3DMark11 Physics test

[Massman]

Well, then we reach the point where we have to ask the question: "Does the ORB provide sufficient anti-cheat detection mechanisms in order to serve as verification platform?" The answer is "no". There are plenty ways to get faulty submissions to generate a verification link. Just a few months ago, there was a clearly faulty submission (score was off) entered in one of the competitions (deleted before the competition ended).

 

Requiring a verification link is: more work for validation, not necessary for 99% of the benchers and not really adding that much more security when it's really necessary (to catch a cheater).

 

Also, we'd still have to manually check each link to verify if everything ok.

 

Fyi, you can still use the v1.0.1 for the ongoing competitions: http://3dmark.com/3dm11/2418797

[FM_Jarnis]

Yes, 1.0.3 requirement for competitions/HoF is not yet live because we want to give people time to ugprade their benchmarks. Well, that and the fact that we don't want to push major 3dmark.com code updates right before the holidays. Our programmers dislike the idea that they may have to spend the holidays fixing stuff at the office...

 

3Dmark.com / ORB validation and anti-cheat stuff has been improved in 1.0.3 as stated in the patch notes. If you know still a way to get a bogus result through with 3DMark 11 1.0.3, by all means let us know and we'll see what we can do.

 

No amount of automation can catch *everything* so contest related stuff needs to be manually validated in case of suspicions anyway and really it is completely up to you what standards you enforce in your contests and toplists etc.

 

Futuremark requires valid 3dmark.com submission for Hall of Fame and for FM-run contests. They will require 3DMark 11 version 1.0.3 soon. Anything beyond that is up to the individuals managing each contest/site that uses 3DMark results. FM recommends that only the latest version of each benchmark is used.

Edited December 28, 2011 by FM_Jarnis