R4.2.4/R4.3: HWBoints finetuning

[K404]

Oh, I know about Win7 bro That's no-ones fault

 

Does it not scale with CPU MHz either? I have never ran a 3 or 4 way system of any kind..... We cannot complain about it not scaling with GPU MHz because that happens with single card too....

 

3D03... yea, it's CPU bottlenecked.... but no-one complains about the slow scaling once we are at CPU limit...

 

[IanCutress]

Actually, in retrospect, Matose has a good point. Take 'Dead Things'

 

http://hwbot.org/user/dead_things/#Points

 

Check his global points. Lots of 60pts, because he has access to multi-CPU servers, so is taking crown in the 24x CPU space and so on, and is now top 5 in the enthusiast league.

[Massman]

Yeap, there are drawbacks to every system. The SR-2 score of KP with 6G Westmere's now gets the points it deserves as does **DP**'s 3Way LN2 score. Others get too much points.

[Mikecdm]

 

 

 

I wonder.... if the 3D01 4x GPU World record was worth 169 points like a usual bench.... how would the leaderboard look in 3 weeks time?

 

I'm sure that within 3 weeks we'll see numerous scores of 3x/4x benches where scores don't scale. 05, 06, AM3 the WR for 1x and 4x is maybe 2-3k difference and most of the time it's the same or less.

 

I don't see how running 3x 580's on air merits WR points or deserves to be rewarded in any way. It's just not impressive. The same applies to any other bench where you can do the same. Right now we've only seen it in 01, the rest will follow suit shortly.

[K404]

There are 5 results in this entire category.... and gold is worth 60 global points. If it was hardware-class, it'd be worth 2 points. Unbalanced much?

 

http://hwbot.org/benchmark/pcmark_2005/rankings?cores=12

[Stromatolites]

There are 5 results in this entire category.... and gold is worth 60 global points. If it was hardware-class, it'd be worth 2 points. Unbalanced much?

 

http://hwbot.org/benchmark/pcmark_2005/rankings?cores=12

 

In my own opinion it isn't unbalanced. You have a point allowance for each category, so allow it, so that people who bench un popular kit get rewarded.

 

On a side note, sorry about whats going on at the moment.

[K404]

Personal opinion, unpopular kit shouldn't be rewarded heavily at all, no matter what it is or who benches it. I believe there should be a minimum number of results and a minimum number of pople/ teams / nationalities benching something before it gets points. I've spoken to PJ about it before, I hope one day he comes around to my way of thinking

 

If you are speaking of what I think you are, thanks for the words of support

[Massman]

I shared the same opinion when we discussed this latest revision internally. My suggestion was to only award a minimum of 60p if the category, at one point, was so competitive it naturally went over 60p.

 

In the end, we dismissed this idea because it made everything too complex. KISS-principle was applied. I think it's actually better this way.

[Christian Ney]

Those rankings are becoming popular now

[TaPaKaH]

look at this the other way around, Kenny

you "only" need to buy two hexacores, an SR2, lots of other crap ... and 60 globals are yours

[Dead Things]

Actually, in retrospect, Matose has a good point. Take 'Dead Things'

 

http://hwbot.org/user/dead_things/#Points

 

Check his global points. Lots of 60pts, because he has access to multi-CPU servers, so is taking crown in the 24x CPU space and so on, and is now top 5 in the enthusiast league.

 

w00t! Who knew folding boxes could make for such good benchers too! lol

 

Seriously, though. I will say that due to my lack of cooling, I have been forced to target more obscure hardware and less popular benchmarks if I had any hopes of posting a competitive score. Now that those benches are worth something, guys with more skill and time on their hands will be taking those boints away from me right quick, and I'll be back in my rightful spot in the rankings eventually.

 

For now, I'm enjoying my time in the Enthusiast League sun while I still can, taking lots of screencaps so I can show my grandkids one day!

[Hondacity]

biggest change imo

 

 

cheers!

[Hondacity]

I thought the reason for giving points is to reward a good score, not a category is has absolutely no interest for benching. To bench 4-way in Win7 for 3DMark01 is like competing in the special olympics

 

L.E: You're changing a little the rules of the game. You want to give normal people reason to bench and I get that, but the distribution of points does not reflect the value of score. This is just my opinion

 

look at deadthings points lol

[K404]

60 global points for stock speed and the category (20x CPU) has ONE result.

 

Please can someone fix this retarded rule?

 

(Dead things..... I don't blame you for this, I have nothing against you.. but at the same time, I am not gonna congratulate you for stock speed.)

Edited January 24, 2012 by K404

[Massman]

You should fix your language too ...

[K404]

Ok, fixed

[IanCutress]

Fix:

 

10pts for a global with 10 or less submissions

20pts for 10-20 subs

30pts for 20-30 subs

40pts for 30-40

50pts for 40-50

60pts for 51+

 

The joy of that global in obscure hw combo should be the cup rather than the points.

[Massman]

I agree, Borandi. The minimum points rule should have been variable since the beginning ...

 

http://bugs.hwbot.org/browse/HWBOT-694

[K404]

Thankyou

[knopflerbruce]

IMO the top spot should have a high minimum. 1st place is (nearly) always a PITA to get (no easy ones below 20 cores). Then we can let the points drop faster instead, if there are just like 10 people fighting, then #1 still gets 50p or so, but 5th place won't get too much (maybe 50-35-25-15-10 is a good way to distribute points).

 

I've been battling these type of low-popularity rankings for a few years... the top scores are top scores for a reason, not just because someone bothered benching his CPU while watching a sitcom. Top 5 is usually quite easy, but that's it. Then again, getting 15-20 points in the more popular rankings is also a walk in the park these days.

[Dead Things]

I think the case of my E7-8860 rig, though, proves that there should be variable awards for top spots, as suggested. Having a rare machine like this and benching it should be worth something, but it should not be what is essentially a bye to first place in the EL.

[I.M.O.G.]

I agree, Borandi. The minimum points rule should have been variable since the beginning ...

 

http://bugs.hwbot.org/browse/HWBOT-694

 

I don't mean to complicate things, but this seems pretty similar to how Rev4 handles TPP. As individuals can dominate the enthusiast league with obscure hardware, so can teams dominate the teams league on obscure hardware.

 

The easiest way to get 50 TPP? Request a new CPU be added, run the 10 2D benches which award HTPP at stock.

 

Or you could take 3x pcmark05 global 1st and get 80 TPP. One way is very expensive and challenging enough that few people could do it - the other way...

 

I chose the pcmark05 route because it was the cooler way. However, any smart team would recognize there are a lot of quick, easy, and valuable points to be had by benching rare stuff or low competition stuff.

 

In spirit, the way HTPP are awarded should encourage more competition in those categories since they are valuable (as I understood it, that was part of the idea behind the Rev4 TPP scheme) - I get the intention, however in 95% of oddball categories it is not creating competition, its just giving easy points.

 

If I had DB access to hwbot, I'd be curious to run a query looking at the top 20 teams, to see how many 1st place HTPP each team has in categories where there is no competition.

 

By the way, just a minor gripe - I think overall the scoring system is working pretty good.

Edited January 24, 2012 by I.M.O.G.

[knopflerbruce]

I don't mean to complicate things, but this seems pretty similar to how Rev4 handles TPP. As individuals can dominate the enthusiast league with obscure hardware, so can teams dominate the teams league on obscure hardware.

 

The easiest way to get 50 TPP? Request a new CPU be added, run the 10 2D benches which award HTPP at stock.

 

Or you could take 3x pcmark05 global 1st and get 80 TPP. One way is very expensive and challenging enough that few people could do it - the other way...

 

I chose the pcmark05 route because it was the cooler way. However, any smart team would recognize there are a lot of quick, easy, and valuable points to be had by benching rare stuff or low competition stuff.

 

In spirit, the way HTPP are awarded should encourage more competition in those categories since they are valuable (as I understood it, that was part of the idea behind the Rev4 TPP scheme) - I get the intention, however in 95% of oddball categories it is not creating competition, its just giving easy points.

 

If I had DB access to hwbot, I'd be curious to run a query looking at the top 20 teams, to see how many 1st place HTPP each team has in categories where there is no competition.

 

By the way, just a minor gripe - I think overall the scoring system is working pretty good.

 

This kinda makes sense. I wonder if massman can post the "score formula" for this one... 5 points could be a tad too high if there's no competition, but it's also interesting to see what it looks like when more teams are competing. I checked my Q6600 PiFast score, and it gets about 95 HTPP. That's 19 times higher than the no competition reward. To compare: the user points for hardware is 2 for 1-20 competitors, and it maxes out at 50. The same ratio is 25 here. If we assume the max is 100 for HTPP, then a similar ratio means 4 HTPP for submissions with no competition from other teams.

 

Edit: We don't want 20 teams to compete before it starts to go above 4 boints just so no-one gets any ideas

[Massman]

If I had DB access to hwbot, I'd be curious to run a query looking at the top 20 teams, to see how many 1st place HTPP each team has in categories where there is no competition

 

I'd do it, but it's not so simple to extract that information from the database.

 

What you say is correct though, there are a couple of "backdoor" options to get points fast and easy. Most of those routes are function of the balance we seek between giving people incentive to submit a result and awarding points on a fair basis. The exact position of the balance is subjective, so hard to make it perfect to everyone.

 

I think the balance in the current revision is a little more to the "give incentive" than the "fair and exact rating" aspect.

[Mr.Scott]

I don't mean to complicate things, but this seems pretty similar to how Rev4 handles TPP. As individuals can dominate the enthusiast league with obscure hardware, so can teams dominate the teams league on obscure hardware.

 

The easiest way to get 50 TPP? Request a new CPU be added, run the 10 2D benches which award HTPP at stock.

 

Or you could take 3x pcmark05 global 1st and get 80 TPP. One way is very expensive and challenging enough that few people could do it - the other way...

 

I chose the pcmark05 route because it was the cooler way. However, any smart team would recognize there are a lot of quick, easy, and valuable points to be had by benching rare stuff or low competition stuff.

 

In spirit, the way HTPP are awarded should encourage more competition in those categories since they are valuable (as I understood it, that was part of the idea behind the Rev4 TPP scheme) - I get the intention, however in 95% of oddball categories it is not creating competition, its just giving easy points.

 

If I had DB access to hwbot, I'd be curious to run a query looking at the top 20 teams, to see how many 1st place HTPP each team has in categories where there is no competition.

 

By the way, just a minor gripe - I think overall the scoring system is working pretty good.

Ya know, you do an awful lot of complaining about how many points people get and what they get them on. You have the opportunity to cash in on rare and low comp stuff too you know. Just let it go. Stop screwing with the point system, it's already hard enough to keep track of. Only mentioning it because every time one of these threads comes up, you're all over it. Give it a rest.