tiborrr Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 Those scores does not comply to the new rules which forces users to show the subtest results. Nothing personal, KtP, but the moderator's explanation was 'score not suspicious'. How come it isn't? Many runs with similiarly clocked cards (obvious in 3DM03) get much lower results, no ORB or subtest provided, but moderators are still claiming there's nothing suspicious. So, even by box-checking that you agree to the new rules doesn't mean a crap around here? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=741315 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=741316 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=741317 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=741320 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiborrr Posted June 2, 2008 Author Share Posted June 2, 2008 (edited) Ofcourse it's unbiased. Those scores we're once before submitted to ORB, i warned hwbot about the lack of proof, they were removed. Now, a week later, they're on hwbot.org again. How come then the first time they we're removed & now they're not? It's good to know the new rules are a joke then and don't mean s**t after all. Now all the cheating guys who almost ran out of bussines due to new rule enforcement will quickly learn how to adapt the scores to look more 'valid'. LOL... I dare all Photoshopers to continue their legacy, it's as easy as before, just watch out when adapting your scores with the life-like MHz speed, hehe! Kill your scene. Compare this & score, almost identical Nature despite some difference in memory speed. 59k is unrealistic with 2600XT yet with 2600PRO. Edited June 2, 2008 by tiborrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiborrr Posted June 3, 2008 Author Share Posted June 3, 2008 Ha ha, it's funny, just take a look at the log. Those exact scores were on hwbot.org previous week and they got deleted, but this time they don't. Bias or unbiased - You can play ignorant on me, that OK, i'm getting used to it around here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiborrr Posted June 3, 2008 Author Share Posted June 3, 2008 I sincerely hoped you guys have some kind of system that logs all submitted and deleted results. Well, noone knows anything again, it's better to lock this topic before something is said that both parties could and would regret . Cheers, N. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 We have and I checked, a score was indeed blocked. In what way are the scores highly suspicious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiborrr Posted June 3, 2008 Author Share Posted June 3, 2008 Not highly suspicious but indeed the result looks too high for the clocks given, compared to the other runs. Best example would be 3DMark03, even 2k1 @ 59k is highly unlikely. But let's leave it as it is, don't wanna argue anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Might be the newer 8.3 drivers he's using, while you used 7.10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiborrr Posted June 3, 2008 Author Share Posted June 3, 2008 Newer -> slower with ATi in older benchmarks because of optimization for newer 3000 series cards, it's funny how it's opposite with nVidia, GeForce 6600GT runs like hell on 169.21 Leave it be, I don't care anymore and lock this up as a favor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiborrr Posted June 3, 2008 Author Share Posted June 3, 2008 Yes, jmke, that's the main reason - if that makes you happy, so be it! :woot: I know it's impossible to hunt down these results even if i put my chip under cascade and run it at 5500-5530MHz and GPU under singlestage which might yield me another 50-100MHz on the GPU. Therefor i say it again - i don't care anymore, please lock it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Newer -> slower with ATi in older benchmarks because of optimization for newer 3000 series cards HD 2000 series got a boost as well, according to different reviews, up to 10% in for example the new Unreal Tournament. Gonna lock this though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts