Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

komadyret

Members
  • Posts

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • Location
    NORWAY

komadyret's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

10

Reputation

  1. Thank you very much for putting an effort into bringing back the advanced search feature so soon. Been a while since I pushed your paypal donation-banner now. Got to have it on a reminder for pay-day Keep up the good work. There are more people appreciating it than voice their praise!
  2. How about a linky to the old search-page? Or was it too tightly integrated into v3 to have the search running separately from it? Just a thought. It was a nice functionality
  3. Miss the old search page. I used it quite frequently, both to limit time-frames of submissions made by my team-mates, and searching for results using certain hardware. I need to take a closer look at this new bot. It may be hidden somewhere I've not yet looked ....
  4. I guess we can live with that Bench the hardware, and sell it for a little coin to someone who benches it, and buy it back to try beat his scores again LOL I think this move is sufficient to keep the benching going for a few months until we can analyze the impact of rev.3 on the community
  5. I was moderating a few entries that had been reported for a team member, and then went to look at some of his other scores. I can't seem to find any "Edit entry" button under the scores... only a report entry and read modification log. Am I blind? Please guide me
  6. I want to add that the points distribution (hardware) looks very good as # of participants approaches and passes 100 Problem is with the less popular hardware.
  7. I haven't looked closely om the implications for my own submissions yet, but I think hwbot are on a right track here. btw, it took forever to read through 42 pages of whining LOL But some posts have opened up a few valid issues here. And If I have missed a few crucial points in how the algorithm works, please bear over with me and correct me. First, I'm not sure the distribution of global points are optimal as of now. It is true that the reward for spending time and LN2 on multi-gpu is a little low when points are given out based om popularity alone. My thoughts went to adding a factor/multiplier to the globals of multi-card benches to make a 2-3-4gpu bench earn globals equal of the singles despite having only half or less number of submissions. I think the insanely hgh scores should be rewarded a bit on top of the points awarded for beating the others in the same category to make those categories more worthvile. That globals in the single-gpu is worth more than the globals in mulit-gpu is discouraging for those benching for points (a rare breed, are they?) And maybe the hardware factor should not be based on the number of, let's say, 3x4870 submissions, but have hardwarepoints based on the overall popularity of the 4870, single and multi? Still won't make owners of the dual-gpu/single-pcb(x2 cards) cards happy, but there is no reason they should be more happy than owners of cards that are unable to run dual/multi slot/gpu. And the "unpopular" hardware points drop-off are looking somewhat artificial. 1.5points for a gold cup in an unchallenged category is plenty. 1 point would be enough. If there are 2 or 3 users it is not unchallenged anymore, and should receive a little more, perhaps 1.5 point. I also think a gold cup should be worth a considerable higher amount of point than a silvercup, and there should be worthwhile points up for grabs for being in the top 50% For 5 submissions my proposal would be 1.5-1.0-0.7-0.5-0.2 For more than 5 submissions but less than, lets say 20, last place should be awarded 0.1 point. For more popular categories I think only top 2/3 (66%) should receive points, with last place(s) earning 0.1 point and 1st place earning a good deal more than 2nd who earn a good deal more than 3rd, and make a smooth slow even decent to the lowest 0.1 point. What I try to say is that the drop off from 1.2 or 0.9 or whatever to 0.1 is too abrupt. And if 1.5 points are awarded for 1st, I think 1.2 is too much for 2nd. Overall I think this looks good tho, now I just need time to bench and try get back those 500 or so places I lost in the ranking
  8. hmm.. a mx400/440 would probably score 1/3 of a GF4 Ti....maybe just 1/4. But I may remember wrong here, might just as well take a peek at the database
  9. #20 is now #21, so that's out of the loop... #5 I can't figure out #10 is now #11 and has opted out on participating in the points. Then there is #8 that probably haven't been updated to show points yet (fresh submission) So there is only #5 that I see no obvious reason for not having points right now...
  10. What benchmark? A saved 3dmark file can be submitted to FM at a later opportunity and then the score can be entered at hwbot with verification link. For some of the cpu benches it's a bit more questionable....
  11. An ES chip is afaik per definition ALWAYS the property of the manufacturer. Why spend money on a chip that never truly can be yours, and in the process of being put of for is to be considered as contraband (selling something that isn't the property of the seller). The only thing I see as "unfair" as far as ES hardware goes, is hardware that don't have been released to retail yet. I think a ES with a retail counterpart is allowed to be part of the ranking. Go on, earn your points, and play fair
  12. And I'm sure there are plenty, as interested parties start to scrutinize them. Big thanks to CP for taking time to do this a bit more systematic than the normal hit 'n miss checking of results close to the ones each member actually submit
  13. IDK knopflerbruce... Maybe I should start a thread on you, and write a long essay in norwegain? But it seems like this is a common problem... I visited OC-TV to catch some glimpses of the ROG dreamhack today, and their chat was full of Finns talking Finnish...even if the first line you get when joining says there are a separate chat set up for Finns in a separate irc-channel
  14. You're welcome RB... take it away... But the idea here is good. Should be added to the wish-list for future possible implementation Like a drop-down under the individual score where you can chose between your own scores (would probably need to show hardware in drop-down, not only score) in same benchmark and compare them side by side. Will probably add a bit of load on the server tho, as it would need to cache a members scores quite often... There may be other and far better solutions, this was just an idea that came to me right now
  15. I didn't know the 8800GT (G92) ever came as a 55nm card Weren't those branded 9800+?
×
×
  • Create New...