it seems to be the consensus that we're granting way too much credit per WU, so i've updated out validator and reduced it by about a factor of 3 (to keep it in line with other projects).

i know that some OSes might be running slower (like OSX) but we're working on optimizing these as well to get them in line with the other platforms.

hopefully everyone's ok with these changes :) i know people like to get riled up about credit :P

---

:(
There goes all the fun!

lol

Folks the # now is 2.17 per result.

---

i just hope that you don't based lowering credits on the stats of http://boinc.netsoft-online.com/e107_plugins/boinc/get_cpcs.php cuz that data is flawed wich has already been proven to be fact.

However i agree that credit was to low ... errr.. hmmm ... ok a bit to high.
Was fun while it lasted :P

EDIT

Had a look at it again and on a dual quad core xeon 5365 @3 GHz that would mean a max RAC of 4.7K/day... i think reducing credits by 3 was a bit to much for that.

---

Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now!

i just hope that you don't based lowering credits on the stats of http://boinc.netsoft-online.com/e107_plugins/boinc/get_cpcs.php cuz that data is flawed wich has already been proven to be fact.

However i agree that credit was to low ... errr.. hmmm ... ok a bit to high.
Was fun while it lasted :P

welp time to move again :(

---

i just hope that you don't based lowering credits on the stats of http://boinc.netsoft-online.com/e107_plugins/boinc/get_cpcs.php cuz that data is flawed wich has already been proven to be fact.

However i agree that credit was to low ... errr.. hmmm ... ok a bit to high.
Was fun while it lasted :P

EDIT

Had a look at it again and on a dual quad core xeon 5365 @3 GHz that would mean a max RAC of 4.7K/day... i think reducing credits by 3 was a bit to much for that.

"A bit too much"? Waaaaay tooo much, what happened to baby steps!!!

---

CLICK TO HELP BUILD

i just hope that you don't based lowering credits on the stats of http://boinc.netsoft-online.com/e107_plugins/boinc/get_cpcs.php cuz that data is flawed wich has already been proven to be fact.

However i agree that credit was to low ... errr.. hmmm ... ok a bit to high.
Was fun while it lasted :P

welp time to move again :(

Yep, I already moved. Project parity is a "David Anderson Dream" that takes all of the competitive fun out of crunching in some projects. That is like telling a store owner he has to set his prices the same as his competitor across the street. I still wonder why everyone thinks SETI has to be the standard. They cannot even keep their project running right most of the time.

i just hope that you don't based lowering credits on the stats of http://boinc.netsoft-online.com/e107_plugins/boinc/get_cpcs.php cuz that data is flawed wich has already been proven to be fact.

However i agree that credit was to low ... errr.. hmmm ... ok a bit to high.
Was fun while it lasted :P

welp time to move again :(

Yep, I already moved. Project parity is a "David Anderson Dream" that takes all of the competitive fun out of crunching in some projects. That is like telling a store owner he has to set his prices the same as his competitor across the street. I still wonder why everyone thinks SETI has to be the standard. They cannot even keep their project running right most of the time.

You should see all the turmoil they're dealing with over there. If they are the standard then BOINC projects are in trouble, lol.

---

CLICK TO HELP BUILD

I just got my first (and last) WU with the new and improved credit.

I enjoyed the short time I crunched here but I must bid my farewell. That type of payout is not acceptable.

Enjoy everyone until such time as it (if it is) corrected.

Happy Easter :)

---

CLICK TO HELP BUILD

2.17 is a bit too low... it's just in the range of what the clients claim and these original benchmark based credits are much lower than the average.

A good value would be 3.8 or even 4, which would also keep the project attractive for (fast) modern 64bit machines.

2.17 is a bit too low... it's just in the range of what the clients claim and these original benchmark based credits are much lower than the average.

A good value would be 3.8 or even 4, which would also keep the project attractive for (fast) modern 64bit machines.

I think this was acted upon much too quickly. We need to come to a consensus on what is a good number before we change things. Not to put Travis down, he was under a lot of pressure to lower the credit number per WU. Keep putting your input into this thread and in a day or two we'll come to a consensus and adjust the credit accordingly.

---

Dave Przybylo
MilkyWay@home Developer
Department of Computer Science
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

2.17 is a bit too low... it's just in the range of what the clients claim and these original benchmark based credits are much lower than the average.

