New cheat-proof Pi Benchmark: Begin Debug.

[eshbach]

OK, i've got a usable build of my pi calculation benchmark done. It is not susceptable to cheats like SuperPi is. I, however, don't know all the cheats (only a few major ones), and the program probably has a bunch of bugs i haven't found yet.

So, you can all help by downloading the benchmark, trying to cheat, looking for bugs, and posting your results here. I will then fix the program to get it perfected and hopefully we can have a new reliable Pi program.

The program is available for download at www.baughman-eshbach.com/ePiInstall.exe
I only have 40GB/Month of bandwidth, so if XS or someone else could help mirror this, that would be great. This is not neccessary until the final version, of course.

here's a screenshot of the program and the checksum verification program i made to accompany it:

http://img139.exs.cx/img139/5083/episcreen3dc.jpg

The verifier is available to moderators upon request.

The accuracy and Pi algorithim are NOT finalized, therefore benchmark times are probably inaccurate, but it will still work, times will just not be comparable with times from the final build (1.0).

You MUST have the .NET Framework installed to run this program. If you don't have it, you can get it from microsoft.com for free: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=262D25E3-F589-4842-8157-034D1E7CF3A3&displaylang=en

You also MUST be connected to the internet in order to run this benchmark.

Features:
Time obtained from remote server.
4 part checksum.
No platform optimizations.

Known Issues (will be posted as they are reported) :
- Should be 4 part checksum - FIXED
- Index out of bounds: 16

Suggested Changes (so far):
- Time in sec:ms format.
- Stop Calculation button.
- A pretty desktop icon.
- No Internet Connection. - Tentatively Changing
- No .NET Framework. - Tentatively Changing

Mirror List:
http://jeff.canyonlake.net/ePiInstall.exe
http://www.drbus.com/files/software/ePiInstall.exe

I will be away for the holidays, but get the list started and i will start fixing things after the new year.

[Karnivore]

Nice effort, I'll give it a shot :toast:

Happy Holdays, have a safe one!

[conrad.maranan]

Sounds good. I'll test it out.

[blinky]

make it so we can see hundreths of a second ;)

[charlie]

failed to initialize??

Ahhhh, I see need .NET !!

[Aphex_Tom_9]

what about the windows clock manipulation cheat?

[eshbach]

failed to initialize??

C

the installer or the program? .NET Framework 1.1 installed?

You will need to reinstall the program after installing the framework i think.

[eshbach]

what about the windows clock manipulation cheat?

shouldn't be an issue since it gets time from a server, not the local machine.

[charlie]

hmmmmm... where's the ms linkie?

[eshbach]

hmmmmm... where's the ms linkie?

here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=262D25E3-F589-4842-8157-034D1E7CF3A3&displaylang=en

i've added it to the first post too.

[DBlue135]

Even though we're talking on AIM right now and this post is completely unnecessary:

What prevents someone from running the test for say 18 iterations, getting a time, setting it to 20 iterations and then taking a screen shot? Your checker program doesn't take into account the number of iterations.

[conrad.maranan]

What's the exact purpose of Accuracy Level?

EDIT:
Nevermind. I figured it out.

[eshbach]

What prevents someone from running the test for say 18 iterations, getting a time, setting it to 20 iterations and then taking a screen shot? Your checker program doesn't take into account the number of iterations.


OK, this brings up an interesting point. Would you rather have the iterations locked after the run and the program need to be "reset" before running again or just make it a 4-part checksum?

[eshbach]

What's the exact purpose of Accuracy Level?

Well, SuperPi has different levels of accuracy of Pi (16k, 1M, 32M, etc) so i thought i would incorporate a similar feature. The more accurate the number the more likely you are to get errors if your OC isn't stable.

[DBlue135]

Just make it a 4 part checksum. That way you don't have to close the program and open it again after every run.

[eshbach]

Just make it a 4 part checksum. That way you don't have to close the program and open it again after every run.

