Hardware master, junkie, extreme junkie awards

I know i've asked about this before but please can we discuss it again?

Its possible to have 300+++ points without having a single top 5 result (no silverware) and its also possible to have 50++ gold cups without having hardware master status.

There is obviously a crossover but they are noticeably different disciplines to some extent.

I think it would be fair to award all the titles that someone has achived. Some guys have hundreds of top 5 results and some have hundreds of golds! To me that deserves a title of some kind, but most of them come under the blanket of hardware master, which although IS good, doesn't tell the full story.

Any opinions?

K

I actually think it's pretty fair at the moment. If you start handing out too many awards they tend to lose their meaning.

We have been thinking about giving a little more hardware points for extremely popular cpu/gpu's, but it's not high on our priority list.

I actually think it's pretty fair at the moment. If you start handing out too many awards they tend to lose their meaning.

 

We have been thinking about giving a little more hardware points for extremely popular cpu/gpu's, but it's not high on our priority list.

Yeah, the last one has crossed my mind, too. I think E6600 (and the others in the same "league" submission-wise) deserve a few points more, perhaps 20 or 25.

Q66 is a submissions monster- easily most popular category on HWB

Q66 is a submissions monster- easily most popular category on HWB

It's a damn close race between E66 and Q66.

mysql> select cpu_model.model, count(result.result_id) submissions from result join cpu_model using (cpu_id) group by result.cpu_id order by submissions desc limit 10;
+-------------------------+-------------+
| model                   | submissions |
+-------------------------+-------------+
| Core 2 Q6600 (2.4Ghz)   |       17934 | 
| Core 2 E6600 (2.4Ghz)   |       17078 | 
| Core 2 E8600 (3.33Ghz)  |       12346 | 
| Core 2 E8400 (3.0Ghz)   |       11481 | 
| Core 2 QX9650 (3.00Ghz) |       10725 | 
| Core 2 E8500 (3.17Ghz)  |        8330 | 
| Core i7 920             |        5684 | 
| Core 2 E6850 (3.0Ghz)   |        5249 | 
| Core 2 E6700 (2.66Ghz)  |        5021 | 
| Core 2 E6400 (2.13Ghz)  |        4353 | 
+-------------------------+-------------+
10 rows in set (1.82 sec)

Q6600 wins. Nearly 18000 submissions, that's 20 people receive hw points for Q6600 and 17080 people who don't. Congrats to the top 20.

Surely, more than 20 people should deserve points

As far as I know, it's a very simple update to the current hwboints mechanism; we only need to change two values.

//EDIT: well, the changes are simple, but the balancing between hardware and global isn't.

Surely, more than 20 people should deserve points

i think so

As far as I know, it's a very simple update to the current hwboints mechanism; we only need to change two values.

 

//EDIT: well, the changes are simple, but the balancing between hardware and global isn't.

Well, those 2 rankings are nearly independant of each other - the 300 limit takes care of that. Giving like 400 points for the top Q6600 wPrime 32m score still doesnt affect the global points ranking:)

No, but that does screw with the hardware masters and team rankings.

The problem is, however, not so much the maximum points given to the best in it's category, but the number of people recieving points.

but make a cap of 30 for the first of harware with +10k submission?

yes it will! as this will mean a lot more people will be hitting the 300 point cap

Yeah, but only 4 of top 20 haven't reached the 300. Perhaps it will affect the lower parts of the rank more, but that one is still messed up by the way too low limit of HW points so it's not like it ruins anything:p Still, the 400 point limit was just an exampl. Raising the VERY popular ones to 20 or 25 won't change too much, I think.

But this is Intel-business, so I'l lleave it up to you. Doesn't affect my scores one single bit;) Unless xeon 3120 will become insanely popular:p

 

Q6600 wins. Nearly 18000 submissions, that's 20 people receive hw points for Q6600 and 17080 people who don't. Congrats to the top 20.

