gulftown ES vs Retail

[Massman]

Haha ... you're really unbelievable. Such a simplistic view on everything.

 

1) Does it matter how many people can? Why does it matter 10 people have A0 but not matter how many people can fake A0?

2) What if they are running like 50MHz higher. Or just 100MHz ...

3) Okay, so now we have to make video proof mandatory every time we suspect an engineering sample is used. Oh right ... and for sure no one will say you can fake video proof.

[Leeghoofd]

Which mod are you referring to ?

Because all the GTX 480 mods were handed out by nVIDIA in a guide

 

I agree for self-discovered mods though, it's a personal matter if the person wants to share the mod he found or not.

 

Really weird that almost noone has it then besides Asus, Gigabyte and eVGA limted crew . And noone shares this public mod... Slow and the other 480 mods aren't as widely spread as you think Bill

 

Well... the mod stuff is quite fair. Some guy thought of something clever that worked. It's a fair game, everyone can figure it out if they have the knowledge.

 

Nvidia figured this GTX480 mod out, gave it to a selected crowd and the happy few OC'ers that got it have to abide some NDA or such... and in case they don't have an NDA they comment with replies like this : "I don't want to share, because I don't want anyone to beat me" or I like SF3D in his nice video "GTX480 has no cold bug"...c'mon

 

Wow now that's sportmanship in it's purest form !!

 

 

sorry to go offtopic here...

Edited June 4, 2010 by Leeghoofd

[knopflerbruce]

If someone wanted to get video proof from me, I'd say: OK, but you visit me and pay your own airplane tickets + LN2 etc needed for the session + my standard hourly wage for the amount of time the session lasts. I think that's fair, at least if you want to have it within a reasonable time frame. To do this is impossible, unless you have a crazy wallet and no job yourself - which is a rare combination.

 

IMO the best thing we can do is to ask people to try to make the competition fair by not using these factory picked samples. Blocking ebay bought engineering samples doesn't make any sense., they're available to anyone. The "illegality" argument isn't valid IMO, Intel doesn't take any actions so in reality they allow us to use these chips. It's a bit like that street in Hamburg where the prostitutes can offer their services, even if it's outside the legal area. The police don't care => who should the people care?

[Splave]

its sad but true, people do cheat but i think the community has done a great job as well as the mod staff here on sniffing those people out. The world would be a better place if photoshop didnt exist lol

 

I think the righteous and respectable big name overclockers wont cheat but the guys backed by big companies worry me. They have the pressure of getting results which can do funny things to people and impair your moral judgment.

 

 

 

EDIT: @ bruce

The police might not know or care but if I saw a lady getting her pocket picked you better believe someones face is meeting the pavement. Trying to get to the top is very frustrating and I sometimes find myself so upset in my results I wonder why I have this as a hobby when Im in a bicycle race and someones on a motorcycle.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Splave

[BenchZowner]

Haha ... you're really unbelievable. Such a simplistic view on everything.

 

1) Does it matter how many people can? Why does it matter 10 people have A0 but not matter how many people can fake A0?

2) What if they are running like 50MHz higher. Or just 100MHz ...

3) Okay, so now we have to make video proof mandatory every time we suspect an engineering sample is used. Oh right ... and for sure no one will say you can fake video proof.

 

Fake-proof video ? Not that hard.

Video starts with the cpu ihs shown, pot mounting, cpuz validation and a bench run at similar clocks and settings all these with a an analog clock next to the monitor shown in the vid the whole time.

 

50 MHz higher ? Fine.

100MHz higher ? fine.

150+ MHz higher = not fine.

 

Now, I'll cut you some slack and stop this hypocritical conversation because the truth is that you guys are afraid of pissing off the top 10 OCers by removing the E.S. scores, and aren't considering a change in the ToC anyway.

 

If you think that it's the right choice, good for you, hope it won't be the opposite for the mass.

[knopflerbruce]

You can always lap the IHS, too. In fact, that's pretty common - at least for CPUs that are not so expensive. But i bet it happens with 980x chips as well.

[Massman]

Hehe, ok.

