Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Benchmark Faking.

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 31, 2006 12:49:48 AM

I thought people would be interested in the articles below:

http://www.overclockers.com/articles444/

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=46...


Quote:


While I was under no dissolution that anyone with reasonable PhotoShop skills could fake a benchmark, I had heard whispers of a program that would allow you to effectively select any benchmark you wanted. The program in question was designed for a game called "Half Life"; however, it greatly effects overall Windows performance. Now the question is "Does this program exist and does it work?".
8O

More about : benchmark faking

May 31, 2006 12:59:12 AM

Thanks for that sock puppet.
May 31, 2006 1:01:10 AM

Quote:
Thanks for that sock puppet.


Word.
Related resources
May 31, 2006 1:04:42 AM

When I saw the title, I thought "finally proof of AMD or Intel faking benches." Boy was I wrong.
May 31, 2006 1:07:39 AM

You have pretty high expectations of sock puppets.
May 31, 2006 1:08:08 AM

:roll: OMG what becomes to this pc community. For once stop all this crap for it's not helping at all. :roll:
May 31, 2006 1:09:55 AM

Quote:
You have pretty high expectations of sock puppets.
I will always give them the chance to change.
May 31, 2006 1:13:17 AM

Quote:
I thought people would be interested in the article below


You thought wrong. Im pretty sure 3D Mark 01 is no longer used for benchmarks.
May 31, 2006 1:28:54 AM

Maybe that article would have been interesting in 2001, when the 3Dmark01 was being used, but what revelence is it today? Easier to assume that all companies try their best to fudge the nembers in their favor. Its called PR, propaganda, and worse. That's why independent testing, whether its by Tom's Hardware,, Anandtech, or whoever is better than what a company claims. That's why I don't believe all the hype about Conroe. When its actually out and being tested in the real world, then I'll pay more attention. Same with VISTA, for that matter.
May 31, 2006 1:59:00 AM

*golf clap*

Wow, the first article dates back ~5 years, the 2nd is 18 months old, lemme guess, you just got electricity or what ?

Of course, benchmarks can be cheated but that's no breaking news...
June 1, 2006 12:27:16 AM

Quote:
When I saw the title, I thought "finally proof of AMD or Intel faking benches." Boy was I wrong.


Who said I don't have proof? 8)
June 1, 2006 12:30:25 AM

When you make claims its a good idea to you know, maybe back them up with something.
June 1, 2006 1:04:51 AM

How do i mine for fish?
June 1, 2006 2:04:09 AM

This PROVEs how Conroe is total BS and AMD is gonna PWN...

It also prooves how everyone online says they get such big overclocks!!! Serioulsy...a a Pentium 1 at 600 MHz? You wish!
June 1, 2006 2:42:03 AM

Quote:
When you make claims its a good idea to you know, maybe back them up with something.


Why do that? Opinion is more useful than facts. We all know that!!!!!!
June 1, 2006 2:43:59 AM

Quote:
This PROVEs how Conroe is total BS and AMD is gonna PWN...

It also prooves how everyone online says they get such big overclocks!!! Serioulsy...a a Pentium 1 at 600 MHz? You wish!
:lol: 
June 1, 2006 3:10:18 AM

Quote:
a Pentium 1 at 600 MHz? You wish!
I did that with a volt mod and a glass of ice water. :lol: 
June 1, 2006 3:14:10 AM

Quote:
Maybe that article would have been interesting in 2001, when the 3Dmark01 was being used, but what revelence is it today? Easier to assume that all companies try their best to fudge the nembers in their favor. Its called PR, propaganda, and worse. That's why independent testing, whether its by Tom's Hardware,, Anandtech, or whoever is better than what a company claims. That's why I don't believe all the hype about Conroe. When its actually out and being tested in the real world, then I'll pay more attention. Same with VISTA, for that matter.


Sailer, here is a test of the conroe from anandtech, http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716&p=3,

And from xtremesystems http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10...

