r1ch

jmke, I'm not going to do anything that hwbot doesn't want me to do - as you've explained, hwbot only works to 2dp. What I'm asking for is special dispensation from hwbot to make a change that gives me the position and points that I should have already. It's only a 3rd place Q8200, and 0.5 points we're talking about, so it's no big deal - it's not like it's a world record!

Thank you knopflerbruce, that's a good idea Are the hwbot mods ok with me changing my time to be 0.01s faster so I get the correct position? The score doesn't have global points, so the score change would only affect the hardware points. Thanks.

I should have put a question mark at the end of that sentence - I was expecting an answer, my mistake. Can you manually change the results so that my faster time is in the correct position?

I did notice that jmke, thanks. I was assuming that as the screenshot shows my time is actually faster, that you would be able to manually change it somehow

Can an admin please switch these two results, the hwbot scores them to 2 decimal places, the scores to 3 dp make mine (3rd place) faster. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=806172 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=853957 Thanks

EDIT: looks like wprime has changed their website so that uploaded 2.0 results can't be submitted to hwbot from their website. Well done wprime!! And a simple fix as well. Now what about those results between Sept '08 and now that 'could' be wprime 2.0 results? Do we just have to accept them or is there a way of blocking those results potentially using wprime 2.0? A ranking system with 3 layers to it (pre-1.55, 1.55 and now some 2.0 results) really isn't very good, especially as it could have been avoided.

So would I jmke, but do you have a better idea than allowing wprime 2.0 results in the meantime?

Nothing done = wprime 2.0 submissions on hwbot.

Thanks for the replies but you aren't actually answering my questions jmke, I don't know if it's the english barrier or something else. What you're saying is that wprime 2.0 are allowed indefinitely. As K404 says, a workaround is better than nothing. Would you take action if a public vote called for it? I can't believe I'm the only one.

Here it is plain and simple... RULE: You must use the wPrime v1.55 version PROBLEM: ANYONE can submit a wprime 2.0 result The REASON you can submit a wprime 2.0 is because of the wprime string. Maybe you can answer one question. Can the wprime website, or hwbot website, change the submission string AFTER the results is submitted online? I believe the string to come from the program/application itself, which means that anyone who has downloaded wprime 2.0 can submit a valid result today, tomorrow and for however long they want. Maybe I should get some LN2 and start posting some wprime 2.0 results that take points away from the people that you will listen to when they start complaining. I'll be honest, I love hwbot. I love the competition. But I find it unbelievable you can allow wrong results for 4 months. PS. I'm not going to go away - I want to see hwbot fair again!

This isn't the problem! You know what the problem is... Hwbot have two options: 1. Hwbot do nothing, and it is accepted that you can use wprime 2.0, submit online, and remove the verification link for a valid score. 2. Hwbot ask for screenshot for all wprime results, just like Spi, pifast, etc etc. Problem fixed. So what is it, is wprime 2.0 allowed or not?

As jmke says, you can submit using 1.55 with an online link. BUT, wprime 2.0 can also be used to submit an online link that by the current hwbot rules would be ok. Shahryar, please I am not calling you a cheater! I have no problem with you, you have not broken any rules. I have a problem with the hwbot rules for wprime and the silence from hwbot on this topic. There is a completely public way of submitting a wprime 2.0 result and there being no way to block it. I can't understand why the rules haven't changed. I feel like I am banging my head against a brick wall. Maybe if it was Superpi or a 3DMark then something would have been done by now. Maybe we should remove all points from wprime now it is not a 'reliable' benchmark....SF3D? I have tried to be polite, patient and understanding but I just don't understand.

3x wprime 2.0 results reported. 3x suspicious results. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=834483 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=834390 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=834505 Goodbye wprime credibility. Note: I'm not saying any one of those results are definitely wprime 2.0 results - but there is no way of knowing they're not.

6 wprime 2.0 results reported today... So everyone knows, via PM on the 8th,

Bingo! Exactly my point. PCMark05 scales perfectly with the drive technology you use. This is a justification AGAINST your argument. To address Gautham, yes, the 9000mbps test was obviously using some sort of caching. So what's the problem? It's identifyable, define some limits and let people enjoy the benchmark. ...just like what has happened with the 220mbps limit, and now the 300 mbps limit. It's funny how people didn't talk about dropping everyone's points for 3DMark03 when AMD GPU's started producing bugged runs. I'm gonna step out of this thread now as I've said my bit and just want to get on with benching, including PCMark05.

Silence. Two months of potential wPrime 2.0 results. Great. Please. This is so frustrating as it's such a simple fix!

Lets look at the justification you've used... Aquamark, 3DMark01 and 3DMark03 are all older and none are designed to run on 2/4/8 core CPU and 2/3/4 GPU setups. To repeat someone else, 388,000 is not the value Aquamark had in mind. The results ARE reliable. They're consistent with the hardware they're run on and the tweaks used. The hardware has got better, just like CPU's and GPU's. If you want to spend thousands on Skulltrail, i7 and 4870X2's and and not concentrate on PCMark05, that's fair enough and it's your choice not to buy an i-RAM or an ACARD. Don't spoil it for those who value filesystem performance enough to spend a few hundred quid on a fast operating system 'drive'.

Bump.

SF3D, you should listen to what your fellow hwbot mods and admins are saying instead of repeating your flawed and blinkered view on the situation. Every argument you put forward has been proved groundless. Massman has this absolutely spot on - read his post again please. You don't seem to understand that the single justification for your argument against PCM05 would have at least 3DMark01 and Aquamark points removed as well. Is this really what you want?

Is your only definition of a hard drive a rotational magnetic drive then? Or do you really want to start debating the semantics of what constitutes a "HDD"? I really really don't. I don't understand the hate for PCMark05. Futuremark are responsible for the all of the confusion, by (rightly) imposing a 220 limit to start with, (wrongly) removing it and then (rightly) putting a limit back but a higher one than before....without public statements to this effect. I feel sorry for hwbot having to moderate scores based on changing rules. However, dumping the benchmark is not right. The only argument that there is against it is that current physical 'drives' that you can install an OS to are "too fast" and not what the benchmark was intended for. By that reasoning, if you dump PCM05, you should dump 3DMark01, probably Aquamark, and with the Windows 7 and ATI/AMD bugged runs with 3DMark03, probably that as well. No? I didn't think so.

Bump.

Here here. Should actually be 21st January, which was when I first reported it to hwbot... Please explain why this is taking so long to sort out, wprime is a joke now with future results having to compete against pre-1.55 scores AND 2.0 scores now.

It's not US that have "found a loophole", it's the multiple person teams that YOU allowed. We would only be following what other people are doing to make it FAIR. I'll say again, we can talk and talk about this but I think the topic needs to be closed until hwbot make a decision.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=774407 Now the FM link works, it's wrong resolution. But of course jmke, this is just me wanting more hwboints.

Bump?!?! Why is wprime 2.0 still allowed?