knopflerbruce

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Perhaps I'm just different, I'm happy when I get 2.4 points for a good score with some cheap and relatively outdated HW.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.

The best would be to have mods from all ranges of OC'ers. Including top 20 and sponsored benchers. I can't miagine any bencher will be able to to what you describe under #2 there, it'll be too easy to spot + one mod doesn't decide much on his own. I also think that ES HW should not be allowed to get global points UNTIL that particular part is available to the public. Like, if the i7 975 is never released, then the benchers should get HW points, but NO global points. I have a feeling it may be hard to code that, but in theory it would be a VERY fair way of dealing with that problem someone described earlier in this thread:) Lots of commetns on different stuff here, but anyways... if B is the way we go, will there be a WR list of some kind, with results and ranking for that particular bench - but without points for the scores that belong to a user that doesn't want to be a part of the Global league?

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.

Does B "remove" the HW points as well as the global points?

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";)

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=763833 - definately Brisbane core, not Toledo;)

1 year ban is fair. Well done to find proof in this case!

This is nuts, with all that info it should be unblocked. If not, then what do you have to do to convince anyone that a score is legit? Probably just a lucky CPU/mobo-combo or something. Just like DFI P45 Plus is so wicked fast in 1m.

If the score is way out of line the mods should ask the owner for an explanation, and then - if he doesnt give any reasonable explanation within a fair time limit - the score should be blocked;)

Speaking of non-existant CPUs: http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_976 and http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_853

I can't see that the skill arguments don't apply to "old school" benchers, too. At least for CPus, you still have to beat some score someone tweaked the hell out of for 100 points. What do you get? 15 at best;) For the same effort. That said, it's still easy to run LOTS of stuff on air cooling and make pretty simple runs just for some medals and points, and that way get much more than 300 points. So we need a limit. The problem with this limit is that when it was created it kept the people go wanted to bench alot of stuff out of the top 20's. Now you're not even in top 200 lol. To sum it up, there are two reasonable solutions: 1) Raise the limit to roughly top 20-30-level, like it was in the beginning. 2) Lower it to 0, so these two competitions are close to indepentant of each other. I really hate it when I see my rank as 200th:rolleyes: Unranked would be MUCH better, as I really don't compete in that competition. If that's not possible, what about adding hardware master ranks to all profiles? Then you have both. Equal for all. Like this (in the case of Kingpin): Rank How are we ranked? Worldwide Rank: #1 of 15873 Country Rank: #1 of 1249 in United States Team Rank: #1 of 420 in XtremeSystems [Missing part: Hardware rank: Worldwide Rank: #N/A of N/A Country Rank: #N/A of N/A in United States Team Rank: #N/A of N/A in Xtremesystems] Points What are points? Total Points: 1564,6 (global points + max(hardware points, 300) ) Global Points: 1264,6 Hardware Points: 553,9 (limited to 300 points for total points)

I don't see the problem here. Is it unfair to have a rare CPU and get like 2.4 points for it? As long as the HW points depends on the number of submissions there really is no problem at all. Removing these kind of rare chips would "force" the users to post them in other categories where they don't belong. 940 extreme belongs then in the 940 category. And then they stay on top of that one for their life, with 15 instead of 2.4 points;)

This is actually true. The question is if the unlocked multi actually helps, the LITTLE experience I have with Brisbanes is that they have some kind of temp limit which is not HTT related, I wouldn't be too shocked if these chips can do more than 300 HTT all the way down to the "critical temperature". I can try to investigate this in a couple of weeks, a friend of mine has a decent 5000+ BE.

THat's what I was thinking;)

To me this sounds like a question with only 2 reasonable answers: 1: Allow all kinds of "HDDs", as long as there is a performance increase and not just an increase in points. 2: Only allow normal HDDs on a raid controller (no iRam etc etc). I don't know what makes the most sense here. But what doesn't make ANY sense is to say that some kinds of "weird" HDD setups are not allowed because they give too high speeds, but others that are just as strange (like iRam) are allowed. Perhaps the easiest would be to only allow HDD's in RAID 0, and no SSD, iRam etc... that would make the benchmark more accessible to other users as well.

The only problem I see is that you may get the idea that intel users are more skilled because they get a faster time;) Apart from that, we can only hope AMD makes a CPU that's faster in spi1m. We went from ~19s to ~11s in one giant leap now, may even be sub-10 soon I think. One more leap like that and suddenly AMD is the winner:p

With Deneb I think it's no real need to separate the ranks. There was a screenie at 7.1ghz or so, I guess 6.9 pistable is possible (at least), I bet the score will be sub 10 at that speed. Which makes it comparable to the Conroe's, actually. It would, however, be nice to have access to some list of benchmarks done with a specific core, for example. You can't fight for AMD pi WR's by using 90nm, or even 65nm, these days anyway;)

*brings out fighting gloves and a big box of dryice*