archive.org ought to cover a decent span of 1995 to 2006, and there's plenty of stuff from that time that never went offline. The old VGA charts from Tom's Hardware, for example.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/vga-charts-iii,730.html

enloop wrote:

The main purpose for this is to have a place where you can look up any piece of hardware and view all configurations and results for that particular build where you can compare and identify ideal setups according to your needs.

I guess it sounds nice, but there are many cases where there is no single "ideal" setup, or in which attempting to duplicate a particular "ideal" setup is a needless expense where something just short of ideal will work just as well.

Is reverse engineering/reconfiguring an old existing benchmark tool out of the question to redirect the results to a new/different website?

Why bother? Any such tool worth using would provide its results in some other form.

Jorpho wrote:

archive.org ought to cover a decent span of 1995 to 2006, and there's plenty of stuff from that time that never went offline. T […]
Show full quote

archive.org ought to cover a decent span of 1995 to 2006, and there's plenty of stuff from that time that never went offline. The old VGA charts from Tom's Hardware, for example.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/vga-charts-iii,730.html

enloop wrote:

The main purpose for this is to have a place where you can look up any piece of hardware and view all configurations and results for that particular build where you can compare and identify ideal setups according to your needs.

I guess it sounds nice, but there are many cases where there is no single "ideal" setup, or in which attempting to duplicate a particular "ideal" setup is a needless expense where something just short of ideal will work just as well.

Is reverse engineering/reconfiguring an old existing benchmark tool out of the question to redirect the results to a new/different website?

Why bother? Any such tool worth using would provide its results in some other form.

I don't think those type of results are what I'm looking for. I need raw data on specific calculations/whatever action that is being executed and I really don't care for the games' performance but for the CPU itself, max overclock w/ a stability level, etc- if I'm making any sense.

That reminds me -- back in the day there was a DUKEBENC.TXT file that someone maintained of Duke Nukem 3D benchmark results on various systems. The person who maintained it asked someone to take over and I volunteered, then maintained it for some months before handing it off to someone else. I never could find this text file in the version that I maintained or later--only a very old version from the original maintainer. I started a thread here awhile back and some people here helped try to find it, without luck. The only version anyone could find was this early version from the original maintainer with only a few results in it. Point being, it can be really hard to find stuff like this. 😉

enloop wrote:

I don't think those type of results are what I'm looking for. I need raw data on specific calculations/whatever action that is being executed and I really don't care for the games' performance but for the CPU itself, max overclock w/ a stability level, etc- if I'm making any sense.

...Not so much, no. The whole point of overclocking is to push hardware out of its specified range; one could not expect consistent results. I don't see how you would measure "stability level", either. You could try measuring CPU temperature, but then you have to start worrying about heat sink design, and airflow in the case, and the whole business with thermal paste.

Have you ever seen such "raw data on specific calculations/whatever action that is being executed" for any specific modern hardware?

And also, if you "really don't care for the games' performance", I guess you're just in this to make pretty boxes that collect dust..?

Jorpho wrote:

...Not so much, no. The whole point of overclocking is to push hardware out of its specified range; one could not expect consis […]
Show full quote

enloop wrote:

I don't think those type of results are what I'm looking for. I need raw data on specific calculations/whatever action that is being executed and I really don't care for the games' performance but for the CPU itself, max overclock w/ a stability level, etc- if I'm making any sense.

...Not so much, no. The whole point of overclocking is to push hardware out of its specified range; one could not expect consistent results. I don't see how you would measure "stability level", either. You could try measuring CPU temperature, but then you have to start worrying about heat sink design, and airflow in the case, and the whole business with thermal paste.

Have you ever seen such "raw data on specific calculations/whatever action that is being executed" for any specific modern hardware?

And also, if you "really don't care for the games' performance", I guess you're just in this to make pretty boxes that collect dust..?

This is close to what I'm referring to in terms of raw data: 7-zip benchmarks for over 60 CPUs
I know 'stability' isn't a real thing, but I define it as the relationship between temperature, number of errors, and number of calculation/speed which is what I'm looking for. And regarding what I prefer to do, I enjoy just looking for files, tuning the settings, and getting the system to be at its very best. Trial and error except when you're losing money.

To relate to games, it's the part where you collect all your hardware for your specific build, collecting its' latest drivers, learning of the systems' support, etc. It's the process right from the beginning until you actually get to play the game that is more fun/fulfilling. And once I know I'm done with it, I probably will jump to the next system and start from scratch again... Maybe some dust but I won't let it go to waste. I have its' uses.