Johan45 Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 That may be so websmile, I have heard that some of the older HW was problematic but the validations that were attempted with new HW that are rejected are the result of what I posted earlier. Some boards the HTT frequency will fluctuate and when "I" was trying to validate on the lowest reaches of that fluctuation it was rejected. When I validated at or near the actual BIOS setting it was accepted. I guess my point was, HWBot already has a specific set of rules that we follow daily. My interpretation is that the rejected results are not valid so by the rules should be disallowed. If that CPU/board won't validate where you want it to then pick something else. I just "assumed" the spirit of the competition was to "find" hardware that would give you an accepted validation at the lowest speed you could get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted September 15, 2015 Administrators Share Posted September 15, 2015 Yes, it will be hard to seperate this. If we follow the rules completely, we will have to remove lots of scores, also new hardware scores where fse screenshots show no subtests for example, in spite of validation link , results wit mem tabs showing no freq and so on. I wonder if any results will be left in the end ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johan45 Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Sure would be interesting. I realize this is a big job and decisions made will never make everyone happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marquzz Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Yes, please no low clock / slowest again. I love overclocking old/slow stuff, so I don't have anything against that, but slowing things down goes against the whole concept, imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johan45 Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 I've had fun with it to be honest. It was a nice change from the everyday pushing and had challenges of it's own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxbassplayerxx Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 I've had fun with it to be honest. It was a nice change from the everyday pushing and had challenges of it's own. Â Sounds like someone who didn't have a 20 day run fail Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trodas Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 websmile - results wit mem tabs showing no freq and so on  On many chipsets CPU-Z did not report memory frequency and even memory timings. Good example is SIS 730 (PCchips M810LR) or i430TX (Asus TXP4-X). Nothing can be done with it.  On the other hand, new CPU-Z version entierly f*cked up timings detection on VIA PT800 chipsets (ASRock 775Dual-VSTA) and the results are completely wrong. This is 3-3-3-10 (28) timings on Crucial Ballistic, thx to Jazzman:   So you see - by CPU-Z is: CL - unknown, tRAS 9, when it is 10 and no info on tRC, despite older CPU-Z versions did not give any trouble on this mainboard. And I reporting bugs to Frank left and right, but no fix...  In case of i430TX I even send him the Intel docs a pointed out what bites on witch registers one can detect the memory settings... what more can I do?  ...  Other programs have quirks too... sometimes it is not that hard to do some record, as to submit the validation. This is, "thanks" to endless bugses of almost everything (for example Aquamark wrapper - run on nVidia Vanta, get score 0, save as valid... submit... and it is still valid ) ...  And it is not like my Vanta is bad, it can do 3D well: ...even with slight overclock from 100/125 to 120/160 But the wrapper suxx...  Same for Heaven wrapper. Also does not work for me on some machines (and much less weird machines that, this MSI K7TM Pro is)...  So, it is fighting with bugses all around the way! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted September 15, 2015 Administrators Share Posted September 15, 2015 I know this, and people who ask for removal of scores because of Hwbot rules should know this as well - this is the point, you cannot apply rules of verification for hardwae that is 15 years old and that noone has tools for anymore to verify according to new rules. I opted to ask CN to let a specialist for old hardware do the moderating because either way it will be done, people will complain and I haven´t enough time atm to ban them all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johan45 Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Sounds like someone who didn't have a 20 day run fail  Good call, it hasn't failed yet and like Rasparthe I live in the country so power can be ifffy. I've just been lucky, now if it can hold out for another day or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxbassplayerxx Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Good luck! Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â *Fail fail fail fail* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trodas Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 websmile - I know this, and people who ask for removal of scores because of Hwbot rules should know this as well - this is the point, you cannot apply rules of verification for hardwae that is 15 years old and that noone has tools for anymore to verify according to new rules. I opted to ask CN to let a specialist for old hardware do the moderating because either way it will be done, people will complain and I haven´t enough time atm to ban them all  Yea, the verification problem is awfull. Back in the day, CPU-Z worked pretty nicely and I can verify 10.7MHz, altrough it did not detected the FSB: http://valid.x86.fr/9b88hu  However todays the CPU-Z fail miserably to detect CPU clock and report false FSB clock 50MHz:   At least it from THAT did not produce "valid" result. However it can produce crazy "valid" results none the less. For example this one: http://valid.x86.fr/b0zd5t  384MB of ram, consisting of 128 + 512MB sticks, detected as 128 + 256MB it report as 640MB of ram. Is not that funny? Definitively CPU-Z shoud allow some moderation in form that user can change the wrongly detected infos under some human supervision, of course...  