Is the Conroe Database too hard to read? What should I do?

Is the Conroe Database too hard to read? What should I do?

  • Leave it the way it is 4 now, then later show leaders 4 each CPU & post link for database download.

    Votes: 6 17.6%

  • Get rid of ALL the results that do not have ALL the information filled out.

    Votes: 2 5.9%

  • Get rid of ALL the results that are not stable overclocks.

    Votes: 4 11.8%

  • Both Option 2 and Option 3.

    Votes: 2 5.9%

  • Show a separate chart for stable and not stable overclocks.

    Votes: 4 11.8%

  • Both Option 2 and Option 5.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Allow each user 1 entry per setup. (Setup= CPUa + MBb)

    Votes: 6 17.6%

  • Both Option 2 and Option 7.

    Votes: 1 2.9%

  • Both Option 3 and Option 7.

    Votes: 9 26.5%

  • Both Option 5 and Option 7.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    34
M

mentok1982

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 17, 2004
Messages
4,372
POLL IS OVER. I have made the changes that I am prepared to make for now.
 
you might want to ONLY list the persons highest score unless its with other eq. Like highest on air and water. Not every time they make another point or 2.


sparks
 
couple things

1. stable should be green, (make unstable color red)

2. remove any results from ES chips, they arent very useful

otherwise i like it a lot.
 
I think it'd be best to seperate the ES and Retail steppings from the chart. Cause honestly, not many of us are gonna have those - and in the future - so whats the pt of those I guess? For information purposes sure, and for those few who get an ES, but maybe have 2 diff charts, or something?

Would just help the list not be so crowded as it is, and leaves out having to distinquish OC's most of us wont be able to reach w/ said processor model.
 
Definently take out multiples, make people post whether or not their OC is an update of a previous one or not. ES could be taken out/seperated, like mentioned, but there aren't many of them anyways. RED = bad/instable/negative stuff in my mind like the other poster said, make green for stability and black for official result would be fine. Unstable results are kinda useless too.


So I guess option 3 and 7 with color changes.
 
Could you please take my entry with the E6300 and replace it with the new one i sent you , also if there is one entry where they are stable but that is only if these are the only entries, also i would like to see the bandwith of Float and Int, which will be able to tell us how much effecient overclock someone has got.
 
Well unstable overclock is not good. You should only display the top 10 overclocks, in each section of CPU.

I like the layout, it is good don;t change it.
 
nooh said:
Could you please take my entry with the E6300 and replace it with the new one i sent you ,
also if there is one entry where they are stable but that is only if these are the only entries,
also i would like to see the bandwith of Float and Int, which will be able to tell us how much effecient overclock someone has got.
Click to expand...

Sentence 1 answer: I am going to update after I figure out what to change about the database.
Sentence 2 answer: What?
Sentence 3 answer: I put a poll up before I started asking what data should be displayed and
what you see is what most of the people wanted.
 
I agree with a combination of two replies. Take away es and only keep one overclock per set of variables. Maybe allow for two entries if one is stock volts and other is higher voltage.
 
I don't mind seeing multiple stable OCs from the same person, however i think it would be useful if each table was separated into what type of cooling they used. So, for instance, within the E6600 table you could group each entry into air, water, and phase.

I know that if I were looking to your chart to figure out how I should do my build, phase and water results wouldn't matter to me because I only intend to do air. If all the entries were grouped together by cooling it would be easier for me to see what works, what works well, and what works poorly, all within the context of the type of cooling I plan to use.

Further, you could then rank each entry in terms of highest OC to lowest OC, allowing you to see what works best within the confines of your particular cooling scheme and processor. So at this point you would still only have one table per processor, but each table would have three groups based on cooling type (no need for a new table or spaces between groups, just a logical grouping of entries), and then within each group the entries could be arranged from highest OC to lowest.

Thoughts?
 
Levii said:
I don't mind seeing multiple stable OCs from the same person, however i think it would be useful if each table was separated into what type of cooling they used. So, for instance, within the E6600 table you could group each entry into air, water, and phase.

I know that if I were looking to your chart to figure out how I should do my build, phase and water results wouldn't matter to me because I only intend to do air. If all the entries were grouped together by cooling it would be easier for me to see what works, what works well, and what works poorly, all within the context of the type of cooling I plan to use.

