HWBOT Team Cup 2015 - SC2: GPU Challenge

Offiziell
Online
Follow on OC-ESPORTS

HWBOT Team Cup 2015 Roadmap


15 Juli 2015 - 30 September 2015: HWBOT Team Cup 2015 - SC1: CPU Challenge


15 Juli 2015 - 30 September 2015: HWBOT Team Cup 2015 - SC2: GPU Challenge


			15 Juli 2015 - 30 September 2015: HWBOT Team Cup 2015


15 Juli 2015 - 30 September 2015: HWBOT Team Cup 2015 - SC3: MEM Challenge


15 Juli 2015 - 30 September 2015: HWBOT Team Cup 2015 - SC4: MISC Challenge

Teilnehmen

HWBOT Team Cup 2015 - SC2: GPU Challenge ist geschlossen seit 30 September 2015.
Dieser Wettkampf ist zwischen Teams.

Der Wettkampf ist beendet. Du kannst nicht mehr beitreten.

Stages:

Stage 1 - Cloud Gate Target: 250
Stage 2 - Aquamark3 Lowest Score
Stage 3 - 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme 1xGPU
Stage 4 - 3DMark99 Max 1x 6600 GT
Stage 5 - 3DMark Vantage Kabini
Stage 6 - 3DMark01 Fury
Stage 7 - Catzilla 576P LGA775 IGP
Stage 8 - 3DMark06 1x 9800GX2
Stage 9 - 3DMark03 Fastest AGP

Teilnehmer

Dieser Wettkampf war offen für alle.

Diskussionen (0)

Discuss the competition at the HWBOT forum (106 comments)

HWBOT General Rules and Guidelines

Here at HWBOT we try our best to deliver a fair and enjoyable playing field for all those who participate in the rankings and competition. To be able to provide this kind of service we have tried to design some submission and general rules to help remove any doubts about whether something is allowed or not. Based on continued experience these rules will be updated, expanded and completed as time goes by. Please check back for any updates.

Zeit übrig:

Geschlossen!

Wähle Rangliste:

Insgesamt
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

HWBOT Team Cup 2015 - SC2: GPU ChallengeRangliste

Overclock.net

276 pts

AwardFabrik

235 pts

Warp9-systems

228 pts

Overclockers.UA

214 pts

Overclockers.com

212 pts

Hardware Canucks

209 pts

TechSweden.org

201 pts

OC Team

142 pts

Hellas Overclocking Team

142 pts

Madshrimps Belgium OC Team

121 pts

XtremeOverdrive OC team Italy

114 pts

Hardware.Info OC Team

105 pts

Team MLG

100 pts

lab501.ro

88 pts

XtremeLabs.org

84 pts

XTREME OC Team Bulgaria

80 pts

OC Krue

63 pts

Belarus eXtreme Team

50 pts

Team Merlion

49 pts

Belarus OC Team

42 pts

ScrapOC

39 pts

Enthusiasts of Portugal

38 pts

Remarc

36 pts

Hardwareluxx.de

36 pts

Cowcotland

35 pts

Team Spartan

34 pts

Team Brazil

32 pts

ASUS Republic of Gamers

32 pts

apprentice overclockers of Argentina

30 pts

Australia OC

28 pts

Team Hungary

24 pts

HW Legend OC

22 pts

Overclock.pl Team

20 pts

Extremebenching.com

19 pts

Enthusiasts of United Kingdom

19 pts

Hardware.fr [HFR]

18 pts

Enthusiasts of United States

14 pts

PC Games Hardware

12 pts

HeavyCoolLabOfOverclockers

11 pts

HwReady OC

9 pts

Offizieller Wettkampf

This is an online event. Participants can compete from all around the world, and make submissions online.

As this is an official level 1 competition, competitors will receive season points for the final ranking as following.

Kommentare

14 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

I can see the 9800GX2 stage is going to be a real challenge

14 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

New mods needed?

15 Juli 2015 Massman says:

I can see the 9800GX2 stage is going to be a real challenge

Hehe, yeah. Sorry for that, it's 3DMark06.

New mods needed?

