Submission & member moderation

I was a little to hasty and missed entering the time in the correct field can some one help me correct this?

There is no image to "prove" the Wprime time submitted. The checksum says it is "invalid". Therefore, it should be blocked or removed, shouldn't it? http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/678429_daidalos_wprime_1024m_athlon_64_3500_newcastle_38min_53sec_110ms?tab=more

I'm a little confused about how are multi gpu classified. If you sumbit a score with let's say, a 5970 (2 cores) and a 5870 (1 core) how do you classify that? 3 5870, 2 5970 or 2 5870? Thanks in advance for the clarification.

Hi guys. I want add my score to the Memory Clock, but I have a few questions before do it. 1- What should contain the screen shot? I try to read the rules but don't show any info. 2- The benchmark score is the RAM clock in the BIOS right? i.e. 800MHz...1000MHz and not the dual channel clock...1600MHZ...2000MHz 3- In memory info, Do i need write the default RAM info? or the overclock settings

hello, I have several questions: -How do you change a team captain? -How does the reporting of validation disabled? I noticed that some of my scores are downgraded, and it is not always justified. Now I try to correct my mistakes. For cons, I see no derating when I signal a problem, often function active x enabled. And how do you get when you can not prove the validity of the score, some have been doing long ago, even posted recently? "I think to activate the active x, this is not always clear: eg 1 of 3Dmark 2003 with a GTX 570 has enabled the physicx! thanking you

How can i submit a result with an Unknown cpu? Can u add this ? --> Intel Core 2 Solo U3500 I don't know if this is the correct section...I hope so! thanks Palmino89

I submitted a result of 2001 which does not appear in the print resulução, but also got into the validation file that can be opened for anyone to see the whole setup! I do not understand why in my case this is not enough and other results that have already submitted enough! No longer to validate the site's futurmark not tucked the link but the file that can open in 3DMark01 and do submit and when he asks if I agree, they go to are detailed, it's all setting Link to the score: http://hwbot.org/community/submission/2116250_billy_the_kid_3dmark2001_se_2x_geforce_gtx_275_132545_marks?tab=info

Here's another one to move. This looks like a Venice processor. It is not a NewCastle. If so, it is submitted to the wrong category. It should be moved to the A64 Athlon 3500+ Venice (939) category. See the CPUZ image submitted with the Benchmark. http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/787242_agrasgr_wprime_1024m_athlon_64_3500_newcastle_34min_41sec_470ms?tab=more

This is NOT a valid entry. The PiFast screenshot shows "Errors In Computation". Accordingly, under the rules, it should be removed. http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/713353_svikens_pifast_athlon_64_6000_x2_33.89_sec Open up the Pi Fast Screenshot and take a look at it. Don't know if we can link to screenshots, if so, here it is: http://www.hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=97910&thumb=false&iehack=.jpg ..

Looks like this is a Brisbane processor. Need to move it to that category? Isn't this category for Windsor Processors? http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/959802_sanders_cpu_z_athlon_64_6000_x2_3565.19_mhz?tab=info

This is NOT a valid Super Pi 32M run. It needs to be moved to the super pi 1M category. Never mind. The offending submission appears to have been removed or moved to the proper category. http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/2111693_aleslammer_superpi_32m_athlon_xp_2700_1min_9sec_703ms?tab=info

i have a problem with a submited score: http://hwbot.org/community/submission/2097731_evosia_3dmark11___performance_radeon_hd_5870_5432_marks&popup=true the hwbot crew need more proof. like it tell on this screen shot but like you can see in the Verification URL, this score was made with the 1.0.0 version of 3DM 2011 (the only one version avaible at this moment, and if I remember correctly, the patch 1.1 was released nearly of December 20 and I was doing this score on 16 like you can see on the verification URL, so have the fps breakdown was impossible at that time). and it's impossible to edit a score made with an other version of 3DM11 for showing it on…

Why does Jort in 17th place receive 5 points for his time of 27.700 receive more points (5.0) than does mufin89 in 16th place who has a time of 27.547 (4.7)? Likewise, why does T_M in 18th place with a time of 27.800 receive more points (4.8) than mufin89 in 16th place who receives only 4.7 points. Moreover, why are some of the entries that appear toward the bottom of the first page for this bench also reappear on the top of the second page of submissions for the bench, and in some cases, receive points for both entries on both pages? See duplicate times for T_M, S_A_V, and slash17 on both pages, for example... http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/ath…

