Massman

Perhaps the taste is subjective and forms a bias for people. Then not being able to taste the content is better?

I know the HWBOT database is! Now trying to find product pictures .

Problem solved! http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/m2a_vm

Ok. If Google Translate doesn't play tricks on me, I see this idea as a way for a leading Russian overclocking team to form a core team of the top Russian overclockers to promote the Russian flag within the realms of the overclocking world, both offline and online. What's wrong with that?

Please discuss this with the people involved; HWBOT is definitly not involved.

It has been removed from the competition because it didn't meet the memory frequency limitation

http://hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=gpu&id=1357_1&id=1625_1 9800GT

Oh, that is nice!

It's called a "challenge", not "children playground"

Why?

PhysX is software for using Nvidia VGA to calculate physics real-time. Hyperthreading is hardware to use the gap in two instructions of one thread to insert an instruction of another thread to improve multi-threading performance. You need drivers to use an Nvidia VGA for rendering physics (software=PhysX) whereas you don't need drivers to use hyperthreading.

Thuban and Deneb

Good idea x 2! Based on this score, I've set the LGA775 memory limit to DDR3-2100. Therefor, I'm expecting 550FSB 1:2 runs (or maybe 660 5:6 haha). Will add memset/cpu-tweaker to limitation list!

The patch will indeed include subtest scores, which will be visible for advanced and professional users. Basic usage will still only have online validation. Also got a positive response to the security leaks and got notified they'll be addressed as soon as possible.

I think it's definitly worth considering and not so far out as some seem to think it is. I assume/know there are some women out there who are well-capable of fitting in with the sub-top of the extreme overclockers. That we hardly see women compete for the victory, meaning: not just accompanying their male friend, makes sense mathematically, I guess, but might as well have an underlying cause. I think it's possible this cause might be due to the environment (overclocking scene is very male-dominated) or due to slim odds of qualifying (why bother showing up as the chances for qualifying are not great). In any case, I'd be very happy to see more women enter the live competition scene and if having a fixed seat for a women-team in the final can be an incentive for them to start participating, I'm definitly in favor. Even if that means other people call it discrimination, gender-bias or 'an opportunity to crossdress'.

Yes, this is possible and was 'kind of' planned. This has no significance in terms of verification, though ...

Security leak found and reported to Futuremark. This leak is a simple dealbreaker and has to be fixed before adding.

"It is not on the compatibility list yet"

Note that a special overclocker's edition has also been suggested when Vantage was released

3DMark03, 05 and 06 all were released with score (+ subtest) visible from the start. Later, they patched those three benchmarks and the score was no longer visible without using an advanced key. Vantage was released with the score hidden from the start, but the score (+ subtest) were visible once you used an advanced key. It's pretty much the same as with 3DMark11, only now we don't even get to see the subtest scores.

Hyper, PSC, D9GTR (Thuban), ... plenty of choice! Yeap! First I have to verify the overclocking capabilities of the SNB, though.

Fyi, this score has been submit through a user-made webpage and not the 3DMark11 application: http://3dmark.com/3dm11/31978. -sigh-

Just heard some "interesting" security issues. Fuck, working at HWBOT makes a man go mental on security

In theory yes, in practice it's not so cheat-proof. Ideally it would be possible to batch-run through command line with the free version. Then we'd be able to make our own wrapper to launch the benchmark, grab all the info and put it in a secured .hwbot file (~ Unigine). Sadly enough, batch runs are only available for the professional licence. Alternatively, we could ask users to send their validation file along with the screenshot. Then we could open the validation file and check for the subtest details ourselves. Sadly enough, we probably don't have the legal authorisations to do this ... also, we don't have any idea how the checksums are calculated so we can't verify if the subtest details are correct.

That logic is circular: we shouldn't do something new because it hasn't been done in the past.