Vinster

Here you go: #1 with 1 Core; http://www.hwbot.org/submission/2397007_lippokratis_hwbot_prime_celeron_m_520_1440.4_primes_per_second #1 with 2 Cores; http://www.hwbot.org/submission/2396297_u22_hwbot_prime_phenom_ii_x3_740_2273.29_primes_per_second but the more I dug the more I found. Thank you for the clarification in the rules section, Now that CPU-Z is a requirement as per the general rules then there are many non-compliant submissions. Including the #1 for 2 Cores. I didn't go through to many more as what I was finding was too inconsistent. Vin

I didn't look all that deep (other than a few searches here) but are there any plans on adding Rules to the HWBot Prime bench? looking at screenshots I am seeing a slew that don't have basic items like CPU-Z (an HWbot Standard) but without rules there is no saying if it's right or not. also looking at the validity I am also seeing people that have both Valid uploads and invalid uploads. and there are some invalid uploads in the Top10's. I haven't touched that bench yet as I don't know what makes it tick (and don't have proper rules) I don't want to waste my time with something that can get revoked for stupidity when-ever rules are added. I also propose that basic rules HAVE TO BE in place to allow any bench to be added to the Beta section. without that it's chaos, and a complete waste of everyone's time... I personally value mine. Vin

Great Work... I want to go buy a BD just to try it. Vin

lol...I had too as well... Vin

Thanks for fixing it. Vin

Winning....

Really? I remember the implementation of a Rig/HW as an enthusiast photo during Rev4... back in 2008 it would had been rev2 or 3... or did I miss a memo ... lol Thanks for looking in to it. Vin

Thank you

One of my Teammates 3DM03 Radeon 9000 Pro submission was flagged for not enough proof. it was originally submitted on Dec-2008, http://www.HWBOT.org/submission/797214_komadyret_3dmark03_radeon_9000_pro_2242_marks I looked at it and saw nothing wrong with it and reloaded the reported submission. i also noted that we couldn't get any added proof as the submission was 5 years old, and that member doesn't have the HW anymore. now it's also not getting it's deserved 2 HW points. it was a validated by Futuremark (but now 3DM03 is not longer supported) so the link is dead. for 2008 it was within the rules, can my teammate get those points back? thanks for looking. Vin

Btw, what epoxy did you use? wont it crack at or beyond -50? Vin

These would be condenders... http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835230013CVF'>http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835230013CVF or http:// http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835230013CVF and they are thin, under 30mm... so it could fit nicely in rectangular tubing.. Vin

I would had cut the heatpipes open to let the LN2 or acetone enter the pipes, but otherwise sweet work. I love it.... now for some numbers.... Vin

Like the others, thank you for all this effort, looks like I'll be retiring the paste I have been using for years... Old faithful AS5/Ceramique. Thanks a bunch Vin

great work Vin

I agree with this... also the guy who benched an 8800 in 2009 probably also didn't have access to as many FW's that are available today for tweaking... also better drivers... if they ran a 15x.xx driver, there were a lot of improvements in just that alone... OC'ing 3-6yrs ago was harder... Drivers change, FW's have changed better documentation on Volt Mods... back then you had to figure it out... now you just google it and you got it.... older HW has gotten easier... I still prefer Older is first... , I understand people changing to Method 1.. it does make sense... but the guy who did it first shouldn't lose points just because other ppl caught up 5 years later so I stick with my method 2 vote if it were to change. Vin

also used the wrong version of wPrime (Not 1.55)... they are a new team too... only 2 members.... Vin

Looking forward to seeing some pricing. Vin

Ya, but massman pointed out in the first page ppl can lower their clock after the fact before the screenie... will want to make ppl lie and it's impossible to enforce... I prefer the way it is now, Older date gets more points.... but if it changes, I'd prefer method 2. what will happen to all the ties in SP1M with folks that have 0.1 points? Vin

Nice... I want to try this on one of my spares now.... Thanks for the motivation... Vin

I like the thoughts, but I don't see any reason to change what has been working. Old benches shouldn't be removed for the sake of being old. Many ppl including myself only bench old HW due to the cost of the hobby... I won't ever own the latest and greatest anymore, it's just too costly. new benches are for new HW... If you want some separation, create a Legacy HW/Benchmark section, leave the points structure as it is, if I get an old CPU/GPU I want to be able to compete with the submissions from 5 years ago. I wouldn't want to lose that right, and if you take that away you'll alienate myself and many other members in my position. All hardware in existence have a place imo. don't take that away. Vin

I created an excel doc with a little code that puts together and sorts by product. only thing is I have to retrieve the user HW manually. is there an easy way I could retrieve each users data? right now it's a manual copy/paste. I'm willing to share my excel sheet if anyone is interested. Here is the output; http://www.411overkill.com/vin/ Vin

Thanks Massman, and thanks Devroush for explaining the way the library populates now, I didn't know it queried all the submissions every time I clicked on that button. I thought the table built up daily or weekly and just presented itself on request. Vin

I don't think so. but how else do you suggest to make it better? Vin

Can we revive this idea now that we have more coding help with the site? Vin

"Must use competition background: link" isn't a link... where do I find the backround?