This Super Pi 1M submission for the 939 Athlon 64 3200+ class was run on an old version of Super Pi that did not show the seconds. Therefore the time needs to be corrected to read 30.999 seconds rather than the present 30.000 seconds. http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/615373_unrealneo_superpi_athlon_64_3200_winchester_30sec_0ms The same is also true for these other ".000" submissions in the 939 Athlon 64 3200+ Winchester class: http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/1028233_trans_am_superpi_athlon_64_3200_winchester_31sec_0ms http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/577632_aclos3_superpi_athlon_64_3200_winchester_32sec_0ms http://www.hw…

Shouldn't this member get points for his submission? His original submission was for 42.55 and it was in error. It should have been for 42.88 which is what his screenshot shows. When a mod changed the score to correct it, his points seem to have disappeared. http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/611908_bkalaz_pifast_athlon_64_3500_venice_42.88_sec

Mods, please take a look at the page 1 & 2 rankings for Super Pi 1M for the A64 3500+ Venice processor. Entries on those two pages are out of order and may have duplications. http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/athlon_64_3500_venice?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=3&manufacturer=amd&hardwareTypeId=CPU_257&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks This is not the first time it has happened something appears badly wrong with the HWBot data base. This seems to happen most often with the Super Pi 1M benchmark.

So I've got some IGP scores here on HWBOT that were taken down due to insufficient verification for rankings. It demands GPU-Z in the screenshot, which hangs up my 890GX board if I have more than two CPU-Z windows open. NOT ONLY this, but at the time (middle of may), GPU-Z didn't even show anything useful, and skewed CPU-Z clocks as well as made the system pretty unresponsive. See here: http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/3772/3004igp3dmark06.png and here (06): http://www.hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=374173&thumb=false&iehack=.jpg http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/996751_beepbeep2_3dmark06_radeon_hd_4290_3307_marks (Vantage): http://…

Here's another one where the database for listings 1-20 is messed up. It has duplicate entries by listed in two or more places for 1-20. Please look at the first two (2) pages of entries very carefully. If you do the problem should be obvious. It is the same type of problem encountered before. Let me know if you see the problem. If not I'll try to explain it more clearly. http://www.hwbot.org/rankings/benchmark/superpi/rankings?start=9&hardwareTypeId=CPU_710 .. For example, look for my time. Note that it is not on page one, but only on page two. Shouldn't it be on page one? 27.078 secs for Super Pi 1M.

I made a mistake and chose the wrong videocard in my profile, a HD5970 when it should have been the HD6970. I made the changes in my profile to correct this but the additional score is still there. http://hwbot.org/community/submission/2100963_ Can you fix this? Thank You.

I went to submit a wPrime32 run about an hour ago and there is no drop down for me to enter the number of cores on my cpu (555BE unlocked to 4). I submitted the score, but then deleted it. I figured it would be best to take it down until clarification is found on this. As it is right now; there is no way to indicate the number of cores on the submission page.

There appears to be no verification at all for this entry: http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/511186_pt1t_superpi_32m_opteron_144_90nm_24min_30sec_870ms Never mind. Heard that verification may have been lost somehow somewhere...

I have noticed a "problem" in the way HWBot separates the 2 diferent models of 550s, for those who don't know, the "old" C2 revision 550s were Black Editions, they hardly pass 4GHz stable (for benching) under air cooling and they need a lot o voltage (easly over 1,5-1,55v) to acomplish that. On the other way, the "new" C3 550s (wich aren't black edition) need little voltage to reach 4GHz (arround 1,45v or even less) even on stock cooling. This differences makes a problem the time we try to score, for example, in WPrime, where an old C2 550 has a hard time trying to be stable at 4GHz and a C3 550 easly run the bench with stock cooling at the same clock, there's no need to…

I was under the impression I had to post my scores under 6970. Till I reread the rules and seen I have to post my scores under 6950. Now my subs are flagged, what do I do to rectify this problem?

I made a couple of WPrime 32 submissions today only to have it show that my AMD Phenom 550be 3.1 gtz processor as an intell cpu. why does it report the wrong processor? CPU-Z shows it correctly on my desktop.

Hi everyone! While testing for hwbot CC2010 i got this strange latency reading, must be a bug of some sort: I have the save from that run if needed.