Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Massman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20466

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Massman

  1. Massman
    And shaderless videocards for everyone!
  2. Massman
    Okay, I quickly read through the different links you provided me and as for now, I can see three issues with the MFT 'tweak': 1) The MFT drive is software dependant, meaning that you need to install an application before you can obtain the gain in performance (in the contrary to iRam, which is plug'n'play 2) The MFT-drive is non-bootable, which means that you need an OS installed before you can add MFT functionality (in the contrary to iRam, which is plug'n'play: installing OS is no problem) 3) The MFT setup actively addresses a part of the memory to read/write data, whereas harddisks (and iRam) are close to independant from memory size or frequency. Although this utility/software is actually very, very good for 24/7 usage, I don't really see it as a real harddisk drive (for which the HDD tests are designed). In the OCZ forums, they suggest a software ramdrive to increase performance as well, but although that can increase performance as well, it's not allowed by FM and HWBot. This opinion is my personal opinion and does NOT reflect the opinion of the entire HWBot crew. In addition, it is NOT the current HWBot policy regarding MFT
  3. Massman
    Can you link me up with information regarding the MFT technology so that I can understand what it does exactly? It's not a software ramdisk as we (used to) know it, but the artificial increase (as Praz mentioned) does raise questions. As mentioned by SF3D: PhysX also gives an artificial increase and also is 24/7 software, but both FM and HWbot don't allow PhysX scores to be submitted. Maybe time for us to ask FM's policy regarding this technology, again?
  4. Massman
    Hold on Andre, we're looking into it at the moment
  5. Massman
    So a software ram-drive? If so, MFT should not be allowed.
  6. Massman
    Mike, could you explain what MFT exactly does? Is it similar to the effects of a software based ramdisk? What is the difference between a normal SSD Raid0 system and one with MFT added?
  7. Massman
    Check his verification link "MFT+SOFTWARE RAM"
  8. Massman
    Fixed that one for ya!
  9. Massman
    Okay. Please don't ruin the game now, Mike, please don't submit another score with the software hdd. Thanks PCMark Vantage has already the limitation of benching on your OS drive? Then I certainly don't understand why FM do the same for PCM05!
  10. Massman
    You're right: if we don't balance out everything, a new system could end up being worse than the one we have now, hence the reason why we're not spending every spare second on developping a new one. http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2037&page=4 In this thread, you'll find some comments regarding the skill/money/points issue.
  11. Massman
    First of all, what we have is a conceptualisation of a new hwboints system, not a ready-to-be-coded format. Main ideas, main structure and a very limited set of numbers that describe a more appropriate (read: fair) distribution of points. There are no plans to translate this concept in a fully working algorythm for reasons that have already been mentioned: time, time, time . Next, the concept has nothing to do with evening things up: there's no such thing as compensating for less-performant hardware. The main idea behind the new hwboints concept was an attempt to address the known issues of skill versus points. Following a thread (on this forum) in which the skill-points issue was brought up, we tried to find an easy solution; a solution that would be more rewarding for pure skill and less rewarding for pure money, regardless of what hardware you are benching. As it turned out, there's no simple solution that benefits both the end-user (you guys!!) and is still as flexible as we want it to be (coding issues). Hence, the blueprint has been put in the freezer. As the current system works quite well (we are aware of the flaws and loopholes ), there's no urgent call to get the plans back out of the freezer.
  12. Massman
    Oh, forgot to mention this. At the moment we have no plans to split up 3D rankings into AMD/Intel. 3D = vga card benchmark .
  13. Massman
    There simply is no date or timeframe. As I explained, the new system requires a total clean-up of the current structure and code of the HWBot database, features and website. That clean-up takes roughly 3 months (estimated time by Frederik) ... full time; given that Frederik has a daily job, he can only work on hwbot maybe 1h a day (7h a week). 3 months at 8h a day = 736h 736h at 7h a week = 105 weeks ~ 2 years. Note that these are fairly rough calculations and only to explain my point here: even if RB started the clean-up in his spare time, using all the time he has available, it would still take more than 2 years before the clean-up is completely done. That would also mean that he spends NO time on other features/bugs in those 2 years ... In other words, in the current situation (1 coder, little time, no income) it's practically impossible to redesign the current hwboints system. Little changes are no problem, though, for instance: adding the sli function, adding benchmarks, changing cap limits, ...
  14. Massman
    It's not 6 different championships, it's WAY more. one for AMD CPU benchmarks with global point one for INTEL CPU benchmarks with global points one for AMD + NVIDIA benchmarks with global points one for AMD + ATI benchmarks with global points one for INTEL + NVIDIA benchmarks with global pointspoints one for INTEL + ATI benchmarks with global points 2D benchmarks: AMD / Intel / other manuf. 3D: AMD / Intel / other + Ati / Nvidia / other + Single / multigpu * 4 categories of cpu's * 7 categories of 2D benchmarks * 9 categories of gpu's * 2 categories of gpu configuration * 6 categories of 3D benchmarks 2D - 4 x 7 = 28 global categories 3D - 4 x 9 x 2 x 6 = 432 global categories Total: 460 global rankings If we add more benchmarks in the future, the categories will expand even further. No problem, but please understand that the current problem is not the theoretical design of a complete new system, but the time available to implent it. Don't expect drastic changes in the near future.
  15. Massman
    Correct
  16. Massman
    There are no plans to cap any subtest at HWBot . Is the difference noticeable in other harddisk subtests? Haven't been able to test iRam versus software ramdisk. At first sight, this certainly seems to be the most elegant solution, but it'll give problems for those who, for instance, want to run Vista using 1 iRam. Plus, like you said, there might be a workaround for this as well.
  17. Massman
    That would make things too complicated, I'm afraid. The design has to be held as simple as possible, otherwise the point distribution service will slow down the site completely AND, more importantly, no one will understand how the hwboints actually work. There are blueprints for a system that goes beyond the points-for-result concept, but the implementation requires us to clean up every page of code ... which would take months to complete. Frederik is doing all he can in the little spare time he has and since this still is a non-professional database (no one gets paid, fred is paying to keep it running) we have no funds to hire a coder at the same level of RB to do the cleaning for us. We're still trying to find an alternative solution for this problem, though .
  18. Massman
    Let's not overreact . First of all, even if FM would be allowing software based ramdisks (or just provide verification links for it), HWBot will not accept software ramdisk scores, even WITH verification link. I reckon it's important to request yet another fix (solution of Mike seems to be the easiest)
  19. Massman
    Hope this picture explains . Basicly, just click on the '+ icon' to see a more detailed score.
  20. Massman
    RB is working on it, shouldn't take too long before the 'link' to the old profile is active.
  21. Massman
    For those who're interested: FM has already replied and is looking if there's an easy solution or direct fix for the issue!
  22. Massman
    My questions were always answered in the past. I've contacted FM as well
  23. Massman
    Now we have
  24. Massman
    Both remarks are 100% valid and although we have allowed WR's without FM links in the past (FM links were added to the score the next day or so), it's not our intention to 'hand-pick' the top scores at all; everyone plays be the same rules. This issue is being addressed within the crew as we speak, so I expect a fair solution by the end of the day. Of course I hope FM just approved the 30k score
  25. Massman
    Hmm, it's your HDR/SM3.0 which seems out of line in comparison to the other scores in that category. That's the reason why all your other scores are untouched.
×
×
  • Create New...