Voting Poll: What Benchmarks Should No Longer Yield Global Points?

OCers Benchmark
2113DMark05
2023DMark01
95Catzilla 1440P
80PCMark05

For our next community poll we need to provide some background information. Following the rising amount of requests to drop PCMark05 for global points, we queried the database to find out which benchmarks with global points are the least popular. Counting the amount of unique overclockers submitting a result using a particular benchmark over the past three months, we find that PCMark05 is the least popular as only 80 overclockers participated in the rankings. Following PCMark05 we find Catzilla 1440P with 95 overclockers, 3DMark01 with 202 and 3DMark05 with 211 overclockers.

To put things in perspective, XTU was used by well over 2,500 overclockers in the past three months. The second most active benchmark is HWBOT Prime with slightly over 750 overclockers participating.

Until July 8 the community has a chance to voice its opinion on the removal of global points for any of the four least active benchmarks. In order to remove the points, we require 67% of the people to vote for the removal of points. As usual you can find the poll in the sidebar.


138

Belgium Massman says:

To the PCMark05 haters out there: this is your chance!

United States l0ud_sil3nc3 says:

Goodnight sweet PCMark05 :D

Germany der8auer says:

PCMark gone in 3, 2, 1

Germany Moose83 says:

Vote for Catfail :D

Germany BenchBros says:

I dont care about the Cat or PCMark... I voted for PCmark... but 05 and especially 01 MUST stay in global rankings!

Germany Moose83 says:

I miss 1 Cinebench here, why we need 2 of them :p Server guys can easy make 200 WR points...

TaPaKaH says:

Is the poll on frontpage displaying percentages correctly? Right now it looks like this:

None, keep it as it is (19.3%, 11 votes)
PCMark05 (40.35%, 23 votes)
Catzilla 1440P (24.56%, 14 votes)
3DMark01 (7.02%, 4 votes)
3DMark05 (8.77%, 5 votes)
Total votes: 57
It seems that the percentages are computed with relation to the total number of votes (=options selected) cast and not to the total number of voters.
I know that I've made multiple choices so the actual number of voters must be 56 or lower.
For example, if 30 people were to select 57 options, the poll would show PCmark dispproval rate of 23/57~40% instead of 23/30~77%.

Germany Moose83 says:

Ban Sam :p

Belgium Massman says:

Sam OCX said: Is the poll on frontpage displaying percentages correctly? Right now it looks like this:
It seems that the percentages are computed with relation to the total number of votes (=options selected) cast and not to the total number of voters.
I know that I've made multiple choices so the actual number of voters must be 56 or lower.
For example, if 30 people were to select 57 options, the poll would show PCmark dispproval rate of 23/57~40% instead of 23/30~77%.


You are correct.

I do a manual query to count the amount of voters and then recalculate to determine the (dis)approval rate.

Germany Moose83 says:

How long this Poll run?

Belgium Massman says:

See last paragraph

Germany Moose83 says:

In order to remove the points, we require 67% of the people to vote for the removal of points. As usual you can find the poll in the sidebar. Does this mean 67% votes at least for 1 bench to remove it?

Belgium Massman says:

I count the amount of voters from the database. Then the amount of votes divided by the amount of voters must exceed 67%.

says:

the legacies have to stay until there is a very pressing reason to remove them

the day 01 goes is the day OC dies

Germany Don_Dan says:

Team.AU said: the day 01 goes is the day OC dies


QFT.

Australia zeropluszero says:

and the day that most of us remember sunlight.

Australia zeropluszero says:

can we do my suggestions next???

zeropluszero said: Voting for removal of

AM3
Superpi 1M
Both wPrime
Pifast
Catzilla 1440P
Heaven Basic
1x Cinebench
XTU (yep, I said it)
PCMark05

Voting for addition of
Unigine Valley

Germany Moose83 says:

Massman said: I count the amount of voters from the database. Then the amount of votes divided by the amount of voters must exceed 67%.


So Benchmarks will only removed if 67% of all members vote?

Im really waiting for the day we only needs 8-60 Core Systems and 10k for GPUs :( Lets ban all legacy and start money battle on Hwbot :(

Belgium Massman says:

No, it will be removed if 67% of the voters choose to remove points from PCMark05

Germany Moose83 says:

That was my first question :D You did missunterstand me :p

Germany der8auer says:

Team.AU said: the legacies have to stay until there is a very pressing reason to remove them

the day 01 goes is the day OC dies


The solution is very easy. Everybody just vote for PCMark05 and the rest stays :D

Germany Moose83 says:

Still not enough votes Roman :p

Kazakhstan TerraRaptor says:

I think that a poll is a bit bugged - it counts ticks but not the voters. I ticked "pcm05" and "none of the above" in order give more safety to 01/05/Cat - so 2 votes are mine but I'm a single voter.

