knopflerbruce

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*

Join da 939 club! happy hunting:D (but don't mess with my scores;))

Ticket ID: 208 Priority: Low http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=485120 - this is the default clocks, and the PN matches what this review calls a Phenom 9900:\r\n\r\nhttp://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-athlon-64-x2,1746-4.html\r\n\r\nWhen I come home from Hannover I\'ll see if it\'s even the exact same chip, it certainly is the same stepping.

Ticket ID: 207 Priority: Low http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=485116 (stock 200x13, otherwise same as x2 4600+ Toledo)

First, 40-50% on a 2.6ghz chip means 3.64-3.90GHz - which is not possible on air cooling. Second, you have an F2 revision, which most likely will top out at 3-3.1Ghz (the F3's are much better, they often do 3.3-3.5Ghz). What changes did you do, btw?

Please take a look here: http://www.hwbot.org/ResultBrowseByVideoCard.do?gpuModelId=1236 Why does it say that there are no results for 3dmark05, 06 or vantage? And where can i find the non-cf results for 3dmark03? They seem to be entirely missing.

K, now I got it:p I thought you thought I meant the difference between 8800gt and 8800gts

I'll go nuts if you start merging CPU categories:D I hope that doesn't happen, though, too few categories will definately hurt HWBot, but to differentiate between some fairly similar performing GPUs/CPUs doesn't do much except freeing up 20-30 extra points for the benchers. Sure, you can look at some of the chips I've asked to be added during the past 2 years and say they perform the same, but they're not 100%the same - like my 3600+ Clawhammer is more or less a 3500+, but it's obviously an early revision that in NO way has the OC potential of the 3500+'es even if they perform the same at stock. And AMD DID label them differently, I bet there is a reason for the extra 100 performance points. I was thinking between 8800gts 320mb and 8800gts 640mb. Obviously there is a difference between 8800gt 512mb and any 8800gts;) I'll agree with the similar performance argument, but remember: if you don't add these cards you'll either get alot of requests - or people will post in some random category that looks fairly similar to their card. It's much easier to add separate ranks, really. It doesn't do any harm to do it, even if it takes a few moments to create them.

Sounds weird. I actually tried to look for some examples where memory scaling was important, but in alot of cases it seems as if the amount if memory doesn't matter at all - there is nearly no difference between 8800gt 256mb, 512mb and 1024mb for example. In other cases, such as 8800gts 320mb vs 640mb there is a pretty huge difference. This doesn't make any sense to me:p This observation brings up a different question; why do you differentiate between 8800gt 256, 512 and 1024mb when the difference is close to nothing - and in this case you don't want to add a new card because the performance isn't different "enough"? In MY opinion, there should be a separate ranking if there are important differences in the specifications - such as memory amount, number of shaders/pipelines/etc etc etc, memory bus and manufacturing process. Adding a category in this case will definately remove any thoughts about "unfairness" (if one of these 1024m cards gets to the #1 spot I BET the old #1 will feel a bit... robbed since he only has HALF the memory on his card). Sure, we see already that people have a hrd time posting in the correct category (I think I know the reason for that...), but that's easy to fix my moving the result when/if it's spotted.

It's easier to add it now, than to add it later and to manually move a number of scores. At some point we WILl se benchmarks that scales with the extra memory.

I own ALL my HW. Don't ever think anything else;) Remember that alot of people buy a CPU, bench it, and then sell it so they can afford other gear (perhaps another CPU if it wasn't good enough).

:D More points! *goes to guru3d to dl 3dmark/pcmark/am3*

Ticket ID: 192 Priority: Low http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/ugpz7/