A hot topic on the benchmarking scene has developed in the form of a HWBOT forum poll created by BenchZowner to discuss whether or not to continue to allow Engineering Sample CPUs as boint scoring hardware. For those that may not know, an ES chip is one that is not released to the public, cannot be sold (legally), and can be coveted for its potential overclocking performance over retail chips. A lot of the sponsored overclockers use these chips and can potentially score more boints than an average joe that is using an unbinned retail chip, which is essentially the heart of the matter.
|
|
The implications for this could be far reaching. The argument presented by BenchZowner is that removing these chips from use would level the playing field between the amateurs and the pros. Some agree, some do not as you can see by the results of the poll (link in the first paragraph). The issue is not a new one, but the passion from both sides of the discussion remain obvious. HWBOT’s own Massman states on the issue:
“…It’s been said a million times, and not just by me, removing ES from HWBOT is just a very short highly ineffective solution. There’s no point in faking to provide a solution when it’s no solution at all.”
So the HWBOT management team is aware of a potential issue, no doubt. Another notable overclocker and member of Overclockers.com, Gautam, stated:
“I’m with most of your guys complaints but what you’re all missing is the fact that stating such a rule won’t solve the problem that you guys want solved. It’s not even a band-aid fix. You guys all want less manufacturer interference, and for it to be easier for the “average joe” to compete. Banning ESes won’t accomplish any of that. What good did that “no ES” rule do in the Gigabyte uguru contest? If you take the GTX480 as an example, the issue isn’t retail vs ES. Some people have access to special BIOSes that others don’t. What good will banning ES cards do there? None.”
The results for this poll seem to be a mixed bag and the debate has been at a constant boil here at overclockers.com and at HWBOT.org.
In response to BenchZowner’s topic, another well respected bencher from our community, MIAHALLEN started another forum poll in regards to making an amateur and professional class separation at “the bot”. In the first 24 hours of voting, the result is considerably in favor (~2 out of 3) of making this change and the management at HWBOT have already been in discussion about it as well.
So what does that mean to you and I, the average overclocker? Only time will tell, but I see this shaking down in two ways. The first, and not likely according to Massman, is that in the future, ES CPUs will not be accepted at HWBOT.org for boints. Many others have mentioned that this is not a solution as the binning process will just be done with retail chips or possibly even fudging CPUz to show that its not an ES chip. The other option that has been in discussion at HWBOT, at least behind the scenes and is now in the public spotlight as noted above, is separating the benchers into amateur and professional sections. The results of this will be unknown as well until rules are decided upon and its rolled out to the public. Stay Tuned benchers!
– EarthDog
Discussion
From the article BTW. ^^
I've been over most of the hwbot thread and our other thread here, first I've heard about this.
The article sums it up pretty well that removing ESes doesn't fix anything, however I think we are going to see a certain man come in here and try to convince us otherwise.
Do some real investigation if you're going to jump on the band wagon and publish articles about this...otherwise it should remian in forum discussions. Articles imply a certain amount of research/fact checking has been done... or credibility gets lost.
Please check my edits above, there were mentions of it in the article as I quoted. I read both threads and mentioned what you state I missed. I put them in orange in case you missed them when reading the article.
Again, if the information is not correct, please, since you are in the know, let us know and they will be corrected.
Crass yellow journalism if you ask me. My point is you only have half of the story, it's not very professional to just snipe bits and pieces out of other forums to make a front page "Article".... Do your research get the whole truth and then publish a "Article" :thup:
Thanks for letting us in on the "confidential" details. Unfortunately, many of us (Earthdog included) do not have access to that area of hwbot. So his report is based entirely on the thread over here and other public information. The source of his facts were cited, and he presents the opinions of others as their opinions, not as his own or those of the Overclockers.com website as a whole.
It is my job as editor to make sure those guidelines are followed. They were followed and followed extremely well. Earthdog's synopsis really impressed me.
Matt
Sounds like a good idea for a follow up article if you ask me.
Thanks for the suggestion.
:thup:
Matt
Thanks for letting us in on the "confidential" details. Unfortunately, many of us (Earthdog included) do not have access to that area of hwbot. So his report is based entirely on the thread over here and other public information. The source of his facts were cited, and he presents the opinions of others as their opinions, not as his own or those of the Overclockers.com website as a whole.
