TaPaKaH Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 I'm not really a 3D guy so I might not understand the "full picture" but as an observer, I can't really see why WR points are necessary in Legacy 3D benchmarks, such as 01, 05, 06 and AM3. My arguments are: 1) These benchmarks are more or less CPU benchmarks now so giving WR points skews the whole user ranking (by up to 400 points) towards having one good CPU. 2) As far as I remember, the purpose of WR points was to reward "absolute max scores" in categories which weren't popular enough to deserve high globals (like 4-way SLI/CF of multisocket servers). This is clearly not the case (anymore) with the Legacies since all top scores are achieved on single-card setups and get plenty of globals. What do others think on the same topic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENiEBEN Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Add a poll Sam. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der8auer Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 I kinda like the fact that for those benches you don't have to use 4 cards for WR points but on the other hand you are right. Not sure to be honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikecdm Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 My initial thought was, do we have to complain about every scenario where someone has an edge on points because of one reason or another. After reading the arguments, I can sort of agree with it a bit. Some of argument two, where WR points take the spot of huge global points. I'd also like to think that rewarding the WR points on a 3d benchmark should actually be for a bench that doesn't rely mostly on cpu power but gpu clocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 1, 2015 Crew Share Posted February 1, 2015 Those legacy benchmarks have become CPU powered bu tonly when using recent cards not ? Does it really pay off to run a 6.5Ghz haswell with a 8600GT ? I vote let them be, many OCing records are never for ever... or you should lock them by CPU/platform being used Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Personally, I agree with Sam's arguments. The question is which benchmarks we consider legacy. Even the regular Fire Strike is CPU bound with multi-gpu. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikecdm Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Some would say that regular fire strike shouldn't even have globals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bullant Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Correct me if I'm wrong but I found alot of the legacy stuff very tweakable that requires some skill level even if CPU bound.The newer stuff seems to be more gpu bound,of course some tweaking required and skill but best gpu ftw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted February 2, 2015 Administrators Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Agree 100% on Bullants statement, I see some of the arguments Sam gave are true, but the fact that the older benchmarks are more or less only stuff left that good tweaking can make a difference and not only pure power makes me think globals and wr points should stay at least for majority of these Edited February 2, 2015 by websmile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeropluszero Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Agree 100% on Bullants statement, I see some of the arguments Sam gave are true, but the fact that the older benchmarks are more or less only stuff left that good tweaking can make a difference and not only pure power makes me think globals and wr points should stay at least for majority of these I don't think anyone's arguing to remove points from the legacy benchmarks completely, but simply to reconsider the WR points for those specific benchmarks. The WR points were implemented to counter low-boint for multi-GPU/CPU WR scores in low activity categories. For example: 100 + 49.6 = 149.6 points for Fire Strike Extreme WR with 4 graphics cards 100 + 125.6 = 225.6 points for Aquamark3 WR with 1 graphics card One could argue that a distribution of 150 vs 125 for FSX versus AM3 is more sensical than 150 vs 225. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der8auer Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Yea it doesn't really make sense that a single GPU benchmark like AM3 will recieve a lot more points than a 4-way FSE record - considering the effort. Without the WRs it looks actually alright. (149.6 vs 125.6) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted February 2, 2015 Administrators Share Posted February 2, 2015 I am not sure it makes sense to keep all legacy 3Ds available for wr points, that´s true, but on the other hand things move into big money direction already, for 4x fse and other newer benchmarks you need handpicked vendor samples because retails won´t beat these (don´t tell me it´s wrong, even sponsored guys with these samples say this) and a handpicked 1k cpu plus board and 2011 system - so we generally talk about moving things even more away from non inhouse benchers in favour of fully sponsored guys. And Roman, which effort? The true fact that you need more cards to level on cold at right temp, which is hard, financial effort if you pay the bill yourself and get retails that will not give you wr or tweaking effort? One or two might be right... I know that power benchers with unlimited ressources hate old 3ds, they take away their material advantage, that´s why I like them^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der8auer Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 There is a big difference from benching 4-way to single card. Even if you have the money it's a pain in the ass. The failure rate caused by condensation is much higher and in addition you usually have to deal with a lot of performance or software issues which don't exist benching single card. But I still understand your point about the money game. But in the end single card benches like 06 or 05 are also money games. Either you bin a huge amount of 4770Ks or you pay a lot to get a decent one. I don't think there is a big money difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted February 2, 2015 Administrators Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) I know the problems on multi gpu and see the effort done - but I don´t agree on your evaluation and facit of 4770k for example, sure you have to bin, but you can at least do this and have a chance to find what you search for, on 5960x you would have much bigger financial effort and on cards as well, and I say "would" because in reality you have no realistic chance to get lots of 980GTX or 5960X retail that is able to beat vendors samples if you bin privately- so ranking will be even more what it is now, closed circle of inhouse or shop-benchers, and no chance to come even close with whatever effort even semi-sponsored guys give. It simply results in money game and no chance at all anymore if you don´t get tons of handpicked Intel/Asus/Galax etc samples. Not sure we will find a way to agree on this topic, our views are from very different angles, and both have points that speak in favour of them Edited February 2, 2015 by websmile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der8auer Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Don't get me wrong - I totally understand your point of view. The question is just if and how we transfer the "money-issue" into the HWBot point system which is only based on activity and competition at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted February 2, 2015 Administrators Share Posted February 2, 2015 The competition issue is strong - I am not in position to comment on this, but think a solution for this that suits all needs would be make dealing with other questions more easy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sergii.ua Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 +1 Remove WR points in AM3/01/15/06 Dont remove in 03, because there 3way sli/crossfire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted February 2, 2015 Administrators Share Posted February 2, 2015 So let me make this clear - after last changes over the years the 3d legacy benchmarks are last chance to get any wr points with using enthusiast class cpu like 1155 or 1150 i7, and to level chances for poor 2011 ocers, we strip these of wr points as well? Sounds like a fair deal seeing that crap like hwbotprime, both cinebenches and wprime, on which you have no chance to get wrs with 1150 for example, are only 2ds that get wr points and on 3d, you have only small chances to get wr without 2011 maybe at uh or catzilla if you are fast and others don´t bother. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinos22 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Removing, no, adjusting points, maybe not a bad idea to look into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splave Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Maybe adjust points for hwbp and xtu while you are at it, they are comicaly high ATM. I think it's time to retire aq3 as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der8auer Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 The point distribution is based on activity/competition so the algorithm itself is fine in my eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted February 3, 2015 Administrators Share Posted February 3, 2015 Generally there is no need to give wr points to all five legacy 3ds, this is overproportional. It might be worth thinking about stripping two of them who don´t scale with multi vga (AM3,01,05 and 06) of this, as well as one of the cinebenches or wprime 1024, and give instead wr points to other old stuff 32m Spi and maybe Pifast to keep the current relation of hardware needed to get wr points. My main goal is to keep this attractive also to people who use 200-300 euro cpus and not only 1k 5960x, on which best samples are pre-binned vendor stuff on top. We are always talking about a "community" - 1150 i7 is backbone of this community at the moment, if you compare number of subs made with 1155 3770k, 1150 4770K/4790K (aka as binnable cpus for all) to all 2011 platforms you will see what I mean, I even left out sandy bridge because of obvious reasons and get more than 110k subs made there which is for these aolne far more than on all three 2011 gens with all cpus, I even left out stuff like k-i5s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaPaKaH Posted February 3, 2015 Author Share Posted February 3, 2015 The point distribution is based on activity/competition so the algorithm itself is fine in my eyes.