-> Validated score still wrong? Let us know here

knopflerbruce · July 16, 2008

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615455
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615450

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=675140

LOL! At least they use the same OS installation, mobo and memory. I'm willing to bet they use the same chip as well, 3 different ES's that have almost indentical potential:D

Maybe they didn't know about the HW sharing policy:confused: If they claim all scores are real I'd be interested in knowing how they can explain why everything seems almost identical:p

George_o/c · July 16, 2008

Hello everybody

Wanted to show you sth ...

AppleWolf (here is his profile http://www.hwbot.org/searchMembers.do?userId=8542&name=AppleWolf), has posted 4 results in the X1650 AGP category, however done with a X1650 PCI-E ... (look at his GPU-Z tab ... )

AppleWolf's 3Dmark 2001 - with a X1650 PCI-E http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=749436

AppleWolf's 3Dmark 2003 - with a X1650 PCI-E http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=749431

AppleWolf's 3Dmark 2005 - with a X1650 PCI-E http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=749432

AppleWolf's 3Dmark 2006 - also with a X1650 PCI-E http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=749433

I reported the scores, and told the reason I did that too, but I've noticed that now I can't report them ... I can assume that means, that hwbot.team has seen them, and didn't notice that we 're talking about a PCI-E X1650 here ? Why didn't AppleWolf ask for a new X1650 PCI-E category, instead of posting scores done with an E8500 + X1650 PCI-E in the AGP category ?

Please remove them ...

Also :

Serban's 3Dmark 2005 score (here it is : http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=746643) has no verification AT ALL ! ... If you press the link to forumpost you will find yourself here ... http://www.xtrempc.ro/forum/viewtopic.php?p=612268#612268

In Serban's post, you will find the submission but no image (unless they have removed the image 'cause the result is two years old ?) ...

Here's what I see anyway ...

Monstru's 3Dmark 2003 is also wrong ...

He is using a X1650Pro ...

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=752369 <-- his score

http://forum.crazypc.ro/showpost.php?p=84401 <-- his link to forumpost (where you clearly see he's using a X1650Pro running at stock clocks (600/800) ...

I think we are now ok

Please create a new X1650 PCI-E category so that AppleWolf can enjoy his scores Do not delete them, just move them

I would be also pleased if you could move the other scores too, in their right category

Thanks in advance, my best regards,

George

knopflerbruce · July 16, 2008

I notice that alot of old scores have missing screenshots, not just the one you just mentioned. Why is that?

Something is a bit weird here;) Are all images deleted after two years or so+ I see that even when I search XS, images in oooold threads have vanished, which is annoying when I look for mods etc... but to have a score deleted that way is much, much worse.

I'm planning to buy a couple of memory sticks for my screenshots, just in case they start disappearing from HWbot, too... :eek:

George_o/c · July 17, 2008

I notice that alot of old scores have missing screenshots, not just the one you just mentioned. Why is that?

Something is a bit weird here;) Are all images deleted after two years or so+ I see that even when I search XS, images in oooold threads have vanished, which is annoying when I look for mods etc... but to have a score deleted that way is much, much worse.

I'm planning to buy a couple of memory sticks for my screenshots, just in case they start disappearing from HWbot, too...

I've noticed that too ... Don't know what this is ... Maybe a problem of imageshack or what ? :confused:

That's a great idea, about old scores ...

eppikk · July 17, 2008

Just a quick Q.

wprime doesnt detect my Q9450's clock speed, and worst of all when i submit directly it submits as a E E6700 or similar.

So after i submit I edit it to match my CPU, is this righ, or must i write something in the REASON for Edit box?

r1ch · July 18, 2008

I don't want to have to report each score individually, but this user has a lot of results that need more proof.

All his 3dmark results have 'validation link' pointing to an incomplete screenshot on his own web server.

http://www.hwbot.org/user.do?userId=11987

And someone else...(no proof)

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=682979

Edited July 18, 2008 by [DR]r1ch

George_o/c · July 20, 2008

Guys what about that ? http://www.hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=22591&postcount=119

Thanks in advance,

George

Bustah · July 22, 2008

This card is the 'pro' version not 'xt' which also [i think makes it pcie n0ot agp. the only thing to go by is the orb link which doesnt clarify between 'agp' or 'pcie' a gpuz screen does. whichever it is, its in the wrong category. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=755077

The user also has entries in 3d01 and 3d03.

Also this one, http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=750583 No clarification if this is an agp or pcie card here, Id say most likely pcie going by the score. only a gpuz screen offers info on if these cards are 'pcie' or 'agp'

obviously the category is for 'agp' cards. both versions were released for this card. If you check my score I show gpuz screens deliberately to show its an agp card not the faster pcie version.

Edited July 22, 2008 by BUSTAMOVE

knopflerbruce · July 22, 2008

This card is the 'pro' version not 'xt' which also [i think makes it pcie n0ot agp. the only thing to go by is the orb link which doesnt clarify between 'agp' or 'pcie' a gpuz screen does. whichever it is, its in the wrong category. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=755077

The user also has entries in 3d01 and 3d03.