Slovenia tiborrr says:

Who voted for Catzilla 1440p? It's one of the few real 3D benchmarks. Granted it costs 10 euro, but so does 3DMark.

I vote for PCMark and 3DMark05. I have a tough time choosing 3DMark01SE as well. So much nostalgia.

Germany Moose83 says:

Me and lot of other did, 1 Cats benchmark is enough, no need for 720p and 1440p...

Germany der8auer says:

That's the same like saying SuperPi1m is enough and no need for 32m. 720p is much more CPU dependent than 1440p.

Germany Moose83 says:

Why not make an complete poll to follow all wishes in community? List all Benchmarks and let the communitiy decide, 2 FS, 2 CB..oh well^^

United States Mikecdm says:

It's easy to choose which bench to remove when it's almost out of only 3 benches. Most will not choose 01 to be removed, there is a very strong dislike towards pmc05 and the other two are questionable. I like pcm05 and I don't want it to go, but I know many would like to see it go. But when the poll is pretty much designed to make it go, might as well just remove with out making the poll and not waste our time.

Belgium Massman says:

Mikecdm said: It's easy to choose which bench to remove when it's almost out of only 3 benches. Most will not choose 01 to be removed, there is a very strong dislike towards pmc05 and the other two are questionable.

I like pcm05 and I don't want it to go, but I know many would like to see it go. But when the poll is pretty much designed to make it go, might as well just remove with out making the poll and not waste our time.


Ehr, there is a "none keep it as it is" option?

United States Mikecdm says:

Still too easy to choose it. I will have one last dance with my globals before they are gone forever.

Poland ivanov says:

Come on, 3DM 01 and 05 just can't be removed... How could you even consider such thing :P
I voted for PCMark.

Colombia saint19 says:

Considering that I will lose only 5.6 points on my little profile, I will vote for PCMark05... Regarding 3DMark01...come on, I am a nOOb on this but that benchmark is an old school and prestige benchmark, everybody want a WR on that and should stay as it.

South Africa Vivi says:

shameful that you put 01 on there!

United States steponz says:

Why would you even consider removing 01 or 05, these are the classic benches. I vote you remove globals from all the benchmarks that major servers represent. Why are we trying to remove benches now anyway? We just added some...

Germany Moose83 says:

Yeah, remove Server stuff and of course XTU :p

Belgium Massman says:

Vivi said: shameful that you put 01 on there!


We just went by activity ratio. Not by personal opinion :)

Bulgaria I.nfraR.ed says:

While I don't like PCMark05 and would be happy to see it go, I agree with Mike. You should have listed all the benchmarks and see what people think. At least that's my opinion. I would have voted PCMark in all cases, so that wouldn't change my mind, but probably distribute the votes to other benches as well.

Colombia saint19 says:

I do not know, could be good idea list all the benchmarks with the results per month?

South Africa Vivi says:

haha just messing with you. i think its time we make emulator for 01 mobile

Germany der8auer says:

Guys the list of benchmarks you can choose here is just selected by the ones with the least activity in 3 months. Just quoting the news from above in case you guys did not read it :P That's the amount of unique users submitting to the benchmarks within 3 months: OCers Benchmark 211 3DMark05 202 3DMark01 95 Catzilla 1440P 80 PCMark05 Amount of overclockers submitting per day: OCers Benchmark 2,32 3DMark05 2,22 3DMark01 1,04 Catzilla 1440P 0,88 PCMark05 So this is not a personal thing it's just the question to the community if you want to disable globals or not. Even if we remove global points the benchmark still exists with hardware points. So if you want to keep 01 just vote for another benchmark or select "None, keep it as it is" if you don't want to change anything. Few years ago everybody complained that hwbot does not listen to the community and now some complain about having to many votes :D

Romania suzuki says:

zeropluszero said: can we do my suggestions next??
Originally Posted by zeropluszero View Post
Voting for removal of

AM3
Superpi 1M
Both wPrime
Pifast
Catzilla 1440P
Heaven Basic
1x Cinebench
XTU (yep, I said it)
PCMark05

Voting for addition of
Unigine Valley



he already made the perfect list,i would vote for all of this :D....




Slovenia tiborrr says:

I think it's funny when people moan we will soon need 60 core CPUs and 10k EUR worth of GPUs to compete in the ladders. The whole idea of removing those benchmarks is that they no longer represent the category they are listed in. On the other hand we have fresh, almost 100% GPU-only dependant benchmarks such as Catzilla 1440p, FSE or Unigine stuff (at least single card) where you can actually compete with a regular K-sku LGA-1150 CPU yet people want them 'out'. P.S.: A WR in '01SE costs the same amount of money (hardware-wise) - if not more - than WR in FSE or Catzilla.

