Suggestion for rev 5/6/7: Fewer 50 point scores

[K404]

Yep.... fewer big rankings

 

Basically.... my thinking is that once the leaderboard is "saturated," it doesn't matter if there are 300 scores submitted, or 1000 or...... 10000- it's still 49.9 points.

 

I would like to see fewer categories get maximum points, because (IMO,) it doesn't reflect the achievement for the guys taking gold in the MOST popular categories.

 

Ideas: Only have maximum points for the single most popular piece of hardware in a hardware class: as broad as s478/775/1366? Or within a CPU series? Wolfdale, Nehalem? For GPU..... ATI 3 series? nV 8 series? It would mean the popularity is relative.

 

It would also mean that the most-rewarded hardware can change, which I think is a neat idea.... it would (at least partly) reflect the buying patterns of computer users

 

Also, could the definition of most popular be a function of HWB userbase? At the moment, if the threshold is a fixed number, it doesn't "mean" anything. If the saturation point is 300... does that mean there is a user base of 301 and the component is OMG popular? Or the userbase is 30,000 and 1% use it? It's also "fire and forget" which means no announcements stating that some people will lose points because the algorithm is being explicitly changed... and it means the numbers have more meaning to people who do not have a massive back story on HWB, because only HWB users understand the points system.

 

 

Vaguely related idea.......

 

Should hardware categories be "closed" after a certain length of time? I am on the fence, but it's an idea i'm throwing out there

Edited February 18, 2012 by K404

[Hondacity]

I'd like to see an example. cpu wise and gpu wise.

[TaPaKaH]

you suggest that getting 50 hardware points is too easy ?

[K404]

I'll use the nVidia 8800 series coz.... I know it

 

If it's split up at a simpler level, using the total submissions for the card as the popularity guage.... BUT.... less submitted-to benches get fewer points....

 

8800GS (384 & 768): 692 + 23

8800GT 1GB: 523

8800GT 256MB: 446

8800GT 512MB: 8802

8800GTS 320MB: 6546

8800GTS 512MB: 7239

8800GTS 640MB: 6601

8800GTX: 13606

8800 Ultra: 4258

 

 

8800GTX gets 50 points per popular gold, but Unigine gets e.g.... 4 points because it has not many submissions.

 

Next card in popularity is the 8800GT 512MB. Thats gets 65% of the points of the 8800GTX... so 32.5

 

Next.... the GTS 512MB: 53% of the points of the GTX..... 26.5 per popular gold

 

etc etc

 

Least popular card: the 8800GT 256MB: gets around 3.4% of the points

 

 

 

 

 

OR maybe there is a way of using the total number of submissions: 48736?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

you suggest that getting 50 hardware points is too easy ?

 

I suggest that as it stands, every single piece of hardware can get 50 points and nothing automatically stands out as being popular or good

Edited February 18, 2012 by K404

[Hondacity]

what is the threshold(sumbissions) before a 1st place hardware submission becomes 49.9 pts? i think this is for the hwb staff but i'd like to know.

[knopflerbruce]

If I got his idea, then the ranking with the most subs will get 50 points, and the other scores are based off that number.

 

I had a different idea once. Use the average score as reference number, and reward points based on how many % above you get, and ignore the ranking. #1 and #2 get the same score, then both get the same amount of boints.

[TaPaKaH]

I think we should treat hardware categories separately, otherwise benching not-so-popular stuff will yield no points at all.

[oanvoanc]

something related:

in a popular category like 8800 gtx 3dm06 Motivation-Wise there is no point in improving from rank 50 up to rank 6.

it would just result in 2.6 more hwboints which clearly doesn't reward the effort.

[K404]

Yea, i've kinda thought the same. Aim for gold, or silver, or may as well stick to water for 20-22 points. It's a hard line to walk though. Personally, I feel the point exponent is too steep, but popular No.1 spots ARE impressive.....

[Massman]

I would like to see fewer categories get maximum points, because (IMO,) it doesn't reflect the achievement for the guys taking gold in the MOST popular categories.

 

Just checked the database.

 

- total amount of HW gold scores: 25470

- total amount of HW gold that gives >=49 points: 175

 

175/25470, that's less than 1%.

[ARandomOWL]

Yea, i've kinda thought the same. Aim for gold, or silver, or may as well stick to water for 20-22 points. It's a hard line to walk though. Personally, I feel the point exponent is too steep, but popular No.1 spots ARE impressive.....

 

Agreed. Once you get into the top 100 of popular rankings, you have to improve your score by about 20 places just to gain 1 extra point. But then there are 10 points separating 1st and 2nd.

[knopflerbruce]

But how much do you have to actually improve your score to get those extra 20 places? Not much I bet.

[K404]

Just checked the database.

 

- total amount of HW gold scores: 25470

- total amount of HW gold that gives >=49 points: 175

 

175/25470, that's less than 1%.

 

So.... there are 25470 gold medals currently available on HWB only 175 of those are worth over 49 points? That's weird, it feels like a lot more!

[Massman]

So.... there are 25470 gold medals currently available on HWB only 175 of those are worth over 49 points? That's weird, it feels like a lot more!

 

Well, 15638/25470 (61%) gold medals only give 2pts (minimum).

 

Just means a lot of golds are in relatively low competitive categories.