knopflerbruce

WHat problems are you referring to? I know only 2... the "wrong validation issue" I've experienced, and the Phenom validation rejection problem.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=500005 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=444773 These aren't 130nm chips.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=618521 This score is simply not possible:p

I'm sure the ones who complain will find the ones that are not "standard" 7800gs's. Since these cards are supposed to be quite a bit better, it's quite likely that they'll be in the top 10 at least:)

Sandbox:D (selling CPUs to a team member is allowed, I'm 99.9% sure I asked about this when the HW sharing thread was active. Still, if that rule is abused - like selling the chip to half a dozen team members - it will still count as HW sharing.)

If memory is so important, how come one can still upload wprime scores that has no timings?

Is the score off in a way that it's likely that a different resolution was being used?

Isn't there a rule that says that blocking just for blocking is not "fair play"? That there should be reasonable doubt about the scores?

Don't you think it's better to have a correct rank, than to have a 0.01s error for a result? You can always ask him to delete the score and reupload it, THEN it should be behind. If he refueses to try that it's obvious he doesnt want to give the rank to it's rightful owner;) PS: perhaps you can "force" the slower score behind the better by changing it to that 0.01s lower, and after a few hours change it back? Then paybe the engine thinks it's newer as the time was modified after the better result was submitted.

Then you link him to this thread. He can say whatever he wants, but he can't claim his score should be in front of a faster one:D

As a temporary fix, change one of the scores by 0.01s. The best would be to lower the worse one, as there's a pretty huge gap between 4th and 5th place. I know it's not ideal, but it solves the ranking issue (at least until someone gets a .87s score:D)

The people who prefer to wait a year or two before beating the crap out of the old "unbelieavable" scores belong in the HW masters league. C'mon and join us!

Ticket ID: 327 Priority: High I think there is a bug with the \"Active Members In The Past 30 Days\" list (team details). I always submit scores every month, but I\'m never in my team\'s list. Grrrrrr!

I read that but I had NO clue it was the same issue:p

Ticket ID: 322 Priority: High When I press the \"+\" sign to view the details of some scores I get message saying \"No hardware found, please be more specific\". That message is displayed in a new \"HWBot window\" where the details should normally be (I have 2 sets of menues on that page now ).\r\n\r\nUsing the newest FF version here... I believe my resolution is 1280x1024.

But I guess it's not the intention that all tests on HWBot can be run on any CPU back to 486's, so as long as it won't need more than 4GB I think it's ok.

I agree with warrior, but hisnumbers are wrong. Rich's numbers don't match with what youcan see here, either: http://www.hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=129 Perhaps Rich's list includes more than one score per bencher, and the link above counts only the best result.

If you have 50+ cups all you need is an average of max 6 points pr cup, which isn't THAT much, really. Still, a new "cup" rank would be sweet for me personally, I'm 2nd:p At least in number of 1st spots. (and not so far from Turrican either;) )

Yeah, any other apps would be additional, not replacements for CPUZ;)

What would be nice to have is a program that would work this way: rank based on number of pi digits computed in (fixed time) seconds. That one would last "forever", since the score would increse with time, not approach zero, as we see with superpi 1m, and especially wprime32m. No idea if that's doable with this app, though...

One bench that needs to be added is one that lasts 1h+ for current CPUs. We had it in the past, but not anymore:rolleyes:

Yeah, but only 4 of top 20 haven't reached the 300. Perhaps it will affect the lower parts of the rank more, but that one is still messed up by the way too low limit of HW points so it's not like it ruins anything:p Still, the 400 point limit was just an exampl. Raising the VERY popular ones to 20 or 25 won't change too much, I think. But this is Intel-business, so I'l lleave it up to you. Doesn't affect my scores one single bit;) Unless xeon 3120 will become insanely popular:p

Well, those 2 rankings are nearly independant of each other - the 300 limit takes care of that. Giving like 400 points for the top Q6600 wPrime 32m score still doesnt affect the global points ranking:)

It's a damn close race between E66 and Q66.

Yeah, the last one has crossed my mind, too. I think E6600 (and the others in the same "league" submission-wise) deserve a few points more, perhaps 20 or 25.