It is my job as editor to make sure those guidelines are followed. They were followed and followed extremely well. Earthdog's synopsis really impressed me.
Matt
Whom did he interview at hwbot?
I'm gonna make like a banana and leave this thread.
Passion is generally a good thing, until the point where it makes you look like your perspective is all out of whack. Everyone will decide that for themselves tho - the messages you post is what they will judge by.
This article is:
1. Relevant current events in the benchmark community
2. Telling people what is going on and where its going on at
3. Telling people what it could mean for the future
4. Leaving it to the reader to draw conclusions
This article is not factually inaccurate - it simply presents current events, and references the source for people to decide for themselves. There isn't even any subjective framing of what is good or bad - and both quotes the author selected are in support of the HWBOT team's approach to the topic.
A lot of us have been big supporters of HWBOT, we all enjoy their platform, and this isn't a criticism piece - hell, it simply states what is going on and what it could mean for the future of competitive benchmarking rather than that information being buried in forums/development/VIP lounges.
Few people appreciate sarcasm. Making suggestions is usually well received. That makes me and probably any reader ask why is this guy angry?
To answer your question - he didn't interview anyone. It's an editorial, it's not classified as news. Its a presentation and perspective of what is going on, leaving it for everyone to decide on their own what they think about the issue, as well as giving them a heads up on likely developments down the road.
:beer:
Again, if there any facts listed that are wrong, please let us know and we will get them corrected (3rd time I have asked this). Help us out instead of chewing me out. :)
Passion is generally a good thing, until the point where it makes you look like your perspective is all out of whack. Everyone will decide that for themselves tho - the messages you post is what they will judge by.
This article is:
1. Relevant current events in the benchmark community
2. Telling people what is going on and where its going on at
3. Telling people what it could mean for the future
4. Leaving it to the reader to draw conclusions
This article is not factually inaccurate - it simply presents current events, and references the source for people to decide for themselves. There isn't even any subjective framing of what is good or bad - and both quotes the author selected are in support of the HWBOT team's approach to the topic.
A lot of us have been big supporters of HWBOT, we all enjoy their platform, and this isn't a criticism piece - hell, it simply states what is going on and what it could mean for the future of competitive benchmarking rather than that information being buried in forums/development/VIP lounges.
The article would be much better if someone asked the administrators at hwbot what/if aything is really being done for future releases to address some of the concerns raised in those threads. All it takes is a few PMs....
glad you nominated yourself to do so. I expect to see your article by the end of the day.
lol... not likely, it's 1:18 am here. I'll be in bed when your close of business (COB) hits there :)
If you can shoot over some contact info for the guys at hwbot (via PM or email), we'd be glad to check it out. Our report was certainly not inaccurate, but of course there are angles we did not cover. One of my goals as editor is to not leave any stone unturned. So if you have contact info for those guys, we can have somebody write a follow-up article. It's a good suggestion, I was just put off by your initial methods of presenting it.
Thanks!
:)
Matt
Well, before you go to bed, can you at least do us the justice of correcting what facts I had wrong (4th time I asked this with no response...) or filling in the 'other half of the story' (that I quoted for you that WAS mentioned sans specifics)?
This just seems to be a lot of **** and vinegar so far.........Mad respect for you but, lets just help us get it right if its only 'half the story' instead of simply berating the author (me!) for 'crass yellow journalism' for not hitting the scope YOU appear to have wanted to see the article written in...
Thats a fair suggestion and would make a great follow up article, but I feel the article as it stands is more impartial... Perspectives obtained directly from HWBOT staff would best be made separately to retain that impartiality.
This article simply presents the issue. It doesn't take BenchZowner's side, it doesn't take HWBOT staff's side, it doesn't take ANYBODY's side... Earthdog wasn't in bed with anyone - just a community observer with a great short summary.
By the way, I've been communicating via PM with RichB about pulling hwbot data into OC Forums... Sometimes he replies very quick, sometimes I have to follow up after a week. I know how it is being busy. Anyways, no PM's were sent, but with your suggestion you can be sure the invitation is presented if anyone from HWBOT would be interested in sharing their perspectives on the issue for a followup article.