Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

_mat_

Members
  • Posts

    1016
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    33

_mat_ last won the day on August 29 2020

_mat_ had the most liked content!

About _mat_

Converted

  • Location
    AUSTRIA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

_mat_'s Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare

Recent Badges

575

Reputation

  1. Avx vnni is an interesting compromise for when the e cores are enabled, That's for deep learning mostly, so not really that much of use for general purpose benchmarks. Anyways, just wanted to point out that disabling E cores has a substantial impact on CPU.
  2. You could import the root certificates manually. My new certificate was issued by SSL.com: https://www.ssl.com/article/ssl-com-root-certificates/ You can also export it from your Windows 7 and import to your Server 2012.
  3. It's a certificate issue for sure (if the install itself is indeed correct). The root certificates need to be updated. I think the system has to be on the internet as well to really update them. It's tedious, I know. I'm working on a fix that does not rely on digital signatures for verification of file tampering. It's not a good idea, because that's exactly what these signatures are for. But I will code a fallback for Windows 7 only. It's in the pipeline, although right now I am focusing on Alder Lake. Edit: You can use BM 0.10.7.2 with Windows 7. It uses my old digital certificate, which was still listed even in very old Windows 7 versions.
  4. You can't draw the line from BenchMate to other benchmarks. It's an indication that certain timers like QPC might be alright, but that really depends on what the other benchmark is using and what BenchMate needs to do to make your benching as easy and bulletproof as possible. For example the legacy 3DMark's use mostly GetTickCount and timeGetTime. Both are really unstable in comparison to modern time measurement methods. And both of these methods are completely avoided when using BenchMate and a more appropriate timer will be injected instead (and measured against 2 other time methods directly implemented via hardware in my driver). Systeminfo doesn't do any timer evaluation on legacy 3DMarks, if I remember correctly. The time measurements are directly inside the benchmark. The newer ones seem to have additional checks, but no idea what and where.
  5. No, it's not a big deal, I can do it. But I rather not if it's not absolutely necessary. I think the workflow would be much cleaner and less confusing for newcomers without the redundancy. But if a decision is made to continue with mandatory CPU-Z for BM validated scores, I can add a helper to enforce it. I have some ideas for that.
  6. I'm up for it! ❤️
  7. Nobody says to throw out legacy or ban XP for legacy. Please read the posts. It's discussed: * if scores that already use BenchMate no longer need redundant CPU-Z windows * if unreleased platforms should no longer be able to use XP * how to make the bot more accessible for new users and not overcomplicate the rules
  8. It's about Alder Lake and running benchmarks on an OS that was not designed for modern platforms. I totally agree with Roman because we don't know shit about the validity of these scores, the timers used or even how stable RTC or the implementations of RTC on a modern platform is. The only solution I can think of for legacy OS would be a separate piece of hardware with a crystal that measures the time independently of the untested OS/platform timer. To just believe that scores are not significantly skewed is very "unscientific" and should not be the standard we measure our work with.
  9. As for the CPU-Z redundancy, I really hope we can make at least a small step here. If you already bench with BM you are already doing much more work to prove that you are not trying to fark the system and willingly take the (relatively small) impact of providing data during the run instead of afterwards. We all know that sensor information after the run can be far away from the truth, yet we take it as a baseline for all other scores. That's a thing of the past when we had no other tool at our disposal. I thought about this for a while a few days ago and to me it feels like the right approach would be to turn the tables and let the odd scores do the work instead of putting it onto 99% of the others. We could flag scores that are out of line as "waiting for proof" and let the bencher rerun to bring additional proof so the score can be properly understood. PS: I'm all for taking the step with Alder Lake of course.
  10. Having more time now to answer properly. I understand the problems that I am just one guy keeping the main part alive. I do have a team, two guys doing web stuff for the validation platform (still unreleased and currently on ice due to other work arrangements we need to finance our lives) and one graphics designer. But the truth is that all you can currently see, the win application, was made by myself. For now at least. I don't like that at all and yes, it's risky. But so is HWiNFO (Martin, 1 guy) and CPU-Z (Franck, 1 guy). HWBOT itself was basically coded by one guy as well. If you don't have the money for redundancy, you have to take the risk. That said, early on when Roman decided to buy HWBOT we got in touch and talked about the opportunity for a cooperation or maybe even more so there is no form of competition for an already difficult niché. It did not work out at the time (guess Roman was busy, it happens), but I am still up for an official cooperation to bring overclocking and benching to a whole new level and to even out the odds that BenchMate could die from one day to the next. In any case, my will leaves the source code of the software to Splave. I sincerely believe that he would know what to do with it.
  11. I was asked to make the result window smaller to fit the CPU-Z windows. We can make it as big as needed!
  12. It was released btw and the error is now fixed: https://benchmate.org
  13. Important update! Please redownload and reinstall the latest version if you have problems! Download: https://benchmate.org/ Changelog: https://benchmate.org/changelog/0.10.8 Support: https://www.patreon.com/benchmate I have fixed several bugs with Windows 7 and 8.1. The driver could not be installed on these systems due to major limitations on these legacy OS versions. Please beware that you might not be able to run BenchMate on Windows 7 if you don't have the latest updates installed. Especially old ass root certificates will not work with my new EV certificate. I had to install IE11 to make the file validation work on all ends. It's really hard to get this working in 2021. I recommend the Winfuture Update Pack, January 2020. I also found a problem with PYPrime's validation of module dependencies and some harmless but annoying workload crashes on 64 bit.
×
×
  • Create New...