Kolian

Please, move this result (cyrix MII in 6x86MX-category) http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710181 here: http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/Cyrix%20M%20II-266GP And you can also move there these results: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710180 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710176 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710177

Ticket ID: 379 Priority: Medium http://www.cpu-collection.de/?l0=i&i=2271\r\nhttp://www.cpu-collection.de/?tn=0&l0=co&l1=Cyrix&l2=M%20II\r\nhttp://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/MII/Cyrix-MII-266GP%20(83%20MHz%202.9V).html\r\n\r\nThere is category Cyrix 6x86MX-PR266, but MII has a newer core which can run at higher clocks and produces less heat. So please, create 6x86MX-PR266 category, and move these results into it:\r\nhttp://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710181\r\nhttp://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710176\r\nhttp://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710180\r\nhttp://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710177

Ticket ID: 378 Priority: Medium Please add Cyrix 6x86MX PR300:\r\nhttp://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=585762\r\n

Please remove "Pentium II 233 Deschutes", because Deschutes started at 266MHz: http://www.cpu-world.com/Cores/Deschutes.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_II#Deschutes http://processorfinder.intel.com/List.aspx?ParentRadio=All&ProcFam=47&SearchKey=

Please move these results here http://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/Pentium%203%20800Mhz . That's two Pentium III 800EB (133MHz FSB) in Pentium III 800E (100MHz FSB) category http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=862835 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840029

Ticket ID: 368 Priority: Medium Please delete \"Pentium 3 300Mhz slot 1 Katmai\" category, don\'t you know that P3 started at 450MHz? I wonder who added this category...\r\nhttp://www.hwbot.org/hardware/processor/Pentium%203%20300Mhz%20slot%201%20Katmai\r\nhttp://processorfinder.intel.com/List.aspx?ParentRadio=25%2C46%2C55%2C47%2C48%2C56%2C50%2C51%2C52%2C&ProcFam=25&SearchKey=

Ticket ID: 346 Priority: Medium http://www.cpu-collection.de/?tn=0&l0=co&l1=Cyrix&l2=M%20II#MII-333GP,75MHzBus\r\nhttp://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=575907\r\n\r\n

Ticket ID: 319 Priority: Medium \r\nhttp://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=566372

Ticket ID: 290 Priority: Medium There is a category for Athlon 900 Slot A with Orion-core (512kb cache), but no category for Athlon 900 Slot A with T-bird-core (256kb cache), so please, add one .\r\nHere are specs and photo of such CPU\r\nhttp://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K7/AMD-Athlon%20900%20-%20AMD-A0900MMR24B%20A.html\r\nhttp://pic.ipicture.ru/uploads/090416/V7vAtatSBU.jpg

Ticket ID: 289 Priority: Medium There are three categories for Athlon 650, but no category for Slot A CPU\'s with T-bird core. Please, add such category. Here are specs and photo of my processor.\r\nhttp://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K7/AMD-Athlon%20650%20-%20AMD-A0650MPR24B%20A.html\r\nhttp://s477.photobucket.com/albums/rr132/Nickolay_I/hardware/252071w.jpg

Here are two 2mx400 results, that's impossible to get such scores on 290/215MHz. Just check other results in this category. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=819708 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=819707

The same thing is with 16Mb-versions. As I already said here, the settings for 16 and 32mb-versions are the same. Poll? Why? The settings are default, it is said in 3DMark2001SE help-file. A poll would be useful for cards such as voodoo banshee, for example, because they can not run test with default settings in 32-bit color. But for TNT-family, I don't understand why the poll is needed.

When will you unblock the results? I don't see any reason for the results to be still blocked. The 3DMark-settings are DEFAULT on TNT's, according to 3DMark help-file, this "benchmark was not run at the default setting" line is an old bug, according to 3DMark FAQ... If there is only ORB-link submitted, without screenshot, then there is no reason at all to block the results So again, why are they still blocked?

No, everything is ok with 16mb-versions and with their scores. I have in my collection TNT 16Mb, TNT2 Vanta 16Mb, TNT2 M64 16Mb, TNT2 16Mb, TNT2 Pro 16Mb, and tested all of them in 2001 with same default settings as 32Mb-versions - if you use correct drivers, there will be no problems.

I think it's a bug - I've seen some screenshots of 2001 on TNT2 without this message. Also, as I have already said in this thread, all my results in 01 (on lots of videocards from TNT's to HD4850) on ORB are marked as "not default", and I don't know why... I've found something here - http://www.futuremark.com/support/3dmark2001/ Looks like this bug is still present in 3DMark2001SE... P.S. Another quote from this FAQ: There's nothing about TNT family