Because I have "valid" result with 640MB ram on i430TX, that is bound to support only 256MB of ram :nana: :nana: :nana:  And no validation of 10.7MHz. Oh, well. At least ATI Rage XL give a nice image at this superslow clock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgi Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 (edited) Ops Edited September 18, 2015 by fgi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint19 Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 I can't submit score in stage 7.Error is "Validation error: A valid futuremark compare url is required if want to reach the PCMark7 Hall Of fame. As only 1 benchmark scores are better than you, you need to provide additional verification." I have valid url. Â Try using https... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgi Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 very fast reply 10x Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejo1 Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 is samsungs "rapid" going to be allowed in the pcmark7 stage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScunnyUK Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 is samsungs "rapid" going to be allowed in the pcmark7 stage? Â Â Id like to know this too but not just Samsung version, is any ram cache / ram drive allowed as I thought using them is illegal? Â Also I think I know the answer but conformation would be good on whever or not Skylake systems can be used in any stage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viper-rd Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Dear Massman. Explain please - for some reason, my result has been removed from the closed stage "CPU CHALLENGE - HM8X SUPERPI 32M"? If it is done on a complaint TASOS - then why did only away my result? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viper-rd Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Only the first three results are correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted September 21, 2015 Administrators Share Posted September 21, 2015 (edited) I am no expert, but your result was checked and chipset was not H86/87 but VIU, on result of the lenovo durian that was now reported several times, this is hm86 http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/durian_7a1/ Hope I could help  Edit - no skylake on any stages of this years team cup - it was released after team cup already had started Edited September 21, 2015 by websmile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viper-rd Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 Websmile. Look at the other results - and explain to me - why they did not HM87/HM86, and not removed? Only the first three results are correct? http://ark.intel.com/products/78945/Intel-Pentium-Processor-3558U-2M-Cache-1_70-GHz?q=3558U - skylake??? )))))))))) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marquzz Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 Why can't I choose processor model in the drop down when entering hardware? It works for other hardware like graphics card and motherboard, bnut not cpu. I used to be able to submit anyway by just writing the exact same as in the dropdown, but now when I try the enter "Pentium 1 90MHz" it just won't except it. And as mentioned, I can't choose that in the drop down either... Â Using latest Chrome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marquzz Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 And I missed uploading result for Via SuperPi 1M since the stages are ending different times! PLEASE DON'T DO THAT AGAIN! The eSport site doesn't even work damnit so it REALLY hard to actually see when stages end!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators websmile Posted September 22, 2015 Administrators Share Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) @viper\-rd As said, I am no expert for this, but since when is skylake 22nm?^^ http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Pentium_Dual-Core/Intel-Pentium%20Mobile%203558U.html And on the results I checked, all have H86 or H87, you simply google the mainboard/Notebook model and find out which chipset is used. Now please accept that we do our job, the results are OK, which yours was not, if you think your chipset is H86/87 make cpuz/aida whatever screenshot and send to Pieter Edited September 22, 2015 by websmile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viper-rd Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 Websmile. Tell me - what my result is different from the second, in addition to the CPU used? Chipset same? http://hwbot.org/submission/2969111_viper_rd_superpi___32m_pentium_3558u_18min_11sec_14ms/ http://hwbot.org/submission/2949927 Â The screenshot of this result there are no information on the chipset - but this result is not taken away - why? http://hwbot.org/submission/2934483 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trodas Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) if you think your chipset is H86/87 make cpuz/aida whatever screenshot and send to Pieter  Not screenshot, whole hardware report will be in order there.  While it is not entierly impossible, that some software identify certain chipset(s) wrongly, the error can be corrected, if it is indeed error. But things like that usually happen only on very rare situations on somewhat obscure and less known, old hardware. Take this find for example: http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=143722  See, how you can present your case to be dealt with? Done AIDA 64 report, show screens, show the reports and come with other sources, claming the different chipset and then the error get fixed.  Just claiming that mainboard X use chipset Y just will not quite cut it.    viper-rd - The screenshot of this result there are no information on the chipset - but this result is not taken away - why?http://hwbot.org/submission/2934483  Maybe because the Asus G551JM is easy to be found NTB: http://www.asus.com/cz/Notebooks/G551JM/specifications/  With clear specifications: Intel® Coreâ„¢ i7 4710HQ procesor Intel® Coreâ„¢ i5 4200H procesor Intel® HM86 Express Chipset  ...that match the user hardware well? Hardly he could be punished for the fact, that CPU-Z 1.72.1 does not recognize the chipset on this particular NTB. Edited September 22, 2015 by trodas 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.