chispy Posted October 30, 2016 Posted October 30, 2016 No problem.Always good to see you around. Don't be a stranger. Same here old friend :celebration: , not a good way to come back to hwbot as you know i have retired from benching over 2 years ago. I have only come back to hwbot because of this troll liqmet , i cannot believe they are letting stuff like this happen at hwbot , seriously this need to stop and stop now , asap or it will snowball soon ... Quote
TASOS Posted October 31, 2016 Author Posted October 31, 2016 Monday morning here. Just got in the forum , to see (once again) , that user liqmet is still going strong. This time , i had an other 9 year+ score reported :ws: Quote
chispy Posted October 31, 2016 Posted October 31, 2016 Monday morning here. Just got in the forum , to see (once again) , that user liqmet is still going strong. This time , i had an other 9 year+ score reported :ws: Tasos this guy do not want to listen to anyone , he keeps doing it everyday , it is very annoying and disturbing. he is out of control with the false reporting and trolling , i am 100% sure he knows exactly what he is doing is wrong , very wrong , this abusive behavior needs to stop and cannot be tolerated any longer. I have already sent PM to @Richbastard @Massman @Christian Ney to let them know of this problematic user , they will take proper action , soon i hope. Kind Regards: Angelo Quote
Christian Ney Posted October 31, 2016 Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) Mkay Since it is not possible to remove the possibility to report submissions for a single user (without touching the code). I will "kindly" ask him to stop reporting via PM. EDIT: Wait, someone here speaks Russian? Edited October 31, 2016 by Christian Ney Quote
TASOS Posted November 1, 2016 Author Posted November 1, 2016 По руÑÑки - к Ñтарым результатам неприменимы Ñовременные правила (вплоть до 2009 Ð´Ð»Ñ Ð²Ñех теÑтов, Ð´Ð»Ñ Ð°ÐºÐ²Ð°Ð¼Ð°Ñ€ÐºÐ° до 2012). Правила менÑлиÑÑŒ, Ð´Ð»Ñ Ñ‚ÐµÑ… времен результаты были оформлены доÑтаточно правильно, чтобы получать меÑто и очки. Ðовые правила не имеют обратной Ñилы, поÑтому нефиг жаловатьÑÑ Ð½Ð° результаты, датированные более ранним временем, чем Ñ‚Ð²Ð¾Ñ Ñ€ÐµÐ³Ð¸ÑÑ‚Ñ€Ð°Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ð½Ð° боте. Ферштейн? Mkay Since it is not possible to remove the possibility to report submissions for a single user (without touching the code). I will "kindly" ask him to stop reporting via PM. EDIT: Wait, someone here speaks Russian? Already done that , by TerraRaptor Quote
Christian Ney Posted November 14, 2016 Posted November 14, 2016 Should we also take care of @M\.Beier? #UnpopularOpinion Quote
Administrators websmile Posted January 24, 2017 Administrators Posted January 24, 2017 @Remarc stop reporting legit 01 results, you can also run x800 at 06 and get score, it is only lower because tests are skipped, legit run remains legit - no time to deal with this madness Quote
Remarc Posted January 24, 2017 Posted January 24, 2017 (edited) websmile i not understand you x800? 06? what do you mean? Edited January 24, 2017 by Remarc Quote
Administrators websmile Posted January 24, 2017 Administrators Posted January 24, 2017 It means if a card can generate a result at correct settings it is ok. Some old cards cannot run all tests at some 3DMarks, the x800 for example has no sm3 and skips the SM3 test at 3DM06 - you get a valid result nontheless, low score, but it is ok. When you have a card that can run 01, but has not enough videoram to run nature, this test ist automatically skipped at a full run. You still get a result, but the score is low. No need to report these, we accept this result because it ran all possible tests the card could at rules settings and gives a score . So please do not report these, they are ok Quote
Remarc Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) the matter is not in the nature test, there need hardware support dx9 to run it (not error low memory) Edited January 25, 2017 by Remarc Quote
Administrators websmile Posted January 25, 2017 Administrators Posted January 25, 2017 3DMark 01 was released start of 2001, dx9 was released december 2002 iirc - anyway, let´s simply stay with the fact that on some 3dmarks an overall result (score) given with missing subtest is still valid, you have no advantage from this because the score will always be lower than if you run all subtests that are offered. Hwbot always accepted these,tthe 3dmark06 was an example for this with the radeon x8xx series Quote
