jigit Posted September 2, 2007 Posted September 2, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=598614 score from Sempron 2600+ (Palermo) Socket 754, not from Socket 462 (Thoroughbred)
demiurg Posted September 3, 2007 Posted September 3, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=548008 All is corrected, unblock result, please.
Woomack Posted September 3, 2007 Posted September 3, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=642030 8800GTX card , not 9700 mobility class (info even in description) http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=504614 info from forum -> Powercolor 9500@9700, not 9700 mobility http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=632606 looks like sli score, too high score for single 8600 gts with so low clocks and c2d 3,2GHz http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=641832 fake or sli score , too low clocks/cpu speed for 11k+ on single card
steelrat Posted September 3, 2007 Posted September 3, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=629820 - cheat, videocard is 1950PRo, seen on screen. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=630628 - cheat, dont see videocard\cpu else. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=629761 - cheat, special hidden resolution and name of videocard.
gianni-gt Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=641905 => no AMD
Massman Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=6420308800GTX card , not 9700 mobility class (info even in description) http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=504614 info from forum -> Powercolor 9500@9700, not 9700 mobility http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=632606 looks like sli score, too high score for single 8600 gts with so low clocks and c2d 3,2GHz http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=641832 fake or sli score , too low clocks/cpu speed for 11k+ on single card http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=629820 - cheat, videocard is 1950PRo, seen on screen.http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=630628 - cheat, dont see videocard\cpu else. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=629761 - cheat, special hidden resolution and name of videocard. fixed
Just Learnin' Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=560164 Description and screenshot show 3.4E Prescott CPU, result is in 3.4C Northwood category. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=641402 Submitted four days ago, old SuperPi and no CPUZ in screenshot.
Massman Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=560164 Description and screenshot show 3.4E Prescott CPU' date=' result is in 3.4C Northwood category. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=641402 Submitted four days ago, old SuperPi and no CPUZ in screenshot.[/quote'] fixed
kal_garath Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 Could you please fix these results : http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634844 - Screen show 516,136sec (8min36.136sec) but written result is : 5min16sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632415 - Screen show 475.178sec (7min55,178sec) but written result is : 5min15sec and no CPU identification on the screen http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632145 - Screen show 241.638sec (4min1.638sec) but written result is : 2min41sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634877 - Screen show P4 630 s.775, but result in category Prescott 3GHz s.478 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=630012 - Screen show 11.921sec, but written result is : 11sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=633012 - Screen show 13029.311sec (3h37min9.310sec) but written result is : 1h30min29sec and no CPU identification http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632417 - Screen show 7899.11sec (2h11min39.110sec) but written result is : 1h19min39sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634703 - Screen show 2573.687sec (42min53.686sec), written result : 26min13sec and the result is under Prescott 3GHz s.478 instead of P4 630 s.775 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=631114 - Screen show 1842.172sec (30min42.172sec) but written result is : 18min42sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634873 - Screen show P4 630 s.775, but result in category Prescott 3GHz s.478 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632691 - Screen show 3min27.689sec (207.689sec) but written result is : 147.69sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634871 - Screen show P4 630 s.775, but result in category Prescott 3GHz s.478 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634842 - Screen show 616.79sec, but written result is 376sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632124 - Screen show 453.36sec, but written result is 293sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632086 - Screen show 244.98sec, but written result is 164sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=632985 - Screen show 229.45sec, but written result is 149sec http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634854 - No CPU identification on the screen http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=641918 - No CPU identification on the screen http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=638218 - No CPU identification on the screen http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=641572 - No CPU identification on the screen http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=635731 - Is SetFSB enough to validate the CPU ? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634879 - Screen show P4 630 s.775, but result in category Prescott 3GHz s.478 Thx in advance
TASOS Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=588457 Prescott 2.8A in 2.8E category http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627612 P4 Northwood 1.8@1.8 does 73sec pifast Better score than a 1.8@3.1 GHZ I need proof this is a valid hexus pifast version 4.1 result.
Pepek86 Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 The same user has points on two submitet score on the same CPU in SuperPI http://www.hwbot.org/user.do?userId=9126 Could you please fix this results : http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=634625 - Screen show 30,687sec but written result is : 30sec
M!chalak Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=547217 - It is 6600 GT because memory frequency is too high http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=500616 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=607995 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=547069 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=609478 Please chcek other results of this category because is some another results on 66GT in category 66 non-GT. Regards, Paul
Crew Trouffman Posted September 5, 2007 Crew Posted September 5, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=640908 --> it's an Athlon XP 1500+ not a MP one look @ the 3rd line in the validation link : "CPU PSN : AMD Athlon XP 1500+"
v@l3nn Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 and look the specification on the screenshot "AMD Athlon XP 1500+"
Blackwarriors Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=588842 -- Not screen or valid http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=639924 -- Not screen or valid http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=639927 -- Not screen or valid http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=639929 -- Not screen or valid http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=639928 -- Not screen or valid http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=576093 -- Not screen or valid http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=575420 -- Not screen or valid http://www.hwbot.org/searchMembers.do?userId=7220&name=jed040 -- No the screen with any score except CPU-Z
Pepek86 Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616055 -- Not screen or valid http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=620093 -- Not screen or valid
Massman Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=640908 --> it's an Athlon XP 1500+ not a MP one look @ the 3rd line in the validation link : "CPU PSN : AMD Athlon XP 1500+" Auch, missed that My mistake, sorry.
Massman Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616055 -- Not screen or validhttp://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=620093 -- Not screen or valid No screen: they were uploaded via the online submition system of wPrime. The invalid problem was a problem we had with early versions.
hipro5 Posted September 6, 2007 Posted September 6, 2007 HELOOOOO!..........Why isn't the below score of Super-Pi 32M in the hwbot rank?.... http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=643644 .
hipro5 Posted September 6, 2007 Posted September 6, 2007 Someone propably have report it as bad and it was blocked?.... coz it was under moderation"..... Have they seen what a Conroe can do with such high fsb and at 1:1....?.....
71proste Posted September 6, 2007 Posted September 6, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=625871 video card not visible http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=571016 no verification screen,or link http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627239 video card not visible
Crew Turrican Posted September 6, 2007 Crew Posted September 6, 2007 wrong categorie http://www.hwbot.org//result.do?resultId=641905 it's a E2180 not a a64 3400+ clawhammer
TASOS Posted September 6, 2007 Posted September 6, 2007 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=571016 no verification screen,or link I fixxed it my self. I uploaded the verification picture. edit The verification image was at a previous forum i used for hwbot The post was modified so the url was lost. http://www.thelab.gr/showthread.php?postid=414556#post414556
Recommended Posts