Result moderators?

Or voltage modifications?

15 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

All new type.. core mods to add DirectX11!

15 Juli 2015 Massman says:

No likes for the Fury stage?

15 Juli 2015 lanbonden says:

No likes for the Fury stage?

haha, must say I hoped that Id never have to tough a Rage 128 pro again, Just glad you guys didnt decide to run it in Aquamark (if it even works there?) as that would have been like few hours runs

15 Juli 2015 I.nfraR.ed says:

No likes for the Fury stage?

Ha, you got me there

I thought it is the new Fury...

15 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

No likes for the Fury stage?

I did until I saw the price of a fury Maxx now, over £100 to get one in the UK

16 Juli 2015 Massman says:

Ha, you got me there
I thought it is the new Fury...

16 Juli 2015 TASOS says:

The target score stage , is a fail , for this kind of competition.

Think about it.

16 Juli 2015 xxbassplayerxx says:

The target score stage , is a fail , for this kind of competition.

Think about it.

Because everyone can do it?

16 Juli 2015 Mr.Scott says:

No likes for the Fury stage?

I like it.

17 Juli 2015 TASOS says:

Because everyone can do it?

Not because of that.

Because of it's ranking system.

1st submission get's the top ranking and all the rest get nothing (i mean less and less points).

At least that's what i see right now.

Country cup is not a speedy competition with a narrow time frame.

All teams must have a reasonable time to prepare and a fair chance to fight for 1st place.

You cant write , that there is a soft launch at 15/07/2015

Then wait for full throttle at 01/08/2015.

The stage ends 15/09/2015

But the top ranking goes to the 1st submission.

Come on.

Where does it say that this is a time frame stage ?

Limitations

A verification screenshot is required.

Please attach a picture of your overclocking rig.

Only submissions made on or after 2015-07-15 are allowed.

Official Team Cup 2015 background mandatory (for stages with screenshot verification): download

17 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

I just thought it was an anti-sandbagging stage. 1 stage out of 30 isn't serious, and to be fair, the description did say that there were stages that are time sensitive. I believe the exact wording was "and some require immediate attention".

17 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

Not because of that.
Because of it's ranking system.

1st submission get's the top ranking and all the rest get nothing (i mean less and less points).

At least that's what i see right now.

Country cup is not a speedy competition with a narrow time frame.

All teams must have a reasonable time to prepare and a fair chance to fight for 1st place.

You cant write , that there is a soft launch at 15/07/2015

Then wait for full throttle at 01/08/2015.

The stage ends 15/09/2015

But the top ranking goes to the 1st submission.

Come on.

Where does it say that this is a time frame stage ?

Why not just plug a graphics card in and get it done. Only takes about 2 hours to get the score with the right card so stop complaining and start competing!!!

17 Juli 2015 lanbonden says:

Why not just plug a graphics card in and get it done. Only takes about 2 hours to get the score with the right card so stop complaining and start competing!!!

Maybe I was unlucky, but took 3 tries to hit 249 points and over 80 to hit 250

17 Juli 2015 knopflerbruce says:

I feel that if you complete the task you should get the top score anyway. After all, it's based on a fair bit of luck - it's a competition, not a lottery

17 Juli 2015 TASOS says:

Please fix the problem with this stage-6

http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2/2365/cloud_gate_target:_250

Give the same points , to whoever , gets the target score or change the whole stage project.

17 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

Please fix the problem with this stage-6
http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2/2365/cloud_gate_target:_250

Give the same points , to whoever , gets the target score or change the whole stage project.

Are you boycotting the stage then? Why not get a score up while there are still some good points to be had? I mean its not F1 racing, TechSweden hasn't won it already.

I'm pretty sure it was intentional so I don't see it getting changed.

17 Juli 2015 MrPaco says:

Not sure if it was noticed but the engine is taking all submissions made in the cloud gate target 250 subcomp and adding them all together on the leader board as 1 leader with 243 points...

Plus there are no team designations as to what team is ranked what...

18 Juli 2015 TASOS says:

Are you boycotting the stage then? Why not get a score up while there are still some good points to be had? I mean its not F1 racing, TechSweden hasn't won it already.

