It's best to think of BOINC credit in terms of average rather than absolute credit per task, especially when there's a lot of variability in runtimes. If you compare average credit per runtime or CPU time for a bunch N-Body tasks before the variability of runtimes showed up to a bunch of tasks now, they're probably similar. BOINC doesn't do well with a lot of variability short term but long term things average out. I'd suggest to just keep crunching and let the credit average itself out. Unless someone can find evidence otherwise, I don't think users get shorted on credit long term. I'd say long term is at least a couple of weeks as one probably needs to complete a lot of tasks for BOINC to figure things out.

I'm not worried about the credits I get.
I crunch for science and "fun". Which I have stated several times in the past.

Is it BOINC or MW doing the credit math?
I wonder how anyone can/could proove that the credits can/will average out.
Makes no sense to me.

I have been running 8 rigs solely MW N-Body for several months and I don't really see anything averaging out.
In fact, the runtimes have excessively increased - that's all I can grasp at the moment.

Yes, I know why. I read what Tom says.

I don't see such behavior on other projects.
Maybe I've had to much heat here in my office ...

Anyway, have a nice day

It's best to think of BOINC credit in terms of average rather than absolute credit per task, especially when there's a lot of variability in runtimes. If you compare average credit per runtime or CPU time for a bunch N-Body tasks before the variability of runtimes showed up to a bunch of tasks now, they're probably similar. BOINC doesn't do well with a lot of variability short term but long term things average out. I'd suggest to just keep crunching and let the credit average itself out. Unless someone can find evidence otherwise, I don't think users get shorted on credit long term. I'd say long term is at least a couple of weeks as one probably needs to complete a lot of tasks for BOINC to figure things out.

I'm not worried about the credits I get.
I crunch for science and "fun". Which I have stated several times in the past.

Is it BOINC or MW doing the credit math?

A little bit of both actually, Boinc does the flops calculations and then MilkyWay assigns the credits based on that result

Completed another one. Estimated elapsed was 20 mins 20 secs. Actual 187 mins 18 secs.

What is annoying is the disparity in credits. Previous task got 2732.2 for 65,612 secs CPU.

Task just completed used 80,624 secs CPU got 2,430.85 credits.

Am winding down and going back to separation tasks.

Try running the Boinc Project wuprop and start counting hours per application instead of worrying about credits

https://wuprop.boinc-af.org

It's not on the list under Add Project but if you go there you can just copy the link above over the top of what's already there and it will come up like every other Boinc Project, there are a few 'hidden' Boinc Projects out there but most are pretty small operations and not some big thing like MilkyWay, Einstein or PrimeGrid for example

ps a Trillion credits still won't get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks, believe me I tried!!

---

Thanks Mikey, will give that a try .👍

mikey: Thanks for the info.

mikey: Thanks for the info.

no problem

Thanks Mikey, will give that a try .👍

No problem

Here is a list of every Project and their apps that's been giving out tasks in the last 24 hours:

https://wuprop.boinc-af.org/active_projects.py

It's not clickable as far as the Projects go so if you need a URL and can't google it just ask and I will post it for you, except for iedera as it's a closed Private Project right now and only accepting new users by invitation only