I don't know why but when I sub the data file it keeps calling my X2 4800 Toledo a Brisbane chip which it's obviously not.

Bones`s HWBOT x265 Benchmark - 4k score: 0.3 fps with a Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (Brisbane)

 

When I try to edit the entry I get a white screen saying something about the entry being edited in the browser header but it doesn't actually do it. Root of the issue is the misidentification of the chip.

 

Thanks in advance for checking this.

 

EDIT:

 

Finally got it to do the edit of the sub but the misidentification issue still needs addressing at some point.

Edited September 23, 20177 yr by Bones

With current system, I don't think it is possible to solve this. X265 reports CPU name, which is in this case "Athlon 64 X2 4800+" and HWBOT engine is trying to find the best match from the database. There is no way to tell which 4800+ it actually is. Anyway the manual edit should work (I've used it few times myself) and this issue is not that common anyway. There are just a few different CPUs with same name.

With current system, I don't think it is possible to solve this. X265 reports CPU name, which is in this case "Athlon 64 X2 4800+" and HWBOT engine is trying to find the best match from the database. There is no way to tell which 4800+ it actually is. Anyway the manual edit should work (I've used it few times myself) and this issue is not that common anyway. There are just a few different CPUs with same name.

 

 

This is a very good bench Havli. Thank you for all the work you put in on this. It would have been a shame to just throw it away. :celebration:

Edited September 24, 20177 yr by Mr.Scott

With current system, I don't think it is possible to solve this. X265 reports CPU name, which is in this case "Athlon 64 X2 4800+" and HWBOT engine is trying to find the best match from the database. There is no way to tell which 4800+ it actually is. Anyway the manual edit should work (I've used it few times myself) and this issue is not that common anyway. There are just a few different CPUs with same name.

 

I know you're making it better and thanks for the work you've put into this! :ws:

 

Perhaps there is a way to get the bench to use CPU-Z info while CPU-Z itself is opened for the screenie, I dunno but just a thought.

 

Anyway you are right, editing is fine by me and I was having a real issue trying to get the site to edit the entry.

Didn't want a mod coming along and nailing me over a sub I coudn't edit in time to correct the error before they saw it.

Thank you for the support

 

Actually - CPU-Z is used to detect all the HW and SW info shown in the main window. It has been like that since the very first version of x265.

 

The problem is - HWBOT API only accept one parameter to specify used CPU and that is the name. I could implement some kind of my own database for CPUs with conflicting names built into the x265 bench and since I know the codename (thanks to CPU-Z), then it would be possible to assemble the correct name for submit... in this case "Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (Toledo) ". Obviously this is not very efficient approach.

 

I have an idea how to do this properly, but it would require update to HWBOT API... and I'm not sure if this can be done.

Hmmm.... I checked and noted the only chip with the model designation of 4800 within socket 939 is the Toledo, Brisbane and Windsor both being AM2 chips and these three are the only ones that appears under the "4800" model query.

 

Perhaps if it could somehow use what socket is being ran to help with this?

I know it can read the socket, chip's codename and board model at least.

 

Just trying to make a suggestion that could possibly help with this and improve the bench overall - Hopefully it may give you a thought or an idea of somekind.

The datafile looks like this (CPU related part):

 

As you can see, there is no field for codename or socket. As far as I know, when you submit the score it works exactly the same way as if you perform manual search on the main site. If you type 4800+, three records show up (in alphabetical order most likely)... and the first one is used for the submission.

 

Like I said in the previous post, there are two solutions. One is non-systemic workaround for current API which would take a lot of time to implement. And the second solution requires changes to the API itself (server side)... and this is beyond my power.

Maybe you'll have a thought sometime later on this, I know you've worked on this enough as is and that is appreciated.

The only real solution is to update the hwbot api. Those wrongly matched items are very bad, resulting in unnecessary administration work.

I dont see someone having time working on this. But maybe Massman grants you access to the code?