RoccoESA

I am the opinion: the score are on the same system developed (see the backround/ desktop (symbols)/opened Task)

greatly

http://hwbot.org/community/submission/888303_nzaneb_3dmark_2001_3x_geforce_gtx_285_91787_marks is listed in the 3x category that is however 2x GPU benched Windows XP can not 3x SLi see the Screen here: http://hwbot.org/searchResults.do?direction=&applicationId=1&cpu=&numberOfProcessors=0&gpu=GeForce+GTX+285&numberOfVideocards=3&manufacturer=&chipset=&model=&memManufacturer=&memType=&memProduct=&minCpuFreq=&maxCpuFreq=&minGpuCoreFreq=&maxGpuCoreFreq=&minGpuMemFreq=&maxGpuMemFreq=&minMemFreq=&maxMemFreq=&countryId=0&teamId=0&userName=nzaneb&minScore=&maxScore=&displayAdvanced=false&dateFrom=&dateUntil=&system=&minTotalPoints=&gpuId=1444&cpuId=0&chipsetId=0&modelId=0&manufacturerId=0&memManufacturerId=&memProductId=&memTypeId=&offset=0

but where are the points? edit - is this from: http://hwbot.org/community/submission/889280_roccoesa_3dmark_2006_geforce_8800_ultra_24469_marks ? from 18.02.2010 ???

i miss 35 HWpoints - no result is reportet or blocked yesterday: today: what happened there? Thx

you have reportet my GT240 Scores ... that is however no problem ... but only in the 3DMark Vantage is PhysX forbidden and I forgot that to bench ... greetz RoccoESA

sorry - was not conscious to me - comment=reporting

the Rules say:

in the personal profile i have 800+ HWPoints - in the Teamprofile only 770 ... can you check this please ?

the score must into the category "3x 3870" and not in the category "3x 3870X2" Yellow - du kannst das doch selber ändern - du musst den Eintrag editieren - dabei kannst du auf 3x 3870 umstellen das ist das selbe / it's the same Question:

sorry - I saw too late did not have enough dice around to hold the clock 4 making a screen - i have benched with higher gpu-clock ... but please we leave that now - it should not concern my score here

apology - you understand my - that is not anything personal I did not address you at all... i have not say "thor is bad" you have mean score pointed out - I have explain the emergence the worth. I announced score without picture and validation - and the crew says "is a old score" - not "is buggy" ... ma score is buggy - not "old" ... Und jetzt müsst ihr euch das mal übersetzen: Ich kann die Echtheit nicht mehr beweisen, da die Hardware nicht mehr existiert. Also habe ich Pech gehabt - trotz Screen,auf demja nun alles drauf ist. Aber darum geht es mir nicht! Es geht mir nicht um MEINEN Score. Nicht ich - sondern Thor hat meinen Score hier eingebracht. Ich wollte lediglich wissen, nach welchem Maß hier gemessen wird und diese Frage wurde beantwortet:

!!! it concerns to me not my score !!! but if you already ask: my dyce was everything - I had to reduce the clock of the graphicscard by the screen to make before the PC freezes - sorry, i have not sponsor, sorry for my financial emergency.if I would have registered other clock rates than in the gpu-z screen, it would have been also not correct. but no role I plays cannot the test anyway not repeat, i have not a board which can 128mhz pcie... leave it, as it is !!! it concerns to me not my score !!! the small user has here anyway no chance against the league of LN2 - and if it passed nevertheless times it "buggy"

it concerns to me not my score - its a global problem "according to which criteria one decides" - this is the point 4 discuss

again and again here blocked because of to high score - according to which criteria one decides? the Main board is broken and has destroys the CCU - as I am to resist? The new mobo can not this mhz ... all indicated are ignored - do I have to be sponsor here, in order for full to be taken? is that competition or war here?

you understand me wrongly I am not frustrated - i make simply new score with slowdown ssd ... next Generation with SATA3 ? pitch had? Its not unfair? you talk again and again about old results - it is not just as unreasonably as a i5 to permit around those a scores Pentium-user not to endanger my results are not importantly - I make this 4 fun ... hwbot must go with the time ... edit personal note: HDD gerneral Usage 500+MB/s and slow down the HDD for Startup is manipulate the (sub-)result - and this is cheating for validity

to exclude and current systems?

I have a normal ICH10R (on the most actual MoBo) with SSD - that is today nevertheless already nearly standard - or? I think, 250MB/s would be a limit, which is up-to-date (i believe FM-ORB say 300MB/s)

which is - that is an outdated rule - that is current SSD technology you does nothing better drop back in, in order to get your rank?

"XP Startup cannot exceed 220MB/s" my system creates 226MB/s with SSD-raid0 - my Score was reported ... (under WinXP/ Win Vista a little less) i have not ram-disk, not sw-ram ... this regulation became outdated for today's systems can't that be adapted? thx

i have Samsung 128GB MLC-SSD raid0

top! HDD - General Usage 537MB- how is to be created?

mit diesem Screen wird im ebay eine CPU angeboten - ist das korrekt?

you have posted also T9600 with EVGA P55? that was nevertheless certainly also a ASUS W90VP ... greets

I have test with setfsb - all attitudes - all PLL - to I found functioned one, those. only functions, the FSB of 266MHz to 333MHz over clocks - not individual MHz