United States Mikecdm says:

So just out of curiosity, why do benchmarks need globals removed?

Germany Moose83 says:

+1 Mike ;) I know the day would come thats why i sold Areca :(

Romania suzuki says:

Tiborrr -3dmark 2001 needs 4670k 6.4+ plus medium 780 ti for 1 gpu and 2x580 for 2 gpu wr. What othet benchmark needs the same ? Actually you csn put the facts in a different way,on which other benchmark i can have a 13th place or so close in the first 20 like on 3dmark2001(i mean for enthusiast) ?

Slovenia tiborrr says:

Suzuki, you are just proving my point. You need a quite a decent - in fact very good CPU - to do a 01 WR. 6.4GHz+ 4670K is not enough for 01 WR. Do you know how many CPUs one has to bin to get ~ 6.5GHz 3D CPU? On the other hand a 4670K or 4770K is more than enough for Unigine and quite competitive in FSE, Catzilla. Again, I hope you understand we're talking about 'GLOBAL' points here, not 'HARDWARE' points. Your 13th 8800 GTS with 23.9 pts will remain just as worthy as before - 23.9pts - should the 3DMark2001SE global points be disabled.

Germany Blackbolt says:

i think pcmark05 is more and more a tweakmark(SSD Mark) no real cpu benchmark,kick it out of global points ;)

Germany Moose83 says:

3DM01 will never die, otherwise Hwbot dies :( Just bin CPUs, nearly all benches need to bin an good CPU^^

Germany der8auer says:

Mikecdm said: So just out of curiosity, why do benchmarks need globals removed?


The activity, especially of Catzilla 1440p and PCMark05 is very low. Other benchmarks have a submission rate which is 10 times higher. HWBot keeps enabling global points for newer benchmarks so wouldn't it make sense to remove global points of benchmarks nobody uses anymore?
Of course the time and effort should still be rewarded that's why hardware points will stay enabled. But it doesn't really make sense to keep global points if there is no competition going on.
And honestly speaking for PCMark05 we both know that nobody uses the benchmark anymore because it got tweaked into limbo. Even the moderators are struggeling with their decisions so it would be better to move the focus to working benchmarks instead of keeping inconsistent ones.

Germany Moose83 says:

Yeah Roman, but we all know you hate Pcmark since more years :D Next legacy Benchmark will go, but what about all the Server benches we have now? Lets limit globals and WR there for ``normal`` CPUs till 8 core ;)

Germany der8auer says:

What are you talking about exactly? The recent 60-Core WR of dhenzjhen recieves 11.0 global points + 100 WR points since it's the fastest overall score. http://hwbot.org/submission/2570026_dhenzjhen_cinebench_r15_4x_xeon_e7_8890_v2_6713_cb The 4-Core result of 8 Pack recieves 117.8 global points. http://hwbot.org/submission/2521398_8_pack_cinebench_r15_core_i7_4770k_1293_cb So the 4 Core result still recieves more points especially if you also include the HW points and it's by far not that expensive. The point-engine is pretty awesome and there is no fix needed here.

Germany Blackbolt says:

I can understand you holger, you fight for your global points. I will also lose a lot of points because I was the best in my team in PCMark05

Germany Moose83 says:

I have no problem with removing Pcmark, but then also remove some Server Benches! Now we dont need to spend money for areca, lets ripp off banc for Server :(

Colombia saint19 says:

The same argument of Tiborrr for 3DMark01 apply to Aquamark right? Would be the same with that benchmark.

Germany Moose83 says:

I said you in the past Roman, lets meet and i show you the Pcamrk tricks. If people only cant tweak there OS, they hate the Benchmark^^

Germany Moose83 says:

Now no PCMark for globals, but 2 Cinebench, 2 Firestrike and so on... The last benchmark where it comes to tweaking is gone now, Pcmark was the only one where you can compete with top guys without need an 6.5 chip!

Slovenia tiborrr says:

Moose, it's funny you always talk about money and budget in this thread and how we should keep it for 'normal' CPUs. Normal is a very relative term. Honestly speaking I can get 2x 16core Abu Dhabis cheaper than I can get 6.5GHz 3D Haswell. Is it normal that I have to buy more than 22 4770K CPUs (that's 22x 300EUR+ and I loose 50EUR each time when I resell it) so I can find a good one in order to compete globally in "3D" benchmark called 3DMark05 or 2001SE? Or even worse - Aquamark? The problems with these so-called '3D' benchmarks is that there is no workaround for underpowered CPU. You cannot simply compensate for an average CPU with brutal GPU clocks. This is where FSE, Unigine DX11 and Catzilla 1440p are much better at and are perfect examples of a true 3D benchmark. I would be okay with that if I was competing in a 2D benchmark such as SuperPI 32M or Cinebench. Let the best CPU win, sure. But there is more to "3D" benching than just solely relying on an overpowered CPU. I have a bad feeling you are being a bit biased. You have a good CPU hence it is in your interest for heavily CPU-dependant "3D" benchmarks remain. As much as I love the legacy 3D benchmarks it is a fact that the hardware has outgrown them. Relying on the fact that the '01SE is very tweakable is saying like the SuperPI 1M is very tweakable (on a 6GHz+ Haswell). It's not. It was highly tweakable back in the Core 2 Duo, REX X48, D9GTR days but it isn't anymore today. These type of benchmarks scale solely with the CPU raw power and the choice of correct OS and/or driver. I am sure this is not your definition of 'tweakable', is it? Thus the global points for them should be removed. 01SE, 05, Aquamark benching will not die if the global points are removed because benching solely for the hardware points are still (and will remain) a highly rewarding type of benchmarking.

