eva2000

Hope the bug fix in point calculation helps... last 14 days of submissions. You have to ask yourself was the 0.1pts worth the time and effort ?

Actually both statements can be right as you have to understand not everyone is viewing the new emerging situation from one person/hwbot folks perspective but that of their own. That's why throughout all 3 revisions of hwbot, there have been folks pro-change and folks against the changes. Definitions of effort and amount of money will differ for everyone participating in hwbot. For folks use to LN2/DI and volt modding they'll see that they put alot of effort, time and money to achieve their results. For folks on air/water who push their systems to the limits of their system cooling limitations, find tweaks and test their systems will see that they also put in alot of effort, time and money. It's all relative. Now the new rev3 has rubbed both kinds of folks the wrong way. 1. Folks on LN2/DI and with more money or saved the asses off for multi-gpu setups in hopes of achieving higher scores now in rev3 see that effort (saving money) and benching in multi-gpu configs are not being rewarding enough relative to older gen hardware which is more popular. 2. Folks on air/water in some categories are only getting minor points 0.1 for their efforts as all the points are now sourced in popular hardware categories which have folks on DI/LN2 or volt modding occupying the >0.1 pt rewarding spots. These folks for reasons financially or otherwise can't afford to modify/volt mod and kill their hardware to compete in the more popular hardware categories. So as you see both statements can be correct as it's all relative

rev3 has now just divided that motivation into 2 - motivation to bench and aim for WRs in general = unchanged - motivation to participate in hwbot = decreased for folks with higher end hardware or aims for WRs on hwbot Clearly rev3 will need some revising as it's going to de-motivate alot of folks from further participation in hwbot as you can see by the issues folks are bringing up here so far. At first, I thought splitting the gpus and cores down would give everyone a fighting chance in these broken down categories, but now with the revised point allocation based on hardware popularity - it has really made it less worthwhile to participate in. At this rate, I don't see how 2x, 3x, 4x gpu and cpu core categories will ever become more popular than they are now as some of you have said 'wait and see once more 2010 submissions come in'. Would the discrepancy between a WR/#1 ranking (in multi cpu/gpu) be further widened as more new submissions come in, now that folks realise there's no worthwhile gain in those and just bench the medium/last gen stuff which is more popular ? Yeah I know it will be a catch 22, if folks do that as it effectively ensures the less popular multi gpu/cpu categories remain unpopular with less points awarded. Edit: what about hwbot API/XML feeds ? they undergoing improvements ? any chance of changing or offering xml using only elements without attributes ? makes accessing the data easier from <team> <name>Team OCX</name> <rank rank="1" hwboints="12991.80" participants="5210"/> </team> to <team> <name>Team OCX</name> <rank>1</rank> <hwboints>12991.80</hwboints> <participants>5210</participants> </team>

wow what a bug ! our team lost 2 spots and 553.5pts at least! check this out what i4memory.com had last night versus now http://www.hwbot.org/hallOfFame.do?type=team&applicationId=all

Thanks for explaining this which makes more sense and probably should of been the first post in this thread so as to not confuse folks/oc'ers. This event is about promoting manufacturers through overclockers/oc'ing - hence the formula one title . Manufacturers are the ones choosing who's competing like F1 racing manufacturer's choose who drives their cars. Perceived skill from manufacturer's point of view. .

Being neutral as possible, i too can't see why UK, Germany and France would be excluded when Australia is included ??? Speaking as a British born Chinese Australian - no bias here

Does indeed... i doubt 240L LN2 will be enough haha

Have fun guys... 240L LN2 dam sure that is enough ?

