moi_kot_lybit_moloko Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 Question: Can I use an older CPUZ version on legacy hardware? Answer: Yes, HWBOT recognises that on LGA1156 and older hardware newer CPU versions can lead to wrong multiplier detection and even BSODs while just opening CPUZ. Therefore scores are allowed on these Legacy platforms with CPUZ version1.59 or CPUZ version 1.77 hmm, afaik that cpuz versions can't validation (req new version cpuz). and no info about cpuz vintage edition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted January 23, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted January 23, 2021 It's not for validation purposes (that always requries one of the latest official version), but for cpuz in screenshots to show the correct cpu speeds during the run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jab383 Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 I think the general rules need something more in the area of video drivers. 2.2 General Verification Rules say: "For many UL 3D benchmarks, HWBOT requires a VALID verification link: This means that no LOD (Level of Detail), nor Tesselation Display Driver tuning is allowed. Hardware and Display Driver must be recognized/approved by UL Benchmarks." 3.2-A Video Card Drivers says: "Unlike Futuremark/UL, HWBOT allows people to use whatever driver they feel is best for their videocard, be it an official or beta version of the videocard driver." These seem to contradict since the Drivers statement does not exclude UL benchmarks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted January 23, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted January 23, 2021 well you can also bench other benchmarks than UL ones right, I'll rephrase it HWBOT allows people to use whatever driver they feel is best for their videocard, be it an official or beta version of the videocard driver. (take note that UL Benchmarks is only Validating submissions within their approved drivers list). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted February 5, 2021 Crew Share Posted February 5, 2021 Could we add "Any 3D" and "Any 2D" to the list of options? I think I'm not the only one who does such searches for given parameters. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 8, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted February 8, 2021 Result forum script implemented on default theme. (not same as white or dark) 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeph8n Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 @Leeghoofd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 9, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted February 9, 2021 Try switching back to the default Mike and let me know if it works than. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeph8n Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 6 hours ago, Leeghoofd said: Try switching back to the default Mike and let me know if it works than. yes that works. Seems like no Dark Theme implementation yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 9, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted February 9, 2021 3 hours ago, keeph8n said: yes that works. Seems like no Dark Theme implementation yet. Modded that one too, should work for both now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 13, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted February 13, 2021 Futuremark verification links issue should be fixed, also if a verification link is required the BOT will ask you for it. Geekbench 4 link is adressed. PCMARK10 series receive hardware boints Currently Tim is working on the database to fix the "new manufacturer" bug and add more moderator stuff so we can switch users to other leagues, teams... , change emails easier,... 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted February 14, 2021 Crew Share Posted February 14, 2021 15 hours ago, Leeghoofd said: also if a verification link is required the BOT will ask you for it. Is it normal that 3DM Vantage requires verification despite being unsupported? https://benchmarks.ul.com/legacy-benchmarks?redirected=true# Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 14, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted February 14, 2021 yes, same for 05/06 globals... if FM removes the support than so be it, till the time being it still works. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 9 5950X,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG CROSSHAIR VIII DARK HERO (3dmark.com) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rauf Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 3 hours ago, Leeghoofd said: yes, same for 05/06 globals... if FM removes the support than so be it, till the time being it still works. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 9 5950X,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG CROSSHAIR VIII DARK HERO (3dmark.com) Depends on how you define "works". Links with lod are no longer public, which means they have no real value. Sure you can screenshot the validation page yourself, but we already provide one screenshot. If one can be faked then why not the other? And then we have the issue where 2 out 3 amd runs will result in false positive for timer issues. So in reality you need luck to get a valid score. I don't think this situation is working very well. Is Benchmate an option if you still want more security than screenshots? Talking everything from 03 to 3d11. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 14, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted February 14, 2021 Does UL allow the score with timer issues? If they don't, we don't either... We follow the same ruling to avoid the discrepancies of the past. So it's not only about security but also about compliance on both sites. FYI since the Escapee history there have been proposals/thoughts to use Matt's experience for enhanced security at UL's side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rauf Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 7 hours ago, Leeghoofd said: Does UL allow the score with timer issues? If they don't, we don't either... We follow the same ruling to avoid the discrepancies of the past. So it's not only about security but also about compliance on both sites. FYI since the Escapee history there have been proposals/thoughts to use Matt's experience for enhanced security at UL's side. These benchmarks are all eol. 3dmark (FS and newer) suite does not have the timer issues, which means that the problem is not the sysinfo itself. And there is little chance that UL fixes eol benchmarks. Also, we allow lod and tess, so we don't follow the same rules anyway. I don't see any other benchmark here that works 33% of the time or so. Please understand that benching 3d11 for example is pretty challenging. You need high cpu clocks, high ram which often is sensitive to cold. Then you have gpu, which if you are lucky can do full pot. But you only have a short while to bench before vram gets too cold because of full pot temps. And you might crack after a short while even if you