I'm pretty sure it was intentional so I don't see it getting changed.

Have you read my previous post ?

I think i made my self clear enough , about the reasons that are wrong.

Can you please answer my question below ?

A new team created today , wants to participate to Team Cup.

Do they have a chance to fight for 1st place in this stage ?

18 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

Not any more, but that is the way the stage was designed. I would argue that if a team was created one day before the competition, it might be the ONLY stage it had a chance of winning. The other 29 stages are heavily biased towards large teams, lots of hardware/sponsored teams, and those teams that are able to gather and share LN2 costs, etc. Should we start handicapping teams that have an advantage in some way. Perhaps if a team is based in a small country, perhaps of 132,000 square kilometers, they should get an automatic reduction in points because of how geographically close they are. I mean we are concerned with this new team being created right?

I honestly, could care less if they give everyone the same points or not, but the overview quite clearly states their was a stage that was time sensitive. If a team missed that clue, followed by the fact that only one stage was open, then why complain about it now? Sour grapes?

19 Juli 2015 TASOS says:

Not any more, but that is the way the stage was designed. I would argue that if a team was created one day before the competition, it might be the ONLY stage it had a chance of winning. The other 29 stages are heavily biased towards large teams, lots of hardware/sponsored teams, and those teams that are able to gather and share LN2 costs, etc. Should we start handicapping teams that have an advantage in some way. Perhaps if a team is based in a small country, perhaps of 132,000 square kilometers, they should get an automatic reduction in points because of how geographically close they are. I mean we are concerned with this new team being created right?

I honestly, could care less if they give everyone the same points or not, but the overview quite clearly states their was a stage that was time sensitive. If a team missed that clue, followed by the fact that only one stage was open, then why complain about it now? Sour grapes?

We are not transmitting at the same band.

Our frequencies are very far apart.

I have the feeling that you are trying to convince me that the original blackboard is white.

If English is your native language , can you please define "soft launch" ?

What i can tell you nevertheless is , that ...

A bad idea will always be a bad idea

Wrong will always be wrong.

I would appreciate , if somebody could explain to me , what the following text in the picture means , in plain English.

19 Juli 2015 Massman says:

Not sure if it was noticed but the engine is taking all submissions made in the cloud gate target 250 subcomp and adding them all together on the leader board as 1 leader with 243 points...
Plus there are no team designations as to what team is ranked what...

http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n619/MrPaco_CP/error1_zps2qbg1tw5.jpg

http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n619/MrPaco_CP/erro2_zpsdmwp1ucl.jpg

I think I figured out what the issue is here. The ranking is almost normal again ... only need a small fix

20 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

It's doing it as a user score and not a team one, probably where the issue lies.

20 Juli 2015 Massman says:

Clever man

20 Juli 2015 QuickFast says:

can I get cloud gate add to my team score

Scotty tell your team to slow down a bit so I can catch up

21 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

Clever man

Not sure if sarcasm, or you really don't know me

I'm far from clever

21 Juli 2015 Massman says:

No, I was being serious. Pretty sure that's the bug

21 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

No, I was being serious. Pretty sure that's the bug

Woop, I did a good thing finally

21 Juli 2015 TASOS says:

.....

If English is your native language , can you please define "soft launch" ?

What i can tell you nevertheless is , that ...

A bad idea will always be a bad idea

Wrong will always be wrong.

I would appreciate , if somebody could explain to me , what the following text in the picture means , in plain English.

Today we soft-launch the Team Cup 2015
feel free to check out the stages. The competition runs until 30/09 but beware: the stages close at different times and some require immediate attention.

Full overview and details on 01/08. Let the games begin!

Looks like i'm asking too much.

Nobody here has English as native language.

21 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

Looks like i'm asking too much.
or

Nobody here has English as native language.

I do, so I noticed that some stages require immediate attention

21 Juli 2015 Massman says:

On the 15th the competition started, but there's an advantage to the active HWBOT members because we don't do an official announcement.

The official announcement/email/social stuff follows on 1st of August.

