BIOS version is so old it is OC.. I've set BCLK 100->110 just why not. Got 620->709 UPS. I OC the CPU currenlty I know...

TY again! This is offtopic here...

azesmbog wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 19, 2023 7:32 am

first we look for a suitable BIOS, then we flash it, and only then, if necessary, we buy a good memory500-4700 MHz is quite achievable for this processor

Thank you so much! I'll dig into this.

Well, I was in OC many-many years ago. Bought this mainboard from my colleauge as he upgraded :) So you say to me that my old-a.s ASrock Z170 Pro4 mainboard which "Supports DDR4 3866+(OC) memory modules" could be able to produce 1.5x UPS in case I go and buy a faster memory kit?? Like DDR4...

guitars11 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 18, 2023 9:07 pm

This is a pretty cool breakdown of the different attributes. How did you do this?

Google sheets From the CSV attached to flame_Sla's post here

guitars11 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 18, 2023 9:07 pm

updated 4.5 and is now 4.5.1. I found 2 furnaces that were not working as intended, somehow the ore got messed up.

I don't get higher UPS for 4.5.1 than 4.5. Actually <1% slower - withing the margin of error: 610 vs 606 UPS.

https://factoriobox.1au.us/results/cpus?map=53590a606b6f0812dc4b9a54b7e5541239bb8ad3bfafdfae39e852055c1b5f06 Processor Intel Core i5-6400 912.4 913 , 912 , 911 Processor Intel Core i5-6500 616.0 620 , 617 , 616 , 614 , 613 , 610 , 610 , 563 I have zero idea how can you get 1.5x UPS w/a slower(?) CP...

And the times visalized from flame_Sla's CSV file - sorry its not milisecs but microsecs:

Added v4.2.7. TY for the measurements, here is the discrepancy:

my computer was created only for a single game (guess which one?) Thinking... :) Even region cloner was not designed for this task. I took ages to create those maps, maybe adding some space would help, don't know. Doing a belt side loading test is something I might do - it did show a diff at UPS Op...

imho for the benchmark it is better to use PS scripts that set a high priority for the factorio process I'm happy to test anything running on Win11 and giving me more consistent UPS (or timing) numbers. Currently for example I have 590/583/593 UPS for Stevetrov v1 - really annoying, this is not wit...

Stevetrov wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 17, 2023 1:16 pm

My first submission

Welcome! 590 UPS, added.

Edit: redone all numbers, see the first post viewtopic.php?f=193&t=105846

Yep, both was me 4.2.2:
https://factoriobox.1au.us/results?map= ... 055c1b5f06

hmm. I'm getting 955 ups for the 8t-7side which is a little slower than just the regular 4.2.2 which I got 1029. I'm not sure what would be making yours be a little faster though on your computer. 4.2.2 still the winnner for now I keep that 1st, dont worry. Once I got my timing I will do a final me...

flame_Sla wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 15, 2023 2:37 am

guitars11 wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 15, 2023 1:07 am

[...] I found having mods active actually eat up a little performance and can throw results off[...]

I use a python script for the benchmark, which forcibly disables all mods

FactorioBox also disables all mods (checked the windows script - it sets a temp file as the mod directory).

I tested some variations for 8 cycle timing (based of v4.2.2). This version was the fastest: Factoriobox: Red Science UPS Editor - guitars11 v4.2.2 8t-7side test by Belter : 579 UPS 8t-7side.png But still, margin of error, no big gain. Still thinking about a perfect or close to perfect timing. NowI ...

Bullshit test, nothing. [...] Factoriobox results taken under ideal conditions. [...] So it's all within the margin of error. Let me disagree with bullshit test, sorry. I've uploaded to Factoriobox for easy sharing. Doing a test w/o mods using the PS script is the most accurate measurement I'm awar...

Is a full belt gives better UPS than a partially filled one? This topic came up again in Discord and Reddit. Measurement Differnce is really small, for extra huge number of belts ( 100 tile long back and forth loop x 100 -> 640.400 blue belt segments) I see 8% UPS difference: AlmostFullvsPartialBelt...

Did a v4.2.2 vs 4.2.2-8t w/ 3 x 10.000 tickt test: average is 582 vs 561 UPS, +3.8% on my computer. Factorio box test was 563 vs 561 (same computer and maps).

[...]we should load 8 gears into the assembly machine![...] It became the ~same UPS, but much better material for perfect timing. Also now there is a chance to get rid of the final buffering pair. Updated v4.2.2 with the timing and the 8 stacksize as suggested above. Had to shift the cycle for half...

On second thought, if we are limiting 2 inserters to 8 items ( gears and copper) to get 11.2 red / sec, would that increase the total inserter swing count? Going every 8.4 red / sec, we would still have 2 inserters going every 12 items. Could be two cycles. Just thinking loud. But NOT working due t...