Barton Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 Would you please add UGP, GTTP, and HTPP points for the PCMark 04 benchmark? (For some reason it seems like all those are not included for PCMark 04 - just plain UHP points at the moment.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaPaKaH Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 why would we want globals for a seriously outdated unpopular benchmark ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stromatolites Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 why would we want globals for a seriously outdated unpopular benchmark ? Increase popularity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 PCMark04 is problematic with >2 core systems. It requires people to switch affinity during the benchmark, which makes it very/too complicated to be used as serious benchmark. We've added hardware points because within each hardware ranking everyone is playing with the same limitations (bugs or not). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 even for monocore cpu when the cpu is too fast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 HTPP should be enabled, though - they're hardware related boints, not globals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted December 3, 2011 Author Share Posted December 3, 2011 PCMark04 is problematic with >2 core systems. It requires people to switch affinity during the benchmark, which makes it very/too complicated to be used as serious benchmark. At what point should affinity be switched during the PCMArk 04 benchmark on multi-cores. Is that required starting with dual cores or only for tri cores or more? And what is the affinity switch that is required? From all cores to only one OR from one core to all cores? Very interesting concept and brand new to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 The third test (with grammar check) is usually the problem. Affinity should be changed to one thread for that test. There is software available to set affinity by time. http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?116886-PCMark04-fix-for-Conroe-post-if-interested& Personally, I think all points should be scrapped for this bench. It's been broken for 5 years and FM don't care (why should they?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Scott Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 At what point should affinity be switched during the PCMArk 04 benchmark on multi-cores. Is that required starting with dual cores or only for tri cores or more? And what is the affinity switch that is required? From all cores to only one OR from one core to all cores? Very interesting concept and brand new to me. There's a work around Barton. PM me and I'll fill you in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted December 3, 2011 Author Share Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) Don't scrap PCMark 04. Many of us with older hardware still run it and still enjoy running it. It does no harm to members who run newer hardware to allow us with the older platforms to have a couple of benchmarks we too can run. Edited December 3, 2011 by Barton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 I only meant the points should go, not the entire bench Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted December 3, 2011 Author Share Posted December 3, 2011 Got what you meant. What's not clear is why it matters to you? You run new hardware and collect tons of points like one of the 1%. Given all you have why should you begrudge the poor folks running old hardware who want to earn a point or two from the old benchmarks that were designed for the hardware we run. Seems petty, small minded, mean spirited and selfish. Greed just isn't pretty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaPaKaH Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 You are right, we all, from Turrican to NickShih, hate Classicplatforms and take all possible measures so that our favourite benchmarks get (more) points than your favourite benchmarks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Turrican Posted December 3, 2011 Crew Share Posted December 3, 2011 hardware points are ok imho. no need for UGP, GTTP, and HTPP points on this benchmark imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) Got what you meant. What's not clear is why it matters to you? You run new hardware and collect tons of points like one of the 1%. Given all you have why should you begrudge the poor folks running old hardware who want to earn a point or two from the old benchmarks that were designed for the hardware we run. Seems petty, small minded, mean spirited and selfish. Greed just isn't pretty. You have completely mis-judged me.... without speaking to me at all. The benchmark is BROKEN. Why support a broken product that is reluctant to give any score at all? It is obsolete and does not run properly/consistently on new or heavily overclocked hardware. If I start benching PCM04 in public (ie submitting results,) am I "allowed" to have an opinion on it? I was the guy who had the original idea to fix it, remember? Are you on any medication for your paranoia? I have tied no names to my opinion of PCM04. My opinion is based on the behaviour of the benchmark itself... i'd say the same if Vince submitted scores daily, or Massman, or SF3D..... anyone. I checked zero PCM04 leaderboards before commenting. It's a vaguely interesting question you almost raised about "benches running on the hardware they're designed for" Would HWB staff be interested in limiting what architectures can be used for benchmarks XY & Z? For example, I'd like to see wPrime not used on more than ~12 threads because it's becoming useless. It's over too fast Edited December 3, 2011 by K404 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 hardware points are ok imho.no need for UGP, GTTP, and HTPP points on this benchmark imho. But isn't HTPP related to hardware points? Globals are overkill, but there's no real reason to not add HTPP when we have the "personal version" already. It just makes the benefit for the team a bit bigger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted December 4, 2011 Author Share Posted December 4, 2011 Thanks for the support, KB. That's a good suggestion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 (edited) imo, HTPP should be enabled also for ''Reference clock'' , ''memory clock'', ''pcmark vantage'', ''ucbench 2011'', ''Unigine Heaven Basic DX9''. And of course ''PCMark 2004'' as well, as they all get UHP ? No ? Edited December 4, 2011 by Christian Ney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Scott Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 imo, HTPP should be enabled also for ''Reference clock'' , ''memory clock'', ''pcmark vantage'', ''ucbench 2011'', ''Unigine Heaven Basic DX9''. And of course ''PCMark 2004'' as well, as they all get UHP ? No ? Yup. None or all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.paco Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 imo, HTPP should be enabled also for ''Reference clock'' , ''memory clock'', ''pcmark vantage'', ''ucbench 2011'', ''Unigine Heaven Basic DX9''. And of course ''PCMark 2004'' as well, as they all get UHP ? No ? +100. I like how you role Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gautam Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Got what you meant. What's not clear is why it matters to you? You run new hardware and collect tons of points like one of the 1%. Given all you have why should you begrudge the poor folks running old hardware who want to earn a point or two from the old benchmarks that were designed for the hardware we run. Seems petty, small minded, mean spirited and selfish. Greed just isn't pretty. Occupy hwbot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Scott Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Occupy hwbot! LOL. I'm sure Barton's comment wasn't meant like it sounded. When frustrated, people say things.......you know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted December 4, 2011 Author Share Posted December 4, 2011 imo, HTPP should be enabled also for ''Reference clock'' , ''memory clock'', ''pcmark vantage'', ''ucbench 2011'', ''Unigine Heaven Basic DX9''. And of course ''PCMark 2004'' as well, as they all get UHP ? No ? Yes, another good suggestion. That sounds like a winner. Plus, no need to set up a tent city that way. ;>) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted December 4, 2011 Share Posted December 4, 2011 Yes, another good suggestion. That sounds like a winner. Plus, no need to set up a tent city that way. ;>) +1, same argument: why not add team hardware point when you have user hardware enabled already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted December 5, 2011 Author Share Posted December 5, 2011 KB, is that question directed to me or to Massman? If it to me, please tell me how to enable team hardware points to PCMark 04. If to Massman, perhaps you and Christian Ney have more influence in those decisions than I. Massman, how 'bout it? Will you enable all the point categories for PCMark 04 or at least the Team Hardware Points? 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.