21 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_launch

Whatever you do, do not look up at Urban Dictionary..... just saying.

21 Juli 2015 Aleslammer says:

Wondering if you have some maintenance going on, getting the opps screen when trying upload an AM3 or GPUPI score and the wall messages aren’t loading.

21 Juli 2015 Luebke says:

i think target score stage is a nice idea, but it shoud be a little bit different: the target shoud be a secret until the stage starts. if the target is known before, everybody has already the result and will upload it within the first seconds. that´s imho boring and has nothing to do with the benchmark. the benchmark itself will be pointless

but if the target is secret until the stage is open, everybody has to hurry to choose the best benchsystem and clocks and try to hit the target first i guess it would be much more fun, wouldn´t it?

21 Juli 2015 Marquzz says:

i think target score stage is a nice idea, but it shoud be a little bit different: the target shoud be a secret until the stage starts. if the target is known before, everybody has already the result and will upload it within the first seconds. that´s imho boring and has nothing to do with the benchmark. the benchmark itself will be pointless
but if the target is secret until the stage is open, everybody has to hurry to choose the best benchsystem and clocks and try to hit the target first i guess it would be much more fun, wouldn´t it?

As far as I know the target score was disclosed when the stage was opened?

And I don't see the point in announcing a target stage without the target score. You still have no idea what kind of hardware you need.

21 Juli 2015 TASOS says:

On the 15th the competition started, but there's an advantage to the active HWBOT members because we don't do an official announcement.

The official announcement/email/social stuff follows on 1st of August.

So , you decited to give ranking and points , to a particular stage , before official announcement ?

And users await for their full competition review on August 1st ?

And that's concidered a good-smart idea ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_launch

Whatever you do, do not look up at Urban Dictionary..... just saying.

From the link you provided , i assume that i had undesdood - translated correctly the overview text of the team cup.

"soft launch is the release .... to a limited audience"

"hard launch is making it generally available or else grand opening"

What more can i say ?

:confused:

Have a nice competition.

21 Juli 2015 lanbonden says:

i think target score stage is a nice idea, but it shoud be a little bit different: the target shoud be a secret until the stage starts. if the target is known before, everybody has already the result and will upload it within the first seconds. that´s imho boring and has nothing to do with the benchmark. the benchmark itself will be pointless
but if the target is secret until the stage is open, everybody has to hurry to choose the best benchsystem and clocks and try to hit the target first i guess it would be much more fun, wouldn´t it?

As the person that took home the stage Id say that if there was one thing to change for next year it would be to have a harder target.

It took me ~80 rounds to hit the target with roughly 10 hits of 1 point under/over before that. If the target was lets say 25.000 instead of 250 the chanse of anyone hitting the exakt target would be alot smaller due to a larger spread of the score between each run.

21 Juli 2015 Mr.Scott says:

Scotty tell your team to slow down a bit so I can catch up

I like it when the guys are enthusiastic.

21 Juli 2015 xxbassplayerxx says:

I like it when the guys are enthusiastic.

Oh you do, do you? :eek:

:banana:

23 Juli 2015 RomanLV says:

Stage 1 - Aquamark3 Lowest Score

Comrades, write the normal aquamark scheduler or please to be blo humanly send screenshots. "Invalid data file: Unable to parse the datafile" - tired This is bearable when the test is a few minutes. But then he goes day and get this garbage

Lose the desire to participate

23 Juli 2015 xxbassplayerxx says:

23 Juli 2015 QuickFast says:

RomanLV same thing here. spent all day on aquamark and it won't save properly

23 Juli 2015 techjesse says:

Stage 1 - Aquamark3 Lowest Score
Comrades, write the normal aquamark scheduler or please to be blo humanly send screenshots. "Invalid data file: Unable to parse the datafile" - tired This is bearable when the test is a few minutes. But then he goes day and get this garbage

Lose the desire to participate

Don't feel so bad, it happens to me to, take a look at this score and I can't upload jack. Same Unable to parse datafile

AQU3%204387_zpsrlt4xuj6.jpg

My old Hot Rod

24 Juli 2015 Massman says:

Maybe Genieben knows what's going on

24 Juli 2015 Marquzz says:

In stage 5, 3DMark01 Fury, is Rage 128 Ultra allowed?