Well you wouldn't have to close it, just click a "reset" button.

[conrad.maranan]

So far, I recommend the following:

- Time in sec:ms format. For example - 19:03
- Stop Calculation button.
- A pretty desktop icon. I like pretty icons. The graphic you have in the title bar would be nice.

[DBlue135]

It's still abusable with a reset button. Nothing prevents someone from photochopping it to read 20

[eshbach]

It's still abusable with a reset button. Nothing prevents someone from photochopping it to read 20


OK: It is now fixed to include a 4 part checksum.

[Geforce4ti4200]

wow this sounds like a sweet cheat resisant program. You got some programming skills there, I was never really good at programing :( alot of the programming stuff is 100x harder than that too. one feature I would really like is an "orb" database where you can upload your scores, screenshots can be manupliated by photoshop or whatever. even if he cant cheat, he can still doctor the screenshots anyway. with a database, you upload your score(similar to 3dmark) and it has rankings for your cpu MHz and class. This will also let you compare your time with anyone else out there and greatly encourage competition ;) after this maybe someone can make a program thats both cpu and gpu intensive, perhaps use 3-d graphics that spin or something and make it so it needs cpu power to calculate the movement. itll be like a "3dmark"

[PS2pcGAMER]

Cool program, and an ORB would be cool.

BTW, I mirrored it:

http://jeff.canyonlake.net/ePiInstall.exe

I have 50GB of bandwidth, but they don't really monitor it so it should be plenty.

Dothan @ 1.7 result:

[bh2k]

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=21389&stc=1

:confused: :confused:

[Hilppa]

BH2K: Too much overclock ;) ;)

[STEvil]

How about make it so a net connection isnt required?

[CodeRed]

How about make it so a net connection isnt required?

yeah, my benching machine lives in the garage and I have to upload results using sneaker-net (floppies)


Can you elaborate on the technique used to calculate Pi? Also is the program optimised and vectorised to use SSE, SSE2 or SSE3. The microsoft compiler does a crap job of optimising vectorisable code.

[HiJon89]

His first post says it has no optimizations so I guess not.

[Flib]

when I click at Calculate! The programm freezes.

Maybe not compatible with Server2003?

[cold_ice]

when I click at Calculate! The programm freezes.

Maybe not compatible with Server2003?
I have Win2003 Server and it is running without a problem.

[PMM]

Nice work...

But App certainly hangs now and then

Timer check ? was does the figures represent I get wild changes in this figure
I presume close to 1000000 = no time odderties ? but whats an exceptable.


Also got this error ? ..............>

See the end of this message for details on invoking
just-in-time (JIT) debugging instead of this dialog box.

************** Exception Text **************
java.lang.StringIndexOutOfBoundsException: 16


************** Loaded Assemblies **************
mscorlib
Assembly Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32 Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/microsoft.net/framework/v1.1.4322/mscorlib.dll
----------------------------------------
ePi
Assembly Version: 1.0.1819.5712
Win32 Version: 1.0.1819.5712
CodeBase: file:///C:/Program%20Files/ePi/ePi.exe
----------------------------------------
System.Windows.Forms
Assembly Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32 Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system.windows.forms/1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089/system.windows.forms.dll
----------------------------------------
System
Assembly Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32 Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system/1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089/system.dll
----------------------------------------
vjslib
Assembly Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32 Version: 1.1.4322.0
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/vjslib/1.0.5000.0__b03f5f7f11d50a3a/vjslib.dll
----------------------------------------
vjscor
Assembly Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32 Version: 1.1.4322.0
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/vjscor/1.0.5000.0__b03f5f7f11d50a3a/vjscor.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Drawing
Assembly Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32 Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system.drawing/1.0.5000.0__b03f5f7f11d50a3a/system.drawing.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Data
Assembly Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32 Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system.data/1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089/system.data.dll
----------------------------------------

************** JIT Debugging **************
To enable just in time (JIT) debugging, the config file for this
application or machine (machine.config) must have the
jitDebugging value set in the system.windows.forms section.
The application must also be compiled with debugging
enabled.