And here is a collection of data started by iterations on the forum, http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10...
June 1, 2006 3:16:24 AM

I just realised that maybe "Benchmark faking" is when your G/F says "YES!!!! YES!!!! YES!!!! It really is 9 inches!" and she's just having you on because it's only 9mm :?:
June 1, 2006 3:23:47 AM

What was his PleasureMark score? :lol: 

Here's a real benchmark that was submitted by a member of tomshardware.
June 1, 2006 3:26:12 AM

Girlfriends were invented to waste money that you could have used on your PC. All those in love are technically addicted to the endorphines released by their body in the presence of this human. So DAMMIT YOU DRUGGIES! BUY A BETTER PC AND DROP THAT HOE.
June 1, 2006 6:23:19 PM

Quote:
Girlfriends were invented to waste money that you could have used on your PC. All those in love are technically addicted to the endorphines released by their body in the presence of this human. So DAMMIT YOU DRUGGIES! BUY A BETTER PC AND DROP THAT HOE.


god, what i wouldn't do to be a druggie aggain.... :cry: 
June 1, 2006 9:07:26 PM

Quote:
a Pentium 1 at 600 MHz? You wish!
I did that with a volt mod and a glass of ice water. :lol: 

Lol nice...truthfully I wasnt in the PC scene until P3 so I dont even know what frequency the P1 was... 200Mhz?
June 1, 2006 9:58:12 PM

Quote:
This PROVEs how Conroe is total BS and AMD is gonna PWN...

It also prooves how everyone online says they get such big overclocks!!! Serioulsy...a a Pentium 1 at 600 MHz? You wish!


Boy, are you in the stone age. Who the heck even cares about Pentium I.
June 1, 2006 10:14:57 PM

Quote:
This PROVEs how Conroe is total BS and AMD is gonna PWN...

It also prooves how everyone online says they get such big overclocks!!! Serioulsy...a a Pentium 1 at 600 MHz? You wish!


Boy, are you in the stone age. Who the heck even cares about Pentium I.

wow i hope u did smell the sarcasim in the mans post....cuz i know i sure did

and just for another note everyone cares about a Pentium I, if u wrap it in tinfoil and put it in the bathtub full of water u can o/c to 1.5ghz.......the Ghost of Richard Nixion told me
June 2, 2006 12:55:04 AM

Quote:
Thanks for that sock puppet.


Word.


NOT Word, Beeeeyotch!
June 2, 2006 12:59:25 AM

Quote:
Thanks for that sock puppet.


Word.


NOT Word, Beeeeyotch!

STFU BaronVonDouchebag
June 2, 2006 1:05:33 AM

Hey man thats totally uncalled for.
June 2, 2006 1:08:03 AM

Quote:
Hey man thats totally uncalled for.


He irritates me greatly in the fact that he just posts uninformed rubbish.
June 2, 2006 1:09:36 AM

Then call him out on it.
June 2, 2006 1:20:03 AM

It should have been locked from the start.
June 2, 2006 1:32:23 AM

Quote:
Then call him out on it.


I'm trying (admittedly not very hard) to work at the same time as posting so Googling and trying to find information to discredit his ramblings isn't high on my list of priorities. Plus most of his crap is wild speculation about the future so you can only prove him wrong in the future when he is shown to be wrong.
June 2, 2006 1:33:21 AM

I've got a 133Mhz Pentium 1 in a Toshiba laptop; some were 233MHz.
June 2, 2006 1:51:37 AM

Quote:
Then call him out on it.


I'm trying (admittedly not very hard) to work at the same time as posting so Googling and trying to find information to discredit his ramblings isn't high on my list of priorities. Plus most of his crap is wild speculation about the future so you can only prove him wrong in the future when he is shown to be wrong.

It looks to be another MMM variant that is not actually MMM, accordingly facts will be useless.

Jack

Maybe we should benchmark all the MMM variants. Then we could see which revisions are more efficient at their fanboism. I hear since AMD fanboi's have been using SOI (Stupid Obnoxious Idiot) technology they have been 54% more efficient at cheesing off people on this forum
June 2, 2006 2:06:33 AM

Quote:
Then call him out on it.


I'm trying (admittedly not very hard) to work at the same time as posting so Googling and trying to find information to discredit his ramblings isn't high on my list of priorities. Plus most of his crap is wild speculation about the future so you can only prove him wrong in the future when he is shown to be wrong.