Germany der8auer says:

Moose83 said: I have no problem with removing Pcmark, but then also remove some Server Benches! Now we dont need to spend money for areca, lets ripp off banc for Server :(


Please read my previous posting.

To give more significant examples:
1st global 24 core ranking: 13.2 global points http://hwbot.org/submission/2474377_dhenzjhen_cinebench_r15_2x_xeon_e5_2697_v2_3221_cb
1st global 36 core ranking: 9.9 global points http://hwbot.org/submission/2482490_oviz_hardware_lab_cinebench_r15_32_opteron_6238_2153_cb
1st global 48 core ranking: 12.1 global points http://hwbot.org/submission/2482161_oviz_hardware_lab_cinebench_r15_4x_opteron_6238_2705_cb

We don't have "server benchmarks" here. You will recieve a lot more points if you participate in 4- or 2-core rankings since the point algorithm is highly affected by the amount of submissions and the activity of the category.

So there is absolutely no need to buy any server hardware. Also don't forget that only your top 15 global and top 20 hardware results count to your profile total.

There are 11 2D Benchmarks and 12 3D Benchmarks which recieve global points. If you count in the different sub categories such as 2, 3, and 4 GPUs there is a huge variety of benchmarks you can participate in. So there is no need to buy a 27 kUSD server setup to have a chance in the ranking ;)

Moose83 said: Now no PCMark for globals, but 2 Cinebench, 2 Firestrike and so on... The last benchmark where it comes to tweaking is gone now, Pcmark was the only one where you can compete with top guys without need an 6.5 chip!


Regarding the 6.5 GHz CPU please read the stuff above. You can also get a ton of globals with cheap single or dual core CPUs.

If you check the definition of benchmark on google you come across stuff like:
-Benchmark: to test the quality and speed of computer software or hardware (= equipment or electronic parts)
-Benchmark: to measure the quality of something by comparing it with something else of an accepted standard

A benchmark which is tweakable by 100% does not reflect the real performance of your system. So it doesn't even make sense to keep it for a comparison database.

Germany Moose83 says:

Cinebench is allmost Server Bench, and we have 2 of them with WR Points ;) Limit cores, or disable one where is problem :D

Germany der8auer says:

Moose83 said: Cinebench is allmost Server Bench, and we have 2 of them with WR Points ;) Limit cores, or disable one where is problem :D


okay, from now on I will just keep quoting myself

der8auer said: Please read my previous posting.

To give more significant examples:
1st global 24 core ranking: 13.2 global points http://hwbot.org/submission/2474377_dhenzjhen_cinebench_r15_2x_xeon_e5_2697_v2_3221_cb
1st global 36 core ranking: 9.9 global points http://hwbot.org/submission/2482490_oviz_hardware_lab_cinebench_r15_32_opteron_6238_2153_cb
1st global 48 core ranking: 12.1 global points http://hwbot.org/submission/2482161_oviz_hardware_lab_cinebench_r15_4x_opteron_6238_2705_cb

We don't have "server benchmarks" here. You will recieve a lot more points if you participate in 4- or 2-core rankings since the point algorithm is highly affected by the amount of submissions and the activity of the category.

So there is absolutely no need to buy any server hardware. Also don't forget that only your top 15 global and top 20 hardware results count to your profile total.

There are 11 2D Benchmarks and 12 3D Benchmarks which recieve global points. If you count in the different sub categories such as 2, 3, and 4 GPUs there is a huge variety of benchmarks you can participate in. So there is no need to buy a 27 kUSD server setup to have a chance in the ranking ;)



Regarding the 6.5 GHz CPU please read the stuff above. You can also get a ton of globals with cheap single or dual core CPUs.

If you check the definition of benchmark on google you come across stuff like:
-Benchmark: to test the quality and speed of computer software or hardware (= equipment or electronic parts)
-Benchmark: to measure the quality of something by comparing it with something else of an accepted standard

A benchmark which is tweakable by 100% does not reflect the real performance of your system. So it doesn't even make sense to keep it for a comparison database.