For example:

<configuration>
<system.windows.forms jitDebugging="true" />
</configuration>

When JIT debugging is enabled, any unhandled exception
will be sent to the JIT debugger registered on the machine
rather than being handled by this dialog.

[craig588]

Stop using .net. It is more trouble than the slight gui benefits it provides.

[eshbach]

ok, lots of replies to make, i'll try to go in order:

geforce: The checksum prevents photoshopping, no 3d graphic is required. An ORB verification system would be cool, but i would definately need a bigger place to host it.

PS2pcGAMER: Thanks for mirroring it, but we will have to figure out a way to sync the updates until it's finished.

bh2K: It looks like you don't have the .NET framework installed.

Stevil: I'm presently working on a way to keep the windows timer cheat from working while not rerquiring a net connection. Hopefully this will be possible.

CodeRed: I'm using a slightly modified Gauss-Legendre algorithm. I don't want to go into too much detail in the code to prevent anyone from getting ideas :)

Flib: Sounds like it can't get to the time server, do you have a firewall running by any chance?

PMM: Looks like you found something i will have to fix. Thanks. I'm not so sure what causes the hanging, but hopefully if i can come up with a net-free version of this it will go away. The timer check is a checksum value. It will be different every time you calculate. It is just another anti-cheat measure.

craig588: What problems does .NET cause? I use VS .NET 2003 for pretty much everything and so does everyone i know from work... I could try to find my VS 6.0 CD's and redo it, but it would take a pretty major issue for me to do that.

[drcrawn]

This is really cool, and quite impressive Eshback. I'm gonna try it out ASAP, which is when I go home after xmas.
I might even try it out on this machine (dad's 3.2EE...dont ask...) but I gotta get the nod from him before installing .net etc.
It is definitely time for a cool new pi program that can't be cheated. I'm sick of seeing 24 sec this and 25 sec that, and thinking "please..."

[eshbach]

This is really cool, and quite impressive Eshback. I'm gonna try it out ASAP, which is when I go home after xmas.
I might even try it out on this machine (dad's 3.2EE...dont ask...) but I gotta get the nod from him before installing .net etc.
It is definitely time for a cool new pi program that can't be cheated. I'm sick of seeing 24 sec this and 25 sec that, and thinking "please..."


heh well you may see 24sec or 25sec from mine because i don't have the accuracy or the algorithim perfected yet, but hopefully by the time you get home from christmas the program will be giving accurate times.

[mikead_99]

I like what you are doing here, nice effort eshbach. :toast: I hate that you use .NET myself, but that is only because until now I have avoided installing the framework as I don't want to support M$'s efforts to squash Sun's Java (on M$ platforms) in any way. Obviously I'm not slowing them down in the least, so I'm going to go ahead and put it on for this.

[agenda2005]

I think it's important to have a cheat proof pi program, but your code is probably running with x87 assembly which tells little about the CPU strenght. Since most people don't program towards it anymore. The use of SSE and SSE2 (Not SSE3 for now until AMD implementation) to optimize the code will be much better as CodeRed mentioned. For someone like me, your Pi program wil not be releveant for comparison if SSE/SSE2 and 3DNow/3DNow!(+) optimizations are not included. Peherps you can make separate optimizations for this instructions and have an interface that shows Pi optimizations for the following intructions.
(1) x87
(2) SSE
(3) SSE2
(3)SSE3
(4) 3DNow
(3)3DNow!(+)
We can have a broad idea of how the program perform under different optimization for each architecture.
NB: Can you try Monte Carlo algorithm and compare with the Gauass-legendre type?

[freeloader]

agenda2005....either I'm wrong or you missed the entire point/purpose of this program. It's meant to be run without optimizations. Strictly X87 FPU. Optimizations are cheats to some people, some not.

