Wrong Result

[THRASHER2]

I was looking at this one today and Said W0W!

Videocard GeForce FX 5300

3Dmark 2001 - 63748 marks - AlfaBoy (Techzonept)
Hardware Rank: 1st GeForce FX 5300 - 2.0 points
Description: Conroe E6600 @ 3950MHz - ATI 1950XTX @ 783/2250 Teamgroup 5300 @ 438 4-4-4-12 (5.6 points)

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=GPU_879

[Massman]

fixed

[TASOS]

The result below...i believe,belongs to the Celeron 478s 335 section.

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=570425

This one,also...(Family 15 Model 3 Stepping 3) 256kb cache...that's a prescott core...so its a Celeron 335

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=574804

Also,this one is NOT a mobile XP2500+ ...it's a regular Barton XP2500+

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=506961

Dani - 33 - Abit NF7-S v2, Barton2500+ (non mobile)@3032MHz, 253FSB 1:1

[TASOS]

Are the scores fixed ?

[Massman]

Are the scores fixed ?
Now they are :)

[TASOS]

Now they are :)
Thanks

[TASOS]

Some more links for editing....

1)http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=559983

Verified by a moderator ....by mistake i believe.
The score belongs to a P4 3.0 'E'

2)http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=559973

This screenshot can't verify the result. (just a clockgen picture) ??
It could be any kind of cpu.

[Massman]

fixed :)

[TASOS]

1)This result is from an ATI 9000 PRO

It shows clearly in this photo
http://images.people.overclockers.ru/71871.jpg

It also has a wrong futuremark link.
The correct one is below
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8966756


2)This score is correct
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=511147

But to be valid,please add the following Forum post
http://www.overclocking-masters.com/forum/hwbot-Classement-Super-PI-1M,p51914.htm#p51914

Screnshot
http://112233445566.free.fr/PM740/22.281.jpg


Edit please
Thanks

[Massman]

Excellent post Tasos!

Fixed it.

[steelrat]

Please fix

1. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=505913 - Result on Venice, but category is Newcastle.
2. http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569123 - Result on Sempron 3000+, but category is Athlon 64 2800+

[Massman]

fixed

[steelrat]

fixed
They still there.

[Massman]

Nope, the cpu's are fixed. The bot may need some times to adjust the rankings, but if you check out the links you gave me, you'll see I fixed them :)

[steelrat]

Nope, the cpu's are fixed. The bot may need some times to adjust the rankings, but if you check out the links you gave me, you'll see I fixed them :)
You carried a result. But his copy remained. Please will delete her. - http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=505921
Also will delete it. - http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569123
Snx.

[Massman]

I don't see the problem. God_Lx has two different scores with the same cpu. One will recieve points, the other one don't. Kiwi has a sempron 64 2800+.

[steelrat]

Kiwi has a sempron 64 2800+.
Category is Athlon 64 2800+!
I don't see the problem. God_Lx has two different scores with the same cpu.
his result on Venice!!! But category is Newcastle.

[Massman]

Kiwi has a sempron 64 2800+.
Category is Athlon 64 2800+!
I don't see the problem. God_Lx has two different scores with the same cpu.
his result on Venice!!! But category is Newcastle.
HUH ???

If you look at the screenshots (verification) you see both 3000+ venice and sempron 64 2800+.

[S_A_V]

Pls check once again this score - http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569123
It's sempron but still in A64 cathegory...

[Massman]

Fixed

[THRASHER2]

This member posted his score in the wrong section (he has a Socket 754)


SuperPi 32m - 28min 54sec 620ms - adrhyan (LinkForce Corner) 2 points
Processor: Sempron 2500+ @ 2681mhz

This thread is for the Socket "A" Semprons only
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_544

His image post of his Processor (Socket 754)
http://img300.imageshack.us/my.php?image=htt383spi32m1bu.jpg

[THRASHER2]

This One is FUNNNNY!!!! :lol:

SuperPi - 26.61 sec - before (OC Forums) 2 points
Processor: Pentium M 310 Celer... @ 3101mhz
Hardware Rank: 1st Pentium M 310 Celeron - 2.0 points
Description: FX-55 CABCE 0516WPMW @ 3101MHz - BH5 @282MHz
Verfication: link to forumpost
http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=4214082

Processor Pentium M 310 Celeron
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_570

[Massman]

This member posted his score in the wrong section (he has a Socket 754)


SuperPi 32m - 28min 54sec 620ms - adrhyan (LinkForce Corner) 2 points
Processor: Sempron 2500+ @ 2681mhz

This thread is for the Socket "A" Semprons only
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_544

His image post of his Processor (Socket 754)
http://img300.imageshack.us/my.php?image=htt383spi32m1bu.jpg
fixed

[Massman]

This One is FUNNNNY!!!! :lol:

SuperPi - 26.61 sec - before (OC Forums) 2 points
Processor: Pentium M 310 Celer... @ 3101mhz
Hardware Rank: 1st Pentium M 310 Celeron - 2.0 points
Description: FX-55 CABCE 0516WPMW @ 3101MHz - BH5 @282MHz
Verfication: link to forumpost
http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=4214082

Processor Pentium M 310 Celeron
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_570
Blocked, can't find the 26.61 screen anymore :(

[steelrat]

another http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=582772 - category is A64 3000+, but result on Sempron.

[Massman]

another http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=582772 - category is A64 3000+, but result on Sempron.
Fixed

[THRASHER2]

Can some please move his score to the X850XT PE Thread

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=GPU_268

3Dmark 2001 - 50584 marks - Quest For Speed (OC Forums)
Processor: Intel Core 2 E6600 ... @ 3920mhz
Videocard: Radeon X850 XT @ 654/648mhz
Description: Intel Conroe E6600@3.92ghz - X850XTPE@654/648

His link shows a X850 XT PE
http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=4815169

[Massman]

Fixed :)

[Drager]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=583361 http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=570836 Linux 1\32m Spi :(

[Massman]

Fixed

[Drager]

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=570836 - and what about this result? It`s still nor blocked. It is on Linux-based OS, but he didn`t write it in description. You can compare his result on 1466MHz with my on 2036MHz. http://images.people.overclockers.ru/104867.png It cant be true - cause too high result with lower cpu frequency.

offtop: please delete one of Celeron M 410 here: http://hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=20

[Massman]

http://hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=570836 - and what about this result? It`s still nor blocked. It is on Linux-based OS, but he didn`t write it in description. You can compare his result on 1466MHz with my on 2036MHz. http://images.people.overclockers.ru/104867.png It cant be true - cause too high result with lower cpu frequency.

offtop: please delete one of Celeron M 410 here: http://hwbot.org/browseHardwareProcessors.do?cpuSubFamilyId=20
Prolly because eist is on, it's a windows XP os for sure. I blocked it anyway, because he has to enter the correct cpu speed in order to recieve points.

