WhiteWulfe

Bump. Seriously, why haven't points been given for this yet?

Why Catzilla? It's a bug-ridden mess, isn't really actively supported by the developer anymore, and on top of that it doesn't give global or hardware points anymore. I'm also curious about the SLI/Crossfire stage, and why someone would go for something so niche, as it seems that not really all that many do the multi-card thing...

Not to mention that some stock coolers are absolutely terrible, and would wind up being replaced anyways.

Using a datafile from a v3.3.3 32B run on my RTX 2080 keeps giving the error message of... You are not using a compatible version of GPUPI - 32B: 3.3. You can download the latest version here: https://www.overclockers.at/news/gpupi-international-support-thread Uhm... I`m using 3.3.3. Worked perfectly fine for a 1B submission. When creating the datafile, no errors were given either. EDIT: Nevermind, apparently the GPU Pi submission tool will let you upload v3.3 datafiles and doesn`t double check. Apparently I was trying to upload a v3.3 score to the non 3.3 one. No idea why it wouldn`t check the datafile up front when it initially uploads it...

True enough. Here's hoping that CPU gets points too. So odd that only GPU got points for that, but they're also pimping v3.3 CPU subs in Divisions.

Points? Currently v3.3 doesn't give any points for 2D other than team power points. Only GPU Pi v3.3 on GPU's got points. Increased subs for v3.3 wouldn't hurt though!

So.... Why the mention of video as a backup validation? Most people tend to focus on just benching.... So what happens if they don't have video? It's worded in a way that pretty much anyone could say something about your sub and you're forced to have a video ready, and not everyone wants to waste hard drive space like that and have a ton of videos lying around on a just in case basis...

Why are people able to sub 6700K's to this? LGA1151 is newer than LGA 1150....

Figured it out. For some strange reason, the emails say "left a message on your wall" and give a (non-clickable) link to your own personal wall. .....All those comments were on the team's wall. Any chance the emails could be fixed with some sort of clarification so you know where the comment is left? ^_^;;;

Sadly this is what my profile's feed shows.... None of the various comments people have left show on my end for some reason. In Chrome while logged in, or Firefox when not logged in (didn't bother logging in on Firefox to see if it would or wouldn't). Makes it a tad difficult to reply to such ^_^;;;;

Occasionally, someone will post on my wall on my profile.... I'll get the email, but none of the posts will actually show. Is there any easy way to fix this by chance?

Ah, many thanks. I tried looking for it in a few different areas, but I didn't have any luck finding it. I'm glad to see it was more of a database glitch. Out of sheer curiosity, how did you find it?

Went looking through my hardware library in my profile today, and noticed something... It seems my reference clock submissions for the P5E have been removed, but I never received any emails about such, or what could be wrong with them. Pictures clearly showcased that it was a P5E, text blurb specifically mentioned that it was a Rampage Formula bios being used (they're cross-compatible, and the Rampage Formula bios actually has a decent amount of options that the P5E's does not, AND it's noticeably more stable). And before someone says "screenshot looks like it says Maximus Formula on the PCB"... That's because the P5E was primarily Maximus Formula boards that didn't pass the RoG requirements, they put a sticker over top of the "Maximus Formula" that said "P5E" and the stickers peel off after a while (doubly so if you're freezing the board repeatedly...) - the sticker on mine pretty much just had to be touched and it came off when I got it. I'm rather curious as to why my 575.09MHz reference clock sub that took quite a bit of prep and work to acquire was pulled, and why no notification was given about such. Thanks in advance.

You do know I'm talking from experience right? A few weeks after Team Cup 2017 ended, I left OCN's team... And with that LOST over 100 competition points from the three stages I had participated in. Hence why the warning - they don't lock in like individual competition points do. I went from several 40+ points per stage... To just a few from each. And that happened for a few of the team events I had participated in. The RoG one also saw a similar pattern for competition points. You can potentially qualify for rewards (if whoever is calling the shot for the team says you can), but unless HWBot has changed it so that team contribution based competitions have their points locked in afterwards, you might be in for a nasty surprise if you're trying to be competitive with others ranking-wise, or even just trying to pursue a personal goal like building up to a specific ranking in your country, for example.

One problem with doing this is it screws up your own scoring, unless they finally fixed that. Competition points you acquired with that team go poof if you leave the team a few weeks later - they wind up becoming whatever the new team you're part of was ranked at, instead of what you earned. So just something to keep in mind.