I can't run the program even at stock speeds. And .net is definitely installed correctly as my ATI control panel needs it and it works fine. :(

[Flib]

i updated the net framework version from 1.0 to 1.1 and got to sp1 for server2003, now I get this error:
Informationen über das Aufrufen von JIT-Debuggen
finden Sie am Ende dieser Meldung, anstatt in diesem Dialogfeld.

************** Ausnametext **************
java.net.NoRouteToHostException:


************** Geladene Assemblys **************
mscorlib
Assembly-Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32-Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/microsoft.net/framework/v1.1.4322/mscorlib.dll
----------------------------------------
ePi
Assembly-Version: 1.0.1819.5712
Win32-Version: 1.0.1819.5712
CodeBase: file:///C:/Programme/ePi/ePi.exe
----------------------------------------
System.Windows.Forms
Assembly-Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32-Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system.windows.forms/1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089/system.windows.forms.dll
----------------------------------------
System
Assembly-Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32-Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system/1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089/system.dll
----------------------------------------
vjslib
Assembly-Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32-Version: 1.1.4322.0
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/vjslib/1.0.5000.0__b03f5f7f11d50a3a/vjslib.dll
----------------------------------------
vjscor
Assembly-Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32-Version: 1.1.4322.0
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/vjscor/1.0.5000.0__b03f5f7f11d50a3a/vjscor.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Drawing
Assembly-Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32-Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system.drawing/1.0.5000.0__b03f5f7f11d50a3a/system.drawing.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Data
Assembly-Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32-Version: 1.1.4322.2032
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system.data/1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089/system.data.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Windows.Forms.resources
Assembly-Version: 1.0.5000.0
Win32-Version: 1.1.4322.573
CodeBase: file:///c:/windows/assembly/gac/system.windows.forms.resources/1.0.5000.0_de_b77a5c561934e089/system.windows.forms.resources.dll
----------------------------------------

************** JIT-Debuggen **************
Um das JIT-Debuggen (Just-In-Time) zu aktivieren, muss in der
Konfigurationsdatei der Anwendung oder des Computers
(machine.config) der jitDebugging-Wert im Abschnitt system.windows.forms festgelegt werden.
Die Anwendung muss mit aktiviertem Debuggen kompiliert werden.

Zum Beispiel:

<configuration>
<system.windows.forms jitDebugging="true" />
</configuration>

Wenn das JIT-Debuggen aktiviert ist, werden alle nicht behandelten
Ausnahmen an den JIT-Debugger gesendet, der auf dem
Computer registriert ist, und nicht von diesem Dialogfeld behandelt.

it's the same as PMM has, isn't it?
Please program it without Framework :(

[RocKer]

That is looking nice,i like new bench progs like that,but i will not install .NET,dont like it,sorry,so i cannot try it out.

[DBlue135]

I hate to say this eshbach, but I think RocKer is right. If you want this to get big, you're going to have to drop the .net framework

[eshbach]

I will carefully consider whether or not to include certain optimizations. If i do include any it will only be ones that will work on all modern processors.

As for dropping .NET... Why is it so hated? If the only reason people don't like it is because of it being a microsoft product, then i see no reason to get rid of it. .NET is a vital part of microsoft's future, and is only getting bigger. If there's a real reason not to use it, then i will rewrite it in VC++ 6.0 or something.

Flib, that's definately a network issue. It's telling you it either can't get packets to the time server or can't get packets back from the time server. Make sure you don't have a firewall blocking it or anything like that.

Freeloder, what error do you get with the program? Did the install go correctly?

[DBlue135]

More people will download it if it's not dependent on .net framework. If this bothers you, you should change it. If this doesn't bother you, keep it the way it is

Also keep in mind that there's a difference between the way things "should" be and the way thing actually are.