+1. Mid-end chips like 1150 can still score globals in as many as thirteen categories (1M, 32M, PiFast, wPrimes, XTU, hwbot prime, Cinebenches, 01, 05, 06 and AM3) each of which brings no less than 100 globals for first. If you compare this to 5960X's global categories (wPrimes, XTU, hwbot prime, Cinebenches, 2/3/4-way non-legacy 3D), you'll see that most of them give less than 100 globals for first so in order to have a high league ranking a good 1150 still is and will be "a must". The only "negative" affect a proposed change will bring is that "one cpu wonders" will no longer be able to propell straight into top 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der8auer Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 The 300€ CPUs already receive a lot of points. Just compare what you can do with 4770K vs 5960X: 4770K: wPrime32m: 119.4 p wPrime1024m: 111.9 p SuperPi32m: 139.2 p PiFast: 126.9 p Cinebench11.5: 124.7 p CinebenchR15: 128.5 p XTU: 166.4 p HWBotPrime: 159.4 p That's a total of 1076.4 Global Points + 0 WR Points you can achieve with a golden 4770K! 5960X: wPrime32m: 76.8 p wPrime1024m: 73.3 p Cinebench11.5: 85.3 p CinebenchR15: 88.2 p XTU: 89.9 p HWBotPrime: 93.0 p That's a total of 506.5 Global Points + 0 WR Points you can achieve with a golden 5960X. Three times more expensive and not even half of what you can achieve as with the 4770K. Now also take the 3Ds into account. Assuming you have full access to unlimited amount of GPUs and ofc golden GPUs. 4770K + golden GPUs: 3DMark01 single GPU: 114.1 GP + 100 WR 3DMark01 dual GPU: 69.1 GP + 0 WR 3DMark03 triple GPU: 43 GP + 100 WR 3DMark03 single GPU: 121.3 GP + 0 WR 3DMark03 dual GPU: 82.5 GP + 0 WR 3DMark03 Quad GPU: 36.8 GP + 0WR 3DMark05 single GPU: 117.3 GP + 100 WR 3DMark05 dual GPU: 82.5 GP + 0 WR 3DMark05 triple GPU: 43.0 GP + 0 WR 3DMark05 quad GPU: 34.4 GP + 0 WR 3DMark06 single GPU: 120.6 GP + 100 WR 3DMark06 dual GPU: 85.6 GP + 0 WR 3DMark06 triple GPU: 41.1 GP + 0WR 3DMark06 quad GPU: 36.8 GP + 0 WR Aquamark single GPU: 125.4 GP + 100 WR Aquamark dual GPU: 93.3 GP + 0 WR Aquamark triple GPU: 41.1 GP + 0 WR Aquamark quad GPU: 39.5 GP + 0 WR Heaven single GPU: 121.9 GP + 0 WR Heaven dual GPU: 89.6 GP + 0 WR Heaven triple GPU: 52.7 GP + 100 WR Heaven quad GPU: 40 GP + 0 WR A solid amount of 2231.2 globals which mainly require a golden 4770K and not really a golden GPUs. However 1220.6 can already be achieved with single GPU 5960X + golden GPUs: 3DMark Vantage single: 122.5 GP 3DMark Vantage dual: 94.4 GP + 5 WR 3DMark Vantage triple: 50.8 GP + 55 WR 3DMark Vantage quad: 48.4 GP + 100 WR 3DMark 11 Performance single: 131.7 GP 3DMark 11 Performance dual: 99.9 GP 3DMark 11 Performance triple: 116.9 GP + 25 WR 3DMark 11 Performance quad: 49.6 + 100 WR 3DMark FS single: 134.2 GP 3DMark FS dual: 102.1 GP 3DMark FS triple: 56.3 GP 3DMark FS quad: 44.9 GP + 100 WR 3DMark FSE single: 118.7 GP 3DMark FSE dual: 94.2 GP 3DMark FSE triple: 52.0 GP 3DMark FSE quad: 49.2 GP + 100 WR Catzilla 720p single: 126.8 GP Catzilla 720p dual: 92.2 GP Catzilla 720p triple: 49.2 GP + 100 WR Catzilla 720p quad: 39.5 GP + 30 WR Catzilla 1440p single: 83.1 GP Catzilla 1440p dual: 65.1 GP Catzilla 1440p triple: 41.1 GP Catzilla 1440p quad: 35.6 GP + 100 WR A solid amount of 2613.3 globals assuming you have a golden 5960X and golden VGAs. However only 717 can be achieved with single GPU So to sum it up. If you have a golden 4770K you can collect: 1076.4 GP + WR in 2D Benchmarks 1220.6 GP + WR in 3D Benchmarks with single GPU or 2231.2 GP + WR in 3D Benchmarks with multi GPU A Total of 2297 with single GPU or A Total of 3307.6 with multi GPU If you have a golden 5960X you can collect: 506.5 GP + WR in 2D Benchmarks 717 GP + WR in 3D Benchmarks with single GPU or 2613.3 GP + WR in 3D Benchmarks with multi GPU A Total of 1223.5 with single GPU or A Total of 3119.9 with multi GPU Conclusion: 4770K + 1 Card: 2297 possible Globals + WR 4770K + multi Card: 3307.6 possible Globals + WR 5960X + 1 Card: 1223,5 possible Globals + WR 5960X + multi Card: 3119,9 with multi GPU Taking away the WRs of legacy: 4770K + 1 Card: 1797 possible Globals + WR 4770K + multi Card: 2807.6 possible Globals + WR 5960X + 1 Card: 1223.5 possible Globals + WR 5960X + multi Card: 3119.9 with multi GPU So actually argumenting about being fair and taking money into account we should remove the WRs asap lol. inb4 tl:dr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.