Massman

You don't see how this is just incorrect? If there were NO ES, people would've used RETAIL and submit scores with retail. Looking at rankings without ES = looking at the ranking without overclockers ...

Lol. You make a statement, I quickly give two examples that prove the statement is wrong and you think it's proof that your statement is right. That's just wrong, mate. In addition, your assumption that Stummer would be on top if no ES were used is also incorrect: people who now use ES would then be using retail and there's no way to predict how that would've gone. Or: none of your posts contain valid arguments. They're just based on flawed assumptions.

Ryba did it not so long ago. //edit: Stummerwinter as well

-sigh- I'm not pretending anything here. If it would be necessary, I can digg up several documents proving that we're trying to work something out where both normal users and marketing overclockers can benefit from without making things we want to control uncontrolable. Several post have been used to explain why it's not as simple as just removing them all, posts you've apparently not read or do not wish to comment on when you notice your arguments start to fall apart. As a last resort, you now start to make anything I say look invalid by making predictions for which you have no base other than personal feelings. There's a reason why I'm saying you remind me of Belgian politicians: using bold statements and suggesting 'solutions' without thinking about the consequences of the proposed solution. Sure, it all sounds very appealing.

^^ the above

Poll: "Voters: 41" HWBOT database: "Users: 24567" //edit: you also missed the point of the post.

1000p on DDR2 is nice. Could it be because of the NB speed? In my DDR3 testing, I noticed that NB speed made quite the difference.

Maybe it's time that I spill some beans here. As some members, apart from myself, have already indicated in this and the poll-thread: the ES are not the real issue here. Removing ES from HWBOT is like fixing a traffic jam by closing the road for all cars: at first sight, the issue will be solved, but other (similar) problems will occur on different places. Just removing the ES in the middle of the game doesn't go; why? 1) Changing rules mid-game is as unfair as it gets 2) Bioses with adjusted microcode will appear making ES look like normal cards 3) We only have CPU-Z indicating the CPU ES editions, we don't have GPU-Z indicating GPU ES editions If there's one thing that the GTX 480 coldslow problem has learned us it's that Nvidia, Asus, Evga and other manufacturers are willing to protect 'secrets' to their advantage: it's all about corporate leverage to take a world record. If it's not on HWBOT, it's on Futuremark or anywhere else. If it ever comes to AMD beating Intel again, rest assured that Intel will be pulling tricks to prove they're the best. Read: sending golden samples to mainboard vendors to take down records. So, what is the real issue? The difference between overclocking for fun and overclocking for marketing purposes. This is something we can solve, on long-term, by creating a different league for marketing overclocking. In fact, first steps in this direction have been taking months ago, but have been kept internally for very obvious reasons: we are still in the design phase of the competition. It's not possible for HWBOT to just create a new league and move everyone who we think belongs there. For a league that is focussed on marketing, we need the support from manufacturers and participating overclockers, otherwise it will just not work. I hope that everyone understands the consequences of this step, though. A lot of guys are now pushing really hard to get sponsorships for their overclocking escapades, hoping to get picked up by a manufacturer and get send hardware. With a marketing league, you could forget all about this: it will be one league for the 'normal' folks and one league for those who get seeded. And this is where another problem occurs: is getting one mainboard for free 'getting seeded'? Is getting one VGA for free? Also, there's no way we can control this: local PR people invite overclockers to public demos sometimes. As a reward, they can keep the hardware. Is this being sponsored? And what about qualifying for GOOC or MOA and getting to play with the most high-end hardware (980X + GTX480), whereas you normally don't have the money for this? As you can see, there's MUCH more to this than just removing the ES from the competition. The ES are just the tip of the iceberg.

Mainly 1M and Wprime 32M for the Benelux GOOC qualification (not that I have a chance ... A0 allowed ). I've got a GTX 480 prepped as well ... who know, maybe.

What would this damage disclaimer say?

Bios lay-out is good; they implented the MIT layout from the P55 series onto this board. By the way ... no one noticed the UDP7 string coming with bios F2? Just FYI, flashing the bios to F4a doesn't change the UDP7 string ... I wonder if that's because of the rev0.2 PCB. This is a media sample, by the way, no special overclockers sample. I'm still trying to work-around the 222MHz BCLK issue. It seems to be the same issue like I had on the UD7: 222MHz wall on air cooling, more on subzero. Will test the subzero part tonight.

Again with the oversimplification ... Go a few posts back in this thread and re-read the posts where people have indicated the issues with removing ES (or even disallowing them). It's not because we disallow them that everything is solved ...

Clever. Too bad you started all this by using the fairness-argument.

We will not "just" remove all ES from HWBOT as it's unfair to those who have bought the ES when it was still allowed.

I can but people lie.