[jjcom]

Another vote for dropping the .NET thing. Some people like me are still on dial up and don't want to download a 25mb file. It take too long. Try and code it so its more like the orgianal, no "extra" programs needed to run

jjcom

[Wrench]

Yeah I vote for droping of .net cause its a pretty big download and its not a quick bench 22+mb .net then the benchmark...

Personal request could you make this multithreaded for SMP enabled systems?

Ie 1 Bench for 2 cpus and a bench for each CPU. I would love to smp bench but their just plainly isn't one.

[Kunaak]

I see no reason to drop .net

unless someone can give me a real reason, I see no reason he should.
I just downloaded .net 1.1 on a 28k modem.
if I can do it, so can you...

[kromosto]

nice app eshbach :toast:

actually i dont have any problems about any of the .net versions but the problem with .net framework C# and J# is if you write the same application exactly the same application in mfc or borland builder say it takes 3 or 4 mbs of memory but when you write it with .net framework it takes at least 20mbs of memory microsoft has to fix this problem

[CodeRed]

Another vote to drop .net.

If your serious about your benching setup then you dont want something big and ugly like .net installed.

My 2c

EDIT: Are you using a C coded FFT routine or is it hand crafted assembly? Once the code is ready and debugged download an evaulation copy of Intel's compiler (30 day license IIRC) and turn up the optimisations. This compiler isnt too bad at SSE optimisations.

[Kunaak]

again, why won't anyone give a actual reason why .net shouldn't be used?

[CodeRed]

again, why won't anyone give a actual reason why .net shouldn't be used?

Plain and simple its too big and is prone to stuffed up installs. It still wont work on my spare duron/win 2k rig and I couldnt be bothered trying to fix that.

Pifast and superpi are so popular coz its a quick download and install.

How many benchies have you avoided coz you couldnt be bothered downloading 20MB and spending the next 30 min trying to get it to work?

[Kunaak]

Plain and simple its too big and is prone to stuffed up installs. It still wont work on my spare duron/win 2k rig and I couldnt be bothered trying to fix that.

Pifast and superpi are so popular coz its a quick download and install.

How many benchies have you avoided coz you couldnt be bothered downloading 20MB and spending the next 30 min trying to get it to work?

pifast and super pi, are both the exact opposite of what this program is trying to be... cheat free.

the more you neuter it, the more you try to make it just another super pi, the more you weaken the program so it's just another program you can cheat on. which just makes another useless benchmark.

pifast and super pi are so dang easy to cheat on, it's almost frustrating to even try and be excited about new records and such with these programs, cause now I am super questionable about every shot I see.
I want the "cheat free" part of this program to remain, and if that meant some people refuse to use it, then no sweat of my back, cause I'd just take them less serious when attempting to show OC's and such.

as for how many benchmarks have I avoided cause they were 20 megs or more?

none.
even with a 28k connection.
it's easy to start downloading something, then go watch a movie, go take a shower, go shopping for food, go to sleep or anything else.
I literally have one of the slowest connections ever at the moment, cause I messed up on paying my bills and now my cable TV is paid 4 months in advance, and my cable internet is overdue by 2 months, all cause the billing service I pay with puts only "cable" on the reason for payment.
when you only get money for school and food each month, a screw up like this, can take weeks to fix, with no job....
so I have AOHell at the moment, blazing away at a amazing 28k, loading webpages once every 2 minutes, and a 1 meg file takes 5 minutes to download.

if I can do it. so can you...

I do it, cause I wanna see a cheat free benchmark.
not another version of super pi thats barely reliable :(

I admit, I don't know about .Net stuff.
but the guy seems to feel it's useful, and important to keep it cheat free.
if theres another way then .Net then do it, but if it makes it easier to cheat on, then it wastes all efforts in this...

[Flib]

but I'm not having a Firewall, the Windows internal one is also off!
And I'm not having a Router,too :(

Which port does the program use?

Ok-got the error away, I had to start the WindowsTime service, but now I'M getting a new error:
Informationen über das Aufrufen von JIT-Debuggen
finden Sie am Ende dieser Meldung, anstatt in diesem Dialogfeld.

