Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Splave

Members
  • Posts

    5901
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    132

Posts posted by Splave

  1. 7 hours ago, Rauf said:

    Same as for the scores with superposition release candidate version :)

    there are some unbeatable hw points because they were done when rules did not explicitly say beta or rc versions were not allowed.

    Fyi, I don't agree with this line of thinking, but removing all old scores is also a bit drastic. And checks can only be done for 3dmark anyway, not superposition so not sure how much we gain by this. For sure there will be huge moderation work still because I guess most users won't read the rules that carefully.

    Always welcome to flag scores that are out of line. In fact we need more intelligent people like you that know what to look for to do so. Perhaps if reporting scores was anonymous less people would be afraid of repercussions by making reports.

    Superposition has the fps graph that is easy to see what's wrong or off about a run. UL should do the same or force ecc for everyone. Instead of requiring new scores to run the race with one leg and compete with other people's two leg scores.

    Requiring higher standards than UL shouldn't be an issue. I've never even looked at the hall of fame there. Hwbot is supposed to be the best most secure WR database. They have an entire staff. One guy fixed 2D benching security in his spare time and still takes shit for it on a daily basis. No wonder 3D will never be fixed. Have fun I don't care anymore. Sub whatever you want.

     

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  2. 3 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

    Correct , we need to analyze things

    just wait for benching on LN2 till this is sorted

    So all current scores that don't have ecc on but "feel" correct can enjoy being permanently 2-3% better performance? 

    If we require it for some we must require it for all. Time to press delete on all 4090 subs without ecc if this is the path we are taking.

    • Like 1
  3. 47 minutes ago, Noxinite said:

    I don't understand what all the fuss is.

    All people have to do it select one setting when they start benchmarking, reboot, bench, change setting back if finished benching, reboot...

    There are plenty of other benches where you need to jump through more hoops to get a good score (or even a score).

    So?

    100% agree, would be really great if we could convince GPU-Z to add ECC check box near where the CUDA etc check boxes are. 

    • Like 2
  4. To those responding we are talking to FM already, why not do it in public so I can be aware of the issue too and everyone else? Thats why I made the thread. 

    On 11/20/2022 at 4:58 AM, TASOS said:

    I dont know if your posts are about something or someone in particular.

    But i will speak in general.

    Since you know/find out some very specific issues about this RTX 4xxx series , why not make an article about it ?

    This stuff is new and many people would like to overclock it up to the edge of stability.

    They probably wont have a clue if their big score is bugged (except if the result/run is too obvious , like in 2k3).

    Are we having something similar like the 3DMark Vantage era ?

     

    Give them a heads up

    Dont assume that everyone is acting with bad intention 

    I guess this is an article here? I also didnt name any names which I could (and will if they dont pull them themesleves. one person already did) :) and oh yes the ones I see should know way better. These are not noobs. The information is here, they can choose to apply it to themselves or not. 

  5. 3D benching as we know it is broken. Plain and simple. What are we going to do about it? RTX-4090's are great cards but they also bug very easily. We need to be better users. If you see your score jump 1k point after raising your mem clock 15mhz that is not normal and not a "lucky" run. When your entire screen is tan from an artifact spanning your entire monitor and your score increases 10% it is not a "lucky run." In my opinion after a first warning we should issue a vacation for the user. 

    After 2 minutes of research it is quite easy to see a bugged run. 

    sus.thumb.png.66ed02acc9cbf1f2c64b06a0ef2de52a.png

    Which 2 look normal, which 2 look equally strange? Going from the pictures alone is easy but when I add the clock frequencies maybe it can help you even more. 

    sus2.thumb.png.c8a4635c97467a8e3094671434c21308.png

     

    I propose that:

    1. If you post a known bugged run you get a warning, then a vacation.

    2. If you are "unsure" then ask a mod or even me if it seems out of line. It is quite easy to read. 

    3. We require monitoring already in 3dMark benches, I propose we show the FPS and FPS average graph section in the result screenshot, if you cant fit it add a second screenshot with it. 

    4. Always welcome to video / disclose tweaks to mods for doubters. 

     

    With the blessing of Roman/Albrecht, people have a week to remove results that "oh maybe it did have a lot of artifacts, or maybe it does seem too high" before we dive in and hand our warnings, or vacations for multiple infractions. 

     

    Im sorry if you feel like I am always the one exposing this stuff, but why do I always have to be the one to do it?  We all work hard on this stuff and an even playing field is the of the utmost importance. Without it this places means nothing. Let's do better, and be better. 

     

     

     

    • Like 10
    • Thanks 5
×
×
  • Create New...