Romania suzuki says:

Tiborrr,in my opinion you are overeacting. I gave you as an example an i5(200 euro) which will suffice for 3dmark2001/03/05/06. Yes it's a matter of luck on cpu but is the same for the benches which you gave as example but in there you need a cpu which cist 1000 euro (4960x)and to be 5.0+ ghz benchable. In 2001 you can take nice global points even on enthusiast (5850/gtx 580/4890 etc...) over others which they don't have the patience to tweak and find a good driver ,people which just pour ln2 (or use waterchillers in enthusiast league) in the pots and press the run button on every 3dmark.

Germany Moose83 says:

Im poor OCer, can i join Enthusiast please :p

United States Schmuckley says:

Massman said: To the PCMark05 haters out there: this is your chance!


If you remove globals for pcm05,you'll be shooting yourself in the foot.
I voted for none,even though I'm not fond of Catzilla.

It'd probably spur me to get a new hobby.

United States Mikecdm says:

der8auer said: Of course the time and effort should still be rewarded that's why hardware points will stay enabled


In regards to PCM05, it would be a waste of time to run on new hardware since there wouldn't be incentive to run since no globals will be awarded. As a result, there will be close to no hardware points. As it is, there is probably close to no hardware points for anything recent. The last chip with a decent amount of hw points was a 2600k.

tiborrr said:
01SE, 05, Aquamark benching will not die if the global points are removed because benching solely for the hardware points are still (and will remain) a highly rewarding type of benchmarking.


Same thing applies here as above. HW points for old cards which are already maxed at 49.9pts would be rewarding. Benching new cards with no incentive wouldn't be rewarding.

Germany Moose83 says:

Can we please fix the Poll on Mainpage!!! I mean, now we see arround 50% PCM and more than 25% Catzilla. Show how many guys voted ;)
I mean...it can be faked easily now :(

Schmuckley said: If you remove globals for pcm05,you'll be shooting yourself in the foot.
I voted for none,even though I'm not fond of Catzilla.

It'd probably spur me to get a new hobby.


Vote this option also means you vote against PCmark :p

GENiEBEN says:

[IMG]https://copy.com/ojQcezacMz7WDlfj[/IMG]

Schmuckley said: Whatever man..It means over half the gear I have will be irrelevant.
Might as well sell it all and take up shooting.


Lol, wasn't referring to you, it was me that didn't vote it. Want that Catzilla out.

United States Schmuckley says:

Whatever man..It means over half the gear I have will be irrelevant.
Might as well sell it all and take up shooting.

Appraisal:Areca ARC-1261 2GB
4X Samsung 840 pros with very little use
9x 775 chips

Canada Mindblowingj says:

I guess it's totally different for pro's but as an enthusiast overclocker on a low budget: PCM05 is one of the easiest benchmarks out there to make points on, due to the fact it is quite old and had old HW benched on it + SSD's are now everywhere etc we actually have a bench where putting effort and learning can be rewarding (point wise) even on traditional cooling. I understand catzilla is frustrating to many but it's lack of scaling with pure frequency (CPU or GPU) makes it another bench where people are rewarded in points for efficiency and that's somewthing that's not budget limited. I do see many negatives and understand it can be an unbalance for the top guys out there, but remember to think of the people trying to get more competitive, unless the removal or global points translates in more submissions on other benches the difficulty level of making points rises.

Philippines dhenzjhen says:

Moose83 said: Cinebench is allmost Server Bench, and we have 2 of them with WR Points ;) Limit cores, or disable one where is problem :D



Don't u dare to touch cine senior! :D

United States Mr.Scott says:

GENiEBEN said: [IMG]https://copy.com/ojQcezacMz7WDlfj[/IMG]


I didn't vote for it either. :p

Germany Moose83 says:

dhenzjhen said: Don't u dare to touch cine senior! :D


I cant touch Senior :p

Philippines dhenzjhen says:

Moose83 said: I cant touch Senior :p



Gut!! :)

United States Gunslinger says:

Should be voting on removing Catzilla 720 and keeping Catzilla 1440 to keep it a GPU focused bench longer IMO.

But voted to axe PCMark05, 3DMark '05 and 3DMark '01 nonetheless




I personally like this idea

Originally Posted by zeropluszero View Post
can we do my suggestions next??
Originally Posted by zeropluszero View Post
Voting for removal of

AM3
Superpi 1M
Both wPrime
Pifast
Catzilla 720p
Heaven Basic
XTU (yep, I said it)
PCMark05

Voting for addition of
Unigine Valley

Australia zeropluszero says:

I could go with keeping catzilla1440P. and I never said anything about removing both cinebench, just that one is totally enough, which is the same for superpi (wprime too if you're into that), fire strike etc.

