knopflerbruce

Yes, but he also said to BenchBros and leghorn-giorgioprimo that they were allowed to do this a long time ago;) I've also read things that sound like this: "sure, you can do this, but then your old accounts must be deleted, and it's bad for your team as they will lose points". Sure, I'm funny:p I try to keep the sh*t-talking to a minimum, but anyone can make mistakes. However, I'm sure you'll find posts where someone said it was allowed, too. Even if there are others where it says you have to wait for a final decision:p

Says Georgia when he posts...

Then create new subteams;) No-one will stop you as long as the other accounts will be deleted.

As long as the rules are the same for every team (that you can create subteams like this), it's not a HUGE problem. It looks weird, but massman ahs said numrous times that this is indeed allowed, so all of you who wish to create a shared account, go ahead and do it instead of asking the same questions over and over again:p ...but I must say this is not a good solution, if too many do this it'll be a LOT harder for individuals with limited resources. Then we need a league for single users ONLY:p The best solution would be to ask BenchBros (and maybe leghorn-giorgioprimo, if that is a subteam of 2 people) to split their accounts within some time frame, say 6 months or so. That'll give them plenty of time to get good scores with their own gear. Just make sure you point out that they can still bench together, just not upload scores to the same account, if that's the way this is solved. PS: there was a question about session scores, perhaps that one is relevant to this discussion as well? Don't remember what was the conclusion of that debate.

Then that IS very little money. Not saying it is because you're stupid or lazy that these people's incomes are low... However, is it THAT bad in Georgia?

I don't quite get why everyone has to compete with the most expensive hardware, you can still have loads of fun with cheap gear:rolleyes: HWBoints exist for a reason lol. Sure it should be about skill, but there's no skill in getting the good hw if someone more or less throw it into your hands;) And what if you're in a team that doesn't like sharing their i7 965's to a dozen people they barely know? Then that's unfair, as the scores are then dependant on your team's willingness to share their parts - which is even worse than having a system where "skill" is a little bit money dependant. (I say a little bit, as you dont need more than an e8600 + p45 to compete in both superpi and pifast, or a cedar mill to compete in the cpuz ranking). ...and if you use your money wisely you WILL get the money to afford an expensive card from time to time. If not, then you must make VERY little money.

It IS important which card it is, what if it's a good one? It's far from fair that a whole team will benefit of one single user's purchased card. If HW is cheaper/more accessible in Germany theycan send you cash so you can buy GPUs for them if they can't get it in Georgia. The results are NOT the same with every VGA, some clock better than others. In the end, the results won't be the same either.

I don't like this... i tried v2.00 on my dual-Opty 856 server last night, and v2.00 was about a second faster than 1.55... too much to compete if the #1 score is maxed out, but not enough to ban a score if it's used:( On a side note... I noticed alot of the good wprime scores were done in vista, but when I tried Server 2008 myself my score was about the same as on XP Pro lol. What kind of crazy tweak do people use that shaves off a second or two just like that? (or did i disable a process that speeds up things quite bit, perhaps..?)

Is there a version string in v1.55? If so, maybe you can block scoreswith NO string that way:)

OK, I use caps lock to make a point about caps lock and exclamation mark usage. That makes me impolite... oh well. Go cry a bit yourself, buddy. I completely understand your way of dealing with things, but look at it this way: every time someone has ANY kind of problem and use "your" tactics, would that encourage the mods to keep up their decent work? ...and FYI, I don't know what my team members have problems with or not. If you want to throw accussations in my direction, feel free to do so. But when you're completely wrong, like now, be an adult and apologize. Unless you want to prove your bullshit, of course;) Good luck with that.

You can ask for a screenie;)

My opinion is that it's better to wait until a GOOD solution is in place (this is quite complex, as it involves FM as well), than to find a quick fix that needs to be corrected anyway. If you don't want regular users to answer your posts, discuss with the mods through PM's - this is a FORUM, remember? UNDERSTOOD???!??!?!!!111ONEONE!!???! @SF3D: Is aggressive bumping the way to go if you want something to be fixed here? I don't think that's good forum behaviour. Reward the polite instead. Besides, what's impoartant and what's not differs from person to person. IMO the wprime issue is FAR more serious than this, for example.