A good value would be 3.8 or even 4, which would also keep the project attractive for (fast) modern 64bit machines.

even 4 is a bit off here's i how to calculated (take into account that times per wu is from an highly optimized windows 64 bit app that i've been testing)

86400(sec/day) / 300 (sec/wu) * 8 (dual quad core xeon 5365@3 ghz=8 cpus) *2.17 credits ~ 4999 credits a day ...

usually on abc@home running 64 bit apps i get a rac of 11.6K /day...

So 4.0 or even 4.2 would be a fair value for a WU.

Anyone wanna comment on my calculation ?

---

Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now!

I just got my first (and last) WU with the new and improved credit.

I enjoyed the short time I crunched here but I must bid my farewell. That type of payout is not acceptable.

Enjoy everyone until such time as it (if it is) corrected.

Help me out here, I'm confused. Do you get money for this? I know it's nice to see the numbers go up, but to only crunch for a project because it's giving out a godly amount of credit..? I'm not trying to start a flame war her, nor even a discussion of human psychology. But I just don't get what the big deal is.
Me, I contribute because I like what Milkyway@Home is trying to accomplish, and in my opinion if every computer in the world donated its free time towards projects like this, we'd be answering important questions all over the place.. and that's what it should be about. Admittedly seeing your credits go up does make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but it should be for selfless, not selfish, reasons.
I'll leave the calculations to those who care (though I feel for the project maintainers who have to)

I guess the real question is where do you want to be amongst all projects?

Isn't ABC and Cosmology currently the highest? Would hate to be in range of like LHC or Spinhenge( bout lowest). This now might be near dead-center but I think Set-optimized should be the standard...so what would that value be? 3-3.5?

Thanks for your input Dave ...it is much appreciated :)

---

So 4.0 or even 4.2 would be a fair value for a WU.

I guess I could live with that. 4.2 would be good and still better as ABC on Linux 64-Bit. :-)

---

Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!

My BOINCstats

I guess the real question is where do you want to be amongst all projects?

Isn't ABC and Cosmology currently the highest? Would hate to be in range of like LHC or Spinhenge( bout lowest). This now might be near dead-center but I think Set-optimized should be the standard...so what would that value be? 3-3.5?

Agreed, 3-3,5 is a good value for 32bit windows.

I guess the real question is where do you want to be amongst all projects?

Isn't ABC and Cosmology currently the highest? Would hate to be in range of like LHC or Spinhenge( bout lowest). This now might be near dead-center but I think Set-optimized should be the standard...so what would that value be? 3-3.5?

Thanks for your input Dave ...it is much appreciated :)

If the whole purpose is to level credits among projects i'd say we're a bit lower than Spinhenge now... btw, don't take seti optimized into account for that cuz seti is absolutely not suited for comparing credits(not even the optimized one) ... believe me i know what i'm talking about :)

---

Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now!

Well I was hoping that I had found a home for a while but now that you have lowered the credits.. CYA

Back to ABC and RS...

I just got my first (and last) WU with the new and improved credit.

I enjoyed the short time I crunched here but I must bid my farewell. That type of payout is not acceptable.

Enjoy everyone until such time as it (if it is) corrected.

Help me out here, I'm confused. Do you get money for this? I know it's nice to see the numbers go up, but to only crunch for a project because it's giving out a godly amount of credit..? I'm not trying to start a flame war her, nor even a discussion of human psychology. But I just don't get what the big deal is.
Me, I contribute because I like what Milkyway@Home is trying to accomplish, and in my opinion if every computer in the world donated its free time towards projects like this, we'd be answering important questions all over the place.. and that's what it should be about. Admittedly seeing your credits go up does make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but it should be for selfless, not selfish, reasons.
I'll leave the calculations to those who care (though I feel for the project maintainers who have to)

See Emanuel what the deal is for me is there is what I deem 8-10 worthy projects I crunch for....I will tend to give higher resource share to those that pay better but not always so ...look at where I am at LHC....but because there are 50+ projects out there ,,,,the competition now plays a role...look at the stats sites running stats specifically targeting those projects and teams competing in them.

---

If the whole purpose is to level credits among projects i'd say we're a bit lower than Spinhenge now... btw, don't take seti optimized into account for that cuz seti is absolutely not suited for comparing credits(not even the optimized one) ... believe me i know what i'm talking about :)

Yes buddy I am much aware of you from my Seti days but I am sure you were not aware of me ;)

Seti-opty because that seems to be the target amongst projects that care....so that "should be" middle of the road target....errr not saying you can't be higher ;)

---