************** Ausnametext **************
java.net.ConnectException:

A very short error ^^ What's that?

[eshbach]

but I'm not having a Firewall, the Windows internal one is also off!
And I'm not having a Router,too :(

Which port does the program use?

Ok-got the error away, I had to start the WindowsTime service, but now I'M getting a new error:
Informationen über das Aufrufen von JIT-Debuggen
finden Sie am Ende dieser Meldung, anstatt in diesem Dialogfeld.

************** Ausnametext **************
java.net.ConnectException:

A very short error ^^ What's that?

this still seems like it's local to your system/network, so without knowing exactly how you have windows configured, it's hard to say what it is . timing is done on port 13. :confused:

Actually a light just went off in my head... you're in germany and i'm using an american time server... could be part of the issue right there.

This is not a problem because i think i have come up with a way to be cheat-free and not use an internet connection. Just sit tight for the next version... and sorry about the headaches!

[CodeRed]

kunaak

I think you misunderstand me. I also would like to see a new standard bench that is cheat free. Making the bench is the easy part (relatively speaking). Making it a standard isnt so easy. Just having a few dozen members at XS running this bench wont sustain the interest ... it needs to be widespread.

Having .net just detracts from getting general acceptance of this bench. You have to download and install another app, sometimes stuffing around getting the right versions and this will just get worse as M$ release new versions of .net

Over the years there have been so many new benchmarks that have come an gone. Most dont even survive a few weeks before fading away. I dont know all the factors that make a program get general acceptance (otherwise Id be a rich as Bill) but convenience certainly ranks high on my list.

Just imagine trying to get the members of another forum to accept this bench and run with it. If the first thread gets cluttered with "I cant install it..." or ".net foobar'd my OS .." or "cant download V1.10364346347 patch 36.a of ...." then the bench will not get popular and become one of the "faded". I dont want this to happen.

A few other points off the top of my (now beer inflicted) head that may help to get wide acceptance

a. Absolutely positively cheat free.

b. nominal execution time. A really short benchmark doesnt give people confidence in the stability of the CPU being tested and a really long benchmark may cause people to lose interest.

b. must test both CPU and mem. People need to see a reward for their 300 Mhz 2-2-2-5 timings :)

c. mustn't favour one architechure too heavily. Hence my desire to see full SSE, SSE2 and even SSE3 optimisations. That way no one feels left out.


Now I hope you see where I am coming from.

Cheers
CodeRed

[eshbach]

kunaak

I think you misunderstand me. I also would like to see a new standard bench that is cheat free. Making the bench is the easy part (relatively speaking). Making it a standard isnt so easy. Just having a few dozen members at XS running this bench wont sustain the interest ... it needs to be widespread.

Having .net just detracts from getting general acceptance of this bench. You have to download and install another app, sometimes stuffing around getting the right versions and this will just get worse as M$ release new versions of .net

Over the years there have been so many new benchmarks that have come an gone. Most dont even survive a few weeks before fading away. I dont know all the factors that make a program get general acceptance (otherwise Id be a rich as Bill) but convenience certainly ranks high on my list.

Just imagine trying to get the members of another forum to accept this bench and run with it. If the first thread gets cluttered with "I cant install it..." or ".net foobar'd my OS .." or "cant download V1.10364346347 patch 36.a of ...." then the bench will not get popular and become one of the "faded". I dont want this to happen.

A few other points off the top of my (now beer inflicted) head that may help to get wide acceptance

a. Absolutely positively cheat free.

b. nominal execution time. A really short benchmark doesnt give people confidence in the stability of the CPU being tested and a really long benchmark may cause people to lose interest.

b. must test both CPU and mem. People need to see a reward for their 300 Mhz 2-2-2-5 timings :)

c. mustn't favour one architechure too heavily. Hence my desire to see full SSE, SSE2 and even SSE3 optimisations. That way no one feels left out.


