K404

UK only?

Awesome!

Thanks

http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/geforce_6800_gt/ Front page world record Rankings are messed up...?

Nope

For lower-power cards, with just a mild OC it will shunt 100% bottleneck to GPU....... you will never need to worry about CPU power again...focus 100% on GPU clocks. *scared face*

Cool Thanks

As title really Beta/ development preview/whatever it is

Looks good, I hope they all run to several pages of ideas...with decisive action

LOL! Trouff....see here: http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?p=148431#post148431 :p

I think the EVGA "trick" is a perfect example of why this area needs more discussion, and there should be some formal HWB/community definition of "availability" IIRC, the cards weren't for "sale" they were "pre-order" which is not the same as available in any way. I can pre-order IB if I hunt out the right shop who wants to price-gouge me. Is it available? Does NDA have to expire for pre-orders to be legally made? Would a company care? Everyone has their own definition of the things this subject covers... and it makes for a minefield. So far, the vast majority seem happy with "NDA only" if the community feels that way, that's fine. The community is why I brought this up..... and yet we ALL know this will NOT be the final discussion about it. I won't even have to start the next thread in X months time to prove i'm right.

You've kinda missed my point as well. You are talking about scenarios of limited availability. It has to be released at all before your comments come into play. I would also like to see discussion about regional availability once a product is released though. What if that wibtek board comes the next must-have? Should one region be enough to call a product "available" (ignore the size of the region, juat "one region") You have said it's a none issue because no previous product has been THAT important. We are talking about the FUTURE. Get guidelines in place BEFORE the event happens. See that it is a loophole waiting to happen. Can vendors fake retail products on a shelf? Who cares about one person, if the rest of the community cannot match it. The MAJORITY should be catered for. PJ.... your stance on the many/ the few, the future/the past varies depending on the situation. Be consistent please.

You have a better understanding of human (and corporate) nature than that. It doesn't matter if it's serious or not. It's a talent pool. Hardware companies should be aware that there are people in the HWB leaderboards with fantastic understanding of XYZ area that can be of use to them. The Pro league have already been noticed (mostly) and/or have relevant jobs in the industry.... along with the salary expectation to match their skills and experience. Look to the up-and-coming talent and you can find yourself the Shamino of the next-gen and they'll cost less to get on-board because they DON'T have 18 companies showing interest. Why did you ask if companies should ask permission to use results for PR & news? You know they're taking an interest in the scores on here.......

One thing you and some are people are missing is: Sometimes it is not -When- it is IF. Not every sampled product gets released. Going back to the Foxconn 790I. Everything about the product made it look like it was going to be released properly. Retail box, review samples, NDA lifted, BIOS development..... then it was cancelled. That is a chunk of my point. Wait until the product is OUT. Make sure it is released. People have to wait a little longer to get points FROM THEIR FREE, COMPANY SUPPLIED HARDWARE, but that's a better solution than the bitching that comes when things go "the other way" People can suggest what they see as "open availability" Personally, I do not consider eVGA pre-orders as availability... i'm sure everyone knows what product I am thinking of. I am not talking about the 7970 situation. Please, no-one mention that unless there is SOMETHING ELSE "wrong" with it other than a staggered, (mostly) paper launch. Massman suggested a time buffer for big hardware based on league. I'm suggesting a time buffer for all hardware to make sure it gets to market at all. It's common sense. Here's an idea. If HWBot increases its folder of company contacts and continues to grow (and I DO hope it does....) if companies care about good HWB exposure, maybe a wider set of rules for availability will encourage vendors to improve global availability. EVERYONE wins

Please keep this one focussed. The only rule in regard to availability is based around NDA. HWB quotes: So, what criterium can be used to determine if the hardware is unreleased or not? What we look at is if there’s some kind of NDA on the product or on any of the technologies the product is using. If both questions are negative, then there’s no problem to receive points. (http://hwbot.org/news/1656_clarification_regarding_unreleased_technology_and_hwboints) First of all, we believe that using new, unreleased, non-available technology is in conflict with one of the main principles of the HWBoints concept which states that the competition is (as) open (as possible) to everyone. We are aware of the fact that a lot of side notes can be made to this principle as you do in fact need a certain amount of financial input to compete at the very top, but using unreleased technology, which might annihilate the current top benchmark results, is even a step further as it’s available to only a very select group of people within the enthusiast community. (http://hwbot.org/news/1166_unreleased_technology_not_applicable_for_hwboints) Would people in the community like to discuss whether, after 2 years, the rule needs looked at again, to minimise/avoid (I wish) conflict over future releases/ paper releases? The options: The NDA-only rule is fine. NDA rule is a good start, but I would like to see extra rules discussed and added if suitable Remember: "NDA rule only" means that a product can have NDA lifted but never be released to market, meaning those with review samples or strong company contacts have an edge. Some products will not matter in 6 months, some will.