 

We have no established that 'for the community' (as Benchzowner has repeatedly stated he's spokesmen) the limitation is set at 150MHz. Now, is that limitation based on the average? On the max so far? On a reference value. Or just yelling out loud "no this cannot be". The irony here is that back when we introduce rankings based on #GPU 'the community' already voiced the concern that HWBOT was degrading to the average and mainstream. Limiting clock frequencies (as that's what this basically comes down to!) seems to be a lot like this as well. How come now this is rectified suddenly?

 

In any case, I'm open to suggestions and disussions with anyone who doesn't consider 'everything bad' and him- or herself 'super-dooper-great'. Of course we know that this issue exists and obviously there are things being talked about behind-the-scenes, but things are not really that simple as some want to make them look. I think it's in ANYONE's best interest that this is thought through instead of resorting to half-working semi-decent solutions. If you want to solve a traffic problem, banning all cars just isn't the right solution ...

[BenchZowner]

"We can't fix this 100%, so we're leaving it fucked up as is"...

 

applies to:

 

Hardware sharing

Manufacturer owned hardware ( benching at asus, gigabyte, etc with THE COMPANY's hardware )

E.S.

 

That's the bottom line.

 

Waiting patiently for an OPB deja-vu.

[Kal-EL]

I have made an internal survey among my team-mates, most of them think that ES should be allowed for WR but not for points.

 

Our internal poll results show a desire for ES to be completely removed. How to regulate such a rule is being discussed as well.

 

HiCookie's scores/clocks are redonkeyless/crazy/sick.

[hipro5]

Who wants a Pall where everyone can vote IF they want ES in hwbot or not?....

[BenchZowner]

Come on, that's going to be a double penetration George

Awaiting "Can't do a poll because it's not right, and disallowing the E.S. isn't possible due to various reasons" post.

[knopflerbruce]

You can do a poll, but it won't affect anything, as we don't know if being jealous or whatever other "stupid" reasons there may be for people to vote no. Not saying there aren't any good explanatons, but this smells like the ones who dont have a golden one will vote no just because they dont have one;)

[hipro5]

You can do a poll, but it won't affect anything, as we don't know if being jealous or whatever other "stupid" reasons there may be for people to vote no. Not saying there aren't any good explanatons, but this smells like the ones who dont have a golden one will vote no just because they dont have one;)

 

So what?.....

 

......and IF we see a 98% (for example) NOT wanting ES's on hwbot rankings, then what?......

[BenchZowner]

we will ignore the poll and still allow the ES to keep 4-5 people on the site & happy.

 

Excuse my cockiness but this thing is ridiculous, we started a few months ago with "We'll wait and see what we'll do, we believe that the retail 980X's and the 670's will catch up with the ES" to "we can't remove ES's because blah blah blah".

[Kal-EL]

we will ignore the poll and still allow the ES to keep 4-5 people on the site & happy.

 

Excuse my cockiness but this thing is REDONKEYLESS, we started a few months ago with "We'll wait and see what we'll do, we believe that the retail 980X's and the 670's will catch up with the ES" to "we can't remove ES's because blah blah blah".

 

The discussion will die down soon and the die hard overclockers will continue to make submissions like the great enthusiasts that they are until the next ES GPU/CPU hits the marketing scene.

[knopflerbruce]

The only REAL argument that I can see is that they're not 980x engineering samples, and therefore not a released model. (980x runs at 3.33Ghz stock, the unlocked A0's are 2.4 and 3.07GHz by default). However, the rules are about NDA and not whether they're officially released or not.

[steponz]

Gardening... nice....

 

Im starting to agree about ES... Really no chance to compete when people have access lots of these chips... I killed mine before I could use it for points... total bummer.. definitely don't want to shell out cash for another...

 

I think the league needs to seperate in to a pro/amateur leage, maybe even a novice.. The big issue would be what determines each...

 

Something needs to happen, since all fun is being taken out of it... Isn't that the point?

[Hiwa]

SR-2 with 2 x Xeons for Vantage is your's?.....

 

is not nick's rig, it's Computex rig, already we got 3

 

and george, please tell me the truth if you bench with SR2 you don't post it? Come on..