Remarc Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 no,you not understand what i mean (i know about miss subtest and give low score)...you read what i write in the description for report?probably no can not run 3dm01 any subtest including low car-get error out of videomem...memory on card 8 mb and everyone who has tried on this card run test get error...how do you explain that? Quote
Administrators websmile Posted January 25, 2017 Administrators Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) He might have modded driver or done something else, he has subtest results, resolution is OK and settings look ok as well. I cannot block a score because you cannot do what he can. I read your comment, but the screenshot is solid and was checked now by Ney first and by me afterwards Edited January 25, 2017 by websmile Quote
Administrators websmile Posted January 25, 2017 Administrators Posted January 25, 2017 99,9% opf people cannot run 2600k on win98, some mod os and can. Dsicussion closed If you are not willing to accept decisions of staff after various guys ruled on reports, you are at wrong forum Quote
Remarc Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 because we are all here so stupid and they are geniuses)I expected such a response from you) once you bother that people send reports - then remove everywhere this option of sending reports, let there be cheaters,bug users and photoshop/paint masters facepalm lol) okey this is your choice,let so is be Quote
Administrators websmile Posted January 25, 2017 Administrators Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) This had nothing to do with genius, if I have no proof of cheating I don´t block - and guys like you who behave like 6 year old and report same submission 10 times again and again should not be able to report, I agree, because you are not only arrogant but also do not respect rules and ruling the fact you obviously dont understand what discussion closed means earns you a timeout, maybe you learn then Edited January 25, 2017 by websmile Quote
TASOS Posted February 10, 2018 Author Posted February 10, 2018 User liqmet ... again. This time , reporting 10 year old results ... again. Reporting ATI 9800 SE results , for not beeing 9800 SE. The reason (for him) is because the are 256bit. Somebody with much more brains than liqmet , created 2 seperated categories for ATI 9800 SE , in hwbot database. 1)ATI 9800 SE 2)ATI 9800 SE 128bit Anybody have a wild guess why ??? Quote
Crew Strunkenbold Posted February 12, 2018 Crew Posted February 12, 2018 1)ATI 9800 SE 2)ATI 9800 SE 128bit Anybody have a wild guess why ??? Those categories are old... And I guess they were created because of the problem Ati/AMD has for years: They simply dont give a f***, how their cards gets identified. Thus those categories where created because GPU-Z said it. Those old categories need a cleanup, need to find time for that. Quote
TASOS Posted February 13, 2018 Author Posted February 13, 2018 Those categories are old...And I guess they were created because of the problem Ati/AMD has for years: They simply dont give a f***, how their cards gets identified. Thus those categories where created because GPU-Z said it. Those old categories need a cleanup, need to find time for that. Gregor Those two 9800SE categories are correct. 9800SE's exist in both 256bit and 128bit versions. The problem here is that "liqmet" thinks that only 128bit are 9800SE and is reporting all other results. I agree with you on the general identification problem with ATI/AMD cards. Quote
Crew Strunkenbold Posted February 15, 2018 Crew Posted February 15, 2018 Gregor Those two 9800SE categories are correct. 9800SE's exist in both 256bit and 128bit versions. The problem here is that "liqmet" thinks that only 128bit are 9800SE and is reporting all other results. I agree with you on the general identification problem with ATI/AMD cards. I just took a look at TPU GPU db and saw there is only a 128bit SE. But multiple sources on the internet and our entries claim there is also a 256bit version of the card. I changed the name scheme of those cards to make it easier to see the difference. Ill also drop a message to TPU GPU DB maintainer... Quote
TASOS Posted June 24, 2019 Author Posted June 24, 2019 @liq_met Congrats for your new WR !!! ? ? Quote 3DMark05 10041 marks darkman16 GeForce 8800 GTX reported by user edit view 11 year and 11 months ago botservice: scanned by bot on forum 11 year and 11 months ago engine: bot picked up changes on forum 39 minutes ago liqmet : reported by user (Pentium 4 'D' 945 ) Comment... 4 Quote
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.