Bobnova Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 I do not envy your jobs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Somebody has to do it And we are kind of crazy (understand stupid) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENiEBEN Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share Posted September 7, 2014 We work for potatoes from our master ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobnova Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 I deleted my bugged results, as a note. Discovered that I have a 980x result that is actually legit, I think. Pretty stoked about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.nfraR.ed Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 I've sorted out mine as well, except there are 2-3 submissions that have the legit score inside, but need edit from a moderator. If you're going to make an exception for such kind of scores, I'd like to keep 'em. Otherwise, I can remove them too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 We will try to edit those exceptions when we see them. But out of 13k results, I am pretty sure we will overlook a few and block them instead. If you think it shouldn't have been blocked and could have been edited, please let us know. @Pieter, when are you going to hire me full time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted September 7, 2014 Crew Share Posted September 7, 2014 (edited) Deleted Madshrimps bugged scores... all for the masters!! However why is this one being blocked ? http://hwbot.org/submission/2499007_leeghoofd_ucbench_2011_core_i5_3230m_430.3_mpt_score The passwords line up, so what's the issue now? Edited September 7, 2014 by Leeghoofd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZFeSS Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 I've got some of my ucbench submissions blocked. Last one was modified and get value achieved with 4 threads (for 4 thread cpu). Does that means that blocked results can be modified for right thread score and get back to the ranking? For example this score was blocked but it has 4 thread score that should be legit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yamahracer19 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 What about dual core processors? Can they run just the default selected threads or would that run be considered a bugged run? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMS Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) Let me see if i understand it right... This is ok because pwds are in ascending order even considering that i used 56/60/64 threads: http://hwbot.org/submission/2323148_noms_ucbench_2011_fx_6300_977.7_mpt_score And this is bugged because pwds is out of order http://hwbot.org/submission/2318196_noms_ucbench_2011_athlon_64_le_1640_(orleans)_83.7_mpt_score Or all this bunnyextraction are bugged because 56/60/64 threads regardless of the pwds order? Edited September 8, 2014 by NoMS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENiEBEN Posted September 8, 2014 Author Share Posted September 8, 2014 I've got some of my ucbench submissions blocked. Last one was modified and get value achieved with 4 threads (for 4 thread cpu).Does that means that blocked results can be modified for right thread score and get back to the ranking? For example this score was blocked but it has 4 thread score that should be legit. Edited to the 4 threads score, thanks for reporting. @yamaharacer: default threads from now on. @NoMS: yes, any thread that is > than the default threads set is bugged anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 make it clear now my 3 core wr is banned, settings i used genieben give me and score was ok i dont get it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmuckley Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Where's UCbench? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Yeah whats going on my 4670k Run now 1552 insteeed of 1900, i dont get it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObscureParadox_3XS Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Finally been removed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Will be back, when cleaned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bogd4n Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Ctrl+A, delete all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zx896.ru Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Panic mode on!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmuckley Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) Will be back, when cleaned. Oh..that's cool No word from the author or anything? I would like for it to be reliable enough for globals, personally. Hats off to whoever's doing the cleaning (probly Genieben) I can never remember what constitutes a bugged run Edited September 8, 2014 by Schmuckley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMS Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Edited to the 4 threads score, thanks for reporting. @yamaharacer: default threads from now on. @NoMS: yes, any thread that is > than the default threads set is bugged anyway. Thanks! Already warned my teammates to not run this benchmark anymore until the new version is out. Will start to delete my bugged subs as soon as i get time to do this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 yeah Genieben and I will clean the mess. As for bugged runs, as long as you use default thread count and/or lower or equal thread count than the cpu total its fine. Just dont set higher thread count than cpu total. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObscureParadox_3XS Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 yeah Genieben and I will clean the mess.As for bugged runs, as long as you use default thread count and/or lower or equal thread count than the cpu total its fine. Just dont set higher thread count than cpu total. But am I right in saying that under certain circumstances (I believe with AMD 3 and 5 core CPUs) a stock run will still bring up a bugged result due to an odd number of threads used?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stelaras Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Two days ago we started cleaning all of our results (HWBOX Team) . I believe we didn't miss anything . I started looking for bugged scores from many people and reported many scores (please don't take it personally) . Thanks , and feel free to check and report if you find a missed/bugged score from my team . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CL3P20 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 yeah Genieben and I will clean the mess.As for bugged runs, as long as you use default thread count and/or lower or equal thread count than the cpu total its fine. Just dont set higher thread count than cpu total. *testing 5960X - i get bug result every run if t-count used is 8/16 .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Can you please show us a screenshot. Thanks 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.