Andre
I am a bit depressed about overclocking circles as of late and have been taking some R&R this summer.
I hope that some of the smart overclockers here will refrain from side taking and protect what we all hold dear and what all the big companies dont get. I have absolutely nothing against any of these companies being a part of our circles but when it comes to affecting our competition I feel depressed. It is getting out of hand.
We need to engage HWBOT or XS or form a new body that would work towards forming a strict, independent and rigid platform which to follow to protect overclocking as a sport from desparate manufacturers one upping eachother over our backs.
I think we should be more agressive about this then we've ever been. Not only is it not good enough to claim a W.R. on unreleased hardware we should completely stop engineering samples being accepted particularly CPU and GFX manufacturers as they make the biggest impact on scores and any other in future that will significantly affect benching (i.e. HDD manufacturers with PCMARK suite for example). The reason why i think ES hardware has to stop entering our competition specifically is primarity to manufacturer superbinnig we have seen from both Intel and AMD in particular from their latest core i7 and Ph2 platforms.
A superbin chip is not a normal ES........these are chips a cut above the rest where no retail or almost impossible to be 100% confident of finding another chip like that from retail sample of say 20 chips and personally binning them. I think both manufacturers have used their binning power to give Ocers access to chips far better than that which we have never had happen before. i knew i could go and find a better retail E6700 or E6600 than the absolute best ES CPUs that came out only shortly after release. This is NOT the case with i7 for example and AMD from what i can see as well.
We should prevent scores from being accepted by manufacturers or their employees. This is different from people receiving hardware to bench as long as it doesnt become another avenue for manufacturers to feed their hardware....in that case it could get more complicated and people getting extremely good overclocks against other benchmarkers could be one sign of "manufacturer seeding" behaviour which should be stopped
I reckon since this is becoming so professional now as Charles said recently that we should then treat it as such. Other professional sports have super comprehensive rules & penalties over their sport so should we no? We should create new categories of benching in addition to current ones where users are encouraged to get the most out of the system.........lots of examples like 32M SuperPi challenge and many 3DMARK challenges created by legends like Vince and others wanting to see how we all stack up with same set of rules. How about low budget challenges we had as well....that was a massive hit and lots of fun.....This enables a lot more people to participate as well and some new names have surfaced showing off enormous skill that would have otherwise gone unnoticed with wallet battle style comp we are a part of right now.
This would also create a good platform for international competitions as currently they just cannot be created fairly due to not all hardware being created equal and being absolutely impossible to bin it to all be the same.
We should probably look at some disclosure related clauses as well in terms of hardware support and general support being received from manufacturers as well to improve transparency and promote openness.
I know that there will be a lot of people huffing and puffing about my post here but i tell you what DONT post a response, think about it, sleep on it and then think about it some more. i know i have for the last coupe of months. I am sure you will see where i'm coming from and try to deal with this constructively
Dino
Originally Posted by dinos22
Andre
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks