Rev3 Up and Running - Complaints, Ideas, Ramblings, Comments ... but no bugs

[komadyret]

I want to add that the points distribution (hardware) looks very good as # of participants approaches and passes 100

Problem is with the less popular hardware.

[Hollywood]

The downside of allowing everyone to score in all categories is that you make it mandatory to compete in all 4 categories in order to be somewhat competitive:

 

- Financial input is extremely large (5870 + 2x 5970 needed)

- Financial input is rewarded over skill/effort (those who can affort to bench, get points)

- The 3D aspect of hwboints is not balanced with the 2D effort (24 3D benchmarks, 7 2D)

 

These are the three main problems we faced when splitting rankings further. There were a couple other minor ones, but I can't remember them all at the moment.

 

The 5 categories is most definitly a viable solution, but I'm not that eager to apply this kind of major changes at this point. Rev3 has been up for less than 48h, which means that the real paradigm shift has yet to happen. Currently, everyone's still applying the Rev2 benching tactics to the Rev3 game, which inevitably leads to "wtf is happening"-situations. Before we can uncover the real flaws of Rev3, and apply fixes where needed, we need people to actually test the system. Both purely for boints and purely for rankings.

 

No doubt, rev3 needs to be tested b4 big changes could be done.

Just goin to explain my thoughts: If you want to be competitive in single vga, you have to have LN2. That means you need a pot. All that sh*t costs money. Same if you run 4 vga with stockcooling.

[westsider]

i have spent couple of hours reading everything about rev3

but i didnt get all the informations

how hwpoints are calculated?

i hope the calculation right now is just a bug or mistake

because i cant understand it

my opinion would be,new site is good but with old system and some improvements

 

hwbot just ruined the whole work and hours of work from some heavy hardware benchers

with regards

[oxyyy]

bug? submited yesterday 2 scores but i can't view them in detail...

 

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=937492

 

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=937511

[BenchBros]

Is there a overview for all benchmark categories?

Global ranking for 1 GPU

Global ranking for 2 GPU

Global ranking for 3 GPU

Global ranking for 4 GPU

and so on... for all CPU categories, too...

 

Keep on the awesome work for this project...

 

THANKS!!!

Finally a question! Thanks BenchBros

you can find them by clicking on "benchmarks": http://hwbot.org/benchmark.do and then on "records" in the list

this needs to be tweaked for be more accessible

I know this record-page... I mean a seperate ranking for the seperate categories. The actual ranking is for all kategories together... so a seperate ranking would be great!

 

THANKS!

[K404]

This has probably been mentioned, but the wPrime listings on a users profile page are back-to-front- the slowest time is listed at the top because its a bigger number.

 

I suspect SPi and Pifast will be the same

 

 

Also-

 

The spacing between each top 5 listing for each categories HOF is too low. It looks too cramped and its hard to pick each leaderboard out

 

 

 

aannndddd

 

For a given submission, the icons for CPU/GPU/RAM/board are too big. They swamp the info they are markers to (IMHO)

Edited January 2, 2010 by K404

[Alriin]

@theLamer

 

You forgot the new "0,1 Points for All"-Rule*.

Why should i bench my AMD-CPUs hour and hour, when each Notebook-Bench brings 0,1 Points. Regardless of which Cooling, Settings, OS,.... in one Day i bench 5 Notebooks with Standardsettings and make 0,1 Points in all Benchmarks. Cool...... :-(

 

 

* Or better: the 0,1 Points for the MOB.

[PeterStoba]

Not sure if you're working on this or not RB, but i'm still having issues with the score comment / forum issue. I know Massman said he had to approve them, but I think either you or jmke said that there was still a bug?

 

 

 

[Massman]

No doubt, rev3 needs to be tested b4 big changes could be done.

Just goin to explain my thoughts: If you want to be competitive in single vga, you have to have LN2. That means you need a pot. All that sh*t costs money. Same if you run 4 vga with stockcooling.

 

Interesting case you bring up.

 

Given an equal amount of financial input, given an equal ranking in their respective category, give a different degree of competitivity in the category, which of the following results should be rewarded more:

 

A) Effort to: insulate, voltmod, find appropriate OS/driver/tweak combination, test for first time, re-test for ranking, get LN2 ...

B) Insert 4 graphics cards, bench

 

Note that the competition in category A is much heavier than in category B. So, you can drop in ranking much faster. Which of the following should be rewarded more?

