Rauf

Nice benching, when will you move to ln2? :)

Nice

Only asmedia ports work.

I like that you banned Asrock!

MOCF sold, I'll keep the ITX board. Close please!

Bump, 250€ for mocf

Great run!

Yes, mine work.

Great run!

Damn, great chip!

Tbh, I dont see where hw-points fit in in a seasonal ranking whatsoever. To me hw points are supposed to be the "stable" points. And if you add background requirements, correct cpu-z version, full screenshot... You will get 90% of rookie submissions reported.

No more compromise! Define a clear objective and make it happen! BTW, isn't "hw depth" what competitive overclocking is all about? Shouldn't the best overclocks be rewarded? I'm all for making it cheaper, but you can never factor out binning

How can an example that shows exactly what I mean be "bad"? I'm sorry but you just don't know what you're talking about. The clocks are normal for a pascal GPU on stock cooler. There's a reason why these cards don't scale so well on extreme cooling, but it's besides the point. Check 970 then, it's the same story: 970: https://uat.hwbot.org/submission/3992854_dragon_soop_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_970_14178_marks or 770: https://uat.hwbot.org/submission/3629333_h2o_vs_ln2_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_770_10426_marks or 780: https://uat.hwbot.org/submission/3761539_h2o_vs_ln2_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_780_14287_marks or 680: https://uat.hwbot.org/submission/3061153_pulse88_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_680_10007_marks or 670: https://uat.hwbot.org/submission/3823010_shar00750_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_670_8631_marks Need more? For CPUs it's the same. There are many examples of stupid hw points. Check this profile for example: https://uat.hwbot.org/user/pkbo/#Points And there are many examples of stupid globals also, I've written about them before. The question is WHY do we have points and rankings? WHAT is to be rewarded and what should the rankings show? As long as I have been a member no one has been able to answer this. It's always been a little bit of this and a little bit of that, which meant a system that has no clear purpose. If you don't know the why and what you want to do, how can you do it properly? For me a ranking and points system should always award the best achievements. Not just hand out points arbitrarily to "everyone who wants to mess around with decent oc's".

There is this also. And ofc it is valid, but is this what hwbot is about? Spamming meaningless results?

If the limit is stupid it does not matter who decides it. Here is one example of a stock cooled VGA and a very easy OC of an air cooled CPU: https://uat.hwbot.org/submission/3557369_gorod_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_1070_20223_marks It gets 33 hw points. You can run the 1070 through all modern or semi-modern 3D and get around 30 points easy with all air/water and very small OC. For reference you can just check h20vsln2's profile to see what kind of good hw points you can get through an all air/water setup. 50x30 points = 1500 points total. And I did not say thousands, I said A thousand points. And this is just hw points. If you want to see good globals which are "easy" to get you just check the same user profile. The newest intel CPU and latest Titan will always get incredible globals even on stock cooling, but the fewer global subs that count, the less impact this has. For me the fewer results that give points the more you have to focus on quality of your subs and makes it less of a money game. Even if it always will be a money game, you can limit it as best you can.

Looking at the votes...for instance 50 hw submission in seasonal ranking... It seems hwbot always wants to promote spamming results. I thought overclocking was about PUSHING HW TO THE MAXIMUM. With rev 8 it will turn even more into rewarding users to run large amounts of hw at stock or just slightly overclocked. How do we promote actual overclocking by this? Tell a new user to spend one week optimizing OS, drivers, cooling etc and he gains 10 points. Another users buys 10 new pieces of hw and runs them at stock through all benchmarks - he gains a thousand points...good balance? I really want to like and support hwbot, but with every new revision hwbot is killing itself more and more. @richba5tard BTW, looking at the rankings I see several top results are missing since the rev 7 migration. Will you make sure this does not happen again? For example almost all of my single 1080 ti submissions are missing: FS, FSX, catzillas, 3Dmark11. I also see that results from Kingpin are missing so it is not isolated to me...

Yes

Hi Up for sale are two MBs: 1: Asrock Z170 MOCF, modded for newer gen CPUs also. Working well (even if it belonged to XA before I bought it ?). The two usual pins are burnt from the modding. Price 280€ 2: Asrock Z390 Phantom gaming ITX. Has XOC bios flashed. Only used board for two sessions, once at home and then during GOC 2018 finals. Board is insulated with silicone grease, so it is washable. Price 150€ Shipping is not included, buyer pays fees etc etc...

Too much quantity, too little quality. Who has time to do 30 good globals and 30 good hw subs per year? And who can do 10 comps in a year? Max 10 globals and 10 hw per year, and max 3 comps. For career 30 hw is fine, but as globals are changing almost every year i think 30 subs for globals is too much even for career.

Newest version is better with 2080ti

I didn't mean to offend either But to be fair benching 3D requires binned cpu AND vga But seriously, maybe hwbot should take a more passive role and don't take a stand to subjective opinions on what should be rewarded and what not. Just give same points to all benchmarks regardless 2D, 3D, "skill", cost, popularity etc. If popularity is rewarded we just end up with XTU situation again... This should also make algorithms easy and reduce server load and maintenance

Nice benching!

For me a 3D-bench measures GPU performance. They are after all in the "videocard" category...legacy 3D benchmarks measure mostly CPU performance. But the definition is not really the point here, and you are missing it. I don't want to limit anyone from using whatever setup they want. My point was that removing globals from 3/4-way setups does not affect anyone who uses older/cheaper hw, as they don't get any globals anyway. For legacy 3D there might be a reason the allow SLI/CF setups of older/cheaper cards as they are capable of doing well enough for globals with a strong CPU. And I don't see why you could not allow any GPU-config for legacy 3D if community wants it. Just don't have separate rankings for it, as it does not scale, and gives way to many 3D-rankings to get easy points in. The problem might be coding it, as hw-points still need separate rankings for diff SLI/CF setups.

I don't understand, you want to bench for globals on GTX 780 sli or what? Take a look at Time spy 2-way ranking. the first non titan or 2080ti/1080ti setup is a dual 1080 setup. It's still pretty high end and it gets 2 global points... If you mean legacy benchmarks I can understand it, but they are not really 3D anymore... Maybe one solution would be to have one ranking for all legacy 3D benchmarks, where you can use any number of GPUs, since they don't scale with GPU power anyway. That would open up to the use of older setups... But in general, for me older hw=hw-points...not globals

:)