what you comparing for 55MB/s? this is a quick run on non-MFT 4xSSD Raid 0

and why is that a problem ? I'm not one of those that 'heavily opposed' software ramdisks, I've always been for them even before pcmark04/05 existed as they're used widely in the REAL world in server/linux environments to improve storage based I/O performance why i'm so pro SSD + MFT ? answer is easy I use it to improve my SSD performance for STORAGE related usage in the REAL world = video encoding scratch disk 4x32GB OCZ SSD Raid 0 + MFT on Highpoint 3520LF PCI-E controller with 256MB cache vs 750GB Samsung SATAII Configurations for System Clocks: 4009Mhz @19x211Bclk with 8x mem multiplier 3x1GB HCF0 @844Mhz 9-9-9-24 i7 920 with HT no Video cache (SATA HDD source drive) = 4min 50s i7 920 with HT with Video cache (SATA HDD source drive) = 4min 10s i7 920 without HT no Video cache (SATA HDD source drive) = 4min 34s i7 920 without HT with Video cache (SATA HDD source drive) = 3min 53s i7 920 with HT no Video cache (SDD source drive) = 4min 05s i7 920 with HT with Video cache (SDD source drive) = 4min 06s i7 920 without HT no Video cache (SDD source drive) = 4min 04s i7 920 without HT with Video cache (SDD source drive) = 3min 55s Note: Video and Audio caches use system's tri-channel DDR3 memory bandwidth which is faster than both SATAII and SSD Raid 0 transfer bandwidth and as I tested early if you disable HT I notice that your get more clock for clock memory bandwidth in Memtest86+ v2.11 than when you have HT enabled. Guess ultimately it comes down to definition of storage usage. The fact is with SSD and even software ramdisks (which were out there way before pcmark04/05), the definition of storage has changed. Now the question is whether FM/hwbot accepts this evolution or not. Anyway, it's up to you guys to decide whether MFT assisted SSD is allowed or not. It's your house so it's your rules either way. edit: Also if the argument is pcmark05 is to test hdd performance not system memory performance which software ramdisks can effect, then the argument can be the same for 3dmark2001/2003/05/06 which all are effected by system memory bandwidth to various extents. Classic is 3dmark2001 which can get pretty big boosts when memory bandwidth is tweaked. Accordingly, since 3dmark benchmarks are meant to test GPU performance and not system memory bandwidth, we should ban 3dmark2001/2003/05/06 as well.

Geez guys getting their knickers in a knot MFT reserves part of the usable target drive's (SSD or regular HDD) free space for it's work (~10% of SSD drive space). You should just allow software ram based benchies too and solve the problem. Software ram disks are accessible by everyone if they want it (sometimes at a price) which is no different to how liquid helium, dry ice and LN2 are available for folks who are willing to fork out dollars for pots, dewars and related expenses. You don't see folks complaining they don't have access due to price/costs to liquid helium, dry ice and LN2 and calling a ban to such usage - well okay there are some folks calling for separate categories to cooling so they can compete. Costs of ramdisks/ssd can't be a valid argument for not allowing them, as liquid helium, dry ice and LN2 costs for pots, dewars and related expenses can also be lumped into the argument for disallowing sub zero cooling. Honestly, have no idea why folks and futuremark are so strongly against allowing memory system be a factor in a benchmark that benchmarks the entire system and should reflect real world usage. Real world facts SSDs are in use for both os and non-os disk purposes Hardware raid controllers use memory caches to improve raid/read/write performance Hard drives have a memory cache to do the same Utilising system memory based caches exist to improve I/O performance is widespread in both consumer and corporate worlds. Operating systems utilise memory system for caching. Databases have query caching (MySQL) to reduce the load on database servers. There's also Memcached to basically move databases into ramdisk storage rather than on hard drive. PHP which is widespread and utilised by allot of applications can use PHP caches like xcache, Eaccelerator and APC to cache PHP to reduce cpu loads. [*]Benchers tune their system cache/memory performance to improve their pi and even 3dmark results Pcmark05/benching pcmark05 measures overall system performance and memory system is part of that so allowing such will open up competition to see who can tune their memory system and bandwidth the best - similar to super pi, everest bandwidth that folks like to see. It still takes into account the cpu and gpu so folks tweaking that + the drive system + mem system will still come out on top eventually we have folks running e-ram/ramdisk for when they bench super pi 32m we have folks clocking and tuning the memory system to get more memory bandwidth and faster memory latency to get better pi and even squeeze out a few more points in 3dmark Folks complaining, are you so stuck in the past that you can't see the future ? In the future, memory system tuning and benching will become even more important especially with both Intel and AMD parties moving to integrated memory controller. Every benchmark run will utilise the memory system and to differing extent improvements and gains in benchmark results will occur by tuning and tweaking that memory system - be it clocking memory higher, tightening main and subtimings etc. The future is here now!