[TASOS]

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=569900

OLD version of superpi without decimal digits

This score should be validated as 12.99

[Massman]

fixed

[THRASHER2]

Verfication: no verification image or link found.

SuperPi - 79.22 sec - ddtung (XtremeSystems) 1.6 points
Processor: Pentium 4 1.6Ghz @ 2400mhz.

PiFast - 98.33 sec - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
Processor: Pentium 4 1.6Ghz @ 2400mhz



http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_313

[Drager]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=575812 x1950xtx in x1950xt category
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=585068 x1950xtx in x1950xt category
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=571487 How it can be corrected? In description there are x1950xtx
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=570429 We dont see "x1950 series"
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554725 x1950xtx in x1950xt category
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=578342 x1950xtx in x1950xt category
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567279 How it can be corrected? In description there are x1950xtx
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=561114 We dont see "x1950 series"
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554532 x1950xtx in x1950xt category

WTF is that all? Terrible situation. Or I dont understand smth?

[Massman]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=575812 x1950xtx in x1950xt category
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=585068 x1950xtx in x1950xt category
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=571487 How it can be corrected? In description there are x1950xtx
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=570429 We dont see "x1950 series"
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554725 x1950xtx in x1950xt category
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=578342 x1950xtx in x1950xt category
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567279 How it can be corrected? In description there are x1950xtx
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=561114 We dont see "x1950 series"
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554532 x1950xtx in x1950xt category

WTF is that all? Terrible situation. Or I dont understand smth?
Fixed all

[Drager]

...still about x1950xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=561412 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=561412 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=580537 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=576067 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=584987 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=565143 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator)
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=555188 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator)
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=580543 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=555048 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554860 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556938 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator)
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567272 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator)
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556802 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator) OPB :\
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556415 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator) OPB :\ No verfication
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556055 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator) OPB :\ No verfication
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=566107 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=568979 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=561868 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator)
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556739 xtx in xt (corrected from moderator)
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=574341 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567270 xtx in xt

[Massman]

I knew there were problems, but this it a lot :o

Fixed all, BIG thanks for posting, Drager !

[Drager]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=579288 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=568031 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=565359 single xtx in 2*xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=568128 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567274 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=557804 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=579930 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=579920 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=574345 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556098 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=584824 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=585508 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=563767 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=574343 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554283 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554865 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=568977 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=571491 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=561866 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=575613 xtx in xt

...I can find more :)

[Drager]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=571489 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=565761 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=582778 xtx in xt
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=582779 xtx in xt

...I forgot aquamark :)

[Massman]

Fixed all

Another BIG, BIG, BIG thanks mate, you're really helping us here :D

[klopcha]

Please fix

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=553657 Result on Sempron 64 2800+ (E6), but category is Sempron 2800+ (D0).
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=575803 Result on Celeron 320 (Prescott), but category is Celeron 2.4 Ghz (Northwood).


3Dmark 2005 score - 2418 marks on GeForce FX 5600 :lol: Unreal
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=576226

And there and then the real result
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=575387

[Massman]

Fixed

[THRASHER2]

This thread is for the GeForce2 GTS

3Dmark 2001 - 6632 marks - Gorak gf2 gts (no team)
Processor: Pentium 4 'B' 2.533... @ 3500mhz
Videocard: GeForce2 GTS @ 240/242mhz
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=GPU_206

Gorak gf2 gts (no team) has a GeForce2 PRO
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7653461

[Gorod]

6600GT SLI submited as Single 6600GT :/

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590933

[Massman]

SF3D fixed it :)

[demiurg]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590972
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590936
I think that is QX6700, not E6700 ;)

[Massman]

Fixed

[klopcha]

Please fix

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567175 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589044 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

[richba5tard]

fixed, thx

[THRASHER2]

This member has a P4 Celeron "D" 315 Prescott 2.26ghz

He posted his score in the wrong Section

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=587836
CPU-Z - 3446 mhz - amd freak (PCE OC Team)
Processor: Intel Celeron s478 2.2ghz @ 3446mhz

[Massman]

FIxed

[THRASHER2]

FIxed
Thanks

"That was QUICK" :D

[klopcha]

Please fix

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589040 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=577679 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

I think in Aquamark the same situation, but I can not prove.


http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=592492 In a screenshot there is no mention of a videocard.

[MaXtoRZP]

Please fix:
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=572204
User submitted a result of 3DMark05 instead of PCMark05

[demiurg]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=592047
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=592047
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590583
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590582
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=593005
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=591928
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=587712
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=591144
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590934
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=587978
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=592756
Than is all QX6700, not E6700!

[THRASHER2]

Processor AMD Duron 1.2ghz
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_497


SuperPi - 89.88 sec - Widowmaker (OCTeamFinland) - (AMD Duron 1.2ghz @ 1200mhz)
He is running a Sempron CPU

SuperPi - 103.5 sec - lucadue (Hardware Upgrad...)
no verification image or link found.

Thanks :D

[THRASHER2]

Processor AMD Duron 1.2ghz
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_497


SuperPi - 89.88 sec - Widowmaker (OCTeamFinland) - (AMD Duron 1.2ghz @ 1200mhz)
He is running a Sempron CPU

SuperPi - 103.5 sec - lucadue (Hardware Upgrad...)
no verification image or link found.

Thanks :D
Any updates ;)

I am scraping up as much points as i can

Big Thanks

#8th here I come

[Massman]

They are already fixed :) Good work sf3d, jmke and RB.

[THRASHER2]

They are already fixed :) Good work sf3d, jmke and RB.
My thanks goes out to all the Mods and Admin's

You guys do a GREAT JOB!

[klopcha]

Again posted !

Please fix

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589040 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=577679 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

I think in Aquamark the same situation, but I can not prove.


http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=592492 In a screenshot there is no mention of a videocard.

[MaXtoRZP]

I cannot understand such incredible results in SuperPi 32M made by Hinnavaatlus team:
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594657
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594659
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594581
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594614
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594602
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594601
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594615
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594628
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594648
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594612
and others.....
real cheaters.......Im angry of those guys

[demiurg]

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=594186
Once again - QX6700 in E6700 section :(

[demiurg]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594657 and others
This is not cheat ;) , this is just SuperPI 1M in SuperPI 32M section.

[Massman]

All fixed.

@ MaXtoRZP: These are not cheats, but their scores were scanned out of the superpi32M thread whereas they should be scanned out of the 1M thread ;)

[klopcha]

Please fix

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589040 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.
This user again post wrong result: http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=587679 (Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200 )

[Massman]

fixed

[demiurg]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595055
QX6700 in E6700 section
Why they are doing this?

[MaXtoRZP]

2 Massman, demiurg
I know that there are not cheats. But if anybody didn't paid an attention for that - they would be the best in SuperPi32m till now. I can't understand why so experienced members made such mistakes.