[Massman]

@theLamer

 

You forgot the new "0,1 Points for All"-Rule*.

Why should i bench my AMD-CPUs hour and hour, when each Notebook-Bench brings 0,1 Points. Regardless of which Cooling, Settings, OS,.... in one Day i bench 5 Notebooks with Standardsettings and make 0,1 Points in all Benchmarks. Cool...... :-(

 

* Or better: the 0,1 Points for the MOB.

 

Okay, let's give 0 points then.

[Guest Autokiller677]

I totally agree with theLamer.

 

I myself have only benched unpopular hardware up to now because I don't have the money to buy mainstream hardware all the time. The only sytems I can benchmark are the ones of my familie and our laptop. Of course, there's no way of getting global points with a Athlon 4800+ or a 9400GT, but with rev.2 it war possible to gather a considerable amount of hardware points with this. Now with rev.3 I lost 50% of my points because most results with this hardware are only rewarded with 0,1 points.

 

And there's still a bug in the hwboints system.

This score of mine http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=895769 ist only rewarded with 0,1 points, whereas the 19th in the ranking (I am the 18th) receives 0,6 points (19th: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=783192 )

 

All in all, I am not very happy with revision 3 and I have no more enthusiasm to benchmark any more unless I get some mainstream hardware because it is rewarded this little in unpopular categories. I fully understand that in categories with more than 300 or 400 submission, it's harder to get to the top, and I also think that in very unpopular categories, 2 points for der 1st are ok, but if I am 4th out of 12 like here http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=899691 it should be worth more than 0,5 points, in my opinion, 1,2 points would be fair. As theLamer already said, the differences between the first places are far too big.

 

The best solution (in my eyes) would be dividing the global rankings in single dual tripple and quad gpu setups and the same for the CPUs in wprime but keeping the algorithm of rev.2, with slight changes, for example, rewarding a first place in a popular category with 75points, but basically, the old calculation system was the best so far.

 

Sincerely

Autokiller677

 

EDIT:

Okay, let's give 0 points then.

I really approved the old system when only the first 20 got points, it was at least better than getting 0,1 points for just running the benchmark. In the time I needed to tweak a system to get in the top 20 in one benchmark and to gather some points, in this very time I can run a lot more benchmarks @stock and gather an equal amount of points. No driver testing, no bench os, just start the pc and run and you get points.

 

Of course, it is like this easier for air benchers to get points but this ain't what benching has been is it?

Running the benchmark has only been a little part of the whole for me. Most time, you spend at tweaking your system etc. pp. but there's no sens in doing so anymore. If I spent let's say, 1.5h in installing a bench os and testing drivers for a 3dmark run to get 0.5 points in the end, it is much more rewarding to run all graphics benches on 2 pc's in the same time because you get more points.

Edited January 2, 2010 by Autokiller677

[Massman]

...

 

So:

 

- You mainly bench close to stock speeds

- You only use air cooling

- You almost never compete in highly competitive rankings

 

BUT

 

- You want loads of points

[Hollywood]

Interesting case you bring up.

 

Given an equal amount of financial input, given an equal ranking in their respective category, give a different degree of competitivity in the category, which of the following results should be rewarded more:

 

A) Effort to: insulate, voltmod, find appropriate OS/driver/tweak combination, test for first time, re-test for ranking, get LN2 ...

B) Insert 4 graphics cards, bench

 

Note that the competition in category A is much heavier than in category B. So, you can drop in ranking much faster. Which of the following should be rewarded more?

 

I am totaly with you on this but: If you want to get one of the top spots in 4xGPU category, you cant run them out of the box! Same as in 1xGPU category.

Whatever you do, its still about the money. Or are you goin to say that bencher without the money to buy tons of LN2 and running the cards with stockcoolers got a fair chance to play within the global game? I guess not. So my idea was about the 5 gpu categories.

Mabye its a way to hand out global points for each category to the user and team and just the best score will get HW points.

Still a lot to think about...

[richba5tard]

I am totaly with you on this but: If you want to get one of the top spots in 4xGPU category, you cant run them out of the box! Same as in 1xGPU category.

Whatever you do, its still about the money. Or are you goin to say that bencher without the money to buy tons of LN2 and running the cards with stockcoolers got a fair chance to play within the global game? I guess not. So my idea was about the 5 gpu categories.

Mabye its a way to hand out global points for each category to the user and team and just the best score will get HW points.

