Jmax Hardware Bench Party

[Massman]

I've seen this score http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=547993 which is for me suspicious and has a lack of validation.

But how can I know what were the exact rules in 2006 ?

 

We don't block scores older than 6 months exactly to prevent people from reporting just to gain points. As this score is from 2006 (!), it won't be blocked because of the lack of propper verification.

[Thor941]

so unblock

 

I still don't understand on what the suspiciousness is based !?

 

Maybe I am too stupid!

[Benji Tshi]

That's NOT what I said! And I believe I made that very clear.

 

Sorry, i'm gonna say it differently

 

When all hwbot crew will be convinced that there is no sharing, did all the results (exepts those who are really incorrect because lack of some details like GPUz or bench settings, etc...) will be restored ?

 

I know you don't say that, i just want to ask other crew members their opinion

 

EDIT : and i think one thing must be explained. We don't want to bother anyone. We just can't understand why some of our results are still blocked. We just ask people (hwbot members and crew) to be reasonnable and fair.

 

EDIT 2 : more pics :

 

 

 

As you can see it, it was a funny party

Edited April 9, 2009 by Benji Tshi

[NeoForce]

List of blocked results was published by me several pages ago.

totophe and westyle make new screens and add ORB links - no more issue.

Other screens are incorrect due to missing subtests details - including 03 result with SLI on X58 - I have several reports from DeDaL that these runs may be bugged - so subtests needed.

I can`t see reason for crew to unblock results which were blocked for missings details because crew believe there was no sharing.

________

Depakote lawsuit info

Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce

[jmax_oc]

Yes it seems that many members don't trust us despite we never cheated and despite we proof every thing we can proof (no sharing, real score since we make some of them again...). I'm sure that you know that all our scores are real and aren't faked. So I don't understand the problem with it.

 

1- We didn't know the subtest rule (like most of clockers on HWBot).

2- Next time, be sure that you will find everything you want

3- We provide pics and videos showing unsharing

4- We provide new screens with similar performances => it says that we didn't cheated the first time.

5- The remaining blocked score aren't extraordinary with the setup.

 

I fear that you are far too strict against us... For example, you blocked Dami1stm 3d06 score's because he used SLI on X58. He has a complete screen (except for subtests). He also had a futuremark validation but FM suxed and he can't make it public (therefore you knoiw it's possible, we not). He provided a screen showing the subdetail and the whole datas and your answer : he can photoshop his screen... Seriously, I think that for the first time on HWBot, you abuse of your moderation's power... Dami1stm is a respectable member.

[0cool]

You said that the subtest permit to know if the score is a fake or not.

 

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=839509

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=839511

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=839512

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=839514

 

Even if there is no subtest , there are all the information , not need gpuz , there is ati tool .

 

Fake with x1900 ? It's a joke...

 

So it's possible to validate them ?

 

Thanks

 

ps : sorry for my poor english.

[Massman]

You said that the subtest permit to know if the score is a fake or not.

 

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=839509

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=839511

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=839512

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=839514

 

Even if there is no subtest , there are all the information , not need gpuz , there is ati tool .

 

Fake with x1900 ? It's a joke...

 

So it's possible to validate them ?

 

Thanks

 

ps : sorry for my poor english.

 

GPU-Z is just absolutely mandatory for 3D benchmarks. Rivatuner/atitool and other sort-a-like programs are only enough verification when GPU-Z fails to recognise the videocard.

[jmax_oc]

I spend only 10 minutes checking SLI / 4870X2 on 3d03 for 'huge' scores. Here you can see a list of incomplete scores (no subtests). They are all 'doubtful' since they can have bugged run since we don't see subests (like Dami1stm for example).

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=817041

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=809988

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=822758

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=824595

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=831012

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=824985'>http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=824985

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=824985

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=827043

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=829464

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=812745

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=832046

 

If you block our score, you have to do same with their scores too. Those scores are like some of our scores : they doesn't respect strictly the rules. HWBot is very huge so if you decide to apply rule on us, apply rule on everyone.

 

For the owners of the quoted scores, I don't know you, I don't dislike you and I don't want your score be bloqued. Don't be furious against me or JMH, you are only quoted for examples. I only want that HWBot treat us like everyone to be as fair as possible.

[0cool]

So there is no issue for these scores ?

 

It's fantastic...

[jmax_oc]

Wait and see 0cool. They have to meet them to take the good decision. They want to be HWBot are fair as possible (and I'm convinced about it) so they will apply the same rule for every one.

[Benji Tshi]

It's fantastic...especially when you know that ATitool was sufficient some months ago. This rule is stupid (because both Atitool, Rivatuner or GPUz make sense) but it's the rule and you should have apply it I'm sorry but no solution here.

 

if you decide to apply rule on us, apply rule on everyone

It's exactly what we all want to see !