LOL! I phrased that kinda badly, didn't I?

Fail! Missed the "add poll" box. Please ignore/close/laugh at me

Please keep this one focussed. The only rule in regard to availability is based around NDA. HWB quotes: So, what criterium can be used to determine if the hardware is unreleased or not? What we look at is if there’s some kind of NDA on the product or on any of the technologies the product is using. If both questions are negative, then there’s no problem to receive points. (http://hwbot.org/news/1656_clarification_regarding_unreleased_technology_and_hwboints) First of all, we believe that using new, unreleased, non-available technology is in conflict with one of the main principles of the HWBoints concept which states that the competition is (as) open (as possible) to everyone. We are aware of the fact that a lot of side notes can be made to this principle as you do in fact need a certain amount of financial input to compete at the very top, but using unreleased technology, which might annihilate the current top benchmark results, is even a step further as it’s available to only a very select group of people within the enthusiast community. (http://hwbot.org/news/1166_unreleased_technology_not_applicable_for_hwboints) Would people in the community like to discuss whether, after 2 years, the rule needs looked at again, to minimise/avoid (I wish) conflict over future releases/ paper releases? The options: The NDA-only rule is fine. NDA rule is a good start, but I would like to see extra rules discussed and added if suitable Remember: "NDA rule only" means that a product can have NDA lifted but never be released to market, meaning those with review samples or strong company contacts have an edge. Some products will not matter in 6 months, some will.

I don't think your comments sit in the same way as a specifically designed and marketed product that doesn't make/hasn't yet made it to shops. RMA is available to anyone who buys the product through retail, no understanding of tweaks should force people to move leagues. Hardmods..... The higher up someone is, the more advanced the mods are *likely* to be, but there are guys in the Pro league who can't mod... and there are guys in the Enthus League who really REALLY can So..... I would say there's a reasonable balance there. Sponsors: responsible & smart sponsors will still check the lower leagues for talent, nurture it and....yep.... cash in on the best while they're still cheap.

Agree with Sam. People who buy on release day get a short-term massive boost in points, which will very likely be lost quickly as drivers mature, mods are developed and 3rd-party PCBs come to market. 2 or 3 weeks might not make any difference to easy availability across most of the world. It will reduce the geographical difference but not eliminate it. Nice idea though A time delay might have interesting effects in keeping the Enthusiast league "affordable" though

True I interpret all these things as "the things that are necessary to get a competitive, valid result" In PCM05, the MHz are unaffected, the user just has to make part of the benchmark "run dirty" to drop the score. Software fix to a hardware "problem" Anyway... I am not really "in" this conversation, PCM05 is not my strong point (but I don't want it banned just coz i'm too dumb to bench it well)

I disagree with the comments about tuning the 220MB cap wasting LN2. I "waste" LN2 getting my GPU up to speed, but it's just part of benching. Same with Copy-Waza.

A weighting can be simple It doesn't have to be like 3DMark06...... Score is: x % based on the ranking of best score at the end y % based on the consistency of their ranking (but see below) over the course of the competition. If onlookers can't follow that, there is a bigger problem to deal with.... BUT.... I do admit, "y %" needs care. It would be much easier to implement "average ranking" instead of ranking consistency..... e.g.... which is better? 75% of the competition in 3rd place, or 25% of the competition in 2nd? Then.... how to calculate the average? A daily script ran at a set time? That would mean a daily sandbag, but over the course of a month-long competition, that's fairly interesting, things keep moving. A daily script ran randomly, but at least 18 hours apart... now... THAT.... would be interesting .... but starts to move away from simple.

Free marketing? It would be nice if the companies at minimum name-checked the bencher or maybe send them some form of thankyou.

It is true. People bench what has the most points attached to it. Give one random category 250 points per gold and watch how the submission patterns change....