Still a lot to think about...

 

I agree, for both money is needed, but isn't overclocking much more about buying decent cooling than buying expensive hardware?

[Alriin]

"Okay, let's give 0 points then."

 

@Massman

 

Im not alone with my opinion: a graduation like Rev2 (Rank 17 have 0,8 Points, Rank 18 0,7,.... and the last: 0 - Zero!!!) was the better method.

I think a lot Changes from Rev3 are good ore at least passable, but this was the first step to lose a lot of Users.

So many People are demotivated now, even Winners of this Revision.

[Hollywood]

I agree, for both money is needed, but isn't overclocking much more about buying decent cooling than buying expensive hardware?

 

Sure it is! But to go for the top, you need to have both! No matter how many vgas you bench!

Edited January 2, 2010 by Hollywood

[Massman]

I am totaly with you on this but: If you want to get one of the top spots in 4xGPU category, you cant run them out of the box! Same as in 1xGPU category.

Whatever you do, its still about the money. Or are you goin to say that bencher without the money to buy tons of LN2 and running the cards with stockcoolers got a fair chance to play within the global game? I guess not. So my idea was about the 5 gpu categories.

Mabye its a way to hand out global points for each category to the user and team and just the best score will get HW points.

Still a lot to think about...

 

That's one of the issues that crossed our minds months ago. Given that we want the overclockers league to represent skill more than the size of one's wallet, we opted to reward the one who has to compete against more people more.

[speddy411]

One thing i noticed that in all the Marketplaces for example PCGHX and Awardfabrik 8800Gts or E8xxx are really liked. And why ??

 

Because if you bench those and take place 100 you get more than 10points, if you try this with old HW you have to bench at least 5 old GPUs and be the number #1.

 

You see its not really about Skill, just about how mainstream your HW is.

[Massman]

"Okay, let's give 0 points then."

 

@Massman

 

Im not alone with my opinion: a graduation like Rev2 (Rank 17 have 0,8 Points, Rank 18 0,7,.... and the last: 0 - Zero!!!) was the better method.

I think a lot Changes from Rev3 are good ore at least passable, but this was the first step to lose a lot of Users.

So many People are demotivated now, even Winners of this Revision.

 

That graduation did not represent the effort one had to put into benching. Why should we be handing out points for free?

[Hollywood]

That's one of the issues that crossed our minds months ago. Given that we want the overclockers league to represent skill more than the size of one's wallet, we opted to reward the one who has to compete against more people more.

 

Massman, but it isnt that different now! You still need a shitload of money to take a topspot!

[Massman]

You see its not really about Skill, just about how mainstream your HW is.

 

Wrong. It's about how much competition there is. If we'd reward mainstream hardware, we'd be seeing huge points for the 8500GT, 8600GT, 9500GT.

 

8800GTX was high-end at it's time, as well as the E8500 (which is more competitive than E8600).

[Massman]

Massman, but it isnt that different now! You still need a shitload of money to take a topspot!

 

Yes. Go back to the example I've given ... I'm assuming an equal amount of financial input. You agreed with me that skill/effort should be awarded more than money.

[Guest Autokiller677]

So:

 

- You mainly bench close to stock speeds

- You only use air cooling

- You almost never compete in highly competitive rankings

 

BUT

 

- You want loads of points

 

I don't want loads of points, I have been perfectly happy with my 30 points in rev.2.

But if I'am 4th out of 12 (in the upper quarter) in a ranking and get only 0.5 points (in other words, a quarter of the ones of the 1st) and the 12th still gets 0,1points, it's just disappointing.

I'd like it more if just the first 10 got points and every rank meant a step of 0,2 points, or, if there are more benchers, the first 20 get points, or the first 50, if there are more than 150 submissions.

Edited January 2, 2010 by Autokiller677

[D!str(+)yer]

I would say, Epic fail, really.

 

You make rev 3 for the bencher with not so much money, but the rev 3 destroy the easy way to earn fast points.

 

A fast Dualcore or quad with these cards which are rare was a really easy way to get fast many points. Perfect for the low budget Bencher.

And this way was not expensive, but you destroy it ....

 

 

In my opinion the rev 3 is exactly the opposite of what it should be.

 

 

There really good ideas with the new separation, but the way of given points are bad!

[Massman]

the easy way to earn fast points.

 

Yes. Thanks for noticing this .