Give me settings

45000 points on the CB23, and I've seen many get 47000 without making much effort. I know that each silicon is different, but I myself have already managed to reach 47000 but with the same settings I used now they don't give me the same score regardless of the values configured in the BIOS.I've been thinking about not using any overclocking settings in the MSI section and using it only in the AMD overclocking section. I found a post on Reddit where a user also lost performance when using the overclocking section of the motherboard manufacturer. Last edited: Feb 17, 2025 #83 So, after resetting the CMOS several times, it is possible to identify that the same BIOS settings give me different performance results. Currently I use individual CO configuration per core and the central issue is to have the same performance with a CO of 0 and CO of -20, for example.Working with several VRM configurations also does not give me performance gains, but when using LLC 6 it is certain that the system freezes.Today I'm using FCLK@2000, but going up more than that doesn't make me gain performance.I've tested several configurations and it's difficult to extract more than 45000 points on the CB23, and I've seen many get 47000 without making much effort. I know that each silicon is different, but I myself have already managed to reach 47000 but with the same settings I used now they don't give me the same score regardless of the values configured in the BIOS. Just my two cents, I tried, like you, to set a negative offset per core, but after spending hours finding the optimal value for each core, I realized that Cinebench R23 and CPU-Z would only score based on the worst core offset I could achieve. So,

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.You should upgrade or use an alternative browser. Thread starter Suntower Start date Jul 28, 2007 #1 An emulation of an emulation? How Philip K. Dick of me! :mrgreen:1. Many, many, many magazines, recordists of all levels extol the virtues of using PSP VintageWarmer on the mix buss to 'glue' a mix together... I've heard similar talk about the SSL buss compressor.2. Conversely, many, Many, MANY people -here- have poo-poohed VintageWarmer here by saying 'Oh... you can do that---even better, with UAD Plug-Ins. I'm sure this is true. ...er... I -guess-. 3. It seems to me that VintageWarmer is basically an emulation of an old tube/VCA compressor, but pimped with a) multiple bands andb) the ability to 'drive' the tube quite hard.SO here are my question(s):1. Can you give me -your- 'PSP VintageWarmer' emulation strategy: plug-in chain, settings, etc. (Using UAD of course.)2. Can you give me -your- explanation of what this 'gluing' business is all about in fairly specific terms. IOW: it does me no good if you say something equally colourful as 'VintageWarmer really ties your mix together'. Thanks!---JC #2 Suntower said: SO here are my question(s):1. Can you give me -your- 'PSP VintageWarmer' emulation strategy: plug-in chain, settings, etc. (Using UAD of course.)2. Can you give me -your- explanation of what this 'gluing' business is all about in fairly specific terms. IOW: it does me no good if you say something equally colourful as 'VintageWarmer really ties your mix together'. I don't have a ton of experience with PSP VW, but when I demoed it my favorite feature was the knee knob. It seemed to do more than simply adjust the knee of the compressor. I have other compressors with a variable knee, and none act quite the same with any settings.I don't think there are any UAD plugs that are made to be as versatile as the VW, but if I were going to try to duplicate one specific sound I got out of it I'd say single band mode,

Also looking at how helpful and friendly the people are in the forums. If someone asks for help then they should get it, not a series of questions about their motives.And sorry, but it’s none of your damn business why I or anyone else choose the settings we do.If the program won’t stop changing the settings, just say so. I’ll uninstall it and go find a better product that does what I want it to do. (I can’t speak for anyone else) Eddy November 19, 2014, 2:00am 8 John,1] Read the eula2] No you don’t always. It depends on the software, the eula, license terms.3] You can set avast what to do if there is a update.4] No it is not. 160,000 new malware samples created every day. system November 19, 2014, 2:13am 9 Well said John J - you’ve pointed all out perfect!Eddy, I’m getting the grasp of how you’ve gained you 12k posts.Cutting the argument short - I did not notice it restores the default settings upon update. It does in my example every time meaning save setting, close interface and reopen it.Eddy, If I tell you I want to just disable the animation of tray icon, are you going to ask me again why I’d want to do that or are you going to get to the point of the initial problem?I suspect I do not get any sensible response off you.Eddy give me an asnwer before any of your future posts: Why would you give the option to untick something and restore it by the Avast itself without notifying me of it? dont tell me about EULA though, ok? What if I change 10 settings - do I neeed to re peat the setttings again every day? (although the issue is that Avast do not keep

