Leeghoofd

Deleted sir

All deleted, but HWBOT moderators require to see the entire desktop including the taskbar for verification purposes. If you have somehting to hide, plz cover it with one of the CPUZ or other tabs. Also ensure you have 2 instances of CPUZ open for 2D and add GPUZ for 3D scores like the below screenshot:

solid stuff, no 12700K love anyone ?

Tim uploaded his early wrappers to the uat.hwbot.org test site. Normally this site is like way slower than the daily one, really feels more responsive. Take note: The site is not getting new submissions, so the front page is empty till you submit something on uat. A lot of work still has to be done and the point calculation has not been touched yet. Also images do not load on the uat version Some feedback I already provided on some of the new pages:

No pun intended David, but if the benchmark executes multiple tasks at the same time and your CPU can't do these, I guess the storage is not the limiting factor but your CPU might be.

I just ran the latest Storage Benchmark from Ul benchmarks and found the information displayed a bit scarce versus other outputs of the 3DMark series. Take eg no temperature output of the tested Storage device ( this could be an ideal indication if throttling occured and/or beter cooling is required No detailed overview of the storage performance on any the 7 test runs, this could also show if any cache or other software is installed to boost the score. ....

it has been added, contains 3 loops of 7 tests, first one is very slow, loop 2 and 3 are way faster, though will take up 15-25 minutes of your time, even on fast storage...

Thanks Tobias

Plz re-run and provide a screenshot like this one plz:

This is something Roman is working on for competitions, the one that holds the top score for a specific period will get rewarded with extra points.

Roman has an idea for competitions on this one Allen, but one step at a time. If you check the front page and actually read it, you can see we only got access to the code end of last year, thanks to the ultra slow paperwork and the Covid shitshow... Didn't we mention numerous times already that 2021 would be a transition year as the programmer can only work during the weekends on the code... I think Tim sorted already tons of broken code, removed deadlocks, enabling most broken features and recoded them to work better than before. The Bot was a limping neglected beast and is now more stable than it was the last 3-5 years. You are probably the expert in coding and could have sorted it all within a few weeks, too bad for all of us we made this paramount mistake of not hiring you. I also know a few that would start a new OC Dbase from scratch, haven't seen much of that either the last decade. Mat can and probably will do a version with BM. It seems clear to me you only listen to those voices in your head, lighten up and exorcise them demons. Eventually it might even make you smile....

fixed

We can go many directions with this: Max 75 hardware points for hardware with over 100 submissions, max 50 sub 100, less than than 50 submissions : 25 points. It all depends how the programmer can program things

it is my initial proposal and was the easiest to explain to the programmer, but we can shift it to maybe at least 75 submissions is maximum 50 HW points. Less then 75 is 25 HW points,.... Yes all benches will probably be treated in the same way, it will be win some, loose some boints. I can just propose, how Tim has to program this, I have no clue...

Max 50 hardware points for hardware with over 100 submissions, max 25 sub 100. Does that sound feasible ? Maybe we can add a 3rd less than than 50 submissions : 15 points That's the big question. Tim has not touched any algorithm or such , he's designing a new front end, call it a wrapper that only requires the ranking from the current old version and will apply the new point algorithm. Front page is already done, now he's looking into the different categories. Its not easy for him to understand as it mostly does not seem logic to him regarding the things we need to have displayed yes or no. If he shows it someday on his local system I'll try to take to some screenies We hope to have it done in Q1

@GTI-R Maybe some nice news for you at Techspot

Just an update on what we have in mind for the points ( Hardware and Global ones ) Maximum of 150 Globals no matter how popular the hardware is. If we have less than 100 subs, maximum will be 100 Globals, for less than 50 submissions maximum will be 50... Less bigger jumps between the top 5 (10-5-3-2) --> some will not like this for sure. Dumping the complex algorithms, the idea is to have fixed designated points for each spot. Points no longer depending on how fast the nr 1 score is. Dumping the 70% cutoff. From spot 21 each position will go down with 0.2-0.3 points. Minimum points will be locked at 2 points. Hardware points difference will be less drastic as you can see, but we try to establish the same idea that each position corresponds with fixed points. Goal is to make the point system more rewarding for a bigger amount of benchers. Lesser calculations are required by the database, thus resulting in a faster HWBot and becoming less error prone.

You can bench on 11, but if your score goes out of bounce versus other scores, we would like to be informed asap. It might be BM wil become a standard if we see many bugged scores on 11

I'll play that one smart and let Roman do the announcement ?

Nice one!!

I think you only need a more performant storage device Richard

Nice hardware pron

This is the reason we are conducting this experiment, we got partial info from AMD and are aware of new Intel configurations that are right around the corner. At the moment the current path seems to be the best option. Choosing between the plague, cholera or massive flooding... no choice was the ultimate one and would create a stir whatsoever.

Well let me start by saying this is not only my show, this has been discussed/decided by more than one person. I was initially on the same boat as many of the people that chimed in here. But I got persuaded by valid argumentations, mainly due to things to come and HWBot is obliged to be more open to these manufacturer innovations. Remaining on the old cores level thinking will not work for these new and upcoming architectures. Moving to the threads option would be too complicated, keeping with the old core stuff will get HWBot rankings into problems next year. As always there's a lot of resistance when something new is introduced like this or when shifting the global points or whatsoever. But does one eat the same sandwich or has sex in the same position for their entire life? Firstly this is a test, if it works it stays, if not it gets removed (yeah even more drama). Secondly Roman wants to do the same with all AL and new AMD CPUs, I would limit it only to the K(F) and analyze how things will go. My main reason is to protect the older legacy 2D stuff where a lot of them "happy" users still have fun. People have to understand that boints don't last forever. Yes blood , sweat and tears gets wiped on a regular basis. People are forced to buy the latest and greatest, rebench all their 3D cards and/or focus on new benchmarks to retain their positions in the ranking. And that's my main point, most of you only see it at an individual level on what you are benching/running right now. AL CPUs are really not that expensive and there's no real requirement for DDR5 (yet) So why not do this upgrade and move on like most do ? The latter is entirely your choice, but at a certain moment you will have to decide to go along with the flow or focus on other rankings like hardware masters. I wished the new points system was already up and running by removing the percental cut-off and doing the same for the complex algorithm dictated by the nr 1 score. Than this massive loss of points would not have happened. Sadly Tim is only ready with some initial rankings and we have to decide on what to display yes or no, also regarding the future releases. By using this new wrapper, he's developing, we would get: Less calculations being made each time a new score is added to the ranking. Thus resulting in a faster and more responsive website as now it is mainly handled by one server. Less error prone as the complex algorithm will be a goner. More boints will be given to lower ranked users. Rankings will get more competitive as there is no longer huge boint discrepancies between users. There is also the idea to have a front page selection tab between extreme and non extreme users. We need to have an automatic flushing cache and removal of deleted scores this to keep the Bot running on its own, without me having to remove thousands of deleted/incorrect submissions yearly. And of course the tons of bugs that still need to be ironed out. All the above causes massive delay on the point system that has been decided upon. Fingers crossed for a Q1 release.

Hail to the new king of Australiaaaaa