It looks to be another MMM variant that is not actually MMM, accordingly facts will be useless.

Jack

Maybe we should benchmark all the MMM variants. Then we could see which revisions are more efficient at their fanboism. I hear since AMD fanboi's have been using SOI (Stupid Obnoxious Idiot) technology they have been 54% more efficient at cheesing off people on this forum

Not sure that is possible --- measure the % efficiency that is --- it wouldn't be so bad, except they bring now useful information to the table. Most of what they say or exaggerations or out right not true. The read too much of the Shakiroookibooobooob, what ever the heck his name is, blog.

Jack

Shakirarhubarb wrote a couple of songs about MMM didn't he?

First there was the catchy latin "Wherever, whenever. Me and MMM are meant to be together" and then there was the slow and sexy "underneath MMM's clothes there's an AMD fanboi"

Aint love grand? 8)
June 2, 2006 2:07:39 AM

Anyone who is cheating to make Intel look great, would actually be causing the opposite effect. Is there cheating going on? If so, it would probably be from some nobody, looking for 5 minutes of fame.
June 2, 2006 2:28:39 AM

Quote:
Anyone who is cheating to make Intel look great, would actually be causing the opposite effect. Is there cheating going on? If so, it would probably be from some nobody, looking for 5 minutes of fame.


Not really. Anyone guilty of posting false benchmarks will see their credibility go down and will probably never be given any hardware from any large companies to benchmark due to the fact that no one will believe their bencmarks anyway.
June 2, 2006 2:33:18 AM

Just to point out - not everybody is a cheater.
Here's my super_pi_1_M score: 04m 24s

Boy, do I need an upgrade.
June 2, 2006 2:35:57 AM

Quote:
Anyone who is cheating to make Intel look great, would actually be causing the opposite effect. Is there cheating going on? If so, it would probably be from some nobody, looking for 5 minutes of fame.


Not really. Anyone guilty of posting false benchmarks will see their credibility go down and will probably never be given any hardware from any large companies to benchmark due to the fact that no one will believe their bencmarks anyway.

As I said, from a nobody - who has no credibility.
June 2, 2006 2:49:34 AM

I think it's time to stop this guys.
June 2, 2006 3:28:45 AM

Quote:
Hey man thats totally uncalled for.


He irritates me greatly in the fact that he just posts uninformed rubbish.


Well, thanks for your spport. Everything I have ever posted has come about. It's not my fault the industry is moving slower than me.
June 2, 2006 3:32:54 AM

Quote:
Then call him out on it.


I'm trying (admittedly not very hard) to work at the same time as posting so Googling and trying to find information to discredit his ramblings isn't high on my list of priorities. Plus most of his crap is wild speculation about the future so you can only prove him wrong in the future when he is shown to be wrong.


You mean my ramblings about the AM2 dividers or everybody and their sister picking up HTX coProcs - perhaps even nVidia/ATi - or maybe that Woodcrest has yet to post a SQL/MySQL/Apache benchmark?


No I know. It was when I said that it would be possible to get more instructions processed without adding more decoders? Maybe this weekend I'll post my greatest hits.


Naaah, you're not worth it.
June 2, 2006 3:36:21 AM

Quote:
Maybe this weekend I'll post my greatest hits.


Please don't.
June 2, 2006 3:45:37 AM

Quote:
Maybe this weekend I'll post my greatest hits.


Please don't.

Feelin a might peekid, are we? Don't worry, I just wanted to get a rise out of you.
June 2, 2006 3:48:29 AM

Quote:
Feelin a might peekid, are we?


WTF is peekid?

Quote:
Don't worry, I just wanted to get a rise out of you.


A+ for effort but you get a F for results.
June 2, 2006 3:59:01 AM

Quote:
Just to point out - not everybody is a cheater.
Here's my super_pi_1_M score: 04m 24s

Boy, do I need an upgrade.


:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 

NICEEEEEE

..........wait a second!!!!! I think you are using the software mentioned in this thread to fake "underclock" (CHEATING!!!!) your CPU to 1Hz to get the worlds slowest time!!!! AHHH you HYPOCRITE!!!
!