Awesome news Yes i went through FM's online support contact form to contact them, waiting on their reply to my last email after i tried their suggested virtualmark workaround and it didn't work. As I told FM and in my original linked post in first post, I used OCZ support forum's stickies for Vista tweaks/registry and MFT to improve OCZ SSD performance particularly for improving random writes on OCZ SSD - total performance can be improved 10-20x fold depending on benchmarks It's my first time using Vista SP2 beta as I usually SP1 so not sure if SP2 played a factor it the speeds but I also vLite with latest hotfixed and integrated update install cds http://i4memory.com/f78/vista-ultimate-sp1-64bit-vlite-build-5582/ and http://i4memory.com/f78/list-vista-post-sp1-32bit-64bit-update-hotfixes-etc-9492/ which also improve SSD performance as since day 1 I owned my OCZ SSDs, I have never experienced any stuttering/freezes or issues with my OCZ Core SSD like other folks have experienced on either onboard ICH10R or on Highpoint RR3520LF PCI-E controller.

Then ran Pcmark05 again but off 2nd SSD partition on N drive and got a nice boost

I see. So tried run Virtualmark and install the prompted software first and got Virtualmark of 26,000 This time split my 4x32GB SSD Raid 0 into 2 partitions of equal size M and N drive and then did a Pcmark05 run and got much higher startup scores but 1/6th the speed in General HDD Unfortunately, still get systeminfo corrupted message on submission page

you referring to this attempt as the suggestion for me to run virtualmark ?

Thanks guys... Well it ain't exactly un verified, as those 4 screenshots (click image for full version) show exactly what was run. Got a reply from FM and it seems there's a chance it will go through. Will do what they suggest later today with a rerun (might as well as above you can see the 2D windows test is quite low).

thanks guys... I tried submitting but hwbot automated verification keeps asking me for compare url hehe Submitted via forum bot update

Just pulled off a nice 30,132 pcmark05 score with raid 0 SSDs but futuremark submission isn't going through - so emailed them to see what's what but wondering if it's okay for hwbot submission ? http://i4memory.com/f80/dfi-x58-t3eh8-pcmark05-30k-broken-13124/ System specs Intel Core i7 920 3836A756 Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme + LGA1366 Bolt Thru kit + 2x 120x38mm Scythe UltraKaze 2000rpm 87cfm fans in push/pull DFI LP UT X58-T3EH8 R.A51 - 12/31 bios HIS HD4870x2 CAT 8.11 Hotfix (Vista) 2x1GB Cellshock PC3-14400 (Micron D9GTR) + 1GB OCZ PC3-14400 Platinum (Micron D9GTR) Ram cooling: 3x 60x25mm Sunon 23.5cfm Maglev fans 750GB Samsung HD753LJ 4x32GB OCZ Core V1 SSD Raid 0 + Highpoint RR3520LF PCI-E Raid controller 256MB Cache Pioneer DVD-RW 1KW Corsair HX1000 psu Vista Ultimate SP2 Beta 64bit vLite'd Click image for FULL LARGE screenshot edit: in response to comments made in this thread i posted my reply at http://www.hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?p=27351&posted=1#post27351 copy and paste quoting

using firefox 3.01 on 1600x1200 LCD screen and seems upload form field rendering is messed up for me

might want to get the iphone locally, some folks i know are on their 3rd Aussie iphone rma replacement heh

haha momentarily miscalculation at the database end i'd say

probably loaded wprime at 5100mhz and clockgen/setfsb higher nothing wrong with that technically but does make it hard to verify i guess

happy birthday man

haha.. There's more to come from us Aussies

Yeah would be a nice feature to have.. 1/3rd of my members have never submitted even 1 entry yet LOL