Antinomy

Same stuff here: http://hwbot.org/community/submission/933863_qwerty84_3dmark_2003_geforce_8100_igp_6502_marks?tab=info Is the score blocking shown in noifications section on the main page?

rebelion, Calathea made a mistake. It's wPrime and PCMark. Both are divided by core count.

Ticket ID: 1076 Priority: High If we take a look here: http://hwbot.org/hardware.processors.do we can see a very big number of categories. It was quite a number a few years ago and now it\'s definitely overweighted.\r\n\r\nThe decision is either add another layer to categories (which will solve the problem but make browsing slower). An example is AMD K10 category of the mentioned page and then links to X2/X3/X4 and so on - the categories we are used to. Like it\'s here: http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/CPU.html\r\n\r\nAnother way (a more easier) is to combine poor populated categories. This won\'t solve the situation (because there\'s not much of them and most categories are overpopulated) but can life a bit easier.\r\n\r\nI suggest to combine the IDT Winchip C6 and Winchip 2 subfamilies in one. There\'s only one CPU in each of them and if we take all produced models it won\'t exceed a number of ten for both. Name it \"Winchip C6/2\"\r\n\r\nAnother category to combine is Transmeta. It\'s like an alien in terms of models count. Name it \"Crusoe/Efficeon\".

So how was you evening reading yesterday?

Thank you. It's the mods fault the didn't accept me as a h/w category moderator so I'll be making you work instead

Ticket ID: 1075 Priority: High 1. Combine this category: http://hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_2235 with this http://hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_930 and delete the first one.\r\n\r\n2. Delete this category: http://hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1325 these never existed, even CPU world doesn\'t know of such and ATM it\'s much more trustful than our database (I hope this will change in time though I don\'t have a chance to help you on this).\r\n\r\n3. Delete this category: http://hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_346 it didn\'t exist either.\r\n\r\n4. Delete both of these: http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/pentium_4_1.4ghz_northwood - there are two of them on the hw subfamily page: http://hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=16\r\nhttp://hwbot.org/community/submission/822670_ice_angel_cpu_z_pentium_4_1.4ghz_northwood_4683.27_mhz\r\n That means that the result is identified incorrectly. This bug comes out during overclocking and is quite known (sometimes Celerons are identified as Xeons and like that). Will report to CPU-Z author for a work around. I know the probable reason of this bug.\r\n\r\n5. Rename \"Pentium 4 1.6Ghz Willamette\" into \"Pentium 4 1.6Ghz Willamette s478\" like the rest are.\r\n\r\n6. Making a space between the frequency and \"GHz\" would fix the bug \"when the CPUs are listed as 2.0 then 2.26 and then 2.2\".\r\n\r\n7. Replace \"Ghz\" with \"GHz\" \r\n\r\n8. Rename \"Pentium 4 2.4Ghz A Northwood\" into \"Pentium 4 2.4Ghz Northwood\" and \"Pentium 4 2.4Ghz Prescott\" into \"Pentium 4 2.4Ghz A Prescott\" - Intel gives the \"A\" suffix for the new generation models which was definitely not Northwood.\r\n\r\n9. Same here - rename \"Pentium 4 2.6Ghz A Northwood\" with \"Pentium 4 2.6Ghz Northwood\" no need in \"A\" suffix since it\'s a regular core, not a new model with existing frequency.\r\n\r\n10. There were only five models of Pentium 4 2.8 for socket 478 - the \r\nregular 2.8 (Northwood, 100FSB)\r\n2.8A (Prescott, 133FSB)\r\n2.8B (Northwood, 133FSB)\r\n2.8C (Northwood, 200FSB, HT)\r\n2.8E (Prescott, 200FSB, HT)\r\nSo this category should be deleted: http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/pentium_4_2.8ghz_northw._200_fsb from what I\'ve seen all of the results are 2.8B (Northwood, FSB133 multi 21) not even 2,8C with 200FSB. I bet these categories are messed up not only by default FSB but even by cores (once the categories are fixed, I\'ll check the results and report to place them in right categories).\r\n\r\n11. Pentium 4 2.8Ghz E Prescott (HT) is called \"Northwood\" in the cores column. Rename to Prescott.\r\n\r\nAt the moment, this is it for desktop s478 stay tuned for reports on other sections.

Very nice

Good one!

Asus P4C800-E is nice, one of the best.Only the resolution and quality altering in powertoy is forbidden, am I right? Stuff like priority is OK?

If that Aibo is your baby then you're either Terminator or Transformer

Massman, separate the complains on you from complains on the things you do So don't take it by heart, it's not about you personally (as for me). And reread your sig - now that's a thing to feel offended!

dejan_bin_laden, hey, did you mean Blizzard people?

Defeat narcotics addiction, child illnesses in Africa and free Tibet. Oh, were was I Cheat-proofing and clearing out the rules for the beginning.

It won't crush if it's run on Win NT

No, the recent hack says that the system has X58 installed with the required activation key. But since the X58 key feature was implemented in new drivers, the hack will work only with them. It doesn't make the system you have NV chipset.

It won't work. Drivers have a check in order not to work on systems not certified for SLI. Before, the requirement was "only NV chipset". After X58, NVIDIA had to certify SLI for these ones because they weren't allowed to make their own chipset. So the drivers added support and then there was a hack to make any system to behave as X58. And since it overrides a new defense mechanism, this will work only with new drivers. So probably you've seen 169.21 results on 780i/790i chipsets.

You mean "join a team"? If yes, he just goes to his profile and select the team from the list. Some teams set a password for joining them so you can't select any specific team. I remember this question was discussed recently. Try to use the forum search keyword "team" for thread title

Replacing it and yes, this is not allowed, it's clearly described in the rules.

That quote was about not launching the benchmark using third-party software this is what this stuff is about. Even things that are not described in the rules can be interpreted as breach of the rules so I don't see a reason to worry about this It's not altering the benchmark settings - no. Then it's OK according to the rules. If it's forbidden - update the rules. Unless it's that simple.

Dammit, there's too much people R.I.P. recently around that I've thought of the bad from the title. Luckily, it's not that bad I think we'll all miss Sampsa, there were thing to learn from him on XS. Hope he'll find himself new things he likes to do. Massman, nice pics

You're not messing with the benchmark - only the driver's optimizations

Hm, XP didn't give me to change Aquamark's priority - "access denied" that's what taskmanager was talking about. This tweak is about application-specific driver optimizations like it was with 3DMark 2001 and all the rest of em, right? Does the score change only on NV or cards of both manufacturers?

Looked at the bottom of the forum's main page and saw that today is TaPaKaH's birthday. HB, Sam! Keep pushing and shocking us with your records 20 years is quite a nice age - not too young to be defined as a kid and so many years ahead. Enjoy this day and do things that you like to (not only today).

It was cooled by LN2.

Outstanding! =)