[demiurg]

this is an autodetect of HWBot of the 6700 string, nothing to do with user error.
Ahy chance to fix it?

[harleybro]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=557196

Result posted is an error finish

[Massman]

Fixed

[Just Learnin']

Hello!

Result posted in Pentium 'B' category, validation link shows CPU to be an 'ES'

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=577268

Is just a screenshot ok to submit for wPrime? I have had scores that were excellent but failed checksum.I question whether this would pass the checksum validation:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595484

How is this determined to be a Pentium 4 'B' ?

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=563524

Thanks for your concern.:) JL

[Massman]

It's not because it's an ES that it's not a pentium 'B' :)

There's only one pentium 4 cpu that's clocked at 3.06 stock, so all scores are legit

[Just Learnin']

Thanks for the clarification! Xeon's are included then?

So screenies in wPrime are ok without validation? Because I have some awesome ones that failed checksum validation!

[klopcha]

Again.
Please fix.

This user again post wrong result: http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589040 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

And http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=593463

May be blocked user?

[Just Learnin']

Here to back up my case regarding invalid checksums in wPrime are cases where a screenie would show no problem but the results he posted failed checksum validation:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=576572

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=576881

So do these scores stand?

From my previous post: So screenies in wPrime are ok without validation? Because I have some awesome ones that failed checksum validation!
Also wPrime has seperate categories for ES and regular 3.06 chips. Why is the ES chip submitted with the regular 'B' chips?

[Massman]

Again.
Please fix.

This user again post wrong result: http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589040 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

And http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=593463

May be blocked user?
Fixed, not a reason to block the user really :)

[Massman]

Here to back up my case regarding invalid checksums in wPrime are cases where a screenie would show no problem but the results he posted failed checksum validation:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=576572

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=576881

So do these scores stand?

From my previous post: So screenies in wPrime are ok without validation? Because I have some awesome ones that failed checksum validation!
Also wPrime has seperate categories for ES and regular 3.06 chips. Why is the ES chip submitted with the regular 'B' chips?
The checksum failing was a problem in the earlier versions. The scores stand :)

We don't make different ES categories, that would just complicate things too much.

[Just Learnin']

[The checksum failing was a problem in the earlier versions. The scores stand :)
Screenies are good enough in wPrime too? :D

[Massman]

[The checksum failing was a problem in the earlier versions. The scores stand :)
Screenies are good enough in wPrime too? :D
No the checksum works perfect now, so we encourage to submit online. It's easier to submit online than to take a picture and upload it and then submit it to our database ;)

[klopcha]

Again.
Please fix.

This user again post wrong result: http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589040 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

And http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=593463

May be blocked user?
Fixed, not a reason to block the user really :)
Are you sure fixed result?

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589040
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=593463

[Massman]

I was sure .. strange.

Fixed them again.

[Gotcha]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=547659

bad category processor , it's a sempron64 ! (look description and screenshot)


http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=547252

bad category processor , it's a sempron64 ! (look screenshot)


http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=591314

hum , score magic ?!

[Massman]

Fixed

[Massman]

I guess it's a score from his 7600gt and 3000+ sempron: http://members.optusnet.com.au/mdice/dfi/3dmark03.png

[Just Learnin']

Prescott CPU in the Northwood SuperPI category also showing at 3200MHz when the screenie shows near 4000MHz.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=506987


This one has no screenie and says he has an EE ES:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=506734


Nothing in his screenie indicates what CPU he has:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=576179


Link to screenie in forum post no good

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=593954


Screenshot no good:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=520037

[Maxi]

Fixed, thanks for reporting.

[klopcha]

This user again post wrong result: http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589040
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=593463 (Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200 )

[Just Learnin']

No screenshot:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=506060

[Massman]

fixed

[Gotcha]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=597041

bad category processor , it's a sempron64 ! (look screenshot)



http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=597039

bad category processor , it's a sempron64 ! (look screenshot)

[Massman]

fixed

[iL .PoLLo]

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=596505

There is no cpuz screen...

[Massman]

blocked

[iL .PoLLo]

blocked
Thank you.

Same problem here.

[gianni-gt]

hi,

this is not an amd result: http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=595826 ;)

gianni

[richba5tard]

fixed :)

[MaXtoRZP]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=597986
World record on tualatin 1.1 in SPi - 1.26 sec :D

[hipro5]

This is with SINGLE 8800GTX......Could someone please fix it?......Thanks guys..... :)

http://www.thelab.gr/showthread.php?postid=535443#post535443

[Febril]

Hi...
Excuse my english...
There is 2 errors:
http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=555485#result#r esult
The WR is a Celeron 1000 and not a 850...
http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=585563#result#r esult
The WR is a Celeron D 2,53GHz (Prescott) and not a 2.5Ghz Nortwood
Thanks......

[flasker]

Hi
Submitted 5 results on April 18 on my forum, 3 are wrong , 2 have yet to be picked up.


Should be single 8800 GTS 640 Mb

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=597899

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=598322

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=598344

These 2 not picked up

http://www.bleedinedgesupport.com/ocz/forum/showpost.php?p=217631&postcount=34

http://www.bleedinedgesupport.com/ocz/forum/showpost.php?p=217628&postcount=32

Thanks Guys

[THRASHER2]

these results are in the wrong thread
They should be in the AMD Athlon 64 3600+ X2 Windsor results


http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1139

CPU-Z - 3504 mhz - fr@me (baika10vers)
http://valid.x86-secret.com/cache/186039.png


CPU-Z - 2300.94 mhz - Sebastian (AwardFabrik)
http://valid.x86-secret.com/cache/175321.png

Thanks

[Massman]

All fixed

[Febril]

I'm sorry but this 2 errors are not fixed:
http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=555485#result
The WR is a Celeron 1000 and not a 850...
http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=556285#result
The WR is a Celeron D 2,53GHz (Prescott) and not a 2.5Ghz Nortwood
....


And in this 2 results:
http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=568570#result#r esult
http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=568566#result#r esult
The two first benchs with 2 CPU, this is normal?
I have already post this yesterday in request features so i don't know if i can announce this on this post....

[Massman]

The first one appears to be an celeron 850ES with unlocked multiplier.
Second one is fixed

I can't change the two last links, though. We're working on the extra support for dual cpu's.

[Febril]

Thanks....
But the CPUz's validation with celeron 850ES indicate a celeron 1000
This is normal?
It's like that with a with unlock multiplier? With CPUz that indicates the specification according to the multiplier ?

[Massman]

Thanks....
But the CPUz's validation with celeron 850ES indicate a celeron 1000
This is normal?
It's like that with a with unlock multiplier? With CPUz that indicates the specification according to the multiplier ?
Yes, I think so. Cpu-z reads the 10x MP and thinks that it's a 100x10 = 1000MHz. celeron, but in fact it's an 850.

[Febril]

So the ES CPU should not they not be prohibited because it's to easy and there is always a doubt.... ?
For exemple, i can with all my CPU benching in the category below and say it's a ES......

