ASRock Z77 Overclocking Competition

[Pasi_FM]

Hello folks,

We have another contest from June 11th to July 9th with partners ASRock, Galaxy, Adata, CoolerMaster and Intel.
http://www.3dmark.com/competitions/asrock-z77/

The contest has two different categories:
3DMark 11 - Performance preset for all users with a Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge ASRock 7 series motherboard, no limitations to the number or brand of GPUs

3DMark Vantage - Performance preset, ASRock 7-series Sandy or Ivy Bridge motherboard and single-GPU only.

There are weekly and overall prizes and all usual rules apply.

See the contest page for prize details and other rules and post any questions or issues in this thread or email me directly at pasi(at)futuremark.com

​http://www.3dmark.com/competitions/asrock-z77/

[Lucky_n00b]

Hi Pasi, I got a few questions :
1. Can we use Sandy Bridge-E + X79 platform?
2. For 3dmark11, Do we have to use v1.03, or can we use other version? (1.02 for example)
3. For ATI Graphics card, can we change the tesselation level, or should we leave it at default value?

Thanks man (^_^)

[Pasi_FM]

Hi Pasi, I got a few questions :
1. Can we use Sandy Bridge-E + X79 platform?
2. For 3dmark11, Do we have to use v1.03, or can we use other version? (1.02 for example)
3. For ATI Graphics card, can we change the tesselation level, or should we leave it at default value?

1) Yes
2) Latest versions of 3DMark 11 and SystemInfo are recommended to minimize issues with validation, but 3DMark 11 versions 1.0.1, 1.0.2 and 1.0.3 are currently all accepted for the contest, although updating SystemInfo is still a good idea to minimize validation hassle with things where our policies and detections have changed after the previous versions were launched (like for example AMD tesselation settings and Lucid Virtu MVP).
3) Our strict policy is that in order to be comparable in contests and such tesselation settings should always be left at the default values.

[Billy-The-Kid]

A contest with the name "ASRock Z77 Overclocking Competition", and then we can use x79 chipset.... it´s strange

[Pasi_FM]

And consider that overruled, contest host ASRock sent a clarification that X79 is not included in this contest, so apologies for the misinformation and our misunderstanding of the intention of the rules text.

The contest page will be amended shortly.

[Lucky_n00b]

And consider that overruled, contest host ASRock sent a clarification that X79 is not included in this contest, so apologies for the misinformation and our misunderstanding of the intention of the rules text.

The contest page will be amended shortly.

Aww, OK then...thx for the notification anyway
* Dang, need to find an asrock Z77 which can do 4-way *

[Pasi_FM]

So we're now in the third week of the contest with Polish overclockers holding top spots in both categories.

The top scores as shown on the page for week 1 have been verified to be valid and match the detected clock speeds and components.

Thus, current top scores for the weekly prizes are the following:

3DMark 11:
Week 1: X-Power
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3680098
Week 2: Chaos
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3735708

3DMark Vantage:
Week 1: rybamcz
http://3dmark.com/3dmv/4144202
Week 2: rsannino
http://3dmark.com/3dmv/4151039

[Pasi_FM]

And the top scores for week 3 are:

3DMark 11:
1. orangenvidia - P27148
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3790594


3DMark Vantage:
1. cische - P48114
http://3dmark.com/3dmv/4168896

(note that the cpu frequency is a known bug of SystemInfo 4.0 with Intel Core i7-3770K, so the score seems high for the frequency shown, please always use the latest version of SystemInfo to minimize suspicious looking benchmark results )

[rybamcz]

Hi there :)

Right now I see that there was a small bug in your contest. Timer on main page was +1h than real time 11:00GMT. So it make me and Chaos wrong in submitting the scores.

So becouse Futurmark did that mistake, could you add this score to competition? It will not change anything in prizes, but we would like to be at 2nd place overall than at 3rd :)

So please be kind with it, becouse it wasn't our foult that Timer was working wrong :(

[Pasi_FM]

Hey,

The timer issue has been noted internally, but unfortunately not before the contest end time as it was a time zone dependent issue and from my time zone it worked correctly at the end of the contest.

The leaderboard on the page was not tied to the timer, so the leader board should shows results that came in according to the end time in the rules (11 am GMT), the time stamps on result details pages are also in this time zone, so anything that has a time stamp before 11:am should be included in the contest.

The jury is currently out on some valid scores that came in, in a situation where locally the user saw time left on the timer, but it was already past 11am.

I'll let you guys know how those are dealt with as soon as there is a final decision.