Hyperhorn

Voted 50 € Had to spend about 120 € just at the customs today and had some other expenses lately, so I just did sent out a lower amount today. But anyway it is at least *something* and it wasn´t the last time either ...

@Hwbot staff: I´m pretty sure you´re rolling your eyes about some comments here, but no matter how annoying it seems, please keep in mind that if people are fighting for something it also means they appreciate or even love it. @Folks: Fighting in a metaphorical sense is ok, fighting in the strict sense of the word not. @Hwbot staff (again): If you say hardware sharing is a major problem, do you mean the amount of reported scores due to hardware sharing claims is borderline (not able to check quantity-wise) or do you mean the cases where you removed scores because of hardware sharing are way too much (for a healthy competition) or do you mean that the results YOU think are based on hardware sharing, but can´t prove it are spreaded too much? A thing I´m really confused about: Why do you try to make something like hardware sharing which is hard to control non-beneficial, if you try to found a new league which is based so much on trust only? I see a major problem regarding non-aircooled setups, but pics including aircooling only and downclocking for screenshots. In the past I heard from staff members, that own cooling categories/leagues will not be succesful, because you can´t control it. I can also remember you refused the idea of a lowclock/fixed-clock competition category/league, because down-clocking is so easy. (reminder: Super Pi 32M @ H55 mini-itx - allegations were there, just a few weeks ago) While I´m a big fan of fixed-clock competitions I think you had a valid point here. Ok, I know maybe we shouldn´t care about it because it is the beginner`s league, but I have a feeling that just because of this reason (WR scores are watched by thousands, 38th best score in a hardware category obviously by a few - and those might not have the experience to detect weird things) it will be less controllable. ...and if somebody deserves a by-the-book-competition then who else, but the beginners? Also what do you think about stricter punishments for UFL (and/or XOL) members? Quote of an older text I wrote about it, but never recieved feedback (Notice "Pros" means UFL (and/or XOL) members now): I mean the reason why hardware sharing is so attractive nowadays is connected to the rev. 3 scaling based on popularity. As you know I never declared against rev. 3 (but tried to give some input about fine-tuning and issues which might happen, sadly I did not have the problem hardware sharing in mind back then) and I will not do about rev. 4 either, but closing loopholes on one side, but create new ones on the other is a great danger if it might be necessary to push rev. 5 forward to close new (old) loopholes.

1. Why are people claiming excessive hardware sharing would benefit the team? I don´t know if I am living in a parallel universe, but as a team capitain of the most active hwbot team all I can say is, that excessive hardware sharing is not an easy way to climb up the ranking, but a very dumb idea whicht might lead to a team ban. So if you want to damage and annihilate a team - go on with sharing and be happy about your "achievement" when the time has come. 2. Why do some guys bring up the example "10 GHz i7-980X + 4x GTX 480 @ 2.000/2.000 MHz will be shared and rule the ranking" (yeah, as you might notice I changed the achievable frequencies to a insolent level, so it´s more frightening, isn´t it?) again and again and again? Does this happen/did it ever happen? Did I miss the super-duper-cherry-picked cheater-team you´re talking about? Can you atleast provide a link to the hwbot news about the ban of such a team or - in case hwbot staff didn`t notice what you clever conspiracy theorists already noticed - provide a dozen of links to the mentioned shared scores based on super-duper-cherry-picked hardware? No? Ok, then please stop inflame people`s opinions with ridiculous horror scenarios ... 3. Live competitions should not have an impact on any Hwbot ranking. Promote it, link to it, upload a tons of pictures, but please do not let it influence the ranking. May I remind you that there are cases of live competitions, where the competition holder wasn´t even able to count the points together and called the wrong winner? Or may I remind you, that there were competitions, where the winner did even offend against official hwbot rules because "it wasn´t against the explicit rules of the competition"? I remember even hwbot staff members offered criticism about it, so please think about it again if external (= supervised by a partner, but not Hwbot!) events should have influence on the hwbot rankings. 4. What about not "making hardware sharing non-beneficial" but "making hardware sharing less beneficial, but still encouraging the grinders on 2nd/3rd/4th etc place"? What do you think about a scalable formula which reduces the points added for the team ranking, but doesn´t work like a binary system (simplified: hero or zero). If the winner contributes all points, could #2 mabye contribute 50 % and #3 25 % etc.? You could even limit the maximal amount, e.g. 1/3 of all points available in the specific hardware category or link the percentage to the points gathered by the team`s #1 in this category. So if your #1 gets 10 points, #2 results can only add 5 points to the team result, but if #1 gets 20 points, #2 can add 10 points already. There are a lot of possibilites here to find a balanced middle course. Hardware sharing is a problem, but as already explained by others it is rather a problem on individual basis not on a team basis (reason included in 1. - read again if necessary) 5. Is it possible to get a own sub-forum for team captains and hwbot staff only? Everytime there´s a new thread about major changes it gets interrupted by offtopic spam or whiners, who seems to not even understand the topic they`re whining about and afterwards it is very difficult to get back to a respectful and constructive discussion. The team captains do represent their team, so they really know what`s going on there. In this sub-forum they could summarize the feedback they get from their team members and act as a speaking trumpet (notice: There are intelligent team members who talk a lot about Hwbot in their own team forums, but are not able to express their thoughts in English - just an example). Plus you could create votings there and the team captains would act like electors of their individual communities/teams: This way you could even ensure that smaller teams attract attention. This does not(!) mean team captains should tell Hwbot staff what to do, but it might solve the problem about less popular votings (team captains have to be interested in all hwbot-related, otherwise they don´t deserve their status) and back-up the staff decissions, especially when it comes to fine tuning issues. Sub-forum can be public (but read-only for non-captains obviously) if the remaining team members want it to be public IMHO.