I know that the majority of people are honest..... but we can't check that

[Massman]

So the ES CPU should not they not be prohibited because it's to easy and there is always a doubt.... ?
For exemple, i can with all my CPU benching in the category below and say it's a ES......

I know that the majority of people are honest..... but we can't check that
There is no reason to block ES scores. If someone uses his ES to submit in multiple categories, we'll find out. I searched for such entries and this user is as honest as someone can be :)

[Febril]

OK......
Thanks.....

[flasker]

Still 3 errors

these should be single 8800GTS 640 Mb

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=598467

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=598470

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=598344

Is the bot is picking up the 8500 sli ready memory in the description and assuming I have 2 8800s? I can edit it out if this is the case.

[Massman]

Fixed

[cowie33]

it seems theres a few 68GS'S in the 68nu nv41 cat. under more than one bench test
http://www.crazypc.ro/forum/showpost.php?p=94510
http://aqm4.invisionzone.com/index.php?view=findpost&showtopic=429&p=7241
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=683376
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=411265
http://www.crazypc.ro/forum/showpost.php?p=94351
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/2257/67757ca.jpg
this card is nv42 ddr3 http://www.hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=16870&thumb=false
http://www.hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=16861&thumb=false
and what kind of varificatoin is this????not showing a card?? or nothing??
http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/5483/t260034ghz6800535x550inhc2.jpg

[THRASHER2]

these results are in the wrong thread
They should be in the AMD Athlon 64 3600+ X2 Windsor results <---

All of these guys have there scores in both Windsor and Brisbane Results :|

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1139

CPU-Z - 2300.94 mhz - Sebastian (AwardFabrik)
http://valid.x86-secret.com/cache/175321.png

CPU-Z - 2512 mhz - Pyra (Tygodnik Komput...)
http://img162.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pyraxa7.jpg

CPU-Z - 2010 mhz - nand2k6 (TipidPC)
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=160632

Thanks

[Ginner]

results posted a bit wrongly :)
he posted as 1777 marks, but the ORB link says 1177,

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=570563

[Ginner]

it said it was verified by a moderator, so couldn't set it under suspicion where i saw it.. thats why i wrote it inhere ;)

[klopcha]

Again.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=597625 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=597626 Result on GeForce 2 MX 400, but category is GeForce 2 MX 200.

The user has changed a screenshot: has changed 400 on 200, it is visible on dim color of figure 200. Links on ORB in screenshots show that card MX400. Example http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=9166472

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589477 Result on GeForce 4 MX 440, but category is GeForce 4 MX 440-SE.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590065 Result on GeForce 4 MX 440, but category is GeForce 4 MX 440-SE.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=557135 Result on GeForce 4 MX 440, but category is GeForce 4 MX 440-SE.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567590 Result on GeForce 4 MX 440, but category is GeForce 4 MX 440-SE.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590069 Result on GeForce 4 MX 440, but category is GeForce 4 MX 440-SE.

No screenshot (but i sure result on GeForce 4 MX 440): http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589476

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=589586 User change default adjustments 3D Mark: Texture Format 16bit and Z-Buffer Depth 16bit.

[gianni-gt]

hi... this is defenetly a fake! http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=500885

this pi time is not possible with this clocks!

to compare the score of el snoro (fully tweaked): http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/2148/3523mhz1648v4gq.jpg

cya
gianni

[Just Learnin']

Curious if this Mobile CPU with different multi belongs with the regular P4 533FSB 3.06 GHz Northwoods? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=559219

[S_A_V]

6800GT SLI results in single card cathegory:

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=507511 - this has been verified as correct by a moderator :o
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554010
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=584369

Please fix. Thx.

[Just Learnin']

This one isn't: http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=559219 it is a Pentium 4 'M', in the Pentium 4 'B' category.

[Just Learnin']

Different multiplier.

[redratamd]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595298
I think ,that's a fake ,because it's not the format likes Pi mod 1.5 with xp.
And ,it's not possible to do a better time with a lower frequency of 600Mhz.
It's not possible.

Wait and see.:D

[harleybro]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=601800

Dual core on a single core cpu? Missing libraries never installed?

[Massman]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=601800

Dual core on a single core cpu? Missing libraries never installed?
Looks valid to me. What exactly do you think is suspicious about this score?

[richba5tard]

Yeah if you compare to other 520's it seems like a valid score. HT gets detected as dual core.

[harleybro]

Ok about the HT just haven't seen any others show as a dual core or two seperate cores. Also the bottom of the box show that the "missing libraries" wheren't installed. Just checking since I need to get a gauge of what scores I need when I throw mine back in the mobo. :rolleyes:

[redratamd]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595298
I think ,that's a fake ,because it's not the format likes Pi mod 1.5 with xp.
And ,it's not possible to do a better time with a lower frequency of 600Mhz.
It's not possible.

Wait and see.:D
it was run on linux.. blocked.
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602609

Hi.
That's the same thing,one more time with linux.

[Massman]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595298
I think ,that's a fake ,because it's not the format likes Pi mod 1.5 with xp.
And ,it's not possible to do a better time with a lower frequency of 600Mhz.
It's not possible.

Wait and see.:D
it was run on linux.. blocked.
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602609

Hi.
That's the same thing,one more time with linux.
blocked.

[redratamd]

Thank's.Because it's easy to do this bench with linux.:D

[Ginner]

found another one that was verified by a moderator.. a Q6600 wPrime run, as a E6600..

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602474 :)

[Massman]

found another one that was verified by a moderator.. a Q6600 wPrime run, as a E6600..

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602474 :)
wPrime runs submitted via the site are automaticly verified if the checksum matches.

I fixed the score.

[Ginner]

as well as several other runs under E6700 are also QX6700. everyone in E6700 wPrime 32M under 17.xxx seconds are false(to be moved to right place)...

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=602648 (he got 2 QX6700 under E6700, anonymous)
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=601014
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=602078 (as are all of his E6700 scores, AnRo)
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=595815
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=598307


This one has no verification link, but compared to the other QX6700, it looks pretty similar, so i would guess it's also a QX6700
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=596235

[Nassuz]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=590285 Hes got first place with a underclocked gfx? Sure this must be another gfx and not a X1950XT hes using, no link either, no sweat we know this guy is good:)


Can someone look into this ....thanks

[harleybro]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602514

Says in link 2x8800gts’s in the description but it's posted in single card area :)

[Lanc]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=601763

2x Radeon 9500 ? Transfer this result to single card, becouse this is unreal to have 2x 9500 on 1 mainboard ;]

[Turrican]

hi guys

here's a super pi results of a duron 1800 which is in the wrong categorie (athlon xp-m 1800+) ;)

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=604359

[klopcha]

Fake result: http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=603156 (In 2.5 times exceeds a world record)

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId Verification link - does not work and the user closes the name of a videocard in window 3D Mark :mad:

[Massman]

Fixed

[klopcha]

I apologize for the idle reference

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=603320 Verification link - does not work and the user closes the name of a videocard in window 3D Mark :mad:

[klopcha]

I apologize for the idle reference

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=603320 Verification link - does not work and the user closes the name of a videocard in window 3D Mark :mad:
Why you do not correct result?


http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=606922 Result on Radeon 9600, but category is GeForce 3 Ti500.

