Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

WhiteWulfe

Members
  • Posts

    199
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by WhiteWulfe

  1. So's XTU and Catzilla... And Vantage... And if you ask the right person, Firestrike is just an epeen "look at the massive hole in my wallet" bench. (note: previous sentence was kind of being silly, and not really serious) I asked about it since people complain that the newcomers aren't sticking around, and one complaint that seems to come up even amongst the "regulars" is there isn't much variety.
  2. Having a good selection would be rather nice.... For both low end, as well as high end gear.
  3. 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?
  4. 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.
  5. I also agree. Given the sheer focus on making life easier reducing server load, and making it easier to work on code, making it so there's half (going by the numbers seen in some of the test server stuff) the shuffling every time a better score is posted would have to do something for load. While I agree a single year might be short, it would probably be more effective than a two year cutoff if we take the intended purpose of the rev8 discussion into consideration - there are probably a LOT more who are 1+ year(s) inactive than there are 2+ years.
  6. And with Apprentice League, let's not mention that it's an absolutely TERRIBLE name for a league. Apprentice is such a downwards step from Enthusiast. LN2 is $7 CAD per liter where I live ($4-4.50 CAD per liter if you're lucky and really REALLY butter up the sales guy PLUS make use of the fact you work for one of their supplies!), and dewars are at least $600 CAD for a small, 20L "cheap" one - a 35L can be upwards of $1,200 CAD brand new depending on which company you purchase from. Most areas it's something that's stupidly expensive. A usable water cooling setup that can handle a number of things is usually only a few hundred dollars, and the only real ongoing cost is replacing the coolant every now and then...
  7. While I do like the idea of three leagues total, my biggest question is this: What kind of actual impact would this have on database load, since that is what originally spurred the whole push towards rev8?
  8. Any particular reason the country rankings are still by calendar year on UAT? Those of us who've spent quite some time working on getting good decent scores and improving miiiight find it slightly problematic/disheartening to put all that time and effort in and then lose it all, thereby making it feel relatively pointless... Also, on UAT, if you go into the Country Rankings and hit previous two things happen...It moves/scrolls you back up to the top of the page, and then absolutely nothing happens. Trying to look at other pages on the country rankings by using the previous/next arrows does nothing.
  9. While I do agree with everything else, I do have to point out one thing: Just because there happens to be a supplier in a nearby city (as not all of us live in a big city, let alone near one) there's no guarantee that pricing will actually be viable. A 35L dewar costs over $225 CAD to fill where I live, and that's not including the $600+ CAD (if you purchased brand new) it would cost to acquire said dewar, or the enviro and hazard fees that get tacked on afterwards onto every LN2 purchase. Sure, you can get it cheaper if you look around (or have a friend that's willing to let you use their "I work or am studying in a research area at a university/college" discount, which would bring it down to, uhm, $35-45 for said dewar to be filled), but that's no guarantee. Even buttering up the sales guys (or managers who can authorize cheaper pricing!) brings that same dewar down to a still not affordable at all price that's over $150. For those wondering why those prices seem so high, the $225 level is assuming $6.50/L, which is a regularly quoted price, the $150 level is at $4.50/L. LN2 in Canada isn't cheap, even if you "know someone"... And depending on the platform you're running (or if you're doing 3D), you're looking at only a few hours of fun before it all runs out. I also recall reading something about a bencher in Columbia (or was it Chile?) that was only able to do LN2 benching because they were sponsored, and their sponsor (Corsair I think it was?) paid for the liquid nitrogen. Dry ice is something that's almost always significantly cheaper, chills things fairly well, and best of all... In a LOT of areas it's $30-40 for a full weekend of fun, assuming you have a decent cooler for it. The cooler I put about $45 CAD into (a cheap 45 or so quart Rubbermaid, with two layers of 1" solid insulation board in it) will hold dry ice that was picked up early afternoon Friday as solid carbon dioxide until Monday morning... Lasting about 25-30 hours of actual benching on LGA 775, and about ten hours or so of benching a 3770k, with enough left over for a short 2-3 hour LGA 775 session the next day. ...Most countries it isn't a dangerous good with specific transport requirements either, unless you buy a full 500lb bin full of the stuff....
  10. Pretty much my thoughts on it. I've skimmed through a lot of things, but wow... Having rankings mostly be focused on what's been done the past year? What happens to growth? What happens to those who actually work on improving, and most importantly, those who tend to focus on older gear because they can't afford to risk (let alone BUY!) the higher end newer gear? Dropping 211 ranks in my country (20th to 231st, ouch) and going from the top 8% (118th out of 1505 is 7.84%) to the bottom third in my league (149th out of 219) just because I've been focused on real life instead of benching could very well coax people who had been active previously to just not return. Sure, some might argue that trying to go after someone's score from ten years ago is a difficult thing, but I say eh, work harder on it - it's what I've done, and I've repeatedly used older scores from more knowledgeable overclockers as a target to push towards... And eventually beat (yes, I'm still elated I beat ONE of Christian Ney's scores - it took over two years to surpass, of course I'm bloody well happy about it!!! Still working on beating one of ftw's scores...) And, like others have mentioned, the new method puts those who tend to rely on hardware points for their standings (due to personal preferences, financial viability of older platforms, or both) are automatically at a disadvantage when someone can get upwards of three times the points through Global/Benchmark points.... AND really does reinforce the whole pay to play aspect of it all, as the only real way to even remotely compete points-wise (or have a chance in going up the rankings) would be to go all-in on liquid nitrogen (alongside all of that expensive brand new gear!), which for a lot of people, is just way too expensive. No, I'm not calling LN2 pay to win, I'm referring to the fact that the newest hardware is bloody expensive, but if you happen to have the bank to get it, you can rather easily jump up the rankings for quite some time with access to such. I'm all for having the workload on the backend be easier, but at the same time, there's a reason why the current system wound up being the chosen compromise in the first place - those who focus on older hardware (and therefore having HUGE walls to climb just to even get remotely decent scores, especially with previously rather popular gear) were able to at least see some sort of reasonable reward for their work (and not just Hardware Masters rankings), those who focused on the competitive side of things were also able to make a good firm push into the higher rankings (I made it as high as 363rd worldwide last year thanks to competition points! Or was it 327th. Either way, still something I never would have even been able to remotely contemplate before rev7, and it helped give me additional motivation to push harder to see just what could be done), and those who had the higher up placements in benches were also rewarded. Is any system perfect? Nope, but I will say this - while going up in the worldwide ranks in nice and all, I'd rather not be going up a few hundred rankings globally just because others weren't able to bench as often (current info shows me going from 1442 to 1201 worldwide JUST BECAUSE OTHERS WERE INACTIVE - that same info that would penalize me 211 spots in country rankings because rl's been a massive pain this past year). Tying competition points to a timer is one thing (otherwise those who've been competing for years would have a HUGE advantage - this was a point brought up back when rev7 was being worked on!), but tying the entire league and overall rankings to such? Blatantly stupid, and a giant middle finger to those older members who may have wound up having real life take priority, and benching somewhat of a back seat for a while. Hell, it's two giant middle fingers to the community in general...
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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?
  14. 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.
  15. Would sure be nice to get a dark theme back on the forums. This new one is retina scorching.
  16. 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 >.>;;;;
  17. 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
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...