Belgium Massman says:

I.nfraR.ed said: While I don't like PCMark05 and would be happy to see it go, I agree with Mike.
You should have listed all the benchmarks and see what people think. At least that's my opinion.
I would have voted PCMark in all cases, so that wouldn't change my mind, but probably distribute the votes to other benches as well.


It should be quite obvious that there is no reason for us to remove the points from the most popular benchmarks. Why shoot in our own foot.

We just checked what the least popular benchmarks with points were and put them up for a vote. I thought that was fair enough, but maybe I was wrong.

Belgium Massman says:

Just checked, total voters: 131. So PCMark is at 65%. For the other three I don't see a problem.

Brazil Rbuass says:

Sorry PC Mark05 fans... I vote for that.
Since the others is all 3D and I am a 3D fan...


P.S. I can not vote... dunno why I can not select the box... please check

Philippines dhenzjhen says:

67% yet? :D

Australia Dinos22 says:

tiborrr said:
As much as I love the legacy 3D benchmarks it is a fact that the hardware has outgrown them. Relying on the fact that the '01SE is very tweakable is saying like the SuperPI 1M is very tweakable (on a 6GHz+ Haswell). It's not. It was highly tweakable back in the Core 2 Duo, REX X48, D9GTR days but it isn't anymore today. .


That's nonsense. The only thing that has changed about it today is your attitude. It's still highly tweakable and more enjoyable to bench than any other 3D bench just about!

Belgium Massman says:

dhenzjhen said: 67% yet? :D


66%

Colombia saint19 says:

rbuass said: Sorry PC Mark05 fans... I vote for that.
Since the others is all 3D and I am a 3D fan...


P.S. I can not vote... dunno why I can not select the box... please check


Here in the thread isn't working, on the front page of HWBot is working.

Belgium Massman says:

Don't click the image, go to the sidebar ;)

Australia Dinos22 says:

To put things in perspective, XTU was used by well over 2,500 overclockers in the past three months.


what if you filter the data to check how many users submitted scores at least 3 times in that period?

Germany Moose83 says:

Lot of guys wanna also kick off this XTU crap ;)

Slovenia tiborrr says:

dinos22 said: That's nonsense. The only thing that has changed about it today is your attitude. It's still highly tweakable and more enjoyable to bench than any other 3D bench just about!

I tend to disagree. It's enjoyable on older hardware, but not on the current gen. Chaning a few registry dwords and getting the right run order for a few L tests to fluke a high FPS is not exactly a rocket science.

Don't get me wrong - '01SE is tweakable and I still enjoy it very very much, but it's not rewarding nor fun on new hardware, especially when you don't have the best CPU. All your effort does not mean much and is nullified when a 100MHz faster CPU screams past your score.

My opinion about XTU is also clear and has been expressed a few times: A proprietary vendor-locked benchmark that only works on specific CPU and is awarded global points has no place on hwbot. But I can understand the decision. At the end of the month the bills have to be paid and since the overclockers don't exactly pour money into hwbot their decision is understandable.

South Africa Vivi says:

tiborrr said: a 100MHz faster CPU screams past your score


3DMARK01 rank:

#1: 6600mhz gigabyte
#2: 6533mhz gigabyte
#3: 6700mhz asus event andre cpu
#4: 6650mhz asus event andre cpu
#5: 6650mhz asus event andre cpu
#6: 6650mhz asus event andre cpu

i wouldnt say 100mhz more screams past, they just didnt know the tweaks, it is rocket science :D

Germany Moose83 says:

:D 01 is so much fun, but its also a lot tweaking like Pcmark :p lol :D

United States Bobnova says:

I would love to see PC05 gone. That would make me happy. Not sure there's a huge amount of point to 3d05 on modern hardware when it's so incredibly CPU bound and 3d06 is as well. Toss one and keep the other? 3d01 is a bit shaky too really, though it's one of my favorite benchmarks. XTU can gtfo as far as I'm concerned, but between it and pc05 I'd chuck pc05. Multiple cinebench versions with globals seems sort of silly.

Germany Moose83 says:

Catzilla gets more and more votes, PCM05 percantage going down :) Seems i have to buy Areca 1883ix lol :D

Australia Dinos22 says:

Vivi said: 3DMARK01 rank:

#1: 6600mhz gigabyte
#2: 6533mhz gigabyte
#3: 6700mhz asus event andre cpu
#4: 6650mhz asus event andre cpu
#5: 6650mhz asus event andre cpu
#6: 6650mhz asus event andre cpu

i wouldnt say 100mhz more screams past, they just didnt know the tweaks, it is rocket science :D


yuppers :celebration:

Belgium Massman says:

Yup, PCMark below 60% now

Germany Moose83 says:

:)

Brazil Rbuass says:

Hey... why I cannot vote?.... is disabled to me. :)

Colombia saint19 says:

rbuass said: Hey... why I cannot vote?.... is disabled to me. :)


You need to vote here Ronaldo: http://hwbot.org/ in the side bar after official partners space.

says:

anyone that voted 3d01/3d05 be ashamed of yourselves!

