Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Max Silencio

Members
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Max Silencio

  1. You can have a (single) result in 3dmark.com at no cost with basic edition.

     

    You also can have any number of results from any benchmarks in 3dmark.com as long as you have one valid license for any benchmark on your account. In other words, if you have, say, advanced 3DMark 11, you can submit as many results as you want with basic edition of Vantage or 06 - just a single paid license turns your 3dmark.com account into fully featured one. Considering for example how many Vantage and 11 keys have been bundled with video cards, this shouldn't be a huge issue... I'm sure anyone serious about latest hardware probably has one or two of those keys just lying around :)

     

    The only use case that really "fails" on the submit front is usage of pirated/keygenned 3dmark advanced/pro keys to get pretty screenshots of the score - you can't submit those to 3dmark.com since the run was not done with a valid key.

     

    Of course in theory this should be a non issue - you already have to show the result in a screenshot for hwbot, so you need a non-basic version for that on all benchmarks - basic edition shows the score only on the website. If you have that screenshot showing the result in 3DMark UI but "cannot submit to 3dmark.com because licenses are not free", then you are basically stating that you are using a pirated/keygenned 3dmark. It is up to the community to decide how "okay" that is - we know the realities of pirate use (heck, we have plenty of stats showing how many people attempt to submit with pirated copies every day) and have no illusions about everyone suddenly rushing to buy the application(s). We just won't provide the online service for illegitimate keys.

     

    +1

    That's a powerful argument. So there's no substantial reason not to post a result link for validation. And it should not be that exhausting to copy and past one link which 3dMark11 automatically offers after benchmarking.

  2. Sorry, but I think this goes into a wrong direction as my intention is not to doubt the scores generally. I just would like to propose a mandatory 3dMark11-url-rule. It's that stupid easy to arrange cpu-z, gpu-z and the small 3dMark11 result window screenshots side by side with no reliability that these are related to the submitted scores.

    But if I'd misunderstood the rules please clear me up.

    And the gpu clocks are normally already back to stock when snapshotted. Some cpu-z and gpu-z screens are in a very low resolution which makes it sometimes hard to read the numbers at all.

     

     

    @forum mods

    So I may extend my question to the forum mods here.

    What are your reliability notions and criterias for the submissions?

  3. But for 3dMark11 there are submissions without an url. So they are not proved.

    One example:

    http://hwbot.org/submission/2268692_pixy_3dmark11___performance_geforce_gtx_680_13351_marks

     

    Here's no 3dMark url. Isn't this mandatory?

     

    http://hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark11_-_performance/rankings?hardwareTypeId=videocard_1913#start=0#interval=20

     

    Just view rank 2th to 7th in the GTX680 3dMarks11 ranking (29 submissions): There is no verification url.

    As well as 12th, 13th, 15th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27

  4. I cannot understand why there are scores here without any verification.

    So scores can easily be sophisticated and it makes no sense for the honest to post them.

    I've seen submissions here which have the same hardware and clocks like me but with extremely higher scores. And there's no 3dMark url or cpu-z screen which shows there real clocks. So the ranking is in that respect pointless.

    Or did I misread this ranking system?

     

    How do you think about this?

×
×
  • Create New...