I downloaded and tried it.At first install it didn't seem to make any difference at all. So I went to their site and read further on it and found that I hadn't configured it properly. It opens a configuration utility that allows you to check which folders you want optimized. You can have it optimize all your folders if you want (optimizing folders means optimizing them so that whatever application or program you are using out of that folder will be optimized to run better in windows XP). After configuring it properly and asking it to optimize only my FS9 folder (which was suggested in the instructions at their site, instead of having it optimize all folders on your hardrive which would take up too much processing power), and checking the tool bar at the bottom of the screen to make sure the icon was there and showing it was indeed running properly, I loaded up FS9.To me, if an application does not give me enough noticeable difference that allows me to increase my display settings, then it is really not needed. It becomes just another program taking up processing power. At first I thought it had indeed improved my frame rate in FS9, but as I continued to fly I noticed increased jerkiness in turns and when panning around in spot view. This was with increased settings via the display settings in FS9. So I gradually decreased my settings to see how much of a boost in performance I was getting. I eventually ended up at the same settings I use without system booster. In fact, as I continued to fly I noticed a gradual bogging down of my system when flying into airports to land, flying the pattern, and waiting for the tower to clear me. It got so jerky I uninstalled system booster (which was quick and easy) and my system was back to normal.So if you want to give it a try I'd suggest you do as after I uninstalled it, it did not seem to have any lingering effects. Perhaps it helps w/other things separate from FS9, that I didn't look into.

Workmanship; everything you would expect from Kodak!I also read the review in PC magazine. I think maybe the author has no idea of the controls and settings available with the 401. He seemed to be a real big Canon fan (maybe a DSLR fan?) I just bought a Canon EOS Rebel T7 and wasted a LOT of money on it. The AZ401 is a lot better camera imho. The only thing the Canon DSLR has going for it is the ability to mount to a telescope. Other than that I am not impressed with Canon at all. Give me the AZ401 any day of the week!100 Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS Rebel T7 Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 "}"> OP Sactojim • Veteran Member • Posts: 9,274 Re: In praise of the Kodak Pixpro AZ401 In reply to tharzill • Apr 29, 2019 tharzill wrote:I have been using the Kodak AZ401 for close to a year now and I love it! It takes awesome photos of the moon with its long zoom (I use digital zoom also to give me a 160X zoom total) I have started shooting night sky photos using the Manual settings available and it is great! It is easy to use, not that heavy, quality workmanship; everything you would expect from Kodak!I also read the review in PC magazine. I think maybe the author has no idea of the controls and settings available with the 401. He seemed to be a real big Canon fan (maybe a DSLR fan?) I just bought a Canon EOS Rebel T7 and wasted a LOT of money on it. The AZ401 is a lot better camera imho. The only thing the Canon DSLR has going for it is the ability to mount to a telescope. Other than that I am not impressed with Canon at all. Give me the AZ401 any day of the week!100Nice photos! Yes, the inexpensive AZ401 is a very good camera with a good lens. Your Canon should run circles around it though. What don't you like about the Canon? Hope to see more of your pics. "}"> tharzill • New Member • Posts: 10 Re: In praise of the Kodak Pixpro AZ401 In reply to Sactojim • May 1, 2019 The Kodak is a lot easier and quicker to use. At least for me for most things. I am begging to get more familiar with the Canon and while it takes beautiful photos also, it seems each task requires a different lens. And that can be an advantage in some settings, but for all around everyday use I still prefer the AZ401. I am currently using them both. I love the 24MP sensor on the Canon!