24 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

In stage 5, 3DMark01 Fury, is Rage 128 Ultra allowed?

Doubt it, wasn't a fury card.

24 Juli 2015 Marquzz says:

Doubt it, wasn't a fury card.

But what defines a Fury-card? I mean, Rage 128 Pro IS Rage Fury Pro. It's only Fury MAXX that had Fury in the name. Isn't Ultra basically the same card as Pro only higher frequencies?

24 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

But what defines a Fury-card? I mean, Rage 128 Pro IS Rage Fury Pro. It's only Fury MAXX that had Fury in the name. Isn't Ultra basically the same card as Pro only higher frequencies?

It's a good question, but suppose you had a competition for 280X only, would 7970 be allowed too? Same core different name. I know it's slightly different but it's all in a name.

At the end of the day I can only guess and I don't know the answer. Wait for one of the mods to make a decision.

24 Juli 2015 Marquzz says:

It's a good question, but suppose you had a competition for 280X only, would 7970 be allowed too? Same core different name. I know it's slightly different but it's all in a name.

At the end of the day I can only guess and I don't know the answer. Wait for one of the mods to make a decision.

Googled it now, and Ultra actually have lower clock speeds. I have to check my collection to see if I have pro or ultra or both.

24 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

I was confused on this also, wiki doesn't list Fury Pro as a Rage card at all, only the MAXX

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units#Rage_Series

And this old review seems to infer that Fury Pro = Rage Pro

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ati-rage-fury-pro-review,133.html

So really not sure how to approach the stage, well other than use a Fury MAXX I guess.

24 Juli 2015 Mr.Scott says:

Planning on a Fury Pro unless I hear different.

24 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

Planning on a Fury Pro unless I hear different.

So they are separate cards? The Fury Pro is a Rage 128 Pro but not all Rage 128 Pro = Fury Pro?

24 Juli 2015 Marquzz says:

Planning on a Fury Pro unless I hear different.

So what is a "Fury Pro" then? As I see it every Rage 128 Pro-gpu based card that isn't a xpert 2000 Pro is in fact a Fury Pro.

24 Juli 2015 Mr.Scott says:

So what is a "Fury Pro" then? As I see it every Rage 128 Pro-gpu based card that isn't a xpert 2000 Pro is in fact a Fury Pro.

I'm holding in my hand right now, a Rage 128 Pro that is neither Xpert 2000 or Fury Pro. I can post a pic if you like.

So they are separate cards? The Fury Pro is a Rage 128 Pro but not all Rage 128 Pro = Fury Pro?

*shrug* I guess.

24 Juli 2015 Marquzz says:

I'm holding in my hand right now, a Rage 128 Pro that is neither Xpert 2000 or Fury Pro. I can post a pic if you like.

*shrug* I guess.

But I don't think they were labelled "Fury Pro". Just that the Rage 128 Pro gpu was used for two cards, and those were sold as either Fury Pro or xpert 2000 Pro.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/389

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ati-rage-fury-pro-review,133.html

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/ati-furypro.html

27 Juli 2015 daimons says:

why my submission did not bring my team points

http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2/2365/cloud_gate_target:_250

27 Juli 2015 xxbassplayerxx says:

http://hwbot.org/submission/2932948_

It looks like it wasn't submitted to the competition.

27 Juli 2015 daimons says:

it is the competition N 11 .

http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2/2365/cloud_gate_target:_250'>http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2/2365/cloud_gate_target:_250

but not for the team points

http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2

27 Juli 2015 Rasparthe says:

The stage is still broken, still waiting on a fix for it. It appears the entire CloudGate stage is being added together and not adding to the team total. Everyone is in the same boat, it will be fixed before the end of the competition I'm sure.

28 Juli 2015 skulstation says:

Watching dia schow

Edit 1:Whit stock settinds.need to find a way to downclok,after ±1h stil watching

28 Juli 2015 skulstation says:

Lol this need more time than i was thinking.