UPDATING FIRMWARE OF OC DASHBOARD In case you have problems with the OC Dashboard not showing the correct values and not applying voltages, here's the way to solve the issue. Step1: connect the OC Dashboard to any given system using the USB connector. I prefer Windows XP as Vista/7 gave me some unclear issues. Normally it shouldn't be a problem, but ... Step2: Install the driver for the newly detected USB hardware. You can download the drivers here. Step3: Open the flash utility and load the new firmware into the application (embedded + open file). The utility and firmware can be found here Step4: Now press 'connect' and then 'start'. The firmware should now be updating. Once done, fill the thermos and start benching. The firmware update is just to make it work with the XPower. You can still use the same Dashboard with the other boards. NOTE: flashing at own risk. Don't think there's any risk involved, but just for the record: I will not cover your hardware damage.

As I said before, for me monday = working day. Last monday was a holiday so then I have free time ...

No, they really want to get those WR's

But you present yourself as everyone's saviour when you're just shouting loudly? Don't you understand that some people see through the sherade you put up and in the end just don't listen anymore? I'm all in fordiscussion, but not when it's just about shouting and getting noticed. It's just a good example of how you want hardware sharing to be attacked, but DON'T accept that questions can also be asked to you or your team. And you're not the only one here ... mud-throwing conversations when we dare to just ask something (not even blocking the result), but when someone else's results look weird it's all "he's lying", "they are sharing" and "remove those results now". I guess you have be on the receiving end to see the irony here. Oh, and the one-sided comment is a bit biased since it's normal you only see the one side ... Fyi, by MOA and GOOC I obviously mean the live finals where hardware is provided. Look, if all of you guys give HWBOT the right and priveledge to remove ANY result without prior notice just because it looks a bit off ... okay. We'll do so, and I can guarantee you on a piece of paper that it would be raining complaints and many more frustrated people will be sitting behind their computers watching the rankings. There's a reason why we like to keep things relaxed as much as possible ... in it's current form, the Overclockers League (or HWBOT as a whole) is designed to serve a competition on an amateur level(*). This means: just supporting the hobby of overclocking by having a website that allows you to gather all your results in one place and give some incentive to maybe push the hardware a little harder. Isn't that the main purpose of overclocking? My rank is now >30p, so now I'm benching to get the team back to the top-20. When my rank was 10, I was benching to get a bit higher up the ranks. If I see two similar scores in front of me ... well okay, I will just try to beat them both. I think none of us (except BenchZowner then) wants to see a competition regulated to the extreme, having to sign a 500-page rule book before you can actually submit a score to the bot. There's an obvious up-side to strict regulation and a not-so-obvious down-side ... (*): yes - i know things are a bit different now. Do yourself a favour and don't 'prove' that it's different.

This is a perfect example on how you can shout A and then act like B. A few weeks ago we asked some Greek friends of you if they were sharing hardware and we got a massive rain of compaints ~ 'how can you even ask us that!'. I also saw no complaints when some Greek overclockers submitted their scores from MOA and GOOC 2009 to hwbot. That's also with manufacturer owned gear. See, from my point of view you're just someone yelling as loud as he can, but not thinking about what he's yelling. Things are just not that simple ... they never are.

Very nice run!

Hehe, ok. We have no established that 'for the community' (as Benchzowner has repeatedly stated he's spokesmen) the limitation is set at 150MHz. Now, is that limitation based on the average? On the max so far? On a reference value. Or just yelling out loud "no this cannot be". The irony here is that back when we introduce rankings based on #GPU 'the community' already voiced the concern that HWBOT was degrading to the average and mainstream. Limiting clock frequencies (as that's what this basically comes down to!) seems to be a lot like this as well. How come now this is rectified suddenly? In any case, I'm open to suggestions and disussions with anyone who doesn't consider 'everything bad' and him- or herself 'super-dooper-great'. Of course we know that this issue exists and obviously there are things being talked about behind-the-scenes, but things are not really that simple as some want to make them look. I think it's in ANYONE's best interest that this is thought through instead of resorting to half-working semi-decent solutions. If you want to solve a traffic problem, banning all cars just isn't the right solution ...

Haha ... you're really unbelievable. Such a simplistic view on everything. 1) Does it matter how many people can? Why does it matter 10 people have A0 but not matter how many people can fake A0? 2) What if they are running like 50MHz higher. Or just 100MHz ... 3) Okay, so now we have to make video proof mandatory every time we suspect an engineering sample is used. Oh right ... and for sure no one will say you can fake video proof.

CPU-Z relies on microcode as well. Change that and you're set. Also, smart cheaters will run their ES just a tad higher than retail to make it look legit. So, detecting ES based on the CPU frequency will not work. Also, then we absolutely remove the possibility that someone just got lucky. Imagine findings a 1k $ golden chip that can do 200MHz more than the rest ... we'd have to remove it because it looks like ES. This has been a problem in the very recent past, you know ...

So we will have to resort on 'gut-moderating'? "Why did you block the score"- - "Because I have the feeling it's ES".