George_o/c Posted February 19, 2008 Posted February 19, 2008 The following results that Nordling posted are not in the right category ... He has posted in the X1650 agp category, while using a X1650 pci-e card ... http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=701989 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=701990 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=701991 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=701992 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=701993 I think it's quite obvious, 'cause he is using a P5E3 WS Pro, a motherboard that's it's commonly known supports only pci-e VGAs, and not AGP ones Take a look at his photos too ... In GPU-Z it's stated : I'm not implementing that Nordling did it on purpose btw Just, that he is clearly mistaken ... Please ! Somebody has to take that into consideration ... It's another card ...
71proste Posted February 19, 2008 Posted February 19, 2008 Lol owned! Learn the rules yourself, I guess:D As you just noticed yourself, sometimes people make (stupid) mistakes. No reason to get upset because of that, all you need to do is post the link and perhaps explain the problem if it isn't obvious (like NO verification at all). yeah exactly,but there isn't problem,screen is 101% ok,the only problem I see is that guy who don't know rules George_o/c take it easy man ;)i'm waiting a long time as well,2 weeks already and I waste a lot of points because of wrong results submitted
Nordling Posted February 20, 2008 Posted February 20, 2008 George_o/c It is not told anywhere which it is a category. It is written only 1650. And who exactly it is not right, you or I are precisely not known. To divide all categories on AGP \PCI it is simply silly
knopflerbruce Posted February 20, 2008 Posted February 20, 2008 George_o/c It is not told anywhere which it is a category. It is written only 1650. And who exactly it is not right, you or I are precisely not known. To divide all categories on AGP \PCI it is simply silly It will create a mess with all those lists, but it's not silly. The penalty for using agp cards is huge, as you can't use the hottest CPUs etc. WHich means that no-one with the agp version will be able to compete for the top scores. Which means that a new category MUST be created to make things fair:)
George_o/c Posted February 20, 2008 Posted February 20, 2008 George_o/c It is not told anywhere which it is a category. It is written only 1650. And who exactly it is not right, you or I are precisely not known. To divide all categories on AGP \PCI it is simply silly Thanks a lot ... Firstly you are playing unfair by posting with a PCI-E VGA, to an AGP category (come on dude, you know it's unfair, but you pretend everything's right, god damn' it ! ), and secondly you indirectly call me silly ... I let knopflerbruce speak for myself
klopcha Posted February 20, 2008 Posted February 20, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=702100 Needs more proof http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=702229 From what time Radeon 8500 has a thermode? http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=702225 Needs more proof http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=702227 Needs more proof
Crew Turrican Posted February 20, 2008 Crew Posted February 20, 2008 wrong card. the i845g can't run nature tets in 01, because of no shaders http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702412 no resolution info http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=698244 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702000
Veld Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=625391 Wrong category - Prescott Cel 2.8 335 in Northwood Cel 2.8 category
Rossi Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 wPrime 1024m - 3min 56sec 980ms - kawal ("(Overclocker.es)") http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=689818 wPrime 32m - 7sec 940ms - kawal ("(Overclocker.es)") http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=689817 This is unreal result for one Xeon 3220. Special Xeon 3220 @ 2992mhz with Dell Inc. 0MY171!! 3Dmark 2003 - 33453 marks - bonzo_catalin (crazypc.ro) http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=677577 Description: E6600 @ 3690 , single X1900XT @ 739/864 This is unreal score on 1900XT!! I sent report but has passed more month, but is not present the answer actions Del this result. I write that on pager 106 but is not present the answer actions........ !!!