Ok, so someone - let's say it was in July 2010 for better imagination - recieves a score from a well-known overclocker, is publishing it at an online competition and gets banned from Hwbot for a year and someone else steals a score from a well-known overclocker after the whole community was going mad about this fictional *cough* score sharing just a few weeks ago, is publishing it at hwbot directly and NOTHING happens anymore? All Fool's day twice this year? Edit: That's exactly the reason why I tag every score I upload somewhere - to prevent unnecessary things going to happen

Hi MAFRI, sorry for the late answer. The tool I used for this result is MSI Afterburner, but it's not the only one you can use.

Congrats for establishing a WR in Super Pi 16K/980X@1 Core/2:6 divider/Win 7/uploaded on Wednesday category! Did you prepare backup scores of your backups scores for my backup scores of my backup scores done with LHe aleady? In this case let me tell you: Nice score, but I might have sth. up on my sleeve. btw whatever you will put up next - it´s NOT FAIR, because my grandma can´t be #1 anymore then - dirty cherry-picker.

I would like to agree, but actually I like tweaks, magic or not. So you started 12 years ago to bench 3DMark 2001 (released 2001) and Aquamark 3 (released 2003)? Maybe you overclocked your daily routine or it is connected to a so you can´t remember exactly? j/k

Interesting BIOS version Awesome result, CPU, UCLK, RAM on the edge - perfect match!

Do me a favor George and push it as hard as you can! I know you can do it better!

Perfect result, congrats! :ws:

Nice RAM! I like the mounting of the 2nd container.

All in all I´m fine with the sharing rules atm. If >I< had to decide about the CPU sharing in 3D benchmarks and could ensure no CPU will be ever shared again (= supposition only) I think I would not allow sharing. But it is allowed right now and I can´t see a stunning domination of a team caused by this rule. Even if there would be THE uber-chip out there (7 GHz @ 3D i7-980X or so ) it will degrade or die after 5, 10 or even 50 LN2-sessions and out-performed by a new chip generation. So excessive sharing might boost a team/group of users in the rankings, but in the long-term they would need an almost infinite source for golden cherries. But if that happens, I see no reason why you shouldn´t be able to get 5,10 oer 20 of these kind of CPUs as you will need powerful insider-contacts or a truckload of money and at this stage just a sharing rule will not bring brack "the balance". btw 1Day, long time no see

I shouldn´t just look at the top scores for max freq. results, thx for the link. Kudos to Blind! I remember his Celeron D 352 results now. It´s really ironic that these CPUs are FSB-limited at > 8 GHz. Certainly it´s an interesting find about the PSU factor - I will keep my faithful OP1000 for sure.

Wow, excellent result! At first it peeved me that I´ve lost a place in the 32M ranking, but now I noticed it´s because of this result and I have a smile on my face. What are the highest frequencies 32M finished at you know about? At Hwbot it seems to be 7,501 MHz for Pentium 4 Cedar Mill and 7,680 MHz for Celeron Cedar Mill achieved by a lunatic guy.

Sick FSB/RAM combination CR 1T? (Memset shows 2T)

It`s retail, baby! Thanks for showing this one and Congrats.

The most ridiculous thing is, that so many of the members here perform illegitimate RMAs for Intel-CPUs but pretend to care about the legal status of an ES-CPU - sanctimoniousness at its best. And FYI if Intel sends you or me an ES-CPU for testing purposes, they want to get the CPU tested. "Owning" on a lawful basis does not have anything to do with Hwbot, otherwise we would upload attachements of bills and notarially certified deeds of ownership. What Hwbot wants, is, that your whole team doesn`t benefit from a single CPU by distributing it to every member. So "Owning" is not "Having access to" is not "Using for Hwbot scores" ... btw 6.6 GHz @ AM3 + 6.55 GHz @ Pifast done with retail i7-980X: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=253332 Some further thoughts about ES CPUs I placed here already: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3927200&postcount=116 --> Idealism and being able to hold a competition are two total different things. Same goes for many, many (cheap OEM) CPUs, which were never released officially. *cough* E8700 *cough* @hipro/hiwa: Sure you`re still on topic?

Ticket ID: 882 Priority: Low I want to ask you to create a category for the Athlon II X2 260u with 1.8 GHz (locked/max. multi = 9) and 25 Watt TDP.\r\n\r\nI`ve made a validation, but it was - as annoying as usual - rejected: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1179163\r\nSo I also made a picture to proove, I´ve benched this CPU - that`s how it looks like: http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=img_1373_hyperhorn_9009zxd.jpg\r\nMore specs, e.g. here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Phenom_microprocessors

CPU-Z validator doesn`t want to reconize my validations these days. I`ve uploaded several cvf-files done with different AMD CPUs and setups and they were all rejected without a single exception. Another example: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1145535 As long Hwbot doesn`t decide to delete ALL rejected results, I ask for fair dos based on the fact it`s not even close to a Top 20 score, too...

Thanks buddy, always appreciated! I´ll try again if I find some free time.

Happy Birthday Mr. Hwbot! :celebration: Initially I wanted to wait until 0 am, but I`m sooo tired.

...perfect for lame backup games.

I know you can do it. Edit: Thank you so much!

While I see your basic problem about missing/false details regarding the used cooling method, I think you have to differ which component was cooled. Massman`s entry is correct - it`s the graphics card`s stock cooler and liquid nitrogen only for the CPU as seen on the setup picture. "Cooling" in the main view of the 3D categories belongs to the graphics card, not the CPU.