[HWBOT Research Lab - AMD Thuban Voltage and Temperature Scaling - Part 4]

Yes you're right, didn't pay attention to that

[HWBOT Research Lab - AMD Thuban Voltage and Temperature Scaling - Part 4]

I read this morning that Pt1t reached 6.5 on the 1090T he tested.

 

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1149052

 

I don't know if this chip is simply a Golden Sample or not, but this promises a lot for the future.

[HWBOT Research Lab - AMD Thuban Voltage and Temperature Scaling - Part 4]

Interesting article.

 

Any expectation on the clocks under Liquid Helium ?

[Some points are not granted]

Hi guys,

 

 

I was just browsing in the Opteron 90 nm category, and I just noticed that in the Opteron 285 ranking some scores in Wprime32 and 1024 don't have any granted points.

 

 

I don't give you any link because they are many of them. I also guess, that this issue is not specific to Opteron 285 only, so perhaps you should (re)check the algorithm (or whatever you call it) that is granting points.

 

Cheers,

 

anvil

[c3tuning - Just to be the first to post :-p, , http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=988776 - 2650.38 MHz Reference Clock]

Your score is not 2650 MHz, but 241 MHz.

[The official HWBOT OC Challenge January 2010 thread.]

Anyway, that's a really good competition !

 

You've done a really good job here.

[The official HWBOT OC Challenge January 2010 thread.]

Ok that's perfectly clear, so we can already say that MX440 will have no point

 

Do you have any financial interest in ebay ??? Juste a joke

[The official HWBOT OC Challenge January 2010 thread.]

Well for exemple during the MSI Extrem Speedster, the Corei5 were given points depending on all CPUs, but at the end of the event, the best Core i5 was given 10 points in each stage.

 

In the Hwbot OC 2010 challenge, le MX 440 are ranked with the Ti. Let's say the stage is over. Pxhx who is the best in the MX 440 has 0 point. But will Hwbot create a new ranking (as for MSI Extrem Speedster), in order to rank the MX440 separately?

 

I do not know what will be the stage 2 in February, and depending on the hardware that will imply stage 2, this new ranking will be useful or useless, I mean if GeForces 4 are included or not in stage 2. Except if you create for each stage of the Hwbot OC challenge both high-end and low-end rankings.

 

Cheers,

[The official HWBOT OC Challenge January 2010 thread.]

Thanks Massman,

 

but will it give points ?

[The official HWBOT OC Challenge January 2010 thread.]

very good, GeForce4 MX 4XXX Rank 2

 

GeForce4 MX 4XXX Ranking:

1. pxhx - 449 marks

2. egm_xt - 232 marks

3. AlinRazvan - 145 marks

4. Joni- - 103 marks:

 

GeForce4 Ti Ranking:

1. D'n'B - 2679 marks

2. Matti OC - 2324 marks

3. OCMARTZ - 2320 marks

4. Lippokratis - 2282 marks

5. Despair - 2159 marks

6. Dan Jacques - 2127 marks

7. Gotcha - 2103 marks

8. Dirk@B - 2101 marks

9. Massman - 1962 marks

10. Johni5 - 1847 marks

 

lg Matti

 

Hi guys,

 

Do those both rankings mean that the final ranking will be splitted in two?

 

Low-end GeForce 4 on one hand and High-end GeForce 4 on the other hand?

 

I have seen no reference to that in the presentation of the competition.

 

Thanks

[The official HWBOT OC Challenge January 2010 thread.]

German supremacy !!!

[The official MSI Xtreme Speeder P55 thread.]

Congratz to everyone !

 

Just one question, some of HwNOT scores have been deleted. This means that Topalof is the first one ?

[Suggestion for change in Hardware sharing rules]

What about M.Beier question ?

[290 MHz Bclk on a i920]

I do not know where you see in my sentences any kind of accusation...

 

I'm just refering to his Hwbot scores and to the comment that c3tuning made.

 

Sorry if people misunderstood me.

[290 MHz Bclk on a i920]

If the user wants to validate his CPU-Z submission there is only one way : Submitting other benchmarks.

 

The only thing is see in his account, is that his Wprime submissions are even not ranked in the top 100 of i920 category.

 

I understand the people who are defending him, but even though someone is a friend of yours, you need some detachment...

[290 MHz Bclk on a i920]

What about the fact that someone (who is not a newbie) gets profit of a CPU-Z bug to get a 15 HWboints-gold cup?

[290 MHz Bclk on a i920]

Hi all,

 

 

Just wanted to ask more info about one result that has been moderated recently by Massman.

 

I'm talking about this score more exactly:

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=899099

 

The comment of Massman is (I quote): "290MHZ BCLK, bugged????"

 

Since such a Bclk is likely improbable and I don't think I am the only one on earth thinking that, I would like to know what has been decided by the crew concerning this result. Has the user sent you more proof about this result?

 

The user still has HWboints for this submission.

 

Cheers,

 

anvil

[Any consideration maybe?]

Hi guys,

 

I have to say that I am happy to see this subject appearing again on Hwbot forums.

 

It is now about one year that I fight sometimes to have the rules updated.

 

There is a simple way to know if users are sharing golden-CPUs for 3D benchmarks. Just have a look in the 2D benchmarks of the user, and see if there is no submission with greater frequency than the one of the 3D benchmark. I really doubt that people benching 3D would forget to bench 2D which are much more fast to execute (at least for Super Pi 1M, PiFast and Wprime 32M).

 

I have to say that I agree every rule you (the crew) create and that you're doing a fantastic job here. But ignoring that the CPUs have a huge influence in some 3D benchmark is really a pity...

[Same scores being submitted again and again...]

Ok thank you Admin

[Same scores being submitted again and again...]

Hi guys,

 

 

I would like to tell you that in my team there are two results that are constantly being scanned by the bot and submitted.

 

Here are the results:

 

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=898720

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=898721

 

The problem is that those scores are really old and now they do not fit the new submission rules.

 

The first one in this list also do not have a screenshot at all. But in the past he had.

 

What do we do? I can easily contact the auther of the first link but not the second one.

 

Cheers,

 

anvil

[Recent Forums links not available]

Great!

 

Thanks a lot Richba5tard.

[Recent Forums links not available]

Hi Guys (crew),

 

 

Just want to ask you why you removed the recent forum threads from the main page of Hwbot?

 

It was really usefull to follow all the different discussions...

 

Will you put it back?

 

 

 

Anvil

[Validation only sucks!]

BenchBros is not saying that a score is not valid if there is no screenshot. He's just saying that with a screenshot it will be better to compare results and have a better monitoring of the frequencies.

 

Also, for Wprime a screenshot would better (I mean even for result moderation) since sometimes the detection of the CPU is completely wrong.

[Wprime issue]

Hi,

 

Instead of submitting Wprime validation, jsut use screenshot (Wprime & Cpu-Z)

[Server usage in Wprime]

I'm criticizing no-one here, I am also benching hardware from my job and familly. I was just trying to make a point against what Wava said.

 

Since I am the only bencher at work/familly there is no sharing at all (just saying that in case of someone coming with the sharing issue).

 

IMO, no-one can say that benching hardware from familly or job is unfair.