Now I hope you see where I am coming from.

Cheers
CodeRed

I definately see what you're saying. I think i now have the program working cheat-free without an internet connection required, but i'm not ready to upload it just yet, especially if i'm dropping .NET.

I am going to try to rewrite it over the next few days to be a standard win32 application, but i can't really give an exact time frame as to when i'll have it done as i will be away and quite busy (though i will have my laptop).

[RocKer]

I see no reason to drop .net

unless someone can give me a real reason, I see no reason he should.
I just downloaded .net 1.1 on a 28k modem.
if I can do it, so can you...
And if i jump off a bridge,you to?????

[Kunaak]

And if i jump off a bridge,you to?????

as poor of an analogy your trying to make... I see what you say, so I would just say this.

if you were jumping off a bridge, to get away from godzilla, sure.

if not, then I'd just sit back and watch the show ;)

[kromosto]

depends on the ratio between the height of godzilla and bridge

[freeloader]

eschbach....I reinstalled .net and it works fine now. Strange. Anyhow, good program and I like the timeserver idea. Sick and tired of seeing people screw up other benchmarks with cheats.

[LSANTHRAX]

I downloaded and ran it, great work eshbach.

My only problem was when i would try and run either the accuracy level 10000000 or 50000000 it would freeze, this sys isn't overclcoked or anything so thats not it. Are those accuracy levels just not working yet or is it just something wrong with my computer?

[RocKer]

as poor of an analogy your trying to make... I see what you say, so I would just say this.

if you were jumping off a bridge, to get away from godzilla, sure.

if not, then I'd just sit back and watch the show ;)
Ok,but becaus you have no problem installing everything MS sets in front of you,therefor everybody else have to do that,i dont think so.

Its the same with that sp2 thingy,i dont want it and that is my good right to do so,if somebody else wonts its np overhere,the point is i dont wanna be a sheap and eat everything that the put in front of me,thats all :) .

[eshbach]

I downloaded and ran it, great work eshbach.

My only problem was when i would try and run either the accuracy level 10000000 or 50000000 it would freeze, this sys isn't overclcoked or anything so thats not it. Are those accuracy levels just not working yet or is it just something wrong with my computer?

well they probably just take an insanely long time because i don't have the accurady levels finished yet.

[Karnivore]

LOL, lets keep it friendly everyone :D

I already have .net installed (for various other reasons) and if I didn't I wouldn't have a problem installing it...

However, A nice little stand alone app would be alot more appealing, if for no other reason then a bandwidth consideration for the folks who may be hosting this.

I would also have to say an alternate to the on-line connection would be nice, some folks prefer to bench with the minimum of drivers, and who knows if the time host will be around a few years from now. If the end result is good it could end up being quite popular, and could remain so for some time.

just my :2cents:

[blinky]

shouldnt .net have been included in SP2?

i mean if they want to make it standard, they should include it in updates so that people dont have to hassle with downloading and installing it

[DBlue135]

No, it's still an optional update. If they start forcing it down people's throats I think there would be an uprising of sorts. Regardless of what it actually is, people don't like to be forced to update things. SP2 caused an uproar when people found out that after a certain date you would have to upgrade. Steam caused an uproar with HL2. It's all a matter of having to do things that you *shouldn't* have to do.

[PMM]

I'm with CodeRed on what make's a sustainable interesting benchmark

And Smallish file size, wins out for me and no co-dependancies to run the app.

I've suffered the 56K modem nightmare and only recently gone to unlimited 1meg ADSL
under my 56K modem I was limited to an uptime of 2hours before the line got disconected certainly make's downloadig large apps a nightmare and certainly had an impact on how often I uploaded the Pifast tables.

