Maxi

I'm simply pointing out that your reference to the scores in the DB may not be the whole story, many people do bench their 24/7 systems. Once again, I would ask you to try benching wPrime under Vista before you jump to any conclusions.

Sure the one's who run a true benching OS, not their daily driver posting rig. I'm not talking tweaks here either, just a clean properly installed benching OS. Try it for yourself before you attempt to throw out everyone elses scores.

I think the staff can talk about re-wording that particular report, you're not the first to react that way to it. I'd also like to remind everyone that english is a second language for the primary coder of hwbot, please remember that before getting too irritated about wording. That is exactly what happens in most cases (insufficient verification), the score is flagged and does not earn points until things are clarified.

You are not the first person to jump to this conclusion. If you read carefully, the text includes the word 'might'. When a result comes into the DB that looks out of place (like yours does) it's not that hard to see how this might happen. If the score is legit in your eyes, you have every opportunity to talk with the moderators about it, doing so in a civil manner will almost always help your cause. If there is a change that needs to be made in the status of a result, hwbot will make every effort to reach the correct decision.

You reported yourself on the 11th saying 'definitely bugged!!!', then it appears you edited the result on the 16th with a new total and ORB URL. The problem was you reporting your own score saying it was bugged, that's where the confusion arose. You also had other results in the DB that were bugged and repoted by yourself. If you have a bugged run please do not submit it and if you do, you may delete it yourself - there is no need to get a moderator involved in many instances. I missed the edit info when moderating this particular result, my mistake. It has now been verified.

hwbot does not prevent the use of different OS versions...aside from the non-Windows OS. Bench away.

No they are useful for every aspect of comparison, if you think a score can be compared accurately without them you have no business in competetive benching. I am going to say this one more time, and this is not directed at any one person, stop pushing. Other people and teams have had scores blocked for missing details and hwbot is not going to make an exception for jmax. It is best if you learn from this experience and move on. Save your result files, take proper screen shots, you'll feel better about posting your benchmarks and so will everyone who looks at them.

We are not going to play this game, let it be enough that you understand hwbot has the final say and all moderation may have an element of discretion involved. It really is in your best interest to move on, of course that's up to you, I'm just giving you some friendly advice

That is really only applicable when a score does not earn globals, we are typically more lenient with those scores because there is less at stake and they are usually a more casual user of hwbot. We are not out to alienate users of hwbot, that is why there is some leeway employed with certain scores. When it comes to results which earn a higher rank, it is only normal they meet the standards every serious bencher expects.

Even if we did this, if anyone comes along in the future and reports these scores they will be blocked again. Why take that risk? I'd suggest you just re-bench, make sure the screen shots are correct and get back to business.

Scores have been being moderated for missing test details for some time, this is NOT a new policy. Again, you can post with an ORB link or a screen shot, the screen shot must have the same information available as the ORB link and that includes the individual test details as written in hwbot rules. When you search the ORB or hwbot and compare scores, what is the reason? Why do you do it? So you can assess the performance of your system against others - without the test details that comparison becomes almost meaningless. It is also nearly impossible to determine if the result is bugged or manipulated in some fashion. Being an experienced bencher I'm sure you understand this. It's best to move on and chalk this up to experience, hwbot will not be altering it's rules to disregard the test details now or in the future.

hwbot has never allowed this, I don't think we will start now but of course it's up to the crew to decide in this case.

hwbot accepts a valid ORB link or a screen shot. The main components of an ORB link include processor type & clock speed, graphics type, individual test details & benchmark settings. A screen shot must include all of the same information. It's a problem with FM on some platforms. Double check your screen shots, you don't want to be wasting bench time and nitro.

It comes from the database design, basically mirroring Super Pi.

LOL @ Gautam!

Why not run the test again? It's not like you're on LN2 or anything.

You should also remove it from the ORB, making results which are obviously bugged public here or on the ORB isn't the best idea.

3DMark 03 is very inconsistent these days, it cannot handle modern hardware. This became very evident when similar R700 results started popping up. It was shown then to be a common bug and not the result of benchmark manipulation. Those results are accepted @ hwbot, I see no reason why this would be any different.

The cap was bumped up recently with the release of newer storage solutions. Software ramdisk = software, Acard Ram disk = hardware. There is a distinct difference between the two. This score is 100% OK from hwbot perspective.

@ Stelaras we need more verification to unblock that score, we'll leave it up to you what form that will take. @ TASOS - Team moderators may not reverse a block, because it has already been reviewed/moderated by a hwbot crew member. The alert at least lets you know a score has been moderated.

Actually it's not, memory clocks make all the difference on bandwidth starved cards, the quad also factors in here. Btw you mixed up your SM 2.0 numbers with his.

Images in sigs do not work on OCF. Are you trying to get them to work somewhere else?

Removing the cap was the wrong step for FM to take, it should have been raised - not removed.

Thanks for sharing hipro

Hi Sergey, Can you explain why the formatting of the screen shots is nearly identical as well? I can understand hardware performing similarly, but it is highly unlikely two different users will format their screen shots the same way. Thanks, maxi