According to recent stats MW was biggest credit generator, so my assumption has some sence ;)

According to recent stats MW was biggest credit generator, so my assumption has some sence ;)

The top 107th BOINC cruncher does not crunch MW. If my credits are cut, and theirs is not because they don't crunch MW, then they will gain on me and my efforts are thus thwarted by the MW cuts.

Now, add that to all the others who don't crunch MW and who are now taking advantage of my (and your) thwarted efforts...

---

I would suggest to stop bitching about the lower credits. Just use the new 0.20 ATI version and your credits/day will be back to the values before the reduction or maybe even slightly higher :D

MW can afford to have "parity" with SETI ;)

Well, ok, I didn't check top 100 actually so I'm wrong in that part.
Still think that separate metric for each project would be much better thing.
It enables much more fair competition w/o such troubles that discussed in this thread...
Wish you to be in top 100 (or top 10, who knows ;) ) among MW crunchers :) Total credits just fiction.
They were changed many times in SETI project , they changed here and do doubts will be changed somewhere else...

The main purpose for enabling credits at all was to add some competition, sporting interest and fun.

Current credit management contradicts this purpose IMHO. And no only in MW.

I would suggest to stop bitching about the lower credits. Just use the new 0.20 ATI version and your credits/day will be back to the values before the reduction or maybe even slightly higher :D

MW can afford to have "parity" with SETI ;)

Downloading! :D

And I repeat - SSDD

Just got to look back at all the 100s (1000s?) of forum posts about credit here @ MW. Trav decides that the project is getting too much flak from DA & the other BOINC projects, so he trims the credits by 1/3.

Old story, same conclusion. At the end of the day, as has already been said here, it's impossible to compare one project's credits to another's. Chalk and cheese!

The only thing that gets me a little riled up, is the lack of discussion BEFORE the credit adjustment. As Ice says, he's got personal goals based on this project, and it's US who actually do the crunching - therefore, why doesn't the admin here give us space to express OUR opinions before making important decisions?

I know this has all been talked about many times. It just seems as though it's fallen on deaf ears...

Just my 2 EuroCents....

---

Seejay **Proud Member and Founder of BOINC Team Allprojectstats.com**

Double post - sorry

The only thing that gets me a little riled up, is the lack of discussion BEFORE the credit adjustment.

If that is any relief to you, I have discussed with Travis about that reduction. I think it is pure concidence that the reduction is completely compensated by the new ATI version ;)

So what is the result? One can now point every cross project parity fanatic to the credit multiplier matching the equivalent value of SETI by saying MW gets high credits on ATIs just because they are so much faster! Furthermore nothing has changed to the worse here, quite to the contrary. The app is now delivering better results even faster than before.

So what is the result? One can now point every cross project parity fanatic to the credit multiplier matching the equivalent value of SETI by saying MW gets high credits on ATIs just because they are so much faster! Furthermore nothing has changed to the worse here, quite to the contrary. The app is now delivering better results even faster than before.

Hey that's not fair. I was enjoying that argument and then you go and speed up it all up and give me even more credits. I demand you reduce the credits further so that we can continue this interesting 'debate' :P

---

;-) ..with my current computer I do more science by reading
your posts than by crunching WU`s.. ;-D So please continue to
discuss what ever you may think of. lol

---

I would suggest to stop bitching about the lower credits. Just use the new 0.20 ATI version and your credits/day will be back to the values before the reduction or maybe even slightly higher :D

MW can afford to have "parity" with SETI ;)

Compensates for the lower credits.

To me it is going back on his word of setting the credits and supposed to have left them be.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

I would suggest to stop bitching about the lower credits. Just use the new 0.20 ATI version and your credits/day will be back to the values before the reduction or maybe even slightly higher :D

CPU version 0.20 SSE missing :(

CPU versions SSE3 on 5050e:
0.19: 4,163.42
0.20: 3,920.63

0.19: 3,038.91
0.20: 2,850.44

I see improvements like 6% - 7%.
While it is great to see this additional optimization, it is far from compensating the last 28% credit cut.

I have put two machines on it now and we will see tomorrow what kind of a daily I get before I speculate any of loss or gain with the new and improved v. 2.

---

I would suggest to stop bitching about the lower credits. Just use the new 0.20 ATI version and your credits/day will be back to the values before the reduction or maybe even slightly higher :D

MW can afford to have "parity" with SETI ;)

And what about the rest of us peons that don't have an ATI card and are running just CPU tasks....

ahhh screw us

This is now officially an ATI only project... and since I don't have one, bye bye

Must be getting close to paper grading time.... hu

If you go to the optimize web site there is one for the non gpu..
http://www.arkayn.us/milkyway/index.html

OK?

---

Are the new 64 SEE 3 faster than the old 19 SEE 4.1, and are the new 20 SEE 3 faster than the old 19 SEE 3?

because my RAC is dropping like a rock and I know other projects would give me more.... just a little pissed that the ATI thing has effected the CPU only crowd... I believe we were here first, and are now being treated like someones old gum that I stepped in walking down the street on a hot day.. ewwwww

Are the new 64 SEE 3 faster than the old 19 SEE 4.1, and are the new 20 SEE 3 faster than the old 19 SEE 3?

because my RAC is dropping like a rock and I know other projects would give me more.... just a little pissed that the ATI thing has effected the CPU only crowd... I believe we were here first, and are now being treated like someones old gum that I stepped in walking down the street on a hot day.. ewwwww

I do believe that CPU 0.20 came out before ATI 0.20, therefore you 'CPU guys' (and I am still one of them) get the preference ;)

---

Last night, latish, I swapped my CPU only rig from the opti client 0.19 to 0.20.

It looks like the new client is faster.

But, I an getting zero credit awarded as this example of the results shows.

---

Go away, I was asleep

Last night, latish, I swapped my CPU only rig from the opti client 0.19 to 0.20.

It looks like the new client is faster.

But, I an getting zero credit awarded as this example of the results shows.

I'm taking a look at the server right now and seeing what's up with the WUs that are being flagged as invalid. Hopefully I can get it sorted out soon.

---

Are the new 64 SEE 3 faster than the old 19 SEE 4.1, and are the new 20 SEE 3 faster than the old 19 SEE 3?

Still did not answer the question.... Which apps are faster?