No wonder that he gets a little srcastic when people think the mods are on duty 24/7;) That's just stupid. There will be a solution, but YOU and everyone else must WAIT until it's here. 13h is nothing, you could at least be decent enough to wait a day between bumps...

Most people who submit scores like this probably don't know they used an "illegal" version. In 99% of the cases, the newest version is the one you should use. But not in this case;) I just wonder what to do with the scores that seem too good for the clocks, but only have an online submission. Blocking them because they have too high efficiency is one option, but without proof it's not that easy, perhaps.

HWBot needs more mods, perhaps. Maybe more coders, too. But no so-called "professionals" can deal with the ranks any better than what the mods do now. The help should come from the community. I can't belive for one second that any non-bencher can give any valid argumetns on how to run this site - you can hire people for $100000000 and their opinion is still worth like 10% of Massman's;) A solution to the capacity problems here is certainly NOT to ask the existing mods to withdraw. Easy math. And SF3D's opinion is 100% valid, he's one of the more sensible members here. Sponsorship is irrelevant in this case, there are no signs that he's serving his company instead of HWBot when he does his job here.

It wouldn't be a disaster if they actually made such a ranking, but then you may want to split the number of cores on CPUs as well. Not to mention the good, old AMD/Intel separate rank debate. I also thought most people benched because it's fun to match their scores against similar setups, not to have the fastest scores on the planet:confused: Perhaps I'm just different, I'm happy when I get 2.4 points for a good score with some cheap and relatively outdated HW. Those who want to have 100+ points for their efforts to find it interesting to bench have an attitude problem.

You use COST as an argument to split up the rankings, and I'm sure you see the relevance - you just don't want to admit that the GPU cost today is actually less than it used to be only 2-3 years ago.

You should ask yourself what you paid for those cards, not whether they are hybrids or not.

Perhaps we need to split dual cores form quads, too. A decent quad cost a fortune these days. Perhaps we need to split by sockets as well, 1366 is far too expensive for normal people...

You can have the same view on alot of other stuff, too, like AMD K7. K8, PIII and so on. Lots of people work their asses off on HW that can never get really high in the global ranks, but if you should make special rules for all these subgroups it'll be a mess beyond your imagination. Converting skill to points is not very straight-forward, unfortunately.

You still have HWBoints to fight for. 15 boints pr 1st place - that's pretty much IMO. Plus, dual GPU cards are MUCH less expensive now than just a few years ago. 7800gtx 512mb retailed for like $700. GTX295 goes for $500 at newegg NOW. I don't get your argument at all, really, you still needed two cards to compete in the 7800-era - $1000 now vs $1400 before. How can you say people are being pushed out by "big money" NOW and not before?

You can also add that it says DDR3 in that 7.11s pi run. Doesn't sound very normal, but I'm not very experienced with Intel setups, so I leave that one to the mods.

I agree, you can't block scores that were valid at the time of posting. But what you CAN do is change the rules so you need a screenie from now on! Take a look at this one: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=821928 The ONLY way you can find out if this is a Brisbane, Windsor or the UNRELEASED and VERY, VERY rare Toledo version is to look at his other submissions and note that there is an x2 5000+ Brisbane core submission or two there. If this user would have 500 submissions, it would be impossible to correct this result. And this is far from the only case, there are alot of submissions for wprime in the x2 4000+ Toledo category. No other scores are in that category. Why? because it doesn't exist;) Still, something makes hwbot think wprime ran one of those non-existant chips. wPrime is a great app, but the issues make the online submission stuff useless;)

Yeah, it's about time one needs to have a screenie to be able to submit. There are just too many flaws with the online submission system. Scores in wrong ranking, no possibility to view system details and now this...

I think the main reason behind the "default settings" requirement was to avoid people making the bench faster - not slower (like this case). These 100 year old cards don't fight for global awards, only for HW points - so if all cards have the same disadvantage I hope you use some "common sense" and don't block a whole lot of scores because "the rules say so";)