300 pts United States

Scoring looks a bit wonky. First is only SUB!

Fixed, average bug however is still present however

Are Opteron CPUs on S940 allowed for Stage 3? Otherwise ppl will be stuck with FX CPUs. 

Doesnt really seem to update the scores

1 hour ago, Gigaherz said:

Doesnt really seem to update the scores

????

link me, I see nothing wrong besides the scores which are linked on the average scoring...

take eg Geekbench4 multi in AMD: 

(10781+8988) / 4 = 4942.25; the average is spot on, even though it lists your fist sub, but counts your best one

CB R20

(11492+8844+16329) / 4 = 9166.25

Team USA submits with the same CPU CORE,  a 5900X is a Vermeer Core, a 5950X is also Vermeer Core based CPU, subbing twice with the same CPU also has no effect on the amount of submissions. Your turn....

it mentions CPU Core, not processor Cores, there's the catch in this stage. 

That's a catch, indeed. I was clueless why my score doesn't show up.

added this:

If there's somehting else unclear, lemme know

anyway our coder is working on the average score listing. Plus we are trying to get rid of that blocking score thingy too, but the latter  might not be fixed this weekend, it will require some extra testing

Wondering why it dosen't appears on the average, it's currently the only ddr3 memory frequency sub in Canada https://hwbot.org/submission/5113624_

6 hours ago, Goku is Gei said:

Wondering why it dosen't appears on the average, it's currently the only ddr3 memory frequency sub in Canada https://hwbot.org/submission/5113624_

You already have a better ddr4 sub. Only one sub counts per user. 

Wondering why his sub dosen't appear on average: https://hwbot.org/submission/5114714_ His ddr3 subs clearly faster than mine

Yup, needs some work, coding, or something. Presently, a better sub is not knocking out a previously submitted lower score. I'm sure they'll get it sorted.

I saw that ddr3 sub had finally appeared, thank you

8 hours ago, SolidStateAlchemy said:

Is this the scenario you mean when you say the coder is working on the average score listing?

yes

The average score listed at the stage page is correct.

The programmer is fixing the shown submissions that are part of this correct average score, as currently they are not properly listed if you click the average score in the stage ranking... 

Easiest thing for the teams to follow up is to make an excel and verify our average with yours... But keeping in mind if users submit multiple hardware scores that they can block other country members' scores...

3 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

yes

The average score listed at the stage page is correct.

The programmer is fixing the shown submissions that are part of this correct average score, as currently they are not properly listed if you click the average score in the stage ranking... 

Easiest thing for the teams to follow up is to make an excel and verify our average with yours... But keeping in mind if users submit multiple hardware scores that they can block other country members' scores...

This result does not show in R20 stage , but it's calculated in average

https://hwbot.org/submission/5115004_tasos_cinebench___r20_ryzen_5_5600x_4745_cb

This result in Wprime stage does not show nor calculated either , it lists scores 1/5

https://hwbot.org/submission/5114998_tasos_wprime___1024m_ryzen_5_5600x_1min_21sec_727ms

euh the stage mentions  : Use 4,6,8,12,16 processor core(s) in total.

5600X and the 5600H are both  6 cores.... so only one score will count, you need to submit with the other processor cores too

For the average score it took your score into account:  81 seconds divided by 5 is 16 seconds something...

If it was the Ultraex2005 score of 130 seconds it would be 26 seconds average...