[redratamd]

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=178340

It's not good in the 3800+ core orleans am2.
The cpu-z is maybe wrong.

http://hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1138

[klopcha]

the other one with MX, doesn't see a reason why he would sheet that one, score is in line with other results;
higher OC on card + higher OC on CPU
Simply it would be desirable a good screenshot with the name of a videocard or working link ORB


Fixed
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=545423 Result on Pentium 641, but category is Pentium 640.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=539224 Similarly
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=503534 Similarly
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=573557 Result on Celeron 320 (90nm), but category is Celeron 2.4Ghz (0.13).
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=601222 No screenshot, no link
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=597062 No screenshot, no link

[Massman]

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=178340

It's not good in the 3800+ core orleans am2.
The cpu-z is maybe wrong.

http://hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1138
It's a Lima core, cpu-z bug.

[Febril]

Hi..
There is 2 same categorie for intel pentium 2 celeron 500Mhz s370:
http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=592847#result
http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=605479#result

[neoforce2007]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=552173 - card used in this test is not TC. So mismatch category.

[klopcha]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=573283 User change default adjustments 3D Mark: Texture Format 16bit .

[Massman]

fixed

[klopcha]

Fixed
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=545423 Result on Pentium 641, but category is Pentium 640.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=539224 Similarly
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=503534 Similarly
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=573557 Result on Celeron 320 (90nm), but category is Celeron 2.4Ghz (0.13).
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=601222 No screenshot, no link
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=597062 No screenshot, no link
Fixed please!

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=553150 The reference and screenshot are not loaded.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=593958 The screenshot is not loaded.

[Massman]

fixed

[Drager]

Global ranking For CPU-Z team OCX: doubled onepagebook`s result with x6800 (8th and 9th place). http://hwbot.org/listResults.do?applicationId=13&teamId=132&filterUser=true

[Just Learnin']

I believe this is a P4C in the P4B section: http://www.hwbot.org/compareProcessorResult.do?resultId=608479#result CPU-Z in screenshot shows stepping 9 Revision D1

[Massman]

fixed

[Just Learnin']

My apologies! I think that the previous score may have been right now (my bad) sorry! I was searching intels Processor Specs and it seems there were P4B's with those specs? You are sure there aren't P4B processors with that stepping and revision? If so here are more he submitted in the P4 B categories:


http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569343

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569340

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569338

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569345

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569396

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=569395

[THRASHER2]

Pentium 4 1.6Ghz willamette
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_313

Members Piou Piou, Jaska, _remus_ & ddtung all have northwood Pentium 4 1.6Ghz Cpu's

Can a Mod please move all there Scores to the Pentium 4 1.6Ghz northwood ranks http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1315


CPU-Z - 3207 mhz - Piou Piou (OverClocking-Ma...)
SuperPi - 124.19 sec - Jaska (OCTeamFinland)
CPU-Z - 1611 mhz - _remus_ (OCTeamFinland)
CPU-Z - 2400 mhz - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
SuperPi 32m - 1h 12min 3sec 880ms - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
wPrime 1024m - 1h 19min 57sec 970ms - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
wPrime 32m - 2min 29sec 170ms - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_313

THanks :D

[Febril]

I'im sorry but the problem with two sames categories celeron 500Mhs s.370 is always.....
I thinks it's a melange with slot 1, PII 500Mhz and s.370.....
I know that it' older CPU....but......

Excuse my english and very thanks for all your make.....

[Massman]

I'im sorry but the problem with two sames categories celeron 500Mhs s.370 is always.....
I thinks it's a melange with slot 1, PII 500Mhz and s.370.....
I know that it' older CPU....but......

Excuse my english and very thanks for all your make.....
I'll check it out as soon as possible

[THEROCK]

PurePC.pl is a very strange team (IMO they cheat):

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554076 ...He's got 9.100 graphics score with 6600 clocked 585/292. Yeah rigth!

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=600567 ...almost stock Radeon 9600 and Barton@2,1Ghz and he is the first. LOL?

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=500616 ...obviously score with 6600GT!

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=526339 ...again!

[SF3D]

Those 6600GT scores are done with MSI 6600 Diamond with ddr3 mem. It's physically same as GT, but named as 6600.

Second one was 06 with 1024x768 resolution. Thanks!

[klopcha]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=567523 Result on Athlon XP-M, but category is Athlon XP.

[Massman]

fixed

[Just Learnin']

Invalid verification link:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=559287

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=596617

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=596616

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=571390

Screenshot link no good:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595232

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595231

No CPU-Z in SuperPI screenie:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594997

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556027

Also are these acceptable screenshots for 3DMark?:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=577098

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=580937

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=577498

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=575561

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=581155

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=574925

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=580758

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=581162

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=574972

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=575622

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=574976

How about these screenshots for Pifast, acceptable?:

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595273

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595179

[THRASHER2]

Pentium 4 1.6Ghz willamette
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_313

Members Piou Piou, Jaska, _remus_ & ddtung all have northwood Pentium 4 1.6Ghz Cpu's

Can a Mod please move all there Scores to the Pentium 4 1.6Ghz northwood ranks http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1315


CPU-Z - 3207 mhz - Piou Piou (OverClocking-Ma...)
SuperPi - 124.19 sec - Jaska (OCTeamFinland)
CPU-Z - 1611 mhz - _remus_ (OCTeamFinland)
CPU-Z - 2400 mhz - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
SuperPi 32m - 1h 12min 3sec 880ms - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
wPrime 1024m - 1h 19min 57sec 970ms - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
wPrime 32m - 2min 29sec 170ms - ddtung (XtremeSystems)
http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_313

THanks :D
Any luck looking at these error :D

[Massman]

Give me some time :). Got examinations coming up :(

[Just Learnin']

Give me some time :). Got examinations coming up :(
Hope your not all alone in this section! :(

[THEROCK]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=554076

Again, with these clocks there is no way that he scored 9.100 on graphics.

[Massman]

All fixed

[NiCu]

Though they're marked as "verified by a moderator" http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556635 shows Windsor in the cpu-z readout on the screenshot, even though it has been submitted as a Toledo core.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=547062 was found to have a dead screenshot link when trying to see if it's the same situation.