are succesful in getting to full pot. Now let's say you manage to pull everything of the above off. Maybe have remounted 2, 3 or 4 times to try to get to full pot. And once you do your score is invalid because of an issue that isn't even a real world problem. This problem applies to 3 out of 10 global gpu benchmarks. If you bench for hw points there are at least 7 benchmarks that have this issue. For me this is a big problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_mat_ Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 (edited) No, it doesn't allow online validation links with (detected) timer issues as far as I know. But there are multiple ways to get a skewed offline score in the latest versions. I detected one recently on Zen 3 with specific motherboards without even touching the reference clock (which is normally detected without problems). So online validation for latest UL products is necessary for reliability in my opinion. Edited February 15, 2021 by _mat_ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted February 17, 2021 Crew Share Posted February 17, 2021 https://hwbot.org/league/hardware_masters/?offset=287 Ranking enumeration bugged. I love breaking things, yep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 17, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted February 17, 2021 3 minutes ago, Antinomy said: https://hwbot.org/league/hardware_masters/?offset=287 Ranking enumeration bugged. I love breaking things, yep Can I change your name to Axtinomy, to see if the ranking is okay then... Aristidis was there first, you catched up, but for some reason it sorts equal spots alphabetically... great programming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted February 18, 2021 Crew Share Posted February 18, 2021 23 minutes ago, Leeghoofd said: Can I change your name to Axtinomy, to see if the ranking is okay then... Only if you promise to change back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted February 18, 2021 Crew Share Posted February 18, 2021 On 1/20/2021 at 5:18 PM, Leeghoofd said: this one or... I've figured out why I thought "any" was missing. It's only available if you're logged in. If you're not, it's not there. Not sure if a bug or a feature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted February 18, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted February 18, 2021 24 minutes ago, Antinomy said: Only if you promise to change back I think many agree never trust a Belgian... Now this ranking doesn't recalculate daily, so we need to wait what the effect will be, Global master ranking is even funnier... sigh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted February 22, 2021 Crew Share Posted February 22, 2021 Another bug to the todo list. https://hwbot.org/team/hardware_hackers/#Members The Contribution ranking is calculated using TPP+UP points = total contribution. But in the #1 member info it's only the TPP displayed. In this case, Dry_Ice total contribution is higher, but 5550 is TPP and I have higher TPP despite lower contribution. Probably worth a fix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ludek Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 (edited) Hi! I want to report a bug and tell you a few words and add ideas. So here is a bug above comment section. https://hwbot.org/submission/4696660 the bug (is in the middle): Also, Please add: -ability to edit "motherboard" and "Processor" sections after I want to upload another motherboard reference clock submit using the same CPU. Or when I want to upload a benchmark result using the same motherboard. Some of these versions were bugged, I don't remember which one. -add "my last 20 scores" on my wall. I think 20 is fine. It helps me to find out which score I have uploaded. For example I beat some motherboards, but using one of them I stopped and have done some additional scores, so after a week of benchmarking I don't remember which one I uploaded. - I want to see my top CPU Frequency result when I click on the link:https://hwbot.org/user/ludek/#My_Submissions - I want to see my top CPU Frequency first, not the 3DMark11 Physics. I see it's alphabetical, but more often we OCers want to see another ocer's cpus. -recalculate option is... well doesn't work at all. it says "Recalulcating all submissions is temporarly disabled to prevent abuse." - add a warning when Im writing a comment below submission score, when my text is long enough. For example if > 500 characters, something goes RED. Edited March 5, 2021 by ludek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted March 5, 2021 Author Crew Share Posted March 5, 2021 1 hour ago, ludek said: Hi! I want to report a bug and tell you a few words and add ideas. So here is a bug above comment section. https://hwbot.org/submission/4696660 the bug (is in the middle): If you using same stuff as in html, things might get mixed, I removed the > and its all fine -ability to edit "motherboard" and "Processor" sections after I want to upload another motherboard reference clock submit using the same CPU. Or when I want to upload a benchmark result using the same motherboard. Some of these versions were bugged, I don't remember which one. Solution is simple: If you want to use the same cpu and another mobo, you submit another score. If you want to submit a benchmark result using the same motherboard you submit a new score. Editing scores is never a good idea with the current code as some stuff like cardnr or batches just remain cached. -add "my last 20 scores" on my wall. I think 20 is fine. It helps me to find out which score I have uploaded. For example I beat some motherboards, but using one of them I stopped and have done some additional scores, so after a week of benchmarking I don't remember which one I uploaded. Programmer is adressing the wall showing nothing, this weekend - I want to see my top CPU Frequency result when I click on the link:https://hwbot.org/user/ludek/#My_Submissions - I want to see my top CPU Frequency first, not the 3DMark11 Physics. I see it's alphabetical, but more often we OCers want to see another ocer's cpus. It's alphabetical on request, changing one thing, messes up everything again as each submission, benchmark and ranking page is linked , so not gonna happen. You will have to get used to it... -recalculate option is... well doesn't work at all. it says "Recalulcating all submissions is temporarly disabled to prevent abuse." Yes and it probably wlll stay disabled or as many user think the bot constantly recalculates everything after their submission. So what does a user do, press recalculate. Nothing happens right now, so let us press recalculate once more... Just for figures we get up to 4-5K subsmissions alone from XTU each week - add a warning when Im writing a comment below submission score, when my text is long enough. For example if > 500 characters, something goes RED. If you write a comment on your submission of more than 500 characters I think you should become a novelist. Use the forum to explain in detail to what you did to get this score. 2 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.