[Hyperhorn]

The most ridiculous thing is, that so many of the members here perform illegitimate RMAs for Intel-CPUs but pretend to care about the legal status of an ES-CPU - sanctimoniousness at its best. And FYI if Intel sends you or me an ES-CPU for testing purposes, they want to get the CPU tested. "Owning" on a lawful basis does not have anything to do with Hwbot, otherwise we would upload attachements of bills and notarially certified deeds of ownership. What Hwbot wants, is, that your whole team doesn`t benefit from a single CPU by distributing it to every member. So "Owning" is not "Having access to" is not "Using for Hwbot scores" ...

 

btw 6.6 GHz @ AM3 + 6.55 GHz @ Pifast done with retail i7-980X: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=253332

 

Some further thoughts about ES CPUs I placed here already: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3927200&postcount=116

--> Idealism and being able to hold a competition are two total different things.

The only REAL argument that I can see is that they're not 980x engineering samples, and therefore not a released model. (980x runs at 3.33Ghz stock, the unlocked A0's are 2.4 and 3.07GHz by default). However, the rules are about NDA and not whether they're officially released or not.

Same goes for many, many (cheap OEM) CPUs, which were never released officially. *cough* E8700 *cough*

 

@hipro/hiwa: Sure you`re still on topic?

Edited June 5, 2010 by Hyperhorn

[hipro5]

is not nick's rig, it's Computex rig, already we got 3

 

and george, please tell me the truth if you bench with SR2 you don't post it? Come on..

 

Of caurse and I would post it IMEDIATELLY..........

Who cares who's mobo is it?........I'm just teasing you.......

[BenchZowner]

Let's see some balls... http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7966

[Massman]

"We can't fix this 100%, so we're leaving it fucked up as is"...

 

applies to:

 

Hardware sharing

 

This is a perfect example on how you can shout A and then act like B. A few weeks ago we asked some Greek friends of you if they were sharing hardware and we got a massive rain of compaints ~ 'how can you even ask us that!'.

 

I also saw no complaints when some Greek overclockers submitted their scores from MOA and GOOC 2009 to hwbot. That's also with manufacturer owned gear.

 

See, from my point of view you're just someone yelling as loud as he can, but not thinking about what he's yelling. Things are just not that simple ... they never are.

[BenchZowner]

This is a perfect example on how you can shout A and then act like B. A few weeks ago we asked some Greek friends of you if they were sharing hardware and we got a massive rain of compaints ~ 'how can you even ask us that!'.

 

I also saw no complaints when some Greek overclockers submitted their scores from MOA and GOOC 2009 to hwbot. That's also with manufacturer owned gear.

 

See, from my point of view you're just someone yelling as loud as he can, but not thinking about what he's yelling. Things are just not that simple ... they never are.

 

First of all, I talk for myself, and only myself.

I'm nobody's manager or lawyer.

 

But since you insist and bring that up again ( yes, I'm aware of all your conversations with nearly every single HOT member ), let me tell you this.

 

IT WASN'T the same VGA.

I know they told you that they could show you their purchase receipts, but you said "blah blah, that's not proof".

Kind of one-sided when you say that to the X & Y person while you suck it up for the A & B person, isn't it ?

 

I don't know which MOA & GOOC 2009 scores you're talking about, but if you're talking about scores from the Greek local qualifiers then you're plainly wrong, because unlike the rest of the "lucky" countries, the Greeks had to use THEIR OWN hardware.

 

And since you're expanding the conversation's subjects, why don't you also tell us how many months it took you guys to take down 1, yes, just 1 of the 5+ pretty darn obviously cheated CPU-z validations of mr Psycho aka Kurumi ?

 

You know, I don't give a shit about points, team rankings, personal rankings, etc but I really can switch to "mofo mode" when it comes to cheating, one-sided judging, handicapping, and unbalanced play/rules.

[Massman]

But you present yourself as everyone's saviour when you're just shouting loudly? Don't you understand that some people see through the sherade you put up and in the end just don't listen anymore? I'm all in fordiscussion, but not when it's just about shouting and getting noticed.