The Hexus Pifast TBH is running at more website's than I've plugged it to the point
I don't know half the sites that have started there own threads, its certainly not exclusive to XS & Hexus I stopped keeping track when it went past 15 different sites
and just pop to the ones where I recognise the members who have submitted inc some that I need to use a on-line translator for to understand what's being posted.

Also get a lot of people with Pifast testing there work machines due to its compact size
the zip is only about 160K and that's 1sec on my machine to download then put that in comparison to a i.e. 25meg app & 25meg co-dependancy to work.

**On a side note...me knowing nowt about .net what impact if any could the .net framework have on potential running? could revisions / updated of the .net framework have a knock on effect to benchmark times? could somebody with a more upto date .net experience better / worse performance... or is .net something different and more to do with GUI aspects than pure coding.

[Kunaak]

the more we neuter this program, the more it just becomes a new version of Super Pi...

then the more useless if becomes.
the point of the program is that it's cheat free.

I see very little for people thinking of ways to keep it cheat free.
it's so frustrating, cause all it's gonna end up as, is another benchmark to cheat with...
and no one seems to care one bit.

all I hear is people want to make it without .net, not for any real reason, just "preference"

they want it small...
not for any real reason.
3 million people downloaded 3dmark.
thats what, 125 megs now?

I give up...
I am not gonna try and argue about this.
my priority is obviously 1 thing.
to keep the programs cheat free.

personally I don't care if 50% of people won't run it.
I don't care if 3 out of 10 people can't get it to work.
I wanna see one thing...

the program thats cheat free.

but that seems to be a secondary priority from what I see....
I give up.
I said my part.
obviously I am in the minority here.

[jumanji969]

Looks like a neat program, will install and run it later. Also will put a mirror up on my schools servers, should be fairly fast.

[PMM]

Kunnak how is not using .net neutering the program ?

Whatever language it is programmed in be it assembly/C/VB or whatever
surely the underlying logic is the same ?

or does .net bring something to the table no other language can do ?

I like to see the program as well, and it maybe .net is at this time the only easy route to start with but its 110% bloatware but the the goal could also be done in 100% assembler -50meg of bloatware still be cheat free using the same principles.

Nobody m8y is disagreeing for the need for a cheat free PI prog... however .net maybe the easiest way to get it but not the only way to get the same result and in a way
that's a 10th or more of the size of going .net route.

I have great repect for the fact its been attempted, i just do not like .net

[Tube]

looks very promising, eshbach. I see the same problem with the .NET framework, if you find a way to drop it or include it with the installer I'm sure that the acceptance will be much higher.
anyway, since it will (hopefully) be cheat-free I could care less about .NET, it's just one out of thousands of software installations I completed so far ;)

I mirrored it at http://www.drbus.com/files/software/ePiInstall.exe (100GB traffic) and will set up a script to keep the mirrored version up-to-date as soon as you release the next version(s). thanks for your effort!

[jjcom]

yeah, its just alittle large. But if its cheat free and this is how is has to be, then I'm for it. :D

jjcom

[DBlue135]

I can say with some certainty (after discussing ways to make thist thing cheat proof with eshbach) that .net has nothing to do with making the program cheat free. He has made some revisions that he won't tell me about, but I can't imagine that they're .net only.

[bh2k]

.NET framework fixed it up, very nice work bud ;)

[eshbach]

looks very promising, eshbach. I see the same problem with the .NET framework, if you find a way to drop it or include it with the installer I'm sure that the acceptance will be much higher.
anyway, since it will (hopefully) be cheat-free I could care less about .NET, it's just one out of thousands of software installations I completed so far ;)

I mirrored it at http://www.drbus.com/files/software/ePiInstall.exe (100GB traffic) and will set up a script to keep the mirrored version up-to-date as soon as you release the next version(s). thanks for your effort!

i could very easiliy slipstream .net into the installer, but i'd think people would want to know whether or not they were installing the framework...

edit: This is probably my last post on the topic until 12/30. Please continue discussion and suggestion, I will carefully read everything posted as soon as i can.