tiborrr

Hi Dino! Check it out: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/member.php?u=18123

I reported this score a while ago but the team hasn't had time to look into it i guess: P4 641 Pifast by DeDaL: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=605984 It looks like the run is bugged, it is too fast by about 10s compared to the others.

@jmke: I am doing that for years with the help of a little app, helps e.g. AM3 drasticly. I described the procedure once on XS.org

Hello all, sorry for my rough tone of my posts once again, i had an exam this morning. I got very angry to see my favorite card's benchmarks getting reported. I have put a lot of effort in it that why i am always angry when someone (not necessarily on purpose) discredits my work. Also now i remembered why i didn't use GPUz - it (version 0.1.9 AFAIK) automatically rebooted the PC if the GPUz was on subzero temperatures! Strange, but that's how it was. Here's a topic that should stand as a proof for all: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=177431 (US english) http://www.oc-lab2.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2828 (slovenian) Thanks once again for quick response. I'll do my best to keep my tone down. Greets, N.

Again someone is having trouble with my X1950XT results: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700502 It's a free edition, cannot change the details. Besides, it was overclocked with ATiTool, i had no GPUz at the time on my hand and RivaTuner was acting weird. Besides - ATiTool reads from the PLL of the graphics card so those clocks are accurate enough. The same goddamn platform as with 2001SE, 03, 05 and AM3. Why is it so difficult to accept that someone has better results than you? It really looks like someone is jacking my scores for a reason, especially those old-but-gold ones, which are my favorites...

P.S.: Good to see NoName back. P.S.S.: This wont work, Richbastard.

Agree with Monstru on majority of his two previous postings, but i think we're really off-topic now

Couldn't agree more. Mickeymouse got up on the wrong foot the other morning when he posted the initial post (so do I, many times unfortunately for the Hwbot crew:p). It could be said differently, but to quit hwbot.org just because you didn't clarify yourself properly (you could have known what will happen, you're a smart guy) is plain childish. I understand your anger, but that was not the right choice, right? How many times would i have to quit hwbot.org just because my score got deleted because i covered the resolution settings information with details window? It was my own damn fault. Re-bench and post, nothing else i could do. In your case it was easy, just edit the description text. You seem to choose the stubborn way My 2 cents, N.

@Benchbros: Perhaps in Germany with 80mio+ population - yes, but not in most of the countries, especially those that were treated as eastern block not so many years ago. But i get your point - it's almost impossible to differ betwen pros and amateurs since people won't tell if they got their HW for free. Best solution in my opinion would be that one could enabled option "SPONSORED/PRO OVERCLOCKER" by will in the hwbot settings which would result in a small icon next to the nickname. This way it would be easiest for both parties to differ between both pros and amateurs. System wouldn't be perfect as all people lie (Gregory House ), but it would be better than nothing. Greets, N.

This is actually a very good idea, but to implement it is a whole another story. How would you separate from pros and amateurs as myself? I am affraid there are too many dishonest people around here, but still their percentage is faily small, so i'd say go for it.

Start reading, i have written specifically "HAS or is provided with". And please, don't tell me they don't have te opportunity to handpick the best clocking hardware with all those sponsors. That's OK, but you must understand not many people has this opportunity. Besides, if you have nothing valid to add it is better not to post at all or to play advocate. Joe & NoName are grown men who can both speak and defend themselves, don't you think? Joe already explained everything, so why did you have to rush to yell at everyone who reasonably doubted about HW sharing? It has been proved that they both had their own HW, so what do you want to flame on? Benchmarking lost it's charm with all this sponsored OC events, i tell you that.

Thank you for approving it, jmke. Greets, N.

@mickeymouse: This commercialization & globalization of OC scene ruined it all for us. We can't do anything but to piss in the wind. You simply can't compete with someone that has / or is provided with five highest-end handpicked graphics card, five top chips, five top clocking boards, etc, etc... I'll stop when they cancel the 3M2k1SE support on ORB. This day isn't too far, believe me.

It's kinda stupid, 3DM03 Free Edition is settings-locked. Besides, i had #1 spot in X1950XT 3DM03 category, why would i even want to cheat? It's obvious resolution and image settings are default, check the subtest results. Statistics doesn't lie. I really don't see a reason to let it be blocked other than to degrade my work.

Thank you for your input bruce, but unfortunatelly it doesn't help at all. Why rushing on blocking perfectly valid results, but stalling on unblocking them? I still take #1 in X1950XT 3DM03 category with my old 29k result (E6700@4.8GHz), but i'd like my perfectly legit score back.

Well?

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700501 Why on earth would someone delete my half an year old result? Just because it's way better than yours? BTW: YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE RESOLUTION IN FREE VERSION OF 3DMARK03. LEARN YOUR BUSSINESS FIRST YOU TRIGGERHAPPY MOD DEMIURG! Unblock it ASAP!

Hi, in the last few days i've submitted a few 7900GS results in three different categories (01SE, 05 & AM3), but only recieved points for 01SE which gave me a boost to ~ 471 points. I've also submitted 05 & AM3 results yesterday and also an improved 01SE run, but still at ~ 471 points while i should be at around ~ 495 since i recieved another 14.8 + 8.7 for AM3 & 05. http://hwbot.org/user.do?userId=7258 I've noticed similiar problem in the past. I solved it with deleting and re-posting the results, but this time it doesn't work. Please attend to it. Thanks! Greets, N.

XS with two new members again on the 4th place, hunting down fellow benching buddies from MXS Modlabs.

@jmke: I told you to provide ORB, not some screenshot. There's no way for a G92 8800GTS single-card to reach 1000FPS at the clocks given before (1050/1150) without MIPMAP tweaking, let alone 1400! Misleading screen, fake or taken from a wrong benchmark. C'mon, are you serious? I though your knowledge of 2001SE was on a bit higher level. Apparently someone else is living in a wokywonderland...

That ORB link leads to 8600GS, those results look all over the place. Too high nature (look like a SLI setup), too low Car High (that could indicate SLI), too low Drago Low (again, indication of SLI).

:banana: Link please?

Yes, jmke, that's the main reason - if that makes you happy, so be it! :woot: I know it's impossible to hunt down these results even if i put my chip under cascade and run it at 5500-5530MHz and GPU under singlestage which might yield me another 50-100MHz on the GPU. Therefor i say it again - i don't care anymore, please lock it.

Yeah, would really like to see 1100FPS Nature on 8800GTS G92

Newer -> slower with ATi in older benchmarks because of optimization for newer 3000 series cards, it's funny how it's opposite with nVidia, GeForce 6600GT runs like hell on 169.21 Leave it be, I don't care anymore and lock this up as a favor