Germany Moose83 says:

+1 :D

United States steponz says:

+1 Most who have voted for these never actually benched them.....

Slovenia tiborrr says:

Team.AU said: anyone that voted 3d01/3d05 be ashamed of yourselves!


I am a bit (3dm05), but I think it will be better in the long run.

GENiEBEN says:

tiborrr said: I am a bit (3dm05), but I think it will be better in the long run.


Yup, makes no sense having all 3 03/05/06, I'd personally choose 03 only.

South Africa Vivi says:

But but but they so different. 03 is gpu. 05 is cpu. And kinda gpu. 06 is cpu and all out gpu

Germany Moose83 says:

Dont tuch 01-06 :(

Germany der8auer says:

No worries. If the community doesn't even want pcmark to go there is 0 risk for the rest :D

Belgium Massman says:

Yeah, the legacy benchmarks were never close to getting removed.

Poland Xtreme Addict says:

PCMark 05 is too buggy/cheatable to have it with globals. 01 SE is fun, it wasn't my benchmark, I benched it few times in my life on ln2, but still it's tweakable, needs strong cpu and gpu on ln2, it's scaling. I see no valid point to remove it. With each hw generation scores are higher and higher, and even with 780 Ti we need GPU on ln2. 03 is scaling great benchmark, gpu power + a bit of cpu power 05 is nice to run, I like it and each generation we have higher scores, who cares if it's now CPU benchmark, it's still fun 06 scales cpu/gpu and each generation scores are higher? What is the point of removing it? In fact I love the fact that older benchmarks need top CPU + a bit of GPU power. What is the problem with that? In fact When 3D11 with Sandy Bridge, everyone benched it with 5 ghz cpu, cause CPU was enough for that time, same with Heaven. Benchmarks are getting older, hw faster and now those need more CPU power. Scores with 5 GHz Haswell on 290X are not that big as with 6 GHz cpu. And for me it's beauty of hw development, cause I prefer to see scores with maxed out cpus and gpus than cpu on air/WC/SS or safe clocks and only pushing gpu. It's too easy. For me only factors which can be considered for removing benchmark are bugs/cheats or if score stop scaling with new gen of hw.

Germany Moose83 says:

Pcmark skales with new Cpus and Gpus ;)

GENiEBEN says:

Vivi said: But but but they so different.

03 is gpu.
05 is cpu. And kinda gpu.
06 is cpu and all out gpu


Hence my point, only 03 makes sense to keep.

Norway knopflerbruce says:

I find it amusing that so many people defend 01, but almost nobody runs the darn thing. If you love it so much, show it through a handful of subs, instead of complaining here :) I voted for 01, just to make sure PCM05 stays... and to piss off some of you folks :D (and because it's not a worse choice than PCM05 IMO). However, this approach aimed at global points is wrong. It shouldn't be about amount of PCM05 haters, it should be about # of subs submitted lately, and the number of users who submitted lately. I'd rather do it this way: set a limit during an announced period of time (say 3 months), and if the activity is not high enough the globals go away.

United Kingdom ObscureParadox says:

Why you haters gotta hate???? :'(


Germany der8auer says:

knopflerbruce said: I find it amusing that so many people defend 01, but almost nobody runs the darn thing. If you love it so much, show it through a handful of subs, instead of complaining here :) I voted for 01, just to make sure PCM05 stays... and to piss off some of you folks :D (and because it's not a worse choice than PCM05 IMO).

However, this approach aimed at global points is wrong. It shouldn't be about amount of PCM05 haters, it should be about # of subs submitted lately, and the number of users who submitted lately. I'd rather do it this way: set a limit during an announced period of time (say 3 months), and if the activity is not high enough the globals go away.


So you say you voted for 01 because you want PCM05 to stay and you want Benchmarks with low activity to lose points.
Well this poll is about the benchmarks with the lowest activities that's why we are asking to remove points or not. 01 has more than double the amount of submissions so your posting doesn't make sense whatsoever.

The biggest problem about PCM05 is that we can hardly moderate reported submissions. Even pro can't keep up with the tweaks so if you guys want it to stay please don't send complaints to me anymore about unmoderated submissions!

Germany Moose83 says:

I can help you Roman with moderating :p

United Kingdom ObscureParadox says:

Moose83 said: I can help you Roman with moderating :p


50% of PCMark 05 scores will vanish overnight then XD

Norway knopflerbruce says:

der8auer said: So you say you voted for 01 because you want PCM05 to stay and you want Benchmarks with low activity to lose points.
Well this poll is about the benchmarks with the lowest activities that's why we are asking to remove points or not. 01 has more than double the amount of submissions so your posting doesn't make sense whatsoever.

