credit comparison to other projects
Message boards :
Number crunching :
credit comparison to other projects
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 . . . 15 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 banditwolf Send message Joined: 12 Nov 07 Posts: 2425 Credit: 524,164 RAC: 0  
|
Guess I've missed those rules. Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected? If it makes sense, DON'T do it. |
Berserk_Tux Send message Joined: 2 Jan 08 Posts: 79 Credit: 365,471,675 RAC: 0 
|
Boinc credit rules,WTF. If the credit goes down more, i will stop crunching MW. |
Labbie Send message Joined: 29 Aug 07 Posts: 327 Credit: 116,463,193 RAC: 0  
|
Bruno's SETI scores would be better if he was using the SSSE3 optimized app than the SSE2 version on that Q9300. Not really a fair comparison IMO.  Calm Chaos Forum...Join Calm Chaos Now |
petros Send message Joined: 3 Aug 08 Posts: 89 Credit: 255,801 RAC: 0 