Massman Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 This is a bit rude, don't you think? If I say I edit them, I HAVE. Now, apparently some scores change back to their old rankings without me knowing of it. You're reposting the results and everytime I fix them, but they change again. Anyway, this problem is forwarded to the crew forums.
RyderOCZ Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 Holy crap what am I reading here? This is a volunteer basis for the crew here, AFAIK, guys..... lighten up. That was very rude I take it these results are keeping you or your team from earning more points? Competition is one thing but, out for blood is something we don't need. Thanks for your hard work Massman
steelrat Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 did you check the EDIT LOG of those entrees? don't think you did, right? 10 Jul 2007 12:44 created botservice scanned by bot on forum 14 Jul 2007 05:23 modified Maxi manually modified by team captain (Maxi) - reason: corrected cpu socket type 17 Jul 2007 11:54 modified Massman manually modified by team captain (Massman) - reason: no reason given 20 Jul 2007 10:39 modified Massman manually modified by team captain (Massman) - reason: no reason given 20 Jul 2007 10:40 modified Massman manually modified by team captain (Massman) - reason: no reason given 25 Jul 2007 10:05 modified Massman manually modified by team captain (Massman) - reason: no reason given 25 Jul 2007 07:38 modified Massman manually modified by team captain (Massman) - reason: no reason given 25 Jul 2007 08:29 modified jmke manually modified by moderator (jmke) - reason: no reason given as you can see, Maxi first attempted to fix the entry 14/07, then Massman at 17/7, then several times 20/25 July. The reason the entry could not be fixed is a bug in the "double entry" detect system, if the same entry is already in the DB, it won't allow you to post a double, so those results are already in DB on S939 too. I've fixed this now with a workaround (unclean though) until richbastard fixed this issue. Massman does a thorough job moderating all these results, show some respect and patience man :-) and thank you of course, for reporting them, I respect you for that, it's a mutual thing=) This is a bit rude, don't you think? If I say I edit them, I HAVE. Now, apparently some scores change back to their old rankings without me knowing of it. You're reposting the results and everytime I fix them, but they change again. Anyway, this problem is forwarded to the crew forums. Thanks for you hard work guys! You will excuse if was rude. It is simple there was a very important for me result, first on my SS. once again thank you for everything. Sorry for my bad english.
Crew Turrican Posted August 3, 2007 Crew Posted August 3, 2007 hi guys the first to guys in 3dmark01 of the geforce4 mx 440 SE categorie are using a normal geforce 4 mx 440 (128bit memory interface instead of 64bit). there's no way you can get that score with that clock & a 64bit interface. the first guy also states in the description that he's using a 128bit card. http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=GPU_852 can someone move this 2 results to "geforce 4 mx 440" ? tia
Crew Turrican Posted August 3, 2007 Crew Posted August 3, 2007 thanks, ifixed thanks, but you've forgotten the 2nd result http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=625590
Crew Turrican Posted August 5, 2007 Crew Posted August 5, 2007 thanks, but you've forgotten the 2nd result http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=625590 ähm , anybody? this results is done with a geforce 4 mx 440 (128bit memory interface) not with a 440 SE (64bit interface)
Crew Turrican Posted August 5, 2007 Crew Posted August 5, 2007 there's no screen in the verification link? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627449
pointhore Posted August 6, 2007 Posted August 6, 2007 XP2600 Thoroughbred No screenshot for verification & it says 2600 Mobile it's in the wrong category http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627433 No screenshot for verification & it says 2600 Mobile. it's in the wrong category http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627425 I have posted these before.
TASOS Posted August 7, 2007 Posted August 7, 2007 Holly Molly ..... 0.63 spi 1M And with a checksum validation http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632037 Does this guy have other results on the bot too ??
pointhore Posted August 7, 2007 Posted August 7, 2007 XP2600 Thoroughbred No screenshot for verification & it says 2600 Mobile it's in the wrong category http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627433 No screenshot for verification & it says 2600 Mobile. it's in the wrong category http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627425 I have posted these before. I see you got the top one fixed. Thanks. The bottom one is still showing up as #1 for the 2600 TB and is also listed for the 2600+ M (no points)
kal_garath Posted August 7, 2007 Posted August 7, 2007 hi, the following scores for a X300SE are in my opinion not possible at these frequencies. It's more scores for a standard X300 (128bit memory interface instead of 64bit for the X300SE). There's no way you can get that score with that clock & a 64bit interface. http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=560550 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=560306 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=620763 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=620767 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=560307 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=620765
Praz Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 3dmark 2003 Global ranking #11 No link to Futuremark thus no way to validate according to the rules. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=631766
fr@me Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 Pifast on 3800+ Windsor 4 fake results! It is not HEXUS!!!
Monstru Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 3DMark2001 on GF4 Ti4200 64 - http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=566652 1st GeForce4 Ti 4200 64 - 3.0 points - Cydoo (Syndrome-OC) The screenshot is not correct, you cannot see the GPU and settings used for the benchmark. And there is no verification link....
Potapicus Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 Pentium-3 850 MHz - http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1016 category - WinPrime1024. 1st place - 1h 50min 17sec 660ms - Cydoo (Syndrome-OC) - compare url is http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=583869 there is no screenshot and no verification link - and the cheksum is INVALID: Verfication: checksum: A6F78CC0 (invalid) and by the way - this user has 4 results in WPrime 1024 - and 3 results has invalid checksum - and there is nothing else, what can confirm the truth of this results.
Crew Turrican Posted August 9, 2007 Crew Posted August 9, 2007 geforce 5900ZT http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=628288 1.)there's no screen/verification 2.)he's using a p4 1.3ghz "Willamete" @ 3.2ghz on air (!!)
pointhore Posted August 10, 2007 Posted August 10, 2007 X1650 pro DDR2 Ran at wrong resolution http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=564863
BioShark Posted August 10, 2007 Posted August 10, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627492 SLI 6800GT in one card category.
Monstru Posted August 10, 2007 Posted August 10, 2007 X1650 pro DDR2 Ran at wrong resolution http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=564863 Sorry, that was a long time ago when I thought that 3DMark 2006 has the same default resolution. My bad, I just deleted the entry from HWbot myself. BUT, soon I will bring the result with X6800, at the corect resolution, and I think you know what is going to happen then
Monstru Posted August 10, 2007 Posted August 10, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632688 Wrong calculation of the result - 140sec does not mean 1minute and 40 seconds, it means 2 minutes and 20 seconds
kal_garath Posted August 10, 2007 Posted August 10, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632688 Wrong calculation of the result - 140sec does not mean 1minute and 40 seconds, it means 2 minutes and 20 seconds Same guy and same wrong calculation for the wPrime1024 : 4468sec means 1h14m28s but not 45m8sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632993 ... in fact, all the scores posted in wPrime32 or 1024 by NIKOSE have a wrong calculation.... easy to make points like that... ...a lot of result of this guy are wrong, the score written is not the same as that one on the screenshot http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632985 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632086 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632124 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632691 etc...
Undertaker Posted August 10, 2007 Posted August 10, 2007 hello, i reported many wrong results in "P4C 3.0Ghz Northwood" : a lot of wrong cpu code name (prescott instead of northwood etc) and in the "C2D T7200" section : a lot of T7300 or Core 2 E4/6XXX . . . Under
Massman Posted August 10, 2007 Posted August 10, 2007 I'll look into all the reported scores when I get back from my vacation
Monstru Posted August 10, 2007 Posted August 10, 2007 Uh...vacation..nice....I just finished mine and I can tell you that getting back to the office really sucks. Have fun! and about Nikose's results....I really think that lacks some math knowledge
Recommended Posts