mickulty
-
Posts
544 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by mickulty
-
-
This year we had what I would call 4 stages, namely SC1 through SC4 with an assortment of benchies within each.
I'd say the top 20 goes on from the first stage, then the top 10 for the third and the top 3 teams for the final round. Most would think top 2 but having a third team there would spice things up a bit.
The benchies in each stage isn't announced until it opens, this way (Hopefully) no one gets the jump on others.... Keeping stages unknown until it's time has been an issue in the past I know, that would need addressing if it hasn't been already.
Each stage could only be for about a week so there woudn't be too much sandbagging, you'd still have it of course but not as bad as before.
Something along these lines would cut down on the excessive sandbagging since you really can't hold them for long anyway AND you'd have a limited amount of time to make them count, not to mention it would probrably be easier on the server too, esp after the first stage is done.
That could be really good for a serious competition but I worry it could hurt participation a bit a bit for more (theoretically) casual comps, whereas both this year and last years formats were really good for participation (though I dread to think what another dogpile stage would do to the servers these days... between server load and moderation load I can see why that was dropped).
The thing with sandbagging is you can't really *ban* it because then you end up with us last-minute benchers being accused of it. What you can do is mess with it. Alza's prize for the mid-comp leader was a really good way of making it less worthwhile, and while the idea of requiring the latest CPU-Z and GPU-Z at time of submission (which yos stole off me lol) wouldn't totally prevent sandbagging it would add a lot of risk to it.
I'd be very interested to hear from some of the madshrimps guys, who I'm sure would rather not sit on scores but felt they had to in order to be competitive - what would have helped?
-
@Leeghoofd FWIW from my perspective - as one of the people otherwise "complaining" - there's nothing wrong with you competing. I'd just like it if you guys uploaded screenshots that weren't so awful, or even better just didn't sandbag so it wasn't even an issue. It's more fun for everyone when people don't sandbag, I really don't think it gives a competitive advantage, and that way the scores could have been caught in websmile's early sweep.
As far as consistency my issue was that when two different teams made scores with crap screenshots halfway through the competition, and one submitted right away while the other held onto it on the last day, it seems the former was more likely to be removed for similar issues as there's a natural inclination to think "well it's fine, he can rebench" rather than "well I don't want to screw him out of a score, it's a silly error and the score still seems legit". In general this is reasonable, but I just feel that people who have chosen to sit on scores for months shouldn't benefit from that courtesy.
The scores I pointed out are gone, so as far as I'm concerned it's fine. I'm happy firstly because consistency has been applied, and secondly because it looks like it won't really affect ranking which is good because that would be a shit way to win. I'd hate to benefit from something like that (tbh... there are other scores with screenshot gore as well but I don't wanna push the matter for that reason).
Regarding cinebench... a lot of benchmarks come with an inconvenience. Time spy requires Dx12. XTU requires a recent Intel processor. Heaven requires an audio device. GPUPI on GPU requires FP64 support. Cinebench 11.5/15 requires 1680x1050 or better resolution. It's annoying but it's for a good reason and not enough reason to lose an otherwise nice benchmark. Hopefully when madshrimps kick our ass again next year they can bring bigger monitors to the bench meet
Hopefully the guys from XO Italy will calm down when it sinks in that third is a damn good place to end up. Getting knocked down by sandbagged scores obviously leaves a bit of a bitter taste in people's mouths, from /r/overclocking's perspective we're actually quite happy now the dust has settled as we were expecting to drop more places than we did.
-
rules are rules michael ????...moderator or not on what ever team theyre with mate !!!!
all screen shots of the subs have to be clearly visible and nothing obscured or by part there of of another tab , and if they are theyre deemed a non valid sub, isnt that the rules too michael ?? because if it isnt in this case and id like to know why have i seen previous subs been deemed non valid and not legitimate and removed for the same thing ?
It's alright... one of the bad scores I highlighted is already gone now so they are being looked at and action is being taken, it's gonna take the moderation staff time to go through everything. I'm sure websmile is doing his best, with how the site is right now patience is definitely required.
(btw if there are any bad subs left from /r/overclocking I hope no-one hesitates to either report them or let me know so I can delete them myself and save mods the effort - I wouldn't want to be a hypocrite here! I know yos screwed up his GTX 285 3dmark2001SE screenshot, and I didn't catch it, because we were both tired from last-minute benching/"procrastibagging" - that one is already gone now and rightly so)
-
On the rig picture front, you either have it as a rule and enforce it properly, or don't have it as a rule at all.
Having it as a rule but letting people off just undermines the whole concept.
I interpreted it as a polite request
-
So, I did actually report a couple of submissions immediately after they were submitted in the hopes there might be time for a rebench to produce some screenshots that weren't total lemons. Sadly that hasn't happened but what can you do if a team sits on all their scores for a month then posts them at the last minute? Ending up not having chance to correct silly mistakes should be the price you pay.
I'm not sure if it would affect the overall ranking at all if some of these were dealt with properly. Certainly I know it wouldn't help my team's rank, which is great because I really wouldn't want to gain from that.
Here's the thing. No-one is accusing anyone of actual cheating here. But people make mistakes and the "idiot tax" that results from that needs to be applied fairly.
