Splave Posted August 23, 2017 Author Posted August 23, 2017 Yeah, I had some positive scores as well. But all pretty much 2.5X higher than normal. Maybe easier on 10 core to control you see I hit my target of 125 current record 120. I could fine tune it by wait time. 4.5ghz
xMec Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Benchmark points Need to Be removed but at least he Need a ban. Great discover splave.
Noxinite Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 More broken benches. x264 seemed pretty cool as well. But yeah, probably should disable points and ban blantant cheaters.
Rauf Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 (edited) I have been wondering about this score for a long time: $@39@`s HWBOT x265 Benchmark - 1080p score: 55.7 fps with a Core i7 6700K Super "efficiency" with E-die mems at 1800MHz, beating Dancop with similar CPU speed and B-die at 2090+ 12-11...and that score was for Country Cup... Edit: and benchmark took two seconds longer to finish... Edit2: never mind fixing hwbotprime, aka the slot machine, good riddance Edited August 23, 2017 by Rauf
Massman Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 (edited) Edit: and benchmark took two seconds longer to finish... Looks like this is how we may be able to identify these results: $@39@`s HWBOT x265 Benchmark - 1080p score: 55.7 fps with a Core i7 6700K Frames: 1128 Time elapsed: 22 seconds FPS: 1128 / 22 = 51.27 != 55.70 //edit: this can vary a bit depending on the milliseconds (i.e. 22.499sec). But in general, we should be able to identify a bogus run by comparing run time and FPS output for X265. HWBOT Prime will be another story however ... Edited August 23, 2017 by Massman
Splave Posted August 23, 2017 Author Posted August 23, 2017 (edited) Think so man. This is the now the Greek tweak? If the bench takes longer at a give mhz and scores better it's manipulated time cheat Edited August 23, 2017 by Splave
Rauf Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 What about thisOGS`s HWBOT x265 Benchmark - 4k score: 6.6 fps with a Core i3 7350K Then look at my submission. xMec`s HWBOT x265 Benchmark - 4k score: 6.63 fps with a Core i3 7350K Could Be cheated ? Couldn't do 6.6 at his frequency and Memory timing. Had to push way far Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A3010 utilizzando Tapatalk Dude, you can't just accuse someone of cheating with no proof. This benchmark varies alot, especially on win7. Tune your OS, or better yet, use proper OS for this bench.
xMec Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Dude, you can't just accuse someone of cheating with no proof. This benchmark varies alot, especially on win7. Tune your OS, or better yet, use proper OS for this bench.Nvm man Just got confused [emoji28] Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A3010 utilizzando Tapatalk
sunset1 Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 so the scores and points gained by this method are safe ? thank god he gets to keep the other scores cus wow .. all that hard work changing the clock back and forth.. amazing work.
Alex@ro Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Good find Allen ! I actually believed in this guy, been a long time since i saw such passion. Ban for 1 year maybe, 1 month is same as nothing.... Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Administrators websmile Posted August 23, 2017 Administrators Posted August 23, 2017 Is this "tweak" tested to work on 1151 as well or is this just speculation now? And second point, does it work on benchmarks with point based result only or also on time based results? And third point, I have a list with some weird 3D results, is it possible stuff like Unigine Heaven for example or FM benchmarks are affected as well? Thanks in advance
speed.fastest Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 And i tryed almost all Java version, now points removed
Splave Posted August 23, 2017 Author Posted August 23, 2017 (edited) Is this "tweak" tested to work on 1151 as well or is this just speculation now? And second point, does it work on benchmarks with point based result only or also on time based results? And third point, I have a list with some weird 3D results, is it possible stuff like Unigine Heaven for example or FM benchmarks are affected as well? Thanks in advance Cines wprimes geek gpupi seem safe from what I try. Geek has built in timer that must match or sends error. Wprime says cheat detected, cinebench scoring the same either way. Same as gpupi. 3d I can try some tomorrow or anyone else can try too. Im not software engineer so maybe I'm missing something out of those but that specific cheat is not working using that method. I can try changing the method to see if there is some tolerance you can still get boost from this It should work on any platform since the program uses windows time in the score in some form. Edited August 23, 2017 by Splave
I.nfraR.ed Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Good find! Seems I was smart enough (read "haven't benched anything in the last several months") to not bother about these benchmarks. Perhaps I'll now move up in the rankings without benching anything, yay!
havli Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Looks like this is how we may be able to identify these results: $@39@`s HWBOT x265 Benchmark - 1080p score: 55.7 fps with a Core i7 6700K Frames: 1128 Time elapsed: 22 seconds FPS: 1128 / 22 = 51.27 != 55.70 //edit: this can vary a bit depending on the milliseconds (i.e. 22.499sec). But in general, we should be able to identify a bogus run by comparing run time and FPS output for X265. HWBOT Prime will be another story however ... Yes, it seems the elapsed time is correct even on the cheated x265 scores - most likely different method is used to measure this time and the actual score time (which is then translated to fps). I will investigate this as soon as I can. I hope it will be possible to fix this vulnerability. I've started to work on update of the x265 benchmark few days ago, it seems there are more problems to solve that I originally thought... this one is extremely serious. I'm sorry such a big issue made it to the live version. During development I've put a lot of effort to make this benchmark as secure as possible (there are many anti-tampering measures in place)... but maybe the most obvious security hole slipped through and been here for the whole time. This time I must do even more thorough testing before the next version goes live.