Further, you could then rank each entry in terms of highest OC to lowest OC, allowing you to see what works best within the confines of your particular cooling scheme and processor. So at this point you would still only have one table per processor, but each table would have three groups based on cooling type (no need for a new table or spaces between groups, just a logical grouping of entries), and then within each group the entries could be arranged from highest OC to lowest.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...


I like you.
I plan on displaying the database in order by cooling method like you described and in
order by fastest overclock to slowest like it is now using two different screenshots. Why
should I display it only one way when I can display it both ways?

Before I started this thing that was one thing I wanted to do with it.
 
Here is what I am gonna do from no on for the main database section.

1.All entries must be stable. 4 hours of a stress program using both cores at the same time or
being able to play current games for more than a few hours with no problems.

2.Each user will get up to 3 entries for each setup. An example of a setup would be an
E6600 on a Asus P5W DH motherboard.

3.I will maintain a list for overclocks that are not stable. There will be 5 entries for each CPU
and each user will be allowed 1 entry for each setup. To be "not stable" you should be able
to run Windows and maybe a benchmark such as 3DMark05 or 3DMark06.

4.Colors have been changed from red to green because some people see red as a "bad" color.
 
Ok Mentok, once again you're over complicating things!!!

I meant to vote for #3 & #7, but I accidentally voted for #2 & # 7.

You could have just selected the option to let people vote for more than one option!!! :) Even your voting thing is confusing!! I appreciate all the work anyway though!

Hindsight is 20/20.

1. Toss results that aren't considered 100% stable
2. Toss results that aren't completely (all columns)
3. Toss results besides the highest OC per user.
etc...
and then allow multiple votes! (or then used the combined options AFTER all your originals) :cool:
 
nooh said:
Can we have idle and load temps ?
Click to expand...

I have said it before and now I will simplify it for you.
No.

chrisf6969 said:
1. Toss results that aren't considered 100% stable
2. Toss results that aren't completely (all columns)
3. Toss results besides the highest OC per user.
Click to expand...

1. No. I don't want to and you can't make me. :mad: I am keeping a list of the top 5 not
stable OCs for each CPU. It will probably be posted in a seond pic next time.
2. Maybe later after I get more results submitted. 13 are incomplete and 15 are complete. I
don't think it would be very nice of me to throw out almost have of the submissions.
3. Maybe later but right now I want to allow each person three results for each CPU and
motherboard combination they have.

And finally I don't appreciate the "tone" mister. I don't go to your threads and yell at you
about how you are running them.
 
mentok1982 said:
I have said it before and now I will simplify it for you.
No.



1. No. I don't want to and you can't make me. :mad: I am keeping a list of the top 5 not
stable OCs for each CPU. It will probably be posted in a seond pic next time.
2. Maybe later after I get more results submitted. 13 are incomplete and 15 are complete. I
don't think it would be very nice of me to throw out almost have of the submissions.
3. Maybe later but right now I want to allow each person three results for each CPU and
motherboard combination they have.

And finally I don't appreciate the "tone" mister. I don't go to your threads and yell at you
about how you are running them.
Click to expand...

actually I wasn't telling you what to do with the database results!! LOL

I was saying your POLL was too hard to read, vote... also!! lmao

I accidentally voted for the wrong one b/c of the way it was worded.... (not numbered on the choice lines) and skipping around between choices, then multiple choices, etc.!

I told you I appreciate all the work you do! I didn't think my "tone" was rude or mean. THIS IS YELLING! not just a few bolded lines.
 
chrisf6969 said:
actually I wasn't telling you what to do with the database results!! LOL

I was saying your POLL was too hard to read, vote... also!! lmao

I accidentally voted for the wrong one b/c of the way it was worded.... (not numbered on the choice lines) and skipping around between choices, then multiple choices, etc.!

I told you I appreciate all the work you do! I didn't think my "tone" was rude or mean. THIS IS YELLING! not just a few bolded lines.
Click to expand...


Well I apologize for the poll then. The poll is basically over as far as I am concerned
because techincally 11 people voted for "Option 3 and Option 7". The changes I am
prepared to make to the database right now have been made. I will eventually allow 1
result per setup per user and even though I have not thrown out the not stable overclocks
completely they are no longer included in the "real" database pic. I want to keep them so
that people can say "wow centvalny got his X6800 up to 4,658MHz".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top