 

It's just a good example of how you want hardware sharing to be attacked, but DON'T accept that questions can also be asked to you or your team. And you're not the only one here ... mud-throwing conversations when we dare to just ask something (not even blocking the result), but when someone else's results look weird it's all "he's lying", "they are sharing" and "remove those results now". I guess you have be on the receiving end to see the irony here. Oh, and the one-sided comment is a bit biased since it's normal you only see the one side ...

 

Fyi, by MOA and GOOC I obviously mean the live finals where hardware is provided.

 

Look, if all of you guys give HWBOT the right and priveledge to remove ANY result without prior notice just because it looks a bit off ... okay. We'll do so, and I can guarantee you on a piece of paper that it would be raining complaints and many more frustrated people will be sitting behind their computers watching the rankings.

 

There's a reason why we like to keep things relaxed as much as possible ... in it's current form, the Overclockers League (or HWBOT as a whole) is designed to serve a competition on an amateur level(*). This means: just supporting the hobby of overclocking by having a website that allows you to gather all your results in one place and give some incentive to maybe push the hardware a little harder. Isn't that the main purpose of overclocking? My rank is now >30p, so now I'm benching to get the team back to the top-20. When my rank was 10, I was benching to get a bit higher up the ranks. If I see two similar scores in front of me ... well okay, I will just try to beat them both.

 

I think none of us (except BenchZowner then) wants to see a competition regulated to the extreme, having to sign a 500-page rule book before you can actually submit a score to the bot. There's an obvious up-side to strict regulation and a not-so-obvious down-side ...

 

(*): yes - i know things are a bit different now. Do yourself a favour and don't 'prove' that it's different.

[BenchZowner]

But you present yourself as everyone's saviour when you're just shouting loudly?

 

I didn't present myself as anybody's saviour.

What I did say is that I'm the one ( of the very few as we can see ) that doesn't give a flying f*ck and say what I think without any hesitation.

There are multiple PM's in my inbox from various people here and on other forums saying that they agree with me and thanking me for putting up a "fight" for them.

 

Don't you understand that some people see through the sherade you put up and in the end just don't listen anymore?

 

That can be only one of the sides of this story, one of the other sides is... lots of people never posted here in this topic or in general, have PMed me, and agree with most ( if not all ) of my posts about this issue, so no, they haven't stopped listening and posting, they never posted to stop now.

 

It's just a good example of how you want hardware sharing to be attacked, but DON'T accept that questions can also be asked to you or your team.

 

First of all, where did you see me saying that I said that I have a problem with the HWbot crew asking questions to any member ( be it a HOT member, a Pure member, or a TeamSuckers member... ) ?

I did say that your behavior and reply to the members involved ( crio & sofos ) and the fact that you were predetermined about what happened, and ditched any attempt of crio & sofos who were more than willing to provide you with any kind of proof you desired.

 

Did you ask the same question and behave the same to smoke and slamms ?

To any other suspicious entry ?

 

Personally I haven't shared any results ever, and wouldn't do it no matter what.

Most of the times ( if not all ) whenever I bench together with other people, I give them the scores, and I don't post any for myself.

I had several chances to "play within the rules", "slip and slide between the cracks" of the rules and share and publish similar scores taken with the same hardware, but I didn't.

Other people might do it, others won't no matter what.

 

I'm all against hardware sharing and any form of cheating, but this isn't about it.

It's about how every single HWbot member is treated, because the way I and lots of other members of HWbot.org see it, it isn't exactly fair and handled the same way.

 

Fyi, by MOA and GOOC I obviously mean the live finals where hardware is provided.

 

I wouldn't mind you removing those scores ( along with every other MOA/GOOC score from any member & country ).

In fact, I have been telling various people that I don't like and don't think it's right to do that, and kindly asked them that they don't, but I'm no god, and neither a control freak.

 

I think none of us (except BenchZowner then) wants to see a competition regulated to the extreme, having to sign a 500-page rule book before you can actually submit a score to the bot.

 

"Do not use ES"... that's a one liner I think.

Anyway, I know for sure that you're not considering removing the ES at all, and you're participating in this conversation just for the sake of being here and not having people saying "Massman or the X member isn't taking any part in this".

 

So do yourself a favor and just say it clearly

 

"We will not remove the ES"

 

plain and simple.