knopflerbruce

It's indeed a bit strange to just block it for that reason... if it's photoshopped then the result is a ban, not a blocked score only. Personally I think it's a real score, just wondering what maxine was thinking:p My guess is that he was far from 100% sure himself, but had a doubt.

If it's a "cheat" driver, then it should be blocked. But, as jmke says, it's easy accessible and it's far from obvious that it's not allowed so no need to give any "punishment" to any user who submits using this driver;)

Np, just wanted to make sure I still have my 12.6(?) points;)

No matter what the reason is, it's just a "cosmetic" difference - so there should be one category instead of two. But no-one will move my score around, no?

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1701 - sure its not this one?

Massman is right, it's a CPUZ bug. I bought my chip from Untouchable, who is 4th or so in one of the CPUZ ranks. He benched it WAY before I did, so he used the old version (Toledo?), but when I ran it CPUZ said Denmark. So it's indeed the same core - no difference:p

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=671226 See helpcenter ticket #44 for more info about the Toledo/Denmark core issue. It's the 2nd time someone wanted to move this score, and the last time it was indeed moved. I don't feel like moving it back all the time to get my 12.6 points, so it would be great if it would be checked once and for all;)

The card should still be added, I thought the idea was to have a complete database;)

If I'm not mistaken, nVIDIA released the 9800gtx+, which was added even if the 9800gtx non plus was already there. Then it's fair that 7800gs+ is added as well. Especially since there is no doubt that there are HUGE differences between the cards.

If most cards can't even theoretically be unlocked, then they should not have to compete against cards where everything is enabled by default. A split is needed, no doubt!

This is not a new chip, it's an 8450.

Yeah, and if HWBot thinks the scores are the same, then the older one is on top.

Yeah, same with the PHI OC competition:p

These are mobiles I think, so the socket is wrong:p

My God is Dirk Meyer:D

If you submit in SLI or CF I cant see that the missing dropdown menu makes a difference at all:p After all, by submitting a single-GPU score in those ranks will give you less points than if it was submitted in the correct one. IMO this issue looks a bit like the one with the old 1m versions, without decimals. When you don't know the decimals, you set it to the "worst case scenario" - 99. Same here, you don't know the number of CPUs, you assume it's 3 or 4, and move them to SLI or CF - unless it's OBVIOUS that it's a single card.

Do all the mods agree to the fact that reasonable scores shouldn't be blocked if the missing part isn't vital? You should discuss this a little bit, as it's pretty clear that Demiurg followed the rules strictly, and jmke uses more "common sense". It's not fair that score removal depends on which mod that looks at the screenshot. Also, any mod that earns points on a score removal should NOT decide the "fate" of that submission. It's called conflict of interest...

I kinda miss XS too:p Too much "H3lP I N33d h3lp 0C'!nG my e 85oo" in the Norwegian one:o

Yeah, but on the other hand... if wprime 32m is replaced by wprime 1024m and 1024m is replaced by... 32768m:p - then it'll take WEEKS to bench that one on older systems. Perhaps it's a good idea to enable/disable some benchmarks for certain CPUs - like when wprime32m takes 0.2s to complete. Probably lots of coding to do, though...

Wasn't there a bug with one of the 3dmark's and win 7?

I believe that a score that has some minor problems with the screenshot will still be valid - but only if the score is normal for the HW. So if you used alot of tweaks (and the score reflects that), then a screenshot without the subtest window is not enough (unless you have an ORB link). If it was run on an unoptimized rig, then it would be OK.

I have one on the way myself:p

MAYBE it's time to remove PCMark as a global benchmark, but to completely remove points for 7500 normal scores because some new HW gives some weird scores is the worst possible solution! Then it's better to create some rules that would limit the problem, and let people continue benching. I bet this kind of issue happens to 3dmark01/03 etc someday, too.

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1815 - this one as well