Submission & member moderation

The difference inbetween the 32bit and 64bit athlons is sometimes massive. The rankings though, don't all have the accurate 64bit markings on there CPU, this mostly applys to the Sempron catogory. There are scores "verified as correct by a moderator" that clearly say x86-64 in the screenshot, and are under the 32bit rankings. Personally i know of a few scores that are AM2 as well and still fall under the old 64 or stock scores, thus pushing olderhardware out of there own rankings. Is anything planned for AM2 ranking alone, so that the old ranking for Sempron and Athlon64 have there own space, having memory run near twice as fast as the old stuff it really improves scores…

Please do not submit results yet. wPrime will have a 'hwbot gui' and we are still testing it. We are periodically removing all results now. Sorry for the confusion.

Having an overall user score totaling all of a users accomplishments is good, but maybe it may be good to also total the points from only the users top benchmark in each benchmark, to facilitate competing within the benchmarks rather than only running loads of benchmarks. For example I am in 271'st place with 14.2 points, but I could easily raise that just by benchmarking everything I lay my hands on. To raise my personal score I would have no issue with that, but it would be nice to know my score based on my top results only. Oh, and you'll notice my X1600XT's in aquamark are referred to as only being one card in the signature image generator. I assume…

Hi guys I was browsing the card hall of fame and noticed my #1 single X1900 XTX score only earned 10 points, yet 2nd place has 19.9 points and 3rd 16.3 Is this normal due to some aspect of the algorithm?

Hi guys, Saw this one tonight, wrong resolution. It's right in the screen cap http://www.hwbot.org/results.image.do?resultId=557850 Thanks

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=550739 3500+ with stepping "CAA2C" (as per the entry description) are clawhammer (not newcastle), but not identified by CPU-Z as such until a later version than which was used in this entry. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=caa2c&meta= Recommend moving to Clawhammer results...

Hi, this resultat is posted as singel card but is sli: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=525050 cheers conman

Hi. I really think these are SLI scores, but have come up in the single card category, knocking my rankings down, which is why I noticed them. I know i`m not impartial on this one, but these submissions shouldnt be in the same category. They`ve been confirmed by a mod as correct, but I think they deserve a 2nd look http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=505538 Opto175 @ 2640 and 7800GTX512 @ 620/900 (3D03, 35.5K) http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=506577 AMD 4800+ @ 3264 and 7800GTX512 624/895 (3D05, 16.5K) http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=556251 Opto175 @ 2640 and 7800GTX512 @ 620/900 (3D05, 14.5K) Thanks, Kenny

I posted up my 3500+ Clawhammer result not realising i needed to specify "Clawhammer" so it was initially recorded as a "Newcastle". I've now editted my entry to be Clawhammer, which will give me #1 1M for that core, but it's still listed as #3 Newcastle 1M. Is it just a lag between me changing it and the site being updated?

The user mentioned on the thread title ( Sveinbra - Xtremesystems team ) has posted some scores with his POV SLI 7800GT as Single Card.

I was checking the results for the Presler 950 CPUZ scores and something didn't look right. I always thought I had the second highest but there were 3 ahead of me. I go to checking the validation links and it turns out the first place one is listed as 6.4ghz when in reality it is 4.6ghz, the third place entry is actually a Presler 960 not a 950. Below is a copy/paste of the listing. Arctic Ice's Pentium 4 'D' 950 6411.44mhz 6411.44 (this one is actually 4.6ghz) Entsafter's Pentium 4 'D' 950 5991.65mhz 5991.65 PcCI2iminal's Pentium 4 'D' 950 5921mhz 5921.00 (this one is a 960 not a 950) boshuter's Pentium 4 'D' 950 5617.63mhz 5617.63 I hope …

Hi guys, One I noticed earlier today, the top score is CF and maybe the 2nd as well. Over 20K ATI single is not possible in '05 by a long shot

Just finished the last entries at 09/09 22h30. It took me about two days to check every single entrie in the 32M challenge, but finally the database is ok. # [ SuperPi 32m ] (417 results) : 09/09/06 22h30 # [ PiFast ] (104 results) : 10/09/06 14h30 Next up: SiSandra

For reporting a big bunch of wrongly matched results and providing good explanations for them. We appreciate it.

Many of them got blocked, including the entire previous top 20. Wrong program versions and/or wrong ways to run them. The accepted versions of the benchmarks in hwbot can be found from the first forum posts of the ranking threads. With the pifast package comes a bat-file and the program should be run with that. Users updating online must search the instructions from some other team's forums for now. Sorry for the confusion. We are planning on making some hwbot benchmarking instructions to website later.

We do understand the reasons behind FM removing Conroe/Merom results from ORB. hwbot decidedly uses the other route. Many of the Conroe and Merom entries now have broken verification links. hwbot makes an exception to its new moderation procedures and will not be blocking these. We hope that from now on submissions with unreleased hw include screenshot verification links.