May 20, 200817 yr No jmke you spoke mods as a collective your words not mine, my discussion here was with you only. I addressed the fact that you came accross a bit patronising. thats all. You responded to that which is fine. basically you told me im beinmg trivial exagerating and not to be upset with a smiling face, I think im entitled to respond to that and not just let you do it without responding to you. The matter is over as far as im concerned and im sorry it went this way. sometimes its wise to try to understand the other part'ys perspective and not just jump on the defensive. as I said twice already I do appreciate what you do, anfd I know it cant be easy. regards.
May 20, 200817 yr @jmke, There is a mistake in here, Have a look at the attachments. This is the second and third score in PiFast in Celeron s478 320: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617269 2nd http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=653467 3rd The second score is 60.73s(the system has give him 60.0s) and the third 60.56s Can you please ckeck it and correct it? Edit:Also check the fourth score is well,it says 62.0s and the calculation on the screenshot says 62.93s. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=620077 I haven't been any further.... stealth
May 22, 200817 yr I got question, why all of my old X300SE scores disapper? Only one is now matched to X300 non SE (??) http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=644155 Can I ask WTF? I want my cups back.
May 24, 200817 yr Could a mod please check this. I did use the report tool but im curious if they should stay in the same category or not. thanks in advance. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=736593 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=728110 If you look at the gpuz screens for both you will see the cards report different architecture and die shrink size,bandwidth and texture rates are different too, but both agp? any ideas?
May 25, 200817 yr http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=GPU_1196 This category is for (!) AGPx8 (!) videocards, not pci-ex16. Please, solve this problem. Move results into pci-e category of x1650 pro ddr2 P.S. All results for x1650 are mixed up. Try to fix it or clean=)
May 26, 200817 yr Sorry to be a pain jmke but this score http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=736593 was achieved with a 'r423' gpu. the category is for 'r420' gpu's. it must belong to the 'r423' category, if its an agp card then maybe it should be in a new category? please advise.
May 26, 200817 yr Thanks jmke, I did wonder if it was an omega driver error, if it is, I have no problem. thanks for your info too.
May 30, 200817 yr Invalid verification and still some points,I have reported few times.. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567829
May 30, 200817 yr jmke Hi! You've blocked my 3dmark03 result, and the reason was "suspect score, used of MIPMAP tweak which is not allowed at HWBot". But I wasn't using this tweak, I have submitted not only screenshot, but also an ORB-link. I think you know that if mipmap tweak is used, then 3dmark03 won't let you to publish score. http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=5820132 Edited May 30, 200817 yr by olegk@
May 30, 200817 yr older versions of Wprime sometimes report invalid checksum even when there's nothing wrong. See why we don't want to go back to older Wprime versions ? if the score is in line with what other are getting with same CPU; there is no reason to block. The benchmark was run with the hardware mentioned and autosubmitted more than a year ago with version 1.43; E6300 @ ~4000Mhz scores the time he has. If you say so,no prob... Cheers
June 1, 200817 yr http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=738608 Duron 750 not a 700 ? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=726187 The same thing ? Duron 800 not a 700 ?
June 1, 200817 yr http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=738608 Duron 750 not a 700 ? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=726187 The same thing ? Duron 800 not a 700 ? The multi are unlockt on the CPU by pen mod
June 4, 200817 yr I have reported these 2 results,but nothing happend.Wrong version of wprime,invalid and still some points: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=738435 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=739723
June 4, 200817 yr I have reported these 2 results,but nothing happend.Wrong version of wprime,invalid and still some points:http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=738435 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=739723 Fixed
June 4, 200817 yr fixed Thanks and one more,valid but version of wprime is wrong : http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=738422
June 4, 200817 yr hey hey give us some time Proste you reported it today and already ask about it less than 24 hours later! One of them I have reported about week ago,so that's why...
June 11, 200816 yr This score http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=506119 I reporte recently as having no proof at all. It was checked by a mod who validated it as an old score. My problem here is that this score was not in this category untill june of this year? meaning if its an old score it has been moved here from another category recently? So if it was moved to this category recently then surely it should be updated with proof. I wanted to check the users scores to see if it had been moved from a x800 pcie category but cant even find the user in the team the score has him linked to? I just checked the evolution ranking on this, the score was ranked 27th untill june 08, this category gpu wasnt even created until very recently because I requested it. So how can it 'being an old score be validated without proof? Edited June 11, 200816 yr by BUSTAMOVE
June 14, 200816 yr Athlon XP 2000+ in Athlon XP 1700 Palomino (M=11) categ: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=742656 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=742608 Please, move to correct category. Tnx.
June 14, 200816 yr Hey, I'm writing to describe my results in Radeon 9550 category: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=745049 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=745050 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=745053 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=745056 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=745057 Firstly, sorry for that I don't use GPU-Z (I have only one screen with GPU-Z), but when any test was end and I want to open GPU-Z it suspend PC, so I used RivaTuner. Next problem is that in screen you can see it is radeon 9600, but 9550 VGuru have jumper to swich overclocking option. So, we can see PC detect card like 9600... Why I wrote it? I want please moderators to check results and put theirs like "This result has been moderated by the hwbot crew...", becouse I won't have problems with it in future. Sorry for may crappy english.
June 14, 200816 yr Looks like 9600.... I have the 4CoreDual, and 9550...i havent problems. Use official approved ATI drivers (not Omegas), and retry GPU-Z. Try lowering VAGP in the 4CoreDual. Edited June 14, 200816 yr by maxine
June 15, 200816 yr It isn't problem with a mobo or card. I think the CPU platform is not stable(stable only for 3DMarks, but not at all), becouse sametimes I have the same problem with CPU-Z. Sorry, I forgot to attach photos of card: and screen with GPU-Z: Edited June 15, 200816 yr by Narmer
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.