Stil my furst stock run.

Edit: its 23:00 in belgium,time to sleap.and let the diaschow continiu

29 Juli 2015 Bones says:

But I don't think they were labelled "Fury Pro". Just that the Rage 128 Pro gpu was used for two cards, and those were sold as either Fury Pro or xpert 2000 Pro.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/389

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ati-rage-fury-pro-review,133.html

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/ati-furypro.html

Seems that I have one not listed in those links, an ATI 3D Rage Pro Turbo.... However could be it is one of the linked cards with a different name, I dunno.

I have at least three variants of the Rgae cards including the one shown in the first link.

29 Juli 2015 Marquzz says:

Seems that I have one not listed in those links, an ATI 3D Rage Pro Turbo.... However could be it is one of the linked cards with a different name, I dunno.
I have at least three variants of the Rgae cards including the one shown in the first link.

You have to lift the heat sink, if it doesn't say Rage 128 Pro on the heatspreader it's not a Fury-card.

Since its hard to tell which card is a Fury-card, I think that either all Rage 128 Pro based cards should be allowed or only Fury MAXX cards.

29 Juli 2015 Bones says:

No heatspreader, looking at the bare core of the GPU to get the info of what it "is".

I agree, seems ATI made several variants of this card model but all look to be more or less the same in their overall specs. Maybe a touch more RAM on one model or something (Later revision?) but roughly the same thing.

29 Juli 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

I agree that the cores are effecitvely the same thing, but for the sake of not overcomplicating things can we just keep it to those with fury in the name.

29 Juli 2015 Aleslammer says:

Concerning AM3 low score if you have a 30+ hour run is it going to count as all 5 subs for the special achievement?

29 Juli 2015 Marquzz says:

I agree that the cores are effecitvely the same thing, but for the sake of not overcomplicating things can we just keep it to those with fury in the name.

Where does it say "Fury" on the card? On some sticker? On the PCB? Most of us don't have retail boxes.

29 Juli 2015 skulstation says:

Damm a ±12h aquamark3 run lost. o_O

But gone.re start now,if system boots to xp o_O

30 Juli 2015 Massman says:

The Cloud Gate target stage has been fixed - All teams should've gotten a boost

2 August 2015 Remarc says:

RomanLV ja verno ponjal chto u tebja rezalt ne gruzitsja sajt rugaetsja i ne prinimaet?

2 August 2015 Remarc says:

RomanLV ja pro aquamark,ne znayu kak tut koment pravit

5 August 2015 lanbonden says:

Anyone else having problem with that stupid frame 643 in the aquamark lowclock test? Doesnt mater if I got the system setup to reach it in 15 mins or 5h, it still get stuck on that single frame every run when I try and go below 500 in score.

7 September 2015 TASOS says:

Have we came up with a conclusion about the Fury stage ?

Which vga cards are allowed ? (other than fury maxx)

Which are the criteria of the moderating team in case of validation asked ?

Helpfull info ?

http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/home/item/111-ati-rage-128-pro

Are we accepting the clocks shown by powerstrip ?

...and even more.

Since gpu-z is of NO use for this stage (usefull for dev_id) ?

Which software can we all of us agree to use ?

Aida ?

7 September 2015 Marquzz says:

Well, I went through 5 rage 128 Pro cards until I actually found one that was identified as a Fury in GPU-Z

8 September 2015 Massman says:

@Strunkenbold, what's the verdict on the Fury cards?

Looks like the old ATI Fury is as problematic as the new AMD Fury

8 September 2015 Strunkenbold says:

New Fury is problematic? This must be a joke.

These old ones are a mess.

There was Rage Fury based on 128GL and a Rage Fury Pro based on 128Pro. Thats all we definitely know.

The existence of Rage Fury Pro category is actually a mistake. In the same way we would have to create a XPERT 2000 PRO or a Rage Magnum category. But that wont make sense.

If you ask me either allow only Rage Fury Maxx to make sure only "real" rage cards do participate or allow Rage 128 and Rage 128 Pro with the slight possibility that some non Fury card slip through into the competition.