So if I'm reading that correctly, provided it's cropped to 1920x1080 (aka cropped to just the one monitor's screen) and has all the other requirements, it's okay?

A quick question comes to mind. Say if a gaming rig with a surround monitor setup is used, and we don't disable the side monitors... Does the verification screenshot need to have all three screens in it, or are we allowed to crop out the side two? I'm suspecting it's with all three, but just wanting to confirm. If all three screens are required, are we allowed to use DisplayFusion (a desktop management pieces of software) to have a custom background on the side ones and the competition in the middle, or do all three need to be the competition background? Seems silly, but curious questions need to be asked sometimes.

Living room is currently torn apart, but I'll try and rewrite it up with nicer pictures due to two reasons (1: better mobile phone now, and 2: I have a mirrorless ILC now so no mobile phone pics, mwa ha ha). Joys of living in a small space and trying to keep everything organized, you have to make massive messes when moving stuff around >.>;;;;

Team Cup 2017 only ended a month and a half ago ~_^

Why are the black and red editions more, out of curiosity? Nice to see the spare parts kit is available again too, here's hoping it doesn't go out of stock in short order, and stays as a regularly available item

Only if a twin-pack Mars bar is also required.

I absolutely LOVE the sound of the whole blind submission part, provided a few things were still possible... - Everyone could at least see who is competing, and how they're looking for submission COMPLETION... Aka your Team A has 3/3 subs posted for a stage, Team B has 2/3, etc - I'd love to have the ability to see what members of my team have submitted... Provided it wouldn't provide a coding nightmare (most teams have their own forums with private sections and/or chats, so logging of scores can always be done here) - There's preferably some sort of penalty to reduce sandbagging... But instead of penalizing submissions that are put in in the last twelve hours (because such would be a coding nightmare, not to mention putting a huge burden on the moderation staff to determine what submission was a sandbag, and which one was because the bencher was paid that day (Friday, like this year's event, was arguably the "last" day) and went and did another round to try and improve their own scores. In essence, some sort of "stage within a stage" kind of idea, where a portion of the final score teams get is based upon where they sit, say the first and second thirds of the competition (end of first month, end of second month)... In order to encourage not only regular participation, but also earlier submissions of results. But I'd then say don't show standings until the very end, have the points be "silently logged behind the scenes" or something to that effect. Say, have a 15/25/60 kind of weighting to it, where 15% of a team's final score would be from their standing in the first month, 25% from where they were in the second month, and 60% from the final month's standings... Y'know, kind of like how things work out in the long run for leagues in regular sporting events. I wanted to say 20/30/50, but feel the 15/25/60 would be better received due to having more of a focus on how things are in the end. Such could also be used to drum up more support from sponsors due to there being more activity with the benching, and people rallying for their teams in a (potentially) stronger manner. ;;; Will that last one reduce sandbagging? Nope, but it would also help alleviate concerns that some would have about a totally blind system, AND would also at least reduce some of the sandbagging because if you banked on sandbagging the lack of results in the first and second third could very well backfire. It also has the side effect of causing some of the smaller teams (or even the larger ones that focus on very specific areas) some chaos in the beginning stretch due to lack of hardware, but on the flipside... It reduces the focus on sandbagging. However, on the flipside, if we have that nice distribution of hardware like we did this year (and not the absolute chaos that was last year with the whole sodimm in dimm converter that didn't work very well for a lot of people, and completely archaic hardware) the chaos could at least be limited in it's nature.

Hmmm.... Didn't notice that first, but at the same time... Weren't those CPU's put into mainly the higher end laptops? Hubby's G74SX has that same processor in it, and was available with either a 1600x900 or 1920x1080p screen, with most of the i7 variants having the 1080p screens. Sub was also done with a pre-KabyLake CPU on Windows 10.

Wow can't see CPU-Z version and the render is partially blocked. Websmile, I hope you don't mind if I add this little bit as a reply to a post that isn't there now.... I've had my 1080P monitors for eight years now (they were $130 CAD each)... Before that I had CRT monitors that could do 1600x1200. Saying "I'm an old bencher" when we've had access to fairly inexpensive monitors for some time (and probably wound up updating some of the ones in our places anyways) seems like a rather odd thing to say. My "main" benching monitor (well, center screen in my gaming rig atm, but will be my benching monitor again in a few months when I finally upgrade my gaming rig's monitors) was all of $80 CAD to pick up, and that was something like a year ago.

There's always the option everyone else uses.... A screen with a high enough resolution to fit everything into one screenshot without covering up stuff