[Massman]

It's fantastic...especially when you know that ATitool was sufficient some months ago. This rule is stupid (because both Atitool, Rivatuner or GPUz make sense) but it's the rule and you should have apply it I'm sorry but no solution here

 

We're talking years.

 

Making GPU-Z absolutely obligatory was one of the very first written rules here at Hwbot. I distinctivly remember a crew member blocking KP's AM3 world record because GPU-Z was not present (summer '08).

[jmax_oc]

Ye, that's Benji said : 0cool make an 'invalid' screen without GPUz.

[Benji Tshi]

I'm not complaining I know it's the rule, and even if i don't agree, i respect it

[jmax_oc]

Read me carefully. Maybe my english isn't the best one but I think I'm clear :

If you block our score for a reason X, so you have to do the same for all scores with the same reason X.

 

In my example X = score SLI or 4870X2 on X58 platform for 3d 2003.

 

But don't be too quick in your answers. It's not important to answer us in one hour. It's important to do the best choice :

1- All blocked (bad thing)

2- All unblocked then you make a news and apply strictly subtest rules (best thing)

3- Block only our scores and let other score as douptful as our alive (the worst thing for everybody)

[Barbybulle]

Hi,

 

First, i not speak english.

 

Look my url and look my picture, is my hardware.

 

HD3870x2

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=839636

 

X1900XT 256

 

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=839605

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=839597

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=839610

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=839622

 

 

Thanks

[NeoForce]

jmax_oc

You forget one thing - moderating bot is also hobby - not our duty to somebody.

I`ll check scores you report tonight or in the morning - and if they are not "legal" - I`ll block them

________

Effects Of Wellbutrin

Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce

[pofigist]

I think that precedent should not be, in principle, and the results do not conform to the rules should be blocked. This will avoid any conflict, regardless of the degree of confidence.

 

Sorry, i use google translator =(

[Benji Tshi]

In fact, Barbybulle had a 1900XT 256Mb and 0cool had a 1900XT 512Mb. So it's not sharing ! It's true that subtests details are missing, but except this, everything is allright as he's the only guy in our team which have 3870 X2.

[jmax_oc]

No man for 2 reasons :

1/ these 10-12 results are perfectly fair. As fair as our scores

2/ these 10-12 results represent less than 1% of all scores which can be reported.

3/ the best for everything is to moderate more easily : let all scores without subtest here and that's all. Write a news and it will be ok for everybody.

4/ Your hobby is to moderate but your duty if you say that HWBot is a fair land, so you have to moderate each results like us. It's the only way for HWBot to keep member's respect : one rule for everyone. I repeat : blocking every score isn't the best solution. I prefer to be clear.

But blocking only JMH's scores is the worst solution.

[NeoForce]

I distinctivly remember a crew member blocking KP's AM3 world record because GPU-Z was not present (summer '08)

It was me.... - rules are the same for everybody, even for Vince;)

Dami1stm is a respectable member.

So why did he submit scores that have incorrect screenshots

Check mine latest scores (since for example Aug 08), or pofigist`s, or DeDaL`s, or SF3D`s - you will not find anything like this - clear ORB link or screenshot with full details

________

NO2 VAPORIZERS

Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce

[jmax_oc]

I repeat : like most of clockers, we didn't know that subtests were mandatory. You can take examples if you want, I can give you others also (me, dami1stm, westyle, pedro rocha, cbgpcs ...). They all are fair clockers who never cheated and these people didn't show each time the subtests windoows...

And don't make confusion : respectable is different to someone who make perfect screen. Respectable is someone who is bright by its behaviour / knowledge / skills.

 

 

I'm waiting official decision from RB. If the decision stay the same (no subtest => score blocked since it's doubtful), I would like to know precisely all douubtful situation (like SLI on X58 on 3d03 for example).

 

 

If you want to block our scores, it's ok we will accept it. But we won't stay at our place, sad by seeing our previous work deleted. We will do our best to make this rule applied to everyone.

[richba5tard]

Like jmke said, I'm the coder of hwbot and I haven't overclocked something since the Athlon XP days. I trust hwbot's moderators decision.

[anvil]

I have two different things to say:

 

First to Jmax:

It appears that the rules have been posted twice, in two different news, at two completly different time periods. So telling that you or 99% of the community doesn't know this rule is not an excuse, and only shows that you and 99% of the community are not reading news.

 

Second to the crew:

If subset has only to be displayed by Hwbot members who have a high score thanks to a good tweak/opti, some of the JMH's have not to be deleted. Actually, I spend a lot of time looking at the results mentionned by JMH members, and they are really not so high compared to others.

[pofigist]

I repeat : like most of clockers, we didn't know that subtests were mandatory.

 

For me. no details = no boints. It's true.

Edited April 9, 2009 by pofigist