Barton

Nice Run, III. Very impressive. Running stock at that!

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 ..

Not really on an DFI Infinity Ultra II board. Just a funny guy - or maybe not.

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

This is NOT a valid Super Pi 32M run. It needs to be moved to the super pi 1M category.

He's NOT participating in the HWBot rankings, but at the time this is typed, 01-17-2011, the ranking page shows that he HAS received points for this submission. That needs to be corrected.

Verification is 404.

The validation image does not meet the requirements for a valid Super Pi submission. It fails to show the version of Super Pi used and cuts off the bottom of the validation for the run. Moreover it does not include the required CPUZ screenies. That plus the fact that the member received points for the submission even when the page states that he does NOT participate in the rankings needs to be corrected.

Athlon 64 3200+ Winchester Pi Fast points were awarded to M.Beier even though he chose NOT to participate in the HW Bot rankings. Shouldn't those points be awarded instead to those members below him who did choose to participate in the rankings? See both of the web pages linked below: http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/athlon_64_3200_winchester?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=6&manufacturer=amd&hardwareTypeId=CPU_263&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/593396_m.beier_pifast_athlon_64_3200_winchester_43.34_sec ========================================================================================= The same user, M.Beir's Super Pi 32M time was NOT to have participated in the rankings, but also received points. http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/593397_m.beier_superpi_32m_athlon_64_3200_winchester_26min_14sec_0ms http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/athlon_64_3200_winchester?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=7&manufacturer=amd&hardwareTypeId=CPU_263&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks The above link show the points it received that it shouldn't have. Anyway, it needs to be corrected, too. ..

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.hwbot.org/community/submission/908550_ocer_superpi_athlon_64_3200_winchester_29sec_0ms

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/athlon_64_3200_venice_s939?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=3&manufacturer=amd&hardwareTypeId=CPU_1119&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks ..

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

Time shown in the verification image appears to be 42.88; Not 42.55.

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.

Would one of the mods check this please?

One should have been to 1-20 and the other to 21-40 of the Super Pi rankings. Try this. Go to the Super Pi 1M ranking page manually. Then, ... Take a look at #12 and then go to the next page and look at #21.

I believe the submission was for 27.078 sec. That's the correct score and how I recall submitting it. That is, I did submit it with the zero to start with. The bot seems to drop those. When I originally looked at the two pages, it was only on the second page and not on the first one. It also appeared that there were duplicate entries on pages one and two. Not just my score, but others. Time to go back and check that. Yep, that's still the case. Please compare ALL the entries on pages one and two. Not just mine. See who is #12 and 21 for example... There could be others, too. Something doesn't look right to me. Do you see it or is it just me? http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/opteron_144_90nm?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=3&manufacturer=amd&hardwareTypeId=CPU_710&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks'>http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/opteron_144_90nm?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=3&manufacturer=amd&hardwareTypeId=CPU_710&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks Compare with: http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/opteron_144_90nm?tab=2drankings#/manufacturer.rankings.do?applicationId=3&manufacturer=amd&hardwareTypeId=CPU_710&hardwareType=CPU&tabid=cpubenchmarks

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.

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...

Is there no verification at all for this entry?

Good addition. We'll look forward to it.

If there is not yet a way to search results for say the fastest Super Pi 1M time on a) perhaps a S478 P4 Northwood of any and all speeds in a single search or b) an AMD Turion S754 chip of any and all speeds, for example, or c) the fastest Wprime 1024 times on any S939 processor, for yet another example, You get the idea... Please consider this a request to add that capability if we don't know have it. =================================================================== If the capability to do searches similar to the examples above already exists would you tell me how to do so? ..

Good job, teams of all nations. You did well. Let's do it again sometime. ;>)

Looks like this one needs to be resubmitted if it is for the December 2010 competition. It appears to be missing the required HW Bot background that should be present for all submissions in that competition. Comment assumes it is submitted as part of the contest and not as an ordinary submission for ordinary HW Bot points... http://www.hwbot.org/community/submission/1095486_skydec_superpi_32m_pentium_3_1.4ghz_1h_9min_39sec_920ms?tab=more http://www.hwbot.org/competition/hoc_dec10

This is not the only one with problems. Check the most recent forum post about problems in the E6750 WPrime 32m lists. It appears to have problems, too. Duplicate entries in more than one instance... ...