[Mind]

Single 8600GT:
1. 3Dmark 2005 - 18824 marks - Unseen (OutOfSpecs.Gr) - (Geforce 8600 GT @ 550/700mhz ) 2 points - http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=600304 //It not single? SLI?
2. 3Dmark 2005 - 15044 marks - Mind (Team MXS ModLab...) - (Geforce 8600 GT @ 999/932mhz) http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=609764

[Maxi]

Though they're marked as "verified by a moderator" http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556635 shows Windsor in the cpu-z readout on the screenshot, even though it has been submitted as a Toledo core.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=547062 was found to have a dead screenshot link when trying to see if it's the same situation.
1) Corrected

2) Stays. Scores not in the HOF and previously validated by a moderator remain vaild when the verification is missing--even though we really prefer to have something always.

Thanks for reporting :)

[Maxi]

Single 8600GT:
1. 3Dmark 2005 - 18824 marks - Unseen (OutOfSpecs.Gr) - (Geforce 8600 GT @ 550/700mhz ) 2 points - http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=600304 //It not single? SLI?
2. 3Dmark 2005 - 15044 marks - Mind (Team MXS ModLab...) - (Geforce 8600 GT @ 999/932mhz) http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=609764
Fixed, thanks for reporting Mind.

[MaXtoRZP]

Does anybody see the resolution settings on these screenies?
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602376
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602374
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602375

[MaXtoRZP]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602375
no reason to expect this result to be false, it is in line with the others, but yes resolution should be visible, but than again, it looks like he's using the free version, so you can only run at default settings;)

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602374
no irregular result, slightly lower CPU clock than 3rd place, but higher VGA clocks, 3D03 loves GPU speed over raw CPU speed

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602376
again, free version of 3D06 - only default settings possible, results are in line with the others at similar speeds, it puts him in 2nd instead of 3rd (your spot) because of higher CPU speed.

I can understand reporting/blocking scores because they are intentionally suspicious, wrong or cheated; but it is obviously not the case here; the fact that you are also running a 8600GTS and get scores slightly lower then him, and you stand to gain points by us blocking his scores has nothing to do with it, right? ;-)

No, but, it's my mistake. Excuse please. I'll be more seriouly observe the screens next time. Sorry again.

[MaXtoRZP]

So, that's another one. I cannot believe that it's AGP 6200A (64Bit) results
I'm running now Mark06 on the 6200A and the HDR\SM3.0 tests are locked (unavialable)
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=582928

[MaXtoRZP]

Hello, i think there is not 6200A result:
The TurboCache Technology is for PCI-E only as i know or i'm not right?
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594133
Another one, can't see any screenies:
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=587907

[MaXtoRZP]

Once again
That's not a E2160, it's E6300:
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=607152
And here we can't see any CPU-z or other one CPUID, only result's log of SPI
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=609982
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=610753
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=610730

[klopcha]

Please fixed result
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=556438 Result on Savage4 Pro, but category is S3 S8 Nitro.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=564244 The screenshot is not readable.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=609587 In a screenshot there is no mention of a videocard.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=555209 In a screenshot there is no mention of a videocard.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=507644 Result on FX5200Ultra, but category is FX5200.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=600237 User change default adjustments 3D Mark: 800x600, 16 bit color.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=562328 No link, no screenshot.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=573724 User change default adjustments 3D Mark: 640x480, 16 bit color.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=560343 and http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=547180 have Identical verification link.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=573734 User change default adjustments 3D Mark: 640x480, 16 bit color.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=573729 User change default adjustments 3D Mark: 640x480, 16 bit color.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=587736 Link fake
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=611267 In a screenshot there is no mention of a videocard.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=604378 In a screenshot there is no mention of a videocard.

[Maxi]

Interesting report klopcha, I like your style of repoting here on the forums rather than via the DB. Results missing certain details will not be blocked at this time, however the changed default settings results are of course not vaild (I'm sure OPP just missed the detail when he was collecting old scores to submit). The other reported scores have been moderated or edited as necessary.

Thanks again,

maxi

[moonsond]

Hello everyone. Here is a way too high away from something real result in 2003 mark on a Radeon 9250 SE - http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=607651 . This video, even if 128-bit, simply CAN'T get such a score, even on a quad core with VMs.

Please, fix it. :)

[S_A_V]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=545749
32k in 3dmark03 on single 7900gs clocked at only 698/856mhz and A64 cpu?
This result has been verified as correct by a moderator but I'm sure it's a bugged run.
Score too high for single card and too low for SLI.

[moonsond]

sorry, what about that 9250? it's not such a problem for me of course, but it's a bit unfair that i can't get a WR cuz' of that fake result :)

[Gotcha]

bad category , it's sempron64 2800+
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=612228

bad category , it's sempron64 2800+
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=612232

No url for validation , and score "magic" ? compare with other GeForce 6100
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=612756

No url for validation
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=562868

No url for validation
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=562225

No url for validation
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=566893

thx ;)

[smile-777]

bad category
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=561736
It is not Cel 2.1
I'm sure it's a cel 2.13

[Gotcha]

bad category , it's sempron64 2800+
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=612228

bad category , it's sempron64 2800+
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=612232

No url for validation , and score "magic" ? compare with other GeForce 6100
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=612756

No url for validation
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=562868

No url for validation
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=562225

No url for validation
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=566893

thx ;)

up ?!

[Gotcha]

fake !
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=614870

[Gotcha]

it's config BI-CPU :s

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=599282
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=599281

[Gotcha]

bad category , it's sempron64 2800+
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616068

[Gotcha]

bad category , it's sempron64 2800+
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=616071

again duster, repost in sempron2800+

[Turrican]

hi

this guy submitted results for a pentium 2 233 in the pentium 233mmx category :D

please move it in the right category.

thanks

pi-fast
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617395

cpu-z
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617393

super-pi
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617401

wprime32m
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617402

wprime1024m
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617405

[Turrican]

ähhm, anyone? :)

[Gotcha]

it's config BI-CPU "Pentium 3 1.0Ghz Coppermine"

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=599282
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=599281

--------

bad category , move to "Sempron 2800+ Palermo"
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=616071

again duster's, repost in sempron2800+

-------

[Massman]

I'll have a look a the topic this evening :)

[Massman]

it's config BI-CPU "Pentium 3 1.0Ghz Coppermine"

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=599282
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=599281

--------

bad category , move to "Sempron 2800+ Palermo"
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=616071

again duster's, repost in sempron2800+

-------

First two: no option to split the Dual and single cpu, yet. It's a little harder to implent then we thought it would be.

Last: blocked: no cpu-z

[Massman]

hi

this guy submitted results for a pentium 2 233 in the pentium 233mmx category :D

please move it in the right category.

thanks

pi-fast
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617395

cpu-z
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617393

super-pi
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617401

wprime32m
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617402

wprime1024m
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617405

Fixed

[Bwanasoft]

I have Problems with much hwbot links

my CPU´s are in the wrong kategorie

i have all cpu´s at Pentium 4 Socket 478

and the results in Socket 423

can you fix it

need you the links ?