mickulty Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Hopefully x265 can stay with a new version, it's nice to have a benchmark that feels fairly "real world". R.I.P. HWBot Prime
Rauf Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Is this "tweak" tested to work on 1151 as well or is this just speculation now? And second point, does it work on benchmarks with point based result only or also on time based results? And third point, I have a list with some weird 3D results, is it possible stuff like Unigine Heaven for example or FM benchmarks are affected as well? Thanks in advance Looking at this score: http://hwbot.org/submission/3396930_a39a_hwbot_x265_benchmark___1080p_core_i7_6700k_55.7_fps It works without a doubt on 1151. The benchmark duration is ~2 seconds off, and eff is through the roof for that mem speed. Doesn't heaven count total number of rendered frames for benchmark score? If so it should not be affected. Don't know about FM but they have been affected by rtc bugs in the past, so it would seem it's worth testing it at least. But it would surprise me if FM haven't thought about this...
Massman Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Will Windows 7 banned for all platform? This is not an OS specific issue.
Administrators websmile Posted August 23, 2017 Administrators Posted August 23, 2017 Looking at this score: http://hwbot.org/submission/3396930_a39a_hwbot_x265_benchmark___1080p_core_i7_6700k_55.7_fpsIt works without a doubt on 1151. The benchmark duration is ~2 seconds off, and eff is through the roof for that mem speed. Doesn't heaven count total number of rendered frames for benchmark score? If so it should not be affected. Don't know about FM but they have been affected by rtc bugs in the past, so it would seem it's worth testing it at least. But it would surprise me if FM haven't thought about this... Well, the time is 2s slower than on second place but result is higher, on splaves results it is the opposite, faster time= higher score like in the rankings. On heaven the results I checked have extremely low minimum fps but extreme high maximum fps compared to other results, this made me wonder if a in benchmark time boost accelerating fps like a fast forward might be problem, but it can have lots of reasons
GtiJason Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 On heaven the results I checked have extremely low minimum fps but extreme high maximum fps compared to other results, this made me wonder if a in benchmark time boost accelerating fps like a fast forward might be problem, but it can have lots of reasons I believe this is what you said to me about my results and it looks to be a valid observation but then what do we say would be causing this in my results since I've been recording the runs to show I'm not messing with them. I've made video's so far for gtx 970/980 and soon 980ti, should I zoom out to show there is no tampering going on. I'm willing to do whatever it takes to prove I'm not messing with anything even borderline sneaky and do believe I can recreate the same eff on demand if needed so lmk. Glad to help
$@39@ Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 Great find splavor, no sarcasm really mean it. But from my point of view you should also try running the benchmarks from console since they are java based. You can even pause them (asus has an onboard button for this). By pausing you can bench around 30-50mhz more depenting on cpu and bench. Pause does not work on hwbotprime for some reason but does work on x265.The overall score ia not affected but you can run higher freq since the benchmark is not all one huge load.the only thing affected is the timer but the score from the valitidy point of view is fine in my opinion.It is the first time i wish i was not on vacation to prove myself but this will happen trust me. I think it is good that we as overclockers try and find exploits of benchmarks but we should not be so thirsty of drama.Of course all of my results are open for scrutinizing,so you are free to do that,just do not jump in conclusions... 1
sunset1 Posted August 23, 2017 Posted August 23, 2017 (edited) Well thanks mods for jumping on this asap. I hope this guy gets a chance to tell his side but .. seems a strong vote from many known ocer. Seems i took too long to post :> If someone is found guilty of a cheat i hope they get a strong message in the shape of a ban. This will create havoc for all of the mods and its pretty sad. I feel for the guys who have slaved over these benches looking for legit tweaks and worked so very hard to put up a good score. Edited August 23, 2017 by sunset1
Administrators websmile Posted August 23, 2017 Administrators Posted August 23, 2017 I believe this is what you said to me about my results and it looks to be a valid observation but then what do we say would be causing this in my results since I've been recording the runs to show I'm not messing with them. I've made video's so far for gtx 970/980 and soon 980ti, should I zoom out to show there is no tampering going on. I'm willing to do whatever it takes to prove I'm not messing with anything even borderline sneaky and do believe I can recreate the same eff on demand if needed so lmk. Glad to help In fact this was not aiming at your score with 970 because I saw the video already, this run is most likely bugged or driver related but for sure not manipulated with a time shift. The 980 run for example is perfectly in line.
Recommended Posts