rsnubje Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Well, you told yourself it is possible to do. Although the audio files are just a part of what actualy is being done that's not supposed to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 The files are locked, when hdd startup begins...you cant replace them;) I use an other method for this, without change the codec;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENiEBEN Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 The files are locked, when hdd startup begins...you cant replace them;)I use an other method for this, without change the codec;) Yea yea sure, TakeOwnership :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeneffect Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 please explain the text edit tweak and how replacing the test files with a blank rtf is not replacing the test files with a blank rtf? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I was talking about Audio comp...not about temp files;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeneffect Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) im talking about temp files which falls under the same rules as the audio files. the test itself is modified by changing/replacing files. I would like clarification and or rationale as to why this is acceptable. Please dont think that Im attacking you or anything like that as its far from the truth. I know everybody is searching for this "tweak" but nobody wants to actually talk about it or its validity. This amongst other things should be discussed openly so we as a community can come to a conclusion as to its legality. Edited October 11, 2012 by zeneffect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I have allready talk about this;) Read more pages back;) New rules? Wrapper? There was talking about too. I have some infos by PN, what i can use actually and what not. Christian Ney use TE and Webpage ``Tweaks`` too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeneffect Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I have allready talk about this;) Read more pages back;) New rules? Wrapper? There was talking about too. I have some infos by PN, what i can use actually and what not. Christian Ney use TE and Webpage ``Tweaks`` too then i guess this brings us back to problem #1... hwbot needs to publish the damn rules! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l0ud_sil3nc3 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 then i guess this brings us back to problem #1... hwbot needs to publish the damn rules! this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew pro Posted October 11, 2012 Crew Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) If your replacing any files to get high text edit or any score in any benchmark your CHEATING C'mon guys no rules need to be published to know this, this is benching 101, if someone replaced a texture file in 3dmark so it didn't render there would be an outrage, same thing, don't do it AND if you have done it, pull those scores down now Don't ruin this benchmark for everyone, stay within the rules Speaking of rules, glucuvio I like you man but why does your 114k orb link say time measuring inaccurate, looks very bad for you dude, I already spoke to you in the past that I thought you were doing something dodgy and that proves my suspicion I'd take that score down very quickly if I were you dude Edited October 11, 2012 by pro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I had never this message during submit. I searched now for it and found this: Time measuring inaccurate This message indicates funny business with the system clock during benchmark run. In most cases, this means that, no, you cannot cheat in 3DMark by adjusting Windows timers during benchmark run or otherwise tampering with the measurements done by the benchmark. If this message persists and you have not done anything out of the ordinary, it may indicate a hardware issue with the real time clock of your system or a presence of a background program that somehow twists the time-space continuum of your operating system in such a way that this anti-cheat detection is tripped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 this We're still discussing the fate of the benchmark. We must decide that first... Would be alot easier for us to make a call on each tweak if they were made PUBLIC. Just saying;) As I've said before, any tweak with more than reasonable gains (10%+) must be proven to be legit before allowed, in my opinion. Some people agreed, but no decision has been made. if this goes through, then text edit, transparent windows, audio compression, web page tweaks that boost the score like crazy are all disallowed until someone proves for everyone that these scores are indeed possible without cheating. You can nudge the other crew members if you feel this is a good idea:p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 The Tweaks i know i have told to Chris. But i dont know 180k TW, 300mill MA. For Web page i did the same i told to Chris, but 30% i score more only with some OS Tweaks;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew pro Posted October 11, 2012 Crew Share Posted October 11, 2012 The Tweaks i know i have told to Chris. But i dont know 180k TW, 300mill MA. For Web page i did the same i told to Chris, but 30% i score more only with some OS Tweaks;) I'm fairly sure the high TW is where that inaccurate timing may be coming from, but in the other hand it might be totally legitimate, hopefully a hwbot moderator can work with him just to confirm everything is above board For example, in the past when everyone was at 60k TW I posted a 100k, gluc thought I posted a 1million and quickly responded with a 600000 TW or something CRAZY, and said something like wow a million I can only get this When He realized I only had 100k it disappeared and we haven't seem it since Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) I only have seen 350k from him on 2600k. In 960T is 180k with stock clocks. I dont know what this trick is... I never scored 100k, still far away Edited October 11, 2012 by Moose83 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew pro Posted October 11, 2012 Crew Share Posted October 11, 2012 It's not a huge deal really as after 80~ it doesnt scale the score much unless you get other subtexts like virusscan and hdd startup higher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Sweet Posted October 11, 2012 Crew Share Posted October 11, 2012 I completely agree with this If your replacing any files to get high text edit or any score in any benchmark your CHEATING C'mon guys no rules need to be published to know this, this is benching 101, if someone replaced a texture file in 3dmark so it didn't render there would be an outrage, same thing, don't do it AND if you have done it, pull those scores down now Since some time ago ALL ( include me) are