Username: Bwanasoft - Crazy-OC

[Massman]

The links would be very useful :)

[hipro5]

I think that this http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=612328 Aqua score has TOO HIGH CPU score for ONLY 5026MHz....:o
It's one of our boys and I think that he didn't do it in purpose....Maybe a bugged run?......Check it out....
I have report it too but it seems that the report file doesn't work anymore!... :confused:

It whould be better at least the top 5 not to say the top 10 Aquamark scores to upload as "verification link" the data file which is prodused by Aquamark after the bench ends....

[Bwanasoft]

the Results are Pentium 4 Socket 478 - please fix it

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616168

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615841

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615151

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=614985

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615890

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615842

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616455

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616166

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616191

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616171

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615891

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615865

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615296

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=615137

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616454

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616457

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616195

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616208

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616472

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616126

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=614984

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=614989

[harleybro]

3dmark 2001 HOF same user in 18th and 19th place. Checking user profile also shows points for 2 identical Super Pi 1m runs for differant teams.

[Massman]

@ Bwanasoft: The results you gave me are in the correct category. All the links you gave me are intel s478 cpu's.

@ harleybro: We know, it's a little bug. RB will fix it as soon as possible.

[hipro5]

Isn't this WR deserves at least 0.5 hwbot points?..... :(
It's not about the points as for me.... It's about it took me 3+months of time and over 300+ litters of LN2 when I was competing with k|ngp|n and now it worths nothing.....Not even a penny..... :(

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=618243


.

[Bwanasoft]

no it´s wrong

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1313

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_313


all in wrong categorie my results in Socket 423 and i compare 478

[Massman]

Isn't this WR deserves at least 0.5 hwbot points?..... :(
It's not about the points as for me.... It's about it took me 3+months of time and over 300+ litters of LN2 when I was competing with k|ngp|n and now it worths nothing.....Not even a penny..... :(

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=618243


.

I'm afraid it will not give you points. Undoubtedly it's one of best and legendary benchmark runs ever, but with a conroe, the score are already blown away :(.

I'm sorry, but this score won't give you more points :(.

[Massman]

no it´s wrong

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_1313

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_313


all in wrong categorie my results in Socket 423 and i compare 478

I don't really see why your cpu's are s423? Cpu-z clearly says s478.

[gradus]

bad verification link. ramdisc?!?:
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=571506
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=604653
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594083
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=594074

:D
3Dmark 2006 - 7866 marks - Quentin (HardwareXL Benc...) - (GeForce 7800 GT @ 400/500mhz ) 14.6
3Dmark 2006 - 7718 marks - Quentin (HardwareXL Benc...) - (GeForce 7800 GT @ 400/500mhz)
3Dmark 2006 - 7331 marks - Quentin (HardwareXL Benc...) - (GeForce 7800 GT @ 400/500mhz)
http://www.hwbot.org/searchResults.do?direction=&applicationId=12&teamId=0&userName=&gpu=GeForce+7800+GT+%281114%29&cpu=&minScore=&maxScore=&gpuId=356&cpuId=0&offset=0&displayAdvanced=false&countryId=0&dateFrom=&dateUntil=&minGpuCoreFreq=&maxGpuCoreFreq=&minGpuMemFreq=&maxGpuMemFreq=&minCpuFreq=&maxCpuFreq=&system=&minTotalPoints=

[harleybro]

Over 16k in 06 at default X6800 and single 8800GTX at default? Also can't find anything else by user and if team is checked doesn't show user on the team.

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619192

[gradus]

Quentin LOL....
3Dmark 2006 - 12713 marks - Quentin (HardwareXL Benc...) - (Radeon X1900 XT 512... @ 625/725mhz )

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619194

[gradus]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=616876

190хтх

[klopcha]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617877 Result on E6600, but category Q6600.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617585 Similarly
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617764 Similarly


http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=614350 and http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617006 - two Identical result


http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=592929 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619242 Result on S939, but category S754.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617196 Result on Celeron 320, but category Celeron 2.4 Ghz.

[pointhore]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=573595 this is a 2.4 prescott not a 2.4B

[gianni-gt]

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=618537 => it must be a fake.. also the with the fastest single-core runs @3.6ghz sub 30sec are not possible ;)

place 1-3 looks suspicious for me.. check the clocks... http://www.hwbot.org//listResults.do?filterBlocked=true&filterUser=true&limit=30&applicationId=6&cpuSubFamilyId=5


http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=616081 => not an AMD cpu ;)

[Just Learnin']

Is this score in 3DMark2001SE valid, http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=612557 ? The screenshot doesn't seem to show the resolution. http://aycu13.webshots.com/image/17772/2001113185884760605_rs.jpg

I tried to use the report button but this happened:

Crap. An error happened.We could blame this on you but it's most likely our crappy coding skills. You could try again or nudge our developpers for fixing this.

Error messagejava.lang.NullPointerException: null Error stack traceorg.hwbot.web.actions.ReportResultAction.run line 45
org.hwbot.web.actions.HwbotAction.execute line 29
org.apache.struts.action.RequestProcessor.processA ctionPerform line 419
org.apache.struts.action.RequestProcessor.process line 224
org.apache.struts.action.ActionServlet.process line 1194
org.apache.struts.action.ActionServlet.doPost line 432
javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service line 709
javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service line 802
org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.in ternalDoFilter line 237
org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.do Filter line 157

[richba5tard]

Thanks JL, I've checked the code and we didn't check whether the user is logged in or not. You need to be logged in in order to report results.

[Just Learnin']

It would have been worth over 10 boints if he did not have higher scores and you did not copy and paste the full description from the moderation thread:

"no boints: nothing, but doubtful or reported results from this category should still be blocked"

[Just Learnin']

Well if the resolution isn't visible in the 3DMark popup I thought it was not an acceptable screenshot? That is/was what I was asking in the first place....

[brx]

these results are with Coppermine core, but they are under P3 500Mhz Katmai core result table (Coppermine is more overclockable and with full speed cache, Katmai is with half speed). results taken from this link: http://hwbot.org/ResultBrowseByProcessor.do?cpuModelId=1006



CPU-Z.:
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=574128
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=602373 = no verification url or image
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619071


PiFast.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619072
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595982


SuperPi.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619073
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=595983
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=574125


SuperPi 32m.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619293


wPrime 1024m.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619368


wPrime 32m.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619074

[Turrican]

hi
this results are in the false category. he's using a p II 266 not a P II 233. ;)
please can anybody move it in the right category.

thanks

pi-fast
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617395

cpu-z
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617393

super-pi
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617401

wprime32m
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617402

wprime1024m
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617405

[klopcha]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617585 Result on E6600, but category Q6600.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619242 Result on S939, but category S754.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617196 Result on Celeron 320, but category Celeron 2.4 Ghz.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=560884 Result very disputable and unreal.

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=526161 Result on Pentium II 400, but category Pentium II Celeron 500.