Also this one, http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=750583 No clarification if this is an agp or pcie card here, Id say most likely pcie going by the score. only a gpuz screen offers info on if these cards are 'pcie' or 'agp'

obviously the category is for 'agp' cards. both versions were released for this card. If you check my score I show gpuz screens deliberately to show its an agp card not the faster pcie version.

He used a Gigabyte GA-K8NS Nforce 3 - at least that's what it says in the description (even if it's not proven that he actually did). nf3 is an AGP only chipset afaik, so this seems to be an AGP card, not pcie.

Bustah · July 22, 2008

Thanks for that. but click the first link above and check validation link, edited in as x800, but orb reads the card as the 'pro' version, not 'xt'

Edited July 22, 2008 by BUSTAMOVE

knopflerbruce · July 22, 2008

Thanks for that. but click the first link above and check validation link, edited in as x800, but orb reads the card as the 'pro' version, not 'xt'

The first one is read as pro, so it should probably be in that category. But it's an AGP card, socket A boards with pcie don't exist afaik. Could also be blocked since it's not clear where it belongs - which is caused by the missing GPUZ screenshot.

The 2nd one seems correct, the ORB reads it as an x800xt pe. it also says that the mobo is a gigabyte board, model unknown. The user says it's an nf3 board, and I can't seem to find any evidence against that, so it has to be the agp version. But again, there is no GPUZ screenshot, and if there's doubt: block the score IMO.

yozuri · July 25, 2008

i think i've submitted proof enough to have my score 30052/3dm05 accepted.

respectfully, yozuri

maxine · July 25, 2008

Resolution Not shown (and is a 6800GT in 6800 categ)

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=643971

Resolution Not shown:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=749279

Geforce 6800 ultra in 6800(simple) AGP

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=758024

Geforce 6800GS PCI Express in AGP categ (abit GD8 havent AGP):

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554919

FAKE: Rivatunner have the focus in taskbar but no window rivatuner focus.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=686843

Ati X1050 in 9550 categ:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=738346

Edited August 22, 2008 by maxine

TASOS · July 30, 2008

3Dmark 2005 - 17234 marks - Gamer ([M]adshrimps.BE OC-Team)

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=648037

date event user description
18 Sep 2007 09:22 created Gamer manual online submission

19 Sep 2007 06:36 checked (crew) Massman checked by a moderator ()

X1900 CF ... into X1900XTX single card category.

TASOS · July 30, 2008

I am also looking for a vanished result.

I had a Dothan M740 superpi 1M result of (22.844 sec) submitted on early 2007.

I cant find it anymore.

What happened ?

Svikens · August 4, 2008

Allmost all scores is wrong, 99% VGA is 8700M not 8800M GTX

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=GPU_1262&name=GeForce+8800M+GTX+%2844%29

Freakezoit · August 5, 2008

Looks Like Sli but ranked as single & Wrong category 512mb card ranked as 1024mb.

It`s too fast For single card & CPU / Gpu Clock (Single 8800GT & Q6600 @ 3.6ghz over 6XXXX @ 03 not possible)

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=757896

TASOS · August 11, 2008

3Dmark 2005 - 17234 marks - Gamer ([M]adshrimps.BE OC-Team)

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=648037

X1900 CF ... into X1900XTX single card category.

I am also looking for a vanished result.

I had a Dothan M740 superpi 1M result of (22.844 sec) submitted on early 2007.

I cant find it anymore.

What happened ?

Bump up ....

stabias · August 11, 2008

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=722946 lga775 3.4Ghz cpu in s478 2.8Ghz category

T_M · August 12, 2008

Once a score has been moderated, i am not able to delete it. Is there a way to get them deleted?

E.g. i would like to delete: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=744854

I would like to clean up my benchmarks so that only the top scores for each of my hardware entries remain (lowering my results total and hence improving my points/result ratio).

Massman · August 12, 2008

You should be able to delete them, I think? If you click on the "+" icon in front of the score, do you see a wastebin icon appearing underneath the details of that particular score? If yes, click it.

I don't really understand why you're so eager to clean up your scores. Points/result ratio is a worthless statistic, because all you have to do to have the best ratio is own the SuperPi 1M world record and delete all your other scores. Furthermore, your ratio will probably be screwed by all the 0.x point scores you have.

Next to that, it's also interesting for other users to compare their best scores against your average scores. I know that when I'm benching, I check out scores that are a bit better than mine to compare what I need to work on.

Bustah · August 18, 2008

This score; http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=718801

I dont believe this is possible, also in the description it is reported as a 'gto' card? but submitted to x800 xt category.

as you can see this score is 11 thousand points higher than the 2nd place card, which seems to be way out of sync with other scores in the category. reporting of this result has been disabled hence my reporting it here.

No gpuz screen either.

This score is in fact more in line with scores in the x800 gto category. it looks like the score was submitted to the wrong category. :]

Edited August 18, 2008 by BUSTAMOVE

sparkY1000 · August 19, 2008

Just noticed some funny things

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=758431

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=757901

Simply amazing clock speeds!

Obviously just a cpu-z mis reading or something no biggy

bartx · August 21, 2008

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=750127

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=732603

Scores are blocked, but both were done running default settings - you can't change anything in free version 3DM 2003. In 2001 if you change something, below score is message "Benchmark was not run using default settings" or sth.