When I ran cinebench on a 1280x1024 monitor I was careful to make sure the entire rendered image was visible, along with window titles cpu-z version and the score. This meant the ranking graph was covered up, which I didn't think would be a problem - turns out it was. I'm fine with that and grateful to websmile for looking through the scores early on so I had time to sort out a bigger monitor and rebench. Now it seems another user benched around the same time and came up with this, which they sat on until the last day: https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u8676/image_id_1907172.png
Now, we all trust and respect the guy who posted this score. I'm certain they haven't cheated. But surely sandbagging shouldn't let you off the idiot tax? Similar with this 3dmark06 score, the window title is actually explicitly circled in the example screenshot but this totally obscures it: https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u7643/image_id_1909354.jpeg Cheat? I doubt it. Silly mistake? Yes, and having sat on the score for long enough that there's no chance to rebench shouldn't give a pass.
Again, I really hope not to personally benefit from these scores being dealt with appropriately, but they should be dealt with the same as anyone else's. Unless these are genuinely completely acceptable screenshots, in which case I challenge the hwbot staff to replace the example screenshots with them. If you wouldn't do that, clearly they aren't acceptable and while we know these particular scores haven't been cheated on they should still be subject to the idiot tax.
As for system pics, I hope no-one has lost a score over those for this comp.
-
-
how many results can there really be, I would pay a yearly fee to not have to wait anyone else?
100%, especially if it means the bot can be made faster for everyone
-
And the 'down to the wire' award goes to...
-
The i9-7980XE launch and wider 7900X availability means a ton of world records are being broken. This means every single score below them has to be recalculated. It's not ideal (indiegogo for a better server, anyone? Or maybe Intel could donate some of their new xeons if they're so amazing...) but things should settle down in time.
-
The celeron submission was just my little joke, I had to test a couple of ebay parts and they matched the competition requirements.
All the scores in the table are the average across the required number of submissions. So if you're the only one on your team submitting for a stage that needs three submissions it gets averaged two scores of zero - IE divided by three.
This always happens on stages where lower is better, which sounds bad, however there's a second factor at play - the team with most submissions (up to the required number) will *always* be ranked higher. So if a stage needs 3 submissions then 5 subs = 4 subs = 3 subs > 2 subs > 1 sub - even if the 1 sub is amazing and the 3 subs are all awful.
-
Hey man, not sure why it let you post this without a screenshot but you need a screenshot with results, launch window and cpu-z cpu and memory tabs
-
New team rule: you don't get to humblebrag about your incredibly lucky hardware finds if you can't even get the manufacturer right :-P
Seriously though, hope you find something.
-
in any case, this teamcup surely emulates members and/to attracts some new folks, this is at least what I/we try to do in my team.
Yeah this has been a great aspect of it. A lot of people on /r/overclocking have gone cold or colder for the team cup, and since putting a callout for RX 480s on the subreddit we've had an amazing response and got a fair few new people signed up. I'm sure other teams have had the same.
-
Mate this is the compute score of the 1050Ti - not the single-core score. You need to run the CPU benchmark to get a single-core score. Please also check the rules and example screenshot for CPU-Z and GPU-Z windows you need open to prove what hardware you're running.
-
Nice score but you need cpu-z windows with cpu and memory tabs visible - please check the benchmark rules and example screenshot. I'll have to delete this but hopefully you can rerun and get a better score by setting realtime priority from the menu in the bottom right.
-
Nice run mate but you forgot the 'show details' :-(
-
Good one Cap'n
Cheers, really wanted to rerun for one extra point but the voltage was kinda high and my home-made aluminium pot's not really that good hence the 1C temp reading.
-
Really sorry mate, this is invalid and I have to remove it as superposition has to be run on windows 7 when using a processor other than skylake or kaby lake - see https://hwbotnews.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/windows8-81-10.png. This is because of a timer bug in windows 8 and 10 that makes cheats possible.
All the 3DMark benchmarks can be run on 10 as long as you validate online and include a validation link as well as the screenshot, you have a nice OC so I'm hoping you can run some of those.
-
Really sorry mate, this is invalid and I have to remove it as superposition has to be run on windows 7 when using a processor other than skylake or kaby lake - see https://hwbotnews.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/windows8-81-10.png. This is because of a timer bug in windows 8 and 10 that makes cheats possible.
All the 3DMark benchmarks can be run on 10 as long as you validate online and include a validation link as well as the screenshot, you have a nice OC so I'm hoping you can run some of those.
-
Awesome work, thanks
-
Ah ok, sorry for the hassle. The run looked like it completed normally. I'll keep an eye on the sub scores in future.
I've had the same happen, it's really annoying. I'd rather it hard crashed so I didn't have to keep an eye on it. Think my "record" was in the region of 100k with super unstable settings, crashed on everything except GT1...
Super easy mistake to make if you aren't watching it like a hawk throughout the run - and sometimes in GT4 it goes so close to the end that it looks like it finished and just took a bit longer to get back to desktop.
-
Well up for this!
-
Did this crash in the middle of GT4?
-
Typo in your score mate - you actually score 50 points higher :-)
HWBOT Team Cup 2017 Discussion
in HWBOT Competitions
Posted
I think maybe some people need to take some time to calm down and reflect rather than writing essays refuting personal attacks that haven't been made. No-one is trying to take the victory away from madshrimps and all the discussion of preventing sandbagging is in reference to future competitions, for this competition it was both clearly allowed and expected by anyone with any sense. The reason I asked for opinions from madshrimps is because I hope any discussion can be about how to make competitions better for *everyone*, not everyone except madshrimps.
Regarding all the time spent and rare hardware destroyed - I could talk about all the time, effort and money that /r/overclocking put in but it would be pointless because I know every team in the top ten and probably a good portion of those outside it has put a lot in. Some damn good scores have been posted by a lot of people.
The best team won and, now that a couple of things have been cleared up where it was needed, no-one can deny that they did so fair and square.
Are the rankings now finalised? After a few weeks of pinned posts about the competition on the subreddit it'd be good to have one telling people how we did.