Hardlimit test bank

[krampak]

@cobito said in Hardlimit test bank:

I've made a couple of changes:
· I've limited the top100 to top50. It will increase as there are more submissions.
· A search function for results has been introduced: you can search for users, processor models or any information that identifies a result. Unlike the tops (where only the best result of a CPU model sent by a user appears), in the search results all the results sent appear.

If you search for 2 digits or less it returns a completely blank page. For example "i3".

Edit: Could you make the searches sorted by score? So if you search for the same model or a range, you see the fastest ones at the top. And while we're at it... would it be too much to ask for the 2 scores (single and multithread) to appear in 2 columns in the search?

PD: Between tonight and tomorrow I might be able to give it a go with a good Xeon xD

[cobito]

@krampak Your wishes have come true.

Searches are limited to 3 characters to prevent overly generic searches that could overload the server (in the future). What you see when searching for "i3" is an error page that I still have to define. To find all i3s you can try searching for intel i3 or core i3.

The results now also show both single and multi-core scores sorted from highest to lowest multi-core score. In the future I may add little arrows to sort the results in the order and column you want.

[cobito]

Apart from the aesthetic changes and the possibility to sort search results based on both single and multi-threaded results that were introduced yesterday, today it is already possible to consult information about individual processor models. To do this, you just have to enter the link of the model that will appear in the tops and in the search results.

The link will only be available when there is additional information about the model. On the page of each model, in addition to the additional information, all the results sent for that model are shown.

As more results arrive, in the future on the pages of each model, performance statistics, graphs of distribution of results, etc., will appear.

By the way, submissions for different modes are also welcome. If your micro can SSE3, having results of all lower modes (FPU, MMX, etc., but especially of Mode 0 [FPU]) is also useful. Not everything in life is AVX2 and in order to be able to make comparisons with real-world results, it is good to have this type of information.

[kynes]

@cobito Check out the latest result I uploaded, you can cheat on the bench.

[cobito]

@kynes Apart from posting 32 threads, have you done anything else?

[kynes]

@cobito No, únicamente eso.

[cobito]

@kynes Well that was expected. I will investigate it.

By the way, I will end up deleting that result.

[kynes]

@cobito Damn, I can't use it as a signature anymore

[cobito]

The problem seems to be due to a failure in the synchronization of the execution of the processes. It appears mainly on slower PCs. For the moment I have patched the issue by limiting the maximum number of threads to at most twice the detected threads. In order to continue sharing results, you need to download the new version.

[Xevipiu]

My best friends are inside the Hwbot Staff, I can pass them the application so they can take a look

[cobito]

@Xevipiu That would be great. The more of us that participate, the more useful it will be for everyone when it comes to making comparisons.

[Xevipiu]

What I miss is a process LOG interface, so the wait wouldn't be so boring

[cobito]

@Xevipiu Tomo nota.

I have rewritten the frequency meter from scratch. If someone with OC would be so kind as to test it, I would appreciate it.

[Fassou]

@cobito Better, but it shows the serial clock, rather than the active

[cobito]

There is a new version of the program that, this time yes, should detect the actual frequency of the processor.

[Fassou]

@cobito It's clear that my processor is a rebel

That said, it takes about ten seconds to close the program, thinking :thinking:

[Sylver]

@Fassou Well blessed are you. It took me about a minute or more

[cobito]

The frequency meter has a small error that will be corrected. Regarding the boot time, yes, it needs to be improved. For now, it should take around 10 seconds.

[Xevipiu]

In processors that are not 100% natics to AVX2, their execution would have to be capped, since it sounds like a hedge the score

[cobito]

@Xevipiu What do you mean by processors that are not 100% native to AVX2?