Massman Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Is that all I get? A score breakdown. If you want to make a point, please add a bit more information. FYI, the benchmark doesn't like it when you have programs opened, or are loading things in the background. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misko78 Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Benchmark was run in same enviroment. Nothing was loading. RUN2 was first RUN1 was second (wrong markings, sorry). What more do you need to see? Please do tell, so we could resolve this matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oki Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 This is not a paranoid situation, this is situation where you cannot be 100% sure that you had a great run. What does that means pretty consistent at stable settings ? If we knew [ I mean all hwbot community] that NB/IMC pushed to the edge MAY cause latency bug we will def knew what to do. Can you see that program needs to be "cleaned", or at least give us all information about it. I am asking again, what is deal with maxxmem if so much pushed NB/IMC can cause that bug. What is the point of "non extreme" benching application on a extreme benching application place ? I suggest Everest Cache and Memory benchmark. Why not : ) It is almost the same..you will never get the same result with both programs.. "Our deal with MaxxMem is just that we include the bench if proven stable. Nothing else. " It is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 ? I'm not following what you guys are trying to prove here? I think we all agree that the benchmark is bugging in some instances. Also, this is something we can't forsee when adding a benchmark ... it's only through extensive testing that issues can surface. Everest benchmark is not possible because there's not a single-score. If you want to rank benchmarks, you need a single score ... not 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animaN Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 ? I'm not following what you guys are trying to prove here? I think we all agree that the benchmark is bugging in some instances. Also, this is something we can't forsee when adding a benchmark ... it's only through extensive testing that issues can surface. Everest benchmark is not possible because there's not a single-score. If you want to rank benchmarks, you need a single score ... not 4. To prove? Dear Massman, for all good ban maxmemm forever from hwbot... We don't agree that benchmark is bugging in some instances...It's bugging all a time...That is clear as a blue sky... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oki Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Ok I am off because you don't get the point at all... For the end what about this http://hwbot.org/community/submission/999732_spyboy48_maxxmem_ddr3_2000.7_marks What about his high NB/IMC cpu on 5.6ghz+ and ram over 2000mhz+ ..Why does he has such a low score.. Can't wait to see and looking forward to GOOC finals where they will be benching this crap of application. If they cancel maxxmem in the finals - they lose ! This is not a way to stimulating people AT ALL. Over and out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 MaxxMem likes low latency ... you are comparing 4.5GHz NB + 2250CL8 to 4.7GHz NB + 2250CL7. The score looks perfectly normal for those frequencies. Two things: 1) At hwbot, we don't impulsively make decisions based on emotional reactions. It's normal that you guys suggest to do everything very quickly. 2) The benchmarks were NOT chosen by HWBOT. We have the platform to host competitions, apart from the hwbot challenges we don't make the rules ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchZowner Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 You have the judging power to decide if MaxxxMem will be added to the HWbot ranked benchmarks though, and adding it will be a big mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richba5tard Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Indeed BenchZowner, as we added Maxxxmem without points to HWBOT for this very reason: to test whether it's stable or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oki Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Ok thank you for your time. I hope people will ignore this application, since is bugged and have no any sense in this place [ stability point ]. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warmaster Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Ok thank you for your time. I hope people will ignore this application, since is bugged and have no any sense in this place [ stability point ]. +1 By accepting this aplication into the scoring sistem shows a big flaw. I hope this will be a reminder for future actions about this program being removed from scoring sistem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animaN Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 1) At hwbot, we don't impulsively make decisions based on emotional reactions. It's normal that you guys suggest to do everything very quickly. Neither do we Massman... We talk about this over 30 hours... But, you closing ayes... That not fair play my friend! 2) The benchmarks were NOT chosen by HWBOT. We have the platform to host competitions, apart from the hwbot challenges we don't make the rules ... Huge mistake Massman. In basketball that's call that traveling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling_%28basketball%29 Hwbot supposed to present overclocking and overclockers! Nobody can't tall hwbot to do this or that... Hwbot need to know what is the best for overclockers and always to fight for them! Ok, U guys collaborate with Gigabyte (read: money), and that is cool! Same as pcaxe.com http://www.pcaxe.com/vesti/hardver/gooc-2010-srbija-online-kvalifikacije But...HWbot supposed to make ultimate rules for everything about benching, not to listen others with less experience in overclocking! That is my point Maxmemm is bad for overclocking is final conclusion. That we are trying to prove! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animaN Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Indeed BenchZowner, as we added Maxxxmem without points to HWBOT for this very reason: to test whether it's stable or not. That's cool! But, not for competitions...huge mistake (not intentionally, I guess ...)... Unfortunately we find out how crapy maxmemm aplication is after competition...2500 Wow! That was easy...Run that again...and again...an again...Similar score... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 But, you closing ayes... That not fair play my friend! This is what I posted: Problem is that this benchmark's producing bugged runs instead of crashing How am I closing my eyes? Hwbot supposed to present overclocking and overclockers! Nobody can't tall hwbot to do this or that... Hwbot need to know what is the best for overclockers and always to fight for them!Ok, U guys collaborate with Gigabyte (read: money), and that is cool! Same as pcaxe.com http://www.pcaxe.com/vesti/hardver/gooc-2010-srbija-online-kvalifikacije But...HWbot supposed to make ultimate rules for everything about benching, not to listen others with less experience in overclocking! That is my point Maxmemm is bad for overclocking is final conclusion. That we are trying to prove! This is a typical case of arguing for the sake of arguing. We both say that MaxxMem has some flaws, we both say it's better not to use it for points ... and still you're trying to accuse me of 'not listening' and now apparently also 'choosing money over community' ... huh? In the end WE provide the platform for competitions. In the end, that's ONLY what we do. Of course, we can make suggestions to organizers how to set up a competition, give insight on behavior of applications and benchmark rules ... but in the end, whoever sets up the competition has the final call. If you work at a bank, you can also suggest the client to invest the money in fund A, but you can't force him to do so. And I think we're now reaching an end of this discussion. Everyone agrees, let's stop arguing just to have fun. I accept one last reply from you, if you feel the need to have the last word Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animaN Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 (edited) And I think we're now reaching an end of this discussion. Everyone agrees, let's stop arguing just to have fun. I accept one last reply from you, if you feel the need to have the last word Ok my friend. I do not want to argument... I hope that you will make suggestion to Gigabyte to ban maxmemm. Simple as that btw how old are you? If you work at a bank, you can also suggest the client to invest the money in fund A, but you can't force him to do so. Bad example. In this case HWbot is a bank, you are banker, and a client will do everithing you say because he is afraid to lose money. HWbot is a alfa&omega. It supposed to be! Edited June 17, 2010 by animaN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.