Just Learnin'
-
Posts
86 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Just Learnin'
-
-
Thanks Jmke.
-
Have they changed? I see this one given as the example for PCMark 05:
http://www.hwbot.org/blog/wp-content/pcmark05.jpg
I have been including all this in my screenshots:
Is that no longer the proper requirement for a screenshot?
-
So these were actually different users?
-
You should see two links come up when you click submit. Close the one you are talking about that goes to the Wprime site and the second one should have another popup just beneath the toolbar. Click on it and allow it to connect. That is the link that submits to Hwbot.
-
Are these from the same user under different names? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=810931 and http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=803993'>http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=803993
Same mobo, CPU and GFX cards and both captains of the team?
Also the score for this result: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=803993 doesn't jive with the GFX card and CPU speeds in the screenshot.
-
You have been promoted to team captain. : )
:banana::ws: Cheers!
-
Harleybro, but he switched teams, then moved and became inactive.
-
Thanks jmke, I created a thread within our benchmark list here: http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38725 but I do not get the option to "add a bot" when I hover over the item "options" then "bots" in my Hwbot profile page. All I can do is click on the item "bots" which gives me a list of our current "bots" with the option to "View", "Configure" or "Remove bot" our existing bots. I can find no option to add or create a new one.
-
How would one go about including it in the list of our Hwbot benchmarks here: http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=81 ??
-
Consider yourselves sponsored by individual entities boys. Same as being sponsored by Evga or Intel, just on a lower scale. Happy Clocking.
That makes sense to me. I have actually read where "sponsored" clockers received CPU's on loan from Intel for short periods only to give them back so another can use them. How does this differ from "loaning" items?
-
but I use default settings.I'm not using the profetional version of the 3dmark06,so I can not change the resolution settings
You then have to plug it into a monitor capable of 1280X1024. Your current monitor/display is probably not capable of this so the benchmark runs at the best it can get from that monitor BUT that is not good enough for a valid score. Guessing you are on a laptop? Can you hook it up to a monitor capable of 1280X1024 and run the benchmark using that?
-
should someone re-check my score
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=655707
I fixed the problem(verification url) ı want my points
The verification link shows that you ran 3D06 at 1280x768 resolution, it has to be run at 1280x1024 to be valid.
-
Prescott in Northwood category, person has points in both categories with this CPU: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=694722
-
Also you can hit Esc on the keyboard when the CPU tests start in '03 and '05 and still get valid results. In '01 you only have to run the 7 graphics tests by using the Custom settings.
-
reported by user due to lack of validation (Where GPU-Z or RIVATINER?)
insufficient verification (crew) demiurg insufficient verification for rankings (Please provide more verification. GPU-Z or RivaTuner must be present on a screen
Rules for 3DMark 05: http://www.hwbot.org/hwbot.post.do?name=application_5_rules
-
so result details are required? Not just the result score? This is getting irritating. At first the results block because it was covering up what resloution the benchmark was ran in. Now this.
-
I'd like to know what am I missing that causes this result to be blocked.
This is what it says in the entry modifications log:
reported by user due to lack of validation (Screenshot is invalid - test results are absent.)
insufficient verification for rankings (Please make the screenshot more informative. The result window MUST be on the scrennshot. )
-
Prescott in Northwood category: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=694722 user has points in both categories.
-
Well it should be pretty straight forward when the time comes to moderate this:
Originally Posted by Just Learnin'This score: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=748050 and this score: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=748069 Were accomplished with this CPU: http://processorfinder.intel.com/Det...px?sSpec=SL8ZZ A socket 775 processor with 90NM technology and 1MB Cache.
I don't know about the others in those categories but my scores are with this CPU:http://processorfinder.intel.com/det...px?sSpec=SL6PG A socket 478 CPU with 0.13 Micron technology and 512MB Cache.
Pretty sure it is an unfair comparison, is there not a separate category for the 524 CPU's?
I reported these scores a week ago with the tool and no changes have been made so...
He posted in the wrong category, this is his CPU: http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1050
And he posted his score in this CPU category: http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_332
I see Massman has been around, is he not capable of remedying this?
-
...is this believable? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=719892
-
I actually think that you are correct. I think there is a post about RB being away on holiday some place here on the forum. As far as I know he is the only one that can change the software, sorry Just Learnin'
Hey there 1Day! Miss ya...
Thanks for the reply :woot: Thought I missed a funeral. 
RB is on holiday, I dont have the resources atm to moderate; and hardware mod is afk I think;)2 replies!!! :banana: Thanks for verifying jmke, about to start a vacation myself.
-
This score: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=748050 and this score: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=748069 Were accomplished with this CPU: http://processorfinder.intel.com/Details.aspx?sSpec=SL8ZZ A socket 775 processor with 90NM technology and 1MB Cache.
I don't know about the others in those categories but my scores are with this CPU:http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL6PG A socket 478 CPU with 0.13 Micron technology and 512MB Cache.
Pretty sure it is an unfair comparison' date=' is there not a separate category for the 524 CPU's?
I reported these scores a week ago with the tool and no changes have been made so...[/quote']
Hellooooo... Everyone on holidays? :nana:
-
This score: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=748050 and this score: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=748069 Were accomplished with this CPU: http://processorfinder.intel.com/Details.aspx?sSpec=SL8ZZ A socket 775 processor with 90NM technology and 1MB Cache.
I don't know about the others in those categories but my scores are with this CPU:http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL6PG A socket 478 CPU with 0.13 Micron technology and 512MB Cache.
Pretty sure it is an unfair comparison' date=' is there not a separate category for the 524 CPU's?
I reported these scores a week ago with the tool and no changes have been made so...[/quote']
Any progress with this?
-
This score: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=748050 and this score: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=748069 Were accomplished with this CPU: http://processorfinder.intel.com/Details.aspx?sSpec=SL8ZZ A socket 775 processor with 90NM technology and 1MB Cache.
I don't know about the others in those categories but my scores are with this CPU:http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL6PG A socket 478 CPU with 0.13 Micron technology and 512MB Cache.
Pretty sure it is an unfair comparison, is there not a separate category for the 524 CPU's?
I reported these scores a week ago with the tool and no changes have been made so...
Bugged run?
in Submission & member moderation
Posted
Can someone tell me how it is possible to get such a high score in CPU test #2 in this submission? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=866479 it is phenomenal compared to all others.