Work is in progress and I really like to say thanks to havli for helping me with research.

I just created a mess in the atom section and need to clean that first after going on with Rage.

8 September 2015 viper-rd says:

can anyone remove the fake results ??

http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2/2366/catzilla_576p_lga775_igp

the first two results are not made in the 775 integrated graphics

Fur test (GPU) the result is too large.

In this case, only the tab graphics card in CPU-Z guarantees that only an integrated graphics card

8 September 2015 xxbassplayerxx says:

can anyone remove the fake results ??
http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2/2366/catzilla_576p_lga775_igp

the first two results are not made in the 775 integrated graphics

Fur test (GPU) the result is too large.

In this case, only the tab graphics card in CPU-Z guarantees that only an integrated graphics card

What makes you think Rasparthe's result is invalid?

http://hwbot.org/submission/2971828

8 September 2015 Rasparthe says:

can anyone remove the fake results ??
http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/team_cup_2015_sc2/2366/catzilla_576p_lga775_igp

the first two results are not made in the 775 integrated graphics

Fur test (GPU) the result is too large.

In this case, only the tab graphics card in CPU-Z guarantees that only an integrated graphics card

Why go right to the cheat accusations? I can assure you that I have no time for cheating, not in my submissions or my teams. I moderate them all the time. I'm sure the mods can attest to that.

Catzilla was a bad choice of benchmark for this stage since it barely, barely runs on 775 IGP. Maybe its throwing up borked runs, I don't know, there are no existing runs for comparison. I saw I was higher than the runs that were (AwardFabrik in 2nd) there but I was using better hardware (Quad compared to Dual) and higher clocked RAM (important for IGP runs) so didn't see a problem. I have other runs in the 300s as well. I didn't get close to 1st place but needed more time to work out the runs I figured.

There is no need to head straight to cheat accusations. You reported the run, the mods can decided. If its not valid, I'll gladly take it down, I'm interested in seeing your runs you are basing the accusations on.

8 September 2015 Bones says:

Looks legit to me - I checked that and yes, the board model he used does have onboard graphics.

His GPU-Z reading shows he did use the onboard IGP so from here it looks valid.

However let the mods do their job, I do believe this one will stand but if it's borked somehow, I'm sure they'll say so.

8 September 2015 Johan45 says:

If any of them are bugged it's the 2332 run that's in first right now. That looks very out of place and not all the test scores are showing.

8 September 2015 viper-rd says:

Rasparthe

Tell us - how you got on the GPU test values at the level of GeForce GTX TITAN+:

Hardware (GPU+CPU) - 196

Physics (CPU) - 68

Fur (GPU) - 5843

Fluid (GPU) - 14551

Raymarch (GPU) - 4044

I specifically looked at the results of more than a dozen - on any weak graphics card is no such values.

if you claim the correctness of your result - prove that the system is no more cards.

Make unwrapped screenshot or video.

you're right - I apologize to you.

i3 2120/8gb/intel HD graphics = 554

Hardware (GPU+CPU) - 576

Physics (CPU) - 66

Fur (GPU) - 42

Fluid (GPU) - 32

Raymarch (GPU) - 21

I would like to have seen a response moderators...

8 September 2015 Rasparthe says:

You have obviously done much more research on the subject than I have. You are correct though something doesn't look right. I stand by the fact I only put up the score because it appeared in line with the ones that were posted, but I didn't look closely at the subscores. I will gladly take it down.

In the future, you may want to start with asking mods to look at a score, give a reason why you think their is an issue and then ramp up to cheat accusations. Starting the other way just looks like sour grapes. I still look forward to seeing your scores though I imagine all that research will pay off.

9 September 2015 viper-rd says:

you are my questions are not answered.

what is the point to argue with you?

let them decide moderators.

9 September 2015 TASOS says:

There is really no need for cheat accusations.

Rasparthe is a valued member of this community and if his score is out of line that would be an honest mistake and nothing else.

9 September 2015 viper-rd says:

TASOS

My offer is valid.

Show the result with an open tab graphics cards in CPU-Z.