The biggest problem about PCM05 is that we can hardly moderate reported submissions. Even pro can't keep up with the tweaks so if you guys want it to stay please don't send complaints to me anymore about unmoderated submissions!


My vote is just as valid in terms of reasoning as the "I don't like PCM05, so I voted for it" ones (quite a few of those it seems) :D

I would've chosen "remove none", but as I noticed alot of people were complaining about 01 being included I just did it for laughs :p it won't go away anyway, based on the current results. I'd prefer to keep globals if people invest time and money into it - and if there was some sort of "keep PCM05 alive" thing going then you'd see the actual interest in the benchmark. I'd hit the submit button for sure.:)

Germany Moose83 says:

Seems Pcmark will stay :) Saving money now for new storage bye bye :p

Belgium Massman says:

56% now for PCMark. Looks like it might even drop below 50% :)

Australia Dinos22 says:

jeez that's one hell of a popular benchmark, over half the people wanna ditch it

Germany Moose83 says:

50/50 allmost So cant banned :)

Norway knopflerbruce says:

If anything it proves that there is a certain fanbase, even though they're not very active at the moment. Much like 01 I bet :p

Bulgaria I.nfraR.ed says:

knopflerbruce said: If anything it proves that there is a certain fanbase, even though they're not very active at the moment. Much like 01 I bet :p


Perhaps Moose posted on some forums asking for help and people voted in his advantage :p
Just like some contests over the net, where the entry with most votes wins.

Busted! :D

websmile says:

We only want you to save cash, Holger, that´s why we want to see this bugged cr.. gone :) - so give in, resistance is futile :p

Romania Alex@ro says:

a lot of dumb people choose to remove 3dmark 2001 it seems,such a pity

websmile says:

Result in startpost only shows amount of submissions made for each benchmark in last three months, poll is on hwbot startpage, below 10% vote for 01 to get stripped of globals. With normal variation of preferences, I think this is still too much :D, nontheless it is far less than on PCM05 for example.

Romania Alex@ro says:

Sorry,just realized that.Still too much people voted for 2001,should be banned on sight :)

Ukraine MaJ0r says:

"To put things in perspective, XTU was used by well over 2,500 overclockers in the past three months. The second most active benchmark is HWBOT Prime with slightly over 750 overclockers participating." - that QUOTE sounds strange because XTU and hwbot prime almost new benchmarks and a lot of OCers want to receive more global points for them. I'd do the same if I decided to spend some money and improve my hwbot rating ) I vote for Cat 1440p.

Germany Moose83 says:

I.nfraR.ed said: Perhaps Moose posted on some forums asking for help and people voted in his advantage :p
Just like some contests over the net, where the entry with most votes wins.

Busted! :D


Of course :p 90% of my friends vote Catzilla :D

Belgium Massman says:

56% for PCMark05.

United States Splave says:

can I vote again against pcmark05 please?

United States steponz says:

Was thinking the same thing.. can I revote?

United States Mikecdm says:

Too late for you guys. I vote against 4 way, I don't like it.

Germany Moose83 says:

+1 Mike 1 cat enough :p

Australia gazza30 says:

Seems a setup why not include all the benchmarks for vote to get an actual picture of what people really want to get rid of Aquafail comes to mind. Removing PCM05 when no other viable system bench exists is silly to even contemplate. Scales with cpu , gpu ,ram , hdd. Unlike most of the early 3d marks which are pretty much just a cpu test these days.

Australia Dinos22 says:

You are right gazza, we need that type of benchmark that isn't as easily manipulated. This one has gone beyond being tweakable to a bit of a joke. If anyone can attest to that it's James

Belgium Massman says:

54% for PCMark now. It's going down. 4 days left!

Norway knopflerbruce says:

Nothing is going down :D 67% limit not even close to be met :p

GENiEBEN says:

That rule is made out by Pieter, any voting system is done based on 50% + 1

Belgium Massman says:

Two-thirds supermajority is quite common practice in voting systems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermajority#Two-thirds_majority

Ukraine MaJ0r says:

Bros where is that poll? Can't find it. Article on main page says: " As usual you can find the poll in the sidebar".
Where's that f(l)ucking sidebar? )

Germany der8auer says:

It's on the main page on the right side below the team-league and stuff. Just scroll down a little.

Ukraine MaJ0r says:

der8auer said: It's on the main page on the right side below the team-league and stuff. Just scroll down a little.


Thanks, found it. Always've seen boring Official partners banners and never scrolled below them ))

Please log in or register to comment.

Leave a Reply: (BBCODE allowed: [B], [QUOTE], [I], [URL], [IMG],...)