websmile

Happy birthday and all the best to you, Christian - have a big fiesta over the weekend

XS was hacked, when it went online again, an older backup was used, so the content is lost

Not bad

Wow, next global best for GPUPI - good job

This is sick, nearly 6,64 ghz

Well done

Thanks guys

I´m retired, what did you expect?

trollolol

I say it again, it can be used. We cannot make a rule that can´t be enforced, there are Galax and G.Skill handpicked samples for example with standard design and retail SPD we can not determine to be es or retail. The Samsung ICs used on Zadac are available world wide, so if we would rule these out and let Galax or GSkill or Team enter, this would be against the spirit of fair play. ES rule will not be enforced on memory sticks. After experience made at moderating I will not rely on people being honest and not use ES with retail comouflage...

Did you fry your mems? ^^

I will keep this in mind for sure, I am well aware of the fact that the navigation for team cup pages in general needs improvement, on this I agree 100%. EOC sports was improved a lot last 12 months, but there is still headroom for more, learning by doing in this case P.S. Franco, this memory is not available anywhere in shops worldwide it seems, normally it would fall into unreleased hardware or engineering sample. And we both know that handbinned sticks by vendors or sticks binned IC by IC are not reflecting retails. But as said, we cannot determine some of these samples, so we decided to not enforce the es rule on this.

Too complicated imho, if we put all the stage rules explicitly on the overview page, this will end up in an enormously big page noone gets an overview. Hwbot tried this in the past at some competitions which had a lot less stages and this brought up big trouble (feedback was bad overview, easy to overlook certain requirements and similar issues). In theory it would be best to have one page with complete rules plus the stage rules again at the stages, I agree on this, but often feedback was tl;dr for people as said. On some stages, we find bugs or problems only after we have feedback from the community, this results in addons or specification for rules, and sometimes we simply do not see all possibilities for loopholes at first sight even after checking the rules several times, this is when feedback from contestants comes in as well. On the picture of the memory stick, this is easy to add without making new submission or even rebench, but we will handle this generously anyway. Our main problem with that one was engineering sample memory, handpicked vendor samples and similar items. We discussed this a lot, but we came to the result that we allow xoc mode for validations because some vendors give out sample with retail spd, some have special spd, and we cannot control the first to be ES anyway. Sometimes hwbot fails, but at a lot of issues, we simply have no alternative to making the rules the way we do, when vendors handle this differently, we cannot discriminate people using Zadak511 samples and allow G.Skill samples for example which have retail spd. It is not as easy sometimes as we would like it to be..^^

The general rules apply, also the rules for each benchmarks, but because we have special requirements for team cup, we stated the specific rules at each stage and also added requirements for verification if these are different from normal procedure (for example verification screenshot with cpuz mem and cpu tab for memory and CPU validation stages) - there you can also download the background, it is available there at each SC and stage. And yes, the background is mandatory.

Looking forward to backups turning up so that you have to grab more cards

GPUs, I thought this was fixed already...

Oops, this is quite fast

Not bad

XOC is allowed and we have no option to detect ES on memory apart from the picture of the stick. The problem on this is that there are too much "ES" (aka vendor binned, handpicked sample) which we can not determine by spd anyway...

CF or SLI is different from single ranking, this has nothing to do with this rule we discuss here and you should know this... - if you have 30 minutes of time, please sit down and check the 6950 and 6970 category and think about the rule again and why it was created this way. The explanation by mickulty is nothing than the rules. It should be clear that you can not allow the same piece of hardware to be submitted at different categories, which is possible with an unlockable 6950 if I follow your idea. I could use it for 6950 and 6970, simply by using original BIOS and then unlock BIOS. It would not even be cheating. You also can not allow people to cherry pick to which category they submit, because then there will be people who always submit in favour of their personal advantage. We would have no option to prevent this from happening if I follow your arguments. And what you say, that an unlocked 290 is a 290x, is not true - a 290 is a 290, if you send it to rma you will not get a 290x in return, if I check the device ID it will show me that this is a 290...it will always be a 290 flashed with another BIOS To finish this for me, two points I saw in this discussion and by checking a few results. The staff can not rely on ethics. This is sad but true. I found people that submitted the same card, unlocked, for both 6950 and 6970 at same benchmark category to grab more points for their ranking. I found people who did submit the exactly same card for some benchmarks at 6950 and other benchmarks at 6970, depending on which gave more points. I also saw people who used card locked for 6950, unlocked it, and then submitted to 6970. Point two, we have no option to determine a general rule for unlocked hardware other then the one existing. D – Hardware Unlocking Again this is a subject where we have to trust on the honesty of the submitter; if you have a CPU with unlocked multiplier, please only submit results under the hardware category of its original model. Don’t emulate other models to gain HWboints, if you are caught you will get penalized or even banned. The same goes for video cards which are modified either with a flashed BIOS or modded software, post your scores in the category of the original hardware. It is allowed to unlock extra cores and cache if your processor allows that. Again, you do have to submit your result to the category of the original hardware. A piece of hardware is defined by its microcode or vendor id, we can only identify it by this, if this is possible at all (some old amd cpus are not fully defined). The rule was created, long before I joined staff, because some people were not sure where to submit, and some simply cheated and submitted same hardware at several different categories to maximize personal cups and points. If you have a better way to prevent this from happening, guarantee the integrity of hardware database at same time and also keep it simple, let us know, we are always in when it comes to improvements at handling for both benchers and mods. P.S. http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=15742

This is the best example that some people are too lazy to read the rules or to understand even crystal clear formulated rules, or obviously simply ignore them - this is what you prove . This whole unlock "plan" by amd plus the tons of rebrands they produce without even changing device ids makes especially handling vga categories by AMD extremely hard. We can only rely on people to go by rules that we try to keep as easy as possible. I do not think that ignoring these is helpful attitude, and it also is not helpful for a fair competition between benchers. P.S. @superpatodonaldo We currently discuss if we use a similar solution like we use on unlocked cpus, where all cpus go to same category but different ranking. Not sure this makes sense though, it will make the category more or less worthless for ranking when it is split up on points, but it could be technically done. In the end for staff it will not change much imho because lots of people will still don´t care where they submit to^^

Keep on benching, the scores of 1 and two core go to same category but different ranking. Because of this it makes sense to improve both scores to the max

Lol, right on target

If it is 5,1ghz like XTU says, this result is OK at given settings -- apart from the fact it most likely killed cpu

Thumbs up, CHL, very nice run