Rossi Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=701020 Aquamark - 7172 marks - George_o/c (OutOfSpecs.Gr) Processor: Pentium 4 3.0Ghz No... @ 3355mhz [ view screenshot ] Videocard: GeForce2 MX400 32MB @ 285/303mhz [#1 GeForce2 MX400 32MB in Aquamark] on air On screen only CPU-Z and Ati Tool but where riva tuner or gpu-z?! needs more proof!!
gprhellas Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 Hello guys I have a complain here. Can please anyone moderator explain to me why this two score (whit 7900GS) is not fixed yet. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700214 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700212 It is obvious that this two scores are made with two card (with moded drivers in SLI mode) and have reported with many players (me including) and till now is in one card category. PLEASE READ THE HISTORY of this two scores. Please remove these two scores and put it to two card category. Thanks for your time. gprhellas
gradus Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=685120 (crew) o polonos checked by a moderator () =-0!!! Aquamark - 127779 marks Processor: Core 2 E6600 (2.4Gh... @ 4000mhz on h2o Videocard: GeForce 7600 GS DDR2 @ 550/450mhz Not real(compare to other results). No info on screen.
gradus Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!6600DDR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=658171 GOZ http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=658174 GOZ http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=657772 GOZ http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=658168 GOZ http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=688299 cheat http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=655229 our friend MaSell and 6600ddr3 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=637950 and his friend cheater passat ^^^^^^^
S_A_V Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=699852 - no resolution and needs more proof
TASOS Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 He obviously ran it at the default settings, as he has the lowest HD3600 score... More proof is only required for HOF. I believe you are wrong. Take a look again....there's only a score screenshot.
gradus Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 6600GT no info on screen. not real score for this clocks. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702648 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702668 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702949 8600GT http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=696079 8600GTS SLI
mAlkAv!An Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 Can anyone please tell me why my result on GF 5750PCX in 3DMark05 has been deleted? And who did it? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702167 I did all with fair methods and oc. no cheat, a screen with all required information(and more) and so on. so whats the need to delete it??? Edit: i got no mail as usual if any result has been reported or deleted by mods...
Crew stummerwinter Posted February 22, 2008 Crew Posted February 22, 2008 Funny... 2 E8400 on a P5K3 Dlx with G80 GTS: > 19 k in 3D06 without any validation http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702946
71proste Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 Funny... 2 E8400 on a P5K3 Dlx with G80 GTS: > 19 k in 3D06 without any validation http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702946 hahaha great
Veld Posted February 22, 2008 Posted February 22, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602151 Wrong category - SuperPi 1M's score posted in PiFast category. Please check and delete.
gradus Posted February 23, 2008 Posted February 23, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702827 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702828 not real score for this clocks and 64bit videocard. benchmark was not run using default settings. no resolution on screen.
gradus Posted February 23, 2008 Posted February 23, 2008 manny - PcOverclock.net Team only 3dmarks..... 2001 not real score for this clocks (some videocards 64bit). benchmark was not run using default settings. no resolution on screen or no video info. sometimes he use omega driver and run not on default settings. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700529 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702827 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=701138 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=639119 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700899 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=640591 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700880 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=702176 2003 professional edition,no resolution on screen: http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=702776 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=701141 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=702828 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=700900 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=689844 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=697095 http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=700531 2005 professional edition,no resolution on screen: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700532 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=703037 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700882 old version 3dmark: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=657017 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=600522 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=698659 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=697097 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=640594 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=690554 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=657015 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=641360 2006 professional edition,no resolution on screen: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700536 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=698660 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=700883 old version 3dmark: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=690558 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=697098 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=640596 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602405 ban?!?
atomel Posted February 23, 2008 Posted February 23, 2008 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=695914 no resolution on the screen. Score at video card clocks for both core and memory impossible in comparison to 2nd place in the ranking.
71proste Posted February 23, 2008 Posted February 23, 2008 Where is moderation This is too much,people waste points because of wrong Results submitted,i have reported a lot of fake's,unreal scores-nothing fixed yet-what is going On????????how long should I wait-month a year?????-this is too much:mad::mad: pls do something!!!!!!!!! Gradus U'r right,some people should be banned,but nobody care I see
Lanc Posted February 23, 2008 Posted February 23, 2008 We need more moderators... I think people who reports many result can be new moderators (if they want).
Recommended Posts