mache Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 sooo... can my score be validated or I must re-run the bench ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kolian Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 jmke But nothing is visible - there is no 3dmark settings, no videocard, no cpu... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikodemus Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Result from user that does not exist: www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=522646? Â Same category, SuperPi with Sempron 3000+ (Athlon XP), top 6 results are ALL matched to wrong processor. They should be in the S939 Sempron categories. All of those result are submitted by the same team and some of them are quite new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzz3l Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=765334 Â Score to high for this Clocks (look CPU-Z only 3,33GHz) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Sweet Posted November 21, 2008 Crew Share Posted November 21, 2008 Please friends see this score 3Dmark'06 in 3DVantage , this wrong score has been reported three times,for diferent guys (first 11-11-2008) but so far there has been moderate. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=791079  thank's  Sw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komadyret Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 SArd's 3dmark 01, 03, 05 and aquamark scores for the Radeon HD 2400 Mobility contain no cpu-z validation. Report button is grayed out. Scores look fairly reasonable so it's probably ok, just lacks the cpu-z in screenshot for validation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komadyret Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Is there a date after/before which proper validation is not required? If so I apologize for the inconvenience. These scores are dated 22-10-2007. Â http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=658682 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=658673 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=658677 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=658681 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komadyret Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Sorry about this. I just see these scores are good to go as they are. All posted within a week of the the new requirements where enforced. Â Happy benching Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikodemus Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 (edited) Result from user that doesn't exist: www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=500660. Result from no user at all: www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=731309 (no "member info" button present). And this is interesting... this user does exist, but you can't find this result 761331 from users submitted results list (plus no "member info" button present). Edited November 24, 2008 by Nikodemus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=558973 Â No validation at all (I know it's old, but were there NO rules in 2006?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komadyret Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=555626 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=776886'>http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=776886 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=776886 Â Â Are these submitted in the wrong category. Northwood A cpus are x24 multi afaik.... There seems to be many more of them too, this is but a few from the first page: http://hwbot.org/searchResults.do?direction=&applicationId=13&teamId=0&userName=&gpu=&numberOfVideocards=0&cpu=Pentium+4+2.4Ghz+B+Northwood++%28366%29&chipset=&model=&manufacturer=&minScore=&maxScore=&gpuId=0&cpuId=333&chipsetId=0&modelId=0&manufacturerId=0&offset=0&displayAdvanced=false&countryId=0&dateFrom=&dateUntil=&minGpuCoreFreq=&maxGpuCoreFreq=&minGpuMemFreq=&maxGpuMemFreq=&minCpuFreq=&maxCpuFreq=&system=&minTotalPoints= Â Also there seems to be a number of x24 multi submissions under the Northwood B category, which I believe should be x18 multi. Â http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=782494 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=600554 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=686310 +++ Â Â Was/is there a quick fix to unlock/change the multi for these cpus that indicates that these enties are correct anyway? Or is the info I find on hwbot (quick-search says Northwood A is 100MHz fsb, and northwood B is 133MHz, which indicates I'm right in assuming Northwood A is x24) and wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Pentium_4_microprocessors) wrong? Â This might need a cleanup... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCGH_Carsten Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590254 Â Conveniently, benchmark resolution is hidden, subtests are not shown (though i recon, this wasn't required, when this result was originally posted). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
demiurg Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 The result is too old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 8, 2008 Share Posted December 8, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=507430 Â No screen, and I have a feeling it's a little bit too fast for this CPU. My guess is that it's a 3000+ Venice, these are MUCH, MUCH more common than Newcastles. And that speed wouldn't be very unthinkable on a Venice core anyway:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 8, 2008 Share Posted December 8, 2008 it was cooled with Prometeia MachII ST, quite a beast, original score posted 21st December 2004! So definitely NOT a Venice core!   it's NewCastle and many at our (then very active forums) tried to beat that score for months:)  don't report scores just because somebody scored better;)  If I had known the submission date was in 2004 and not in 2006 (which is what it says when I look at the details) I wouldn't have reported it.  Seriously, if a 2 year old score with no verification suddenly drops into first place, you have to understand that I'm asking questions. But if you say it's real I believe it. If you get a chip that can do the necessary HTT, then this score isn't unbelieavable. But yeah, you need phase:p Or in my case - dryice.  PS: that score is going DOWN!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCGH_Carsten Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 The result is too old. Â Sorry, i don't get it: Too old to... what exactly? Convey a plausible proof of the score being in line with rules in place at that time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fr3ak Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 The result is too old. Â Oh, I see. So though the result is not submitted properly, it will get right after some time. Interesting point. How long exactly is "too old"? Â I take it you know a lot of people spend a lot of time benching old hardware for the whole purpose of getting points on Hwbot to help the team, because they cannot affort new stuff, don't you? Your answer is a straight kick in the nuts for those guys... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCGH_Carsten Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Thanks a lot guys, very enlightening! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCGH_Carsten Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Old, but plainly visible in the wrong category, even though checked by a mod: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=765560 Â Description AND Link both say it's an Ultra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F.O.G.N.A. Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 Hi,  this is an error on my profile  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 Screenshot is gone, so impossible to really tell if it's an athlon or a sempron. Since it's 3s faster than #2, I'd say it's definately not a sempron The cache difference makes a huge difference in spi1m... Â http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=645970 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 sorry, that score is more than 1 year old  Yeah, but still... It's an unreasonable score for that chip on air cooling, if you look into it you'll see that it fits much better amongst the 3400+ ATHLON's. You can move such old scores if you want to, I'm not asking it to be deleted because of the mission screenshot. Just moved to the category where it MOST LIKELY belongs. This isn't the first time anyone put an Athlon in a Sempron ranking... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 (edited) that a score from 2004 even! lol I moved it to Athlon 64 Newcastle S754 , I don't think there was a S754 Sempron 3400+ in 2004 Â It's a clawhammer, it says so in his signature;) And yes, there were no 3400+ semprons at that time (the highest rated sempron was the 3000+, which was a paris core AFAIK). Edited December 15, 2008 by knopflerbruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 good detective work  This is my "territory", you know;)  PS: Aiming for top 10 HW master by this evening - finally on the FRONT PAGE!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=710566 - ddr2 memory, so can't be a Newark core;) He has some other scores listed in the mobile sempron 3400+ keene-category (which uses DDR2 memory), I guess that's where it belongs. Â PS: it's a VERY good idea to ask for a verification image even for wprime benches, the auto-CPU-detect isn't working properly... Just a thought. Â Edit: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=687005 - this one is not a mobile clawhammer... 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.