ruining this benchmark, the results today can not give valid comparisons by the hardware used. I think so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 It's not a huge deal really as after 80~ it doesnt scale the score much unless you get other subtexts like virusscan and hdd startup higher Yeah, i know, the other subtest work like multiplikator on score. I have try to get Win 7 look as XP, but TW did not run Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew pro Posted October 12, 2012 Crew Share Posted October 12, 2012 I completely agree with this Since some time ago ALL ( include me) are ruining this benchmark, the results today can not give valid comparisons by the hardware used. yeah thats for sure, i played a big role in this too, BUT my personal opinion is as long as its within the rules, what we know as a traditional tweak, not modifying anything in the benchmark, not tricking the benchmark into thinking its faster than it is, i think its fine, and it is great to have a benchmark where the software guys can really sink their teeth in and compete on a global level, thats a great thing, we just need to clean things up a little and this can be a thriving benchmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeneffect Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) so.... the reality of the matter comes down to 2 possibilities? a.) anything goes so long as orb validates and rape the shit out of the benchmark (in which case I will start playing pcm05.) b.) benchmark no longer has points... or everybody gets reset to 0 after a strong wrapper is made. I don't see how you guys can moderate the previous submissions unless EVERYBODY is honest about their score and moderates themselves... *tired of watching commercials, back to the fishing channel...* Edited October 12, 2012 by zeneffect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Sweet Posted October 12, 2012 Crew Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) Clearly PcM 2005 is a complex issue. zeneffect, following your line of thought a.) anything goes so long as orb validates and rape the shit out of the benchmark (in which case I will start playing pcm05.)b.) benchmark no longer has points... or everybody gets reset to 0 after a strong wrapper is made. a) Absurd results, unusual regardless of the hardware that has been used, maybe tomorrow for example, Pentium III (Copermine) 750 Mhz get higher score than a i7 920 b) Is fair to those who have lost many hours to achieve good or better scores, without using tweaks or tricks like change something in the software ? Perhaps is time to let out,. would be a pity., maybe We should no longer use this benchmark at HWBOT. BUT my personal opinion is as long as its within the rules, what we know as a traditional tweak, not modifying anything in the benchmark, not tricking the benchmark into thinking its faster than it is, i think its fine, and it is great to have a benchmark where the software guys can really sink their teeth in and compete on a global level, thats a great thing, we just need to clean things up a little and this can be a thriving benchmark Mmmm i dont think so, but counting on me to help in this problem Ps: Meanwhile nobody wants to admit it, many use (and used) ramcaching in this PcM 2005, like another PcMarks Edited October 12, 2012 by Sweet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeneffect Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) Clearly PcM 2005 is a complex issue. zeneffect, following your line of thought a) Absurd results, unusual regardless of the hardware that has been used, maybe tomorrow for example, Pentium III (Copermine) 750 Mhz get higher score than a i7 920 b) Is fair to those who have lost many hours to achieve good or better scores, without using tweaks or tricks like change something in the software ? Perhaps is time to let out,. would be a pity., maybe We should no longer use this benchmark at HWBOT. Mmmm i dont think so, but counting on me to help in this problem Ps: Meanwhile nobody wants to admit it, many use (and used) ramcaching in this PcM 2005, like another PcMarks yes... but you have the problem of being able to tell the difference between illegal tweaks and legal tweaks... previous points would have to be moderated which would be a near impossibility. both legal and illegal result in an absurd score for the subtest that is tweaked. we could disclose tweaks, and decide what is allowed and not allowed and make a strict guideline, but you fall into the inability to tell how the previous scores were run. its all catch 22 no matter how you look at it. resetting back to 0 would suck for alot of people, but what are the other realistic alternatives while keeping the benchmark around for points? going back to choice A. yes you get crazy results... but seriously... whats the difference between what is going on today? it seems the only real requirement for this bench is a merit badge in the boy scouts and an orb validation as it stands now. to throw more fuel into the fire... why are you guys even listening to me? i dont think i even have a single pcmark05 submission.... Edited October 12, 2012 by zeneffect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 We must talk about an new System for PCMark. Gluvocio will answer soon, he has Problem to login into the forum;) What is thinking about 2 PCMark Leagues? Like Enthustiast and OC League. One League for the supertweaks with WR Points. And an seperate League for Non-Supertweaks-Users The bencher must deside while submit to hwbot wich league he goes;) What is thinking about this methode? Its allways too late to delete all supertweak scores! You cant say to all, hey, supertweaked runs will be deleted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza30 Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 We must talk about an new System for PCMark. Gluvocio will answer soon, he has Problem to login into the forum;) What is thinking about 2 PCMark Leagues? Like Enthustiast and OC League. One League for the supertweaks with WR Points. And an seperate League for Non-Supertweaks-Users The bencher must deside while submit to hwbot wich league he goes;) What is thinking about this methode? Its allways too late to delete all supertweak scores! You cant say to all, hey, supertweaked runs will be deleted Sure mate lets have 2 leagues for every benchmark one for cheats and one for legit results. I hope you where kidding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristidis Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 You call supertweaked runs those that you try to find a way to make legal submissions in Futuremark? I believe that supertweak has lost its meaning here. Ok move those “supertweaked” runs to another category without points and let those that they have skills to push their hardware to limits alone and with points in PCMark05 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.