'd accuse him of beating his children and wife (if he has them, I don't actually know). You'll know when I'm targetting someone. In fact, check the archives for me targetting SoDNighthawk...I was quite young at the time, which is why it seems sort of amateur. And as for the defeatest thinking...bullsh<b></b>it, you know just as well as I do (if you know jack about computers) that his system simply can't get 14k in PCMark04...not even half of that, frankly.

He can't be getting the various scores he's getting with his system. No one will ever legitimately get those scores with a similar setup. Frankly, a dual core PD (no difference in platforms here, so don't even try it) at the same exact clocks with faster memory and tighter timings and an R520 or G70 won't even get that score.

Am I the only one here other than Sampsa and FUGGER (who, by the way, have the top two spots in the ORB for PCMark04) that understands this?

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
I'd also like to see various Super Pi times (1M, 16M, 32M, maybe 4M) and 3DMark01 Lobby High.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

mozzartusm

Splendid
Sep 17, 2004
4,693
0
22,780
Posting scores is one thing but if you are running some form of speed cheat to obtain results then that would be cheating.

Just notify futuremark about the bug. Contact info is found on the site.
Im not running anything to cheat the system. I notifyied them by 2 seperate e-mails but they havent replied and probably wont


Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> Owned!
TT 680W PSU
 

mozzartusm

Splendid
Sep 17, 2004
4,693
0
22,780
VAPOR

No Intel system can reach that number yet....maybe when we see DDR2-1200 with 3-2-2-4 timings, MAYBE
I do owe you an apology. This was the statement that you made. You clearly did say 1200 and not 800 like I quoted you as saying. The reply after this had something about 800 in it and I mixed them up.

I already was well aware of the fact that me and you really need to chill out, but after I went back and found out that I was wrong about what you had said it opened my eyes to the fact that I was letting my temper get the best of me. Ill take my share of the blame for the tension and offer that for the good of everyone we try to mend the fence. I tried to PM you, but you dont except PMs. I think that me and you are mainly not seeing eye to eye because I havent done a very good job of explaining my full intentions with all of this. If you care to discuss this PM me your messenger addy.

Intel P4 550(3.4)@<font color=green>5Ghz</font color=green>
Asus P5AD2-E-Premium
Crucial Ballistix DDR2 667@<font color=red>DDR2 800<font color=red> Owned!
TT 680W PSU
 

darko21

Distinguished
Sep 15, 2003
1,098
0
19,280
They also go out and buy Intel because they 'know' it's better
You sure about that? maybe it's cause they think and believe that or maybe that's what they are told or better yet taught. What Joe shmoe thinks he knows ain't always the truth. and if you really belive dell only use intel cause it's better think again. The intel inside marketing program dictates what goes inside dell as far as cpu's go.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.