[Turrican]

hi
this results are in the false category. he's using a p II 266 not a P II 233. ;)
please can anybody move it in the right category.

thanks

pi-fast
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617395

cpu-z
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617393

super-pi
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617401

wprime32m
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617402

wprime1024m
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=617405



anyone ? :)

[klopcha]

To the aforesaid me I shall add:
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622461 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622456 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622459 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622457 Result on S939, but category S754.

In a command "PurePC.pl" continuous swindlers it turns out.

[Massman]

Sorry, guys, I haven't had much time lately. I'll check this out asap

[hipro5]

Hi guys..... :)
Take a look at this page: http://www.hwbot.org/hallOfFame.do?type=result&applicationId=12
The first score at SINGLE VGA is 22xxx with cores at 670MHz?.....
He must have submited wrong....It'll propably be SLI mode.....PLUS when I try to open it, it give me an error..... :)

[Maxi]

klopcha & turricane, all fixed.

Thanks for reporting.

[harleybro]

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=622242

Error in computition time on pifast

[harleybro]

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=621155

Time shows as 20 seconds but is 20.97

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=623881
CPU-z shows 4204 but it's listed at 4888:

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=617648
Is E6600 but listed as Q6600

[Massman]

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=621155

Time shows as 20 seconds but is 20.97

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=623881
CPU-z shows 4204 but it's listed at 4888:

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=617648
Is E6600 but listed as Q6600

Fixed

[Massman]

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=622242

Error in computition time on pifast

fixed

[klopcha]

klopcha all fixed.


I do not see

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622461 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622456 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622459 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622457 Result on S939, but category S754.

New
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=605412 Screenshot is wrong
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=577164 Error in computition time on pifast

[Massman]

I do not see

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622461 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622456 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622459 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622457 Result on S939, but category S754.

New
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=605412 Screenshot is wrong
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=577164 Error in computition time on pifast

All fixed.

The reason why those first four were not changed is that those users already had better scores in the same category. When those were moved to the s939 category, these took their place as best s754.

[Sebastian]

Hi,

I tried to report the following entry: http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=624261

Reasons are:

- wrong category (to be benched: GeForce 6800 AGP 'vanilla' but entry is a 6800 ultra)
- The project id is not valid (Futuremark verification link is 'dead')

Obviously the concerning member ist not active any more or his result was not scanned correctly by the HWbot.

Here is the Category it is listed in currently: http://hwbot.org/searchResults.do?direction=&applicationId=12&teamId=0&userName=&gpu=GeForce+6800+Agp+%2878%29&cpu=&minScore=&maxScore=&gpuId=1184&cpuId=0&offset=0&displayAdvanced=false&countryId=0&dateFrom=&dateUntil=&minGpuCoreFreq=&maxGpuCoreFreq=&minGpuMemFreq=&maxGpuMemFreq=&minCpuFreq=&maxCpuFreq=&system=&minTotalPoints=
And this is the Category it actually belongs to: http://hwbot.org/searchResults.do?direction=&applicationId=12&teamId=0&userName=&gpu=GeForce+6800+Ultra+%28332%29&numberOfVideocards=one&cpu=&minScore=&maxScore=&gpuId=160&cpuId=0&offset=0&displayAdvanced=false&countryId=0&dateFrom=&dateUntil=&minGpuCoreFreq=&maxGpuCoreFreq=&minGpuMemFreq=&maxGpuMemFreq=&minCpuFreq=&maxCpuFreq=&system=&minTotalPoints=


Could you please fix that?
Best regards
Sebastian - AwardFabrik.de

[Sebastian]

Thanks jmke, I appreciate your efforts, sorry for my impatience.

[demiurg]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=620063 - the result is 47.00s, not 37s
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=609627 - this is superpi 1M

[Massman]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=620063 - the result is 47.00s, not 37s
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=609627 - this is superpi 1M

Both were fixed by another crew member :D

[klopcha]

All fixed.

The reason why those first four were not changed is that those users already had better scores in the same category. When those were moved to the s939 category, these took their place as best s754.

But he is using 939 category HW in 754 cpu-section on bot.

[Sebastian]

Hi,

the first position in the following Category does not match the video card's clock rates by far and the entry can not be inspected: http://hwbot.org/searchResults.do?direction=&applicationId=1&teamId=0&userName=&gpu=GeForce+6800+Agp+%2885%29&cpu=&minScore=&maxScore=&gpuId=1184&cpuId=0&offset=0&displayAdvanced=false&countryId=0&dateFrom=&dateUntil=&minGpuCoreFreq=&maxGpuCoreFreq=&minGpuMemFreq=&maxGpuMemFreq=&minCpuFreq=&maxCpuFreq=&system=&minTotalPoints=

[harleybro]

Wrong resolution:
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=626376

Link not valid:
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619154

[Massman]

Wrong resolution:
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=626376

Link not valid:
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=619154

Fixed

[Massman]

Hi,

the first position in the following Category does not match the video card's clock rates by far and the entry can not be inspected: http://hwbot.org/searchResults.do?direction=&applicationId=1&teamId=0&userName=&gpu=GeForce+6800+Agp+%2885%29&cpu=&minScore=&maxScore=&gpuId=1184&cpuId=0&offset=0&displayAdvanced=false&countryId=0&dateFrom=&dateUntil=&minGpuCoreFreq=&maxGpuCoreFreq=&minGpuMemFreq=&maxGpuMemFreq=&minCpuFreq=&maxCpuFreq=&system=&minTotalPoints=

Fixed

[harleybro]

This one is still up.
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=626494

Edit: well I guess it was just reposted

[Massman]

This one is still up.
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=626494

Edit: well I guess it was just reposted

I asked him for a FM link and he added one. Can't check it right now as the FM orb is down.

[harleybro]

I asked him for a FM link and he added one. Can't check it right now as the FM orb is down.

Ok this one has a link but the resolution is 1024x768. I had one like that myself awhile back but realized what happened and pulled it the next day. More then likely his monitor is not capable of running 1280x1024.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2447880

[Massman]

I've send a mail :)

[steelrat]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622461 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622456 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622459 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622457 Result on S939, but category S754.

All result's are in wrong category! Please fix it!

[pointhore]

XP 2600 thoroughbred

No screenhot for verification
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627433

No screenhot for verification
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627425

This clown doesn't have a screenshot either. :D lmao
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627475

[harleybro]

Not sure on this one but both 06 screens show differant readings?

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=616270

[Massman]

http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622461 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622456 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622459 Result on S939, but category S754.
http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=622457 Result on S939, but category S754.

All result's are in wrong category! Please fix it!

fixed

[Massman]

XP 2600 thoroughbred

No screenhot for verification
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627433

No screenhot for verification
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627425

This clown doesn't have a screenshot either. :D lmao
http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=627475

fixed

[Massman]

Not sure on this one but both 06 screens show differant readings?

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=616270

fixed