@you're right - I apologize to you@

9 September 2015 xxbassplayerxx says:

viper, have you tried running Catzilla on 775 IGP yet? Give it a try and report back with your findings.

Quick hint, the benchmark won't even open if your memory isn't above 600MHz. Not to criticize whoever chose this stage but Catzilla is about the worst benchmark possible to run on IGP. I'm sure it's bugging on nearly every run.

9 September 2015 I.nfraR.ed says:

No need for accusations in cheating.

Sure, the run is bugged, but you know what... it happened to me several times on various cards (much newer and powerful than this).

It is most probably a stability problem. At a certain point in the benchmark the system fails and the points for subtests get inflated a lot.

I can imagine on that slow system you can't really tell if the benchmark froze or still running normally. Don't have such system, but I bet it is pushing it very hard.

As it is said: you're innocent by default, until proven guilty.

9 September 2015 Aleslammer says:

Bench does throw a lot of whacky scores and a great number of folks havenâ€™t ran it that much so donâ€™t know that much about it. Thatâ€™s one good thing about it being used in the TC by letting folks know what is generally used for determining bugged runs.

Personally have had three or four runs way out of line with cards that others had posted scores with so had something to compare to. Ran a Quadro FX 570 three or so months ago which had a high Raymarch compared to the other sub tests but was present on every run, did note it in the remarks section. Cards before and after seemed in line same hardware and OS.

10 September 2015 ObscureParadox@3XS says:

viper may I suggest you take a breathe and calm down for a second, as others have stated if any mistake was made then it would be an innocent one and not intended by Rasparthe.

I suggest you let the mods do their work and not start a witch hunt in the forums

10 September 2015 Rasparthe says:

New Fury is problematic? This must be a joke.

These old ones are a mess.

There was Rage Fury based on 128GL and a Rage Fury Pro based on 128Pro. Thats all we definitely know.

The existence of Rage Fury Pro category is actually a mistake. In the same way we would have to create a XPERT 2000 PRO or a Rage Magnum category. But that wont make sense.

If you ask me either allow only Rage Fury Maxx to make sure only "real" rage cards do participate or allow Rage 128 and Rage 128 Pro with the slight possibility that some non Fury card slip through into the competition.

Work is in progress and I really like to say thanks to havli for helping me with research.

I just created a mess in the atom section and need to clean that first after going on with Rage.

So what is the official ruling on this? Are Rage Pro cards allowed? Only MAXX? Only 4 days left in this stage so would like the clarification. Personally I can't seem to find a Rage Fury Pro, only Rage 128 Pros.

10 September 2015 Strunkenbold says:

You can submit with your 128 Pro card in the Rage Fury Pro category as I probably will merge them later.

10 September 2015 TASOS says:

... Personally I can't seem to find a Rage Fury Pro, only Rage 128 Pros.

Rage 128 Pro is Fury Pro.

11 September 2015 Strunkenbold says:

Ok I finally sorted those Rage cards. Rage Fury cards where always 128bit and 32Mb Memory. Means, you can submit with:

Rage 128 (128bit, 32Mb)

Rage 128 pro (128bit, 32Mb)

And dont forget to attach a GPU-Z or Everest / AIDA window! Best is both.

Massman, please also allow Rage (128bit, 32Mb).

11 September 2015 TASOS says:

Current version of gpu-z , is practically useless.

The only thing it can read correct , is the device-id.

It wont read the correct bus width.

11 September 2015 Strunkenbold says:

It may display wrong things but it still shows useful information.

If there is SDR and 64bit displayed means: SDR 128bit

If there is DDR and 64bit displayed means: SDR 64bit

To be really sure you have to use everest / aida. Powerstrip is not enough.

I had to drop many results in the 128bit section because of no validation though I know that all score under 1000points are basically made with 64bit memory interface.

18 September 2015 Spiedie says:

Just to be sure before i start a run with aquamark, windows 8.1 IS allowed for unoverclockable systems right? (Dell venue 8 pro with Atom Z3740D in this case)

18 September 2015 xxbassplayerxx says:

Honestly, I think not. It may be logical but it's still outside of the rules.