Massman Posted November 9, 2010 Author Share Posted November 9, 2010 CPU-Z is a bit more reliable when it comes to info, imho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiller Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 hell ya, just do it. Just more proof of the setup, but that old scores still are good before the date this will be official. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1Day Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 hell ya, just do it. Just more proof of the setup, but that old scores still are good before the date this will be official. Yes that is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patch Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Nope. Don't want to lose "on the edge" scores trying to add ancillary manufacturer info. Of course more info is good, but I like where the lines are already drawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuchnit Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 CPU-Z memory tab is mandatory. It's been mandatory from the beginning (first example screenshots I made were already with memory tab) I always show the memory timings tab. As a matter of fact I don't think I have ever submitted without the mobo tab either. I'm not trying to single anyone/team out here, but I remember this score from when it was posted up. (crazy score) I'm sure you'll find a lot more in the database. Massman is this screen sufficient? I know these runs have ORB links, but with the new screenshot rule will these screens cut it? I mean moving foward. I know you won't block old runs for a new rule. http://hwbot.org/community/submission/1016811_kingpin_3dmark2001_se_2x_geforce_gtx_275_140080_marks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1Day Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 No the screen-shot that you posted of the 2001SE benchmark will not be acceptable once the new rules are introduced, regardless of the ORB link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaJ0r Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Voted No! I agree with Me4Me, BenchBros, Sam, etc. Sometime another cpu's window can crash, sometime resolution is low to show more informations, sometime people can forget to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoF Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 I voted "no" too...one more CPUz tab, more time for the system to crash... mb information is not that essential for us. For 3DMarks there is maybe not enough space on the desktop on 17"/19" lcds. 3Dmark window, score-window, test details, 1x GPUz, 2xCPUz... I think thats enough... Cheers! everything said in that post I'm with you guys here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted November 9, 2010 Author Share Posted November 9, 2010 Still quite a big group that prefers to keep it the way it is. Arguments against it are more than valid, I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxi Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 More information is never a bad thing, I voted yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiborrr Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 No, I can sometimes hardly open two CPU-Z tabs due to stability issues. We're not running prime/linx tests here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScunnyUK Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 (edited) I have voted Yes because i like to see (and give) as much info as possible in a result screen shot. But I also bench on a 1280:1024 monitor so understand it can sometimes be hard to fit everything into the screeny, also it is not nice when the system crashes whilst trying to take your screen shot.. So for these reasons I think a good comprimise would be : motherboard tab is prefered but not esential, but adding motherboard infomation when filling in result details should be mandatory. Edited November 10, 2010 by ScunnyUK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinos22 Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 i voted yes and i have been doing that for a long time. its good to see what bioses ppl run particularly with superpi stuff on the other hand i always wished that CPuz would have less tabs so maybe we can ask Franck to make it a bit simpler so that there is no need to have 4 CPuz open but just one and expand views of different categories etc for screens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steponz Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 Im with dinos on this.. 1 screen would be nice.... All that info should be there... and its always nice to track for the future.... meaning your db will like it.... lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 I voted "no" too...one more CPUz tab, more time for the system to crash... mb information is not that essential for us. For 3DMarks there is maybe not enough space on the desktop on 17"/19" lcds. 3Dmark window, score-window, test details, 1x GPUz, 2xCPUz... I think thats enough... Cheers! I agree with that. Keep it as it is right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted November 10, 2010 Crew Share Posted November 10, 2010 Voted No! Reasons are the same as the guys before me said - stability, fittability (sometimes it hard to get even Spi+2*CPU-Z). Get an S3 Trio 64 and make a run at 1024*768. During 3D the Aquamarks and 3DMark06 windows are very big and you need to open GPU-Z in addition. If you want and are able to put it on screen, do it. And I do sometimes (kinda lazy, but I'll try to get it more often). Otherwise - it's not vital. And it won't help with cheating for sure (is that the main reason to make in mandatory?). Cheat proofing should either not make life harder or 99% make cheating harder. The subject doesn't fit any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chispy Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 Yes , i voted yes as this subject has been on my mind for such a long time after seen almost no information on some submisions with very out of line and very high scores that im 100% sure were not 100% legit due to hardware limitations (aka motherboard) , i started digging thru the database and theres quite a lot of these floating around , specially in 2D , Wprime ,SuperPi , Pifast. Motherboard tab should be a MUST YES , to avoid cheating in the future and to keep the database acurate. Thank you Massman . Kind Regards: Angelo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreadlockyx Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 I voted "I just like to vote". But, it should be mandatory to include motherboard information and picture when submitting a score. And serial number on both box and board should be good also. Including a mobo tab is sometimes hard with small monitors, unless you have two connected to the computer. That's my point of view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted November 10, 2010 Crew Share Posted November 10, 2010 chispy, it won't help to avoid cheating As for the database - you can fill in the MoBo line if you like in the results description. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinster Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 I voted yes as I usually include the MB tab... but for ppl running 17-19" monitors, this could be tricky.. Vin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiller Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Massman, is here any update on ? does it goes mandatory or not ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.M.O.G. Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Voted no. There's always some level of uncertainty, but the current system is working well. If you look at enough scores, its not hard to tell what is reasonable and what is not. Confirming the motherboard info does little to ensure the scores are legit, but is a bit of extra work. Sounds like more worrying about cheating instead of worrying about our own benching. I vote for more focus on benchmarking and the love of the game, and less worrying about what other people are doing. The obvious cheaters and the questionable submissions will be scrutinized, and if some slip by then so be it. If you are working hard at your own benches, there aren't enough cheaters or invalid submissions to make a big impact on you. If you encounter something questionable, report it. Let the judges and mods worry about it. Otherwise, focus on your own benching and thats the key to success. 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.