When you put it like that, Im really lucky to be ranked top 20 for the Q66 in SPi32M, wP 1024 and 32 as well as PCM05

When you put it like that, Im really lucky to be ranked top 20 for the Q66 in SPi32M, wP 1024 and 32 as well as PCM05

You the man!

:ws:

hehe

I have talk about this with Massman, but i think both achievments Hardware Master and Hardware Junkie must be cumulative.

Because get 50+ cups is one thing, get 300hwboints it's another thing, even it's both fights in hardware category...

So someone like Hipro should have 3 achievments for example...

I have talk about this with Massman, but i think both achievments Hardware Master and Hardware Junkie must be cumulative.

Because get 50+ cups is one thing, get 300hwboints it's another thing, even it's both fights in hardware category...

So someone like Hipro should have 3 achievments for example...

If you have 50+ cups all you need is an average of max 6 points pr cup, which isn't THAT much, really. Still, a new "cup" rank would be sweet for me personally, I'm 2nd:p At least in number of 1st spots. (and not so far from Turrican either;) )

mmmm

I was thinking (yeah sometimes i do that) You are saying that q6600 has 17.000 results, wich is a great number, but I look up in the Q6600 and I found this numbers:

Bench / results

wprime32........663

wprime1024.....442

superpi 32.......195

superpi 1.........697

Pifast.............201

PCmark05........221

CPUz..............561

-------------------

Total..............2980

Only 3 benchs are upper than 500 results ( Result is equal to the best result per user in this bench ). So I was thinking in if it is possible to do this:

If results < 500 only top20 obtains points

If results > 500 and results < 1000 only top25 obtains points

If results > 1000 and results < 1500 only ...guess what? yes! only top30 obtains points, Got the point?

How can you see, much less than 17000 results about only Q6600 are useful.

I hope that I was written you can understand it, because i do my best. =)

Where did you get those numbers? They do not represent all submissions. 17000 is correct.

mysql> select application.name, count(result.result_id) submissions from result join application using (application_id) where cpu_id = 919 group by application.application_id order by submissions desc;)
+------------------------------+-------------+
| name                         | submissions |
+------------------------------+-------------+
| 3Dmark 2006                  |        4502 | 
| wPrime 32m                   |        2234 | 
| 3Dmark 2003                  |        1576 | 
| 3Dmark 2005                  |        1561 | 
| SuperPi                      |        1403 | 
| 3Dmark 2001                  |        1313 | 
| wPrime 1024m                 |        1101 | 
| CPU-Z                        |        1069 | 
| Aquamark                     |        1063 | 
| 3DMark Vantage - Performance |         616 | 
| PCMark 2005                  |         533 | 
| PiFast                       |         380 | 
| SuperPi 32m                  |         362 | 
| SisoftSandra                 |         187 | 
| PCMark Vantage               |          60 | 
| PCMark 2004                  |          20 | 
+------------------------------+-------------+
16 rows in set (0.21 sec)

I stole it to you! (joke)

I take the top 1000(yeap 1000) instead of top 100 in the links of this category: http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_919

May be I dont be clear.

Take an example:

| 3Dmark 2006 | 4502 |

All this 4502 results are not campetive in q6600 category because the important thing in 3D benchs it's the VGA, the processor could help you to gain some points but the VGA is the star.

SuperPi | 1403

OKay there are 1403, but how many are from the same Overclocker? so, you can have a lot of result in the same bench with the same processor, but only you best result can get point. Then the number decrease. Or may be i am wrong.

My point is, if it is possible to increase the top points, it could be by the amount of benchs in wich the processor is the star, and only him.

It's hard to think, (and may be hard to implamentate) give points for GPU and CPU en 3D benchs.

:-/

I agree with warrior, but hisnumbers are wrong. Rich's numbers don't match with what youcan see here, either: http://www.hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=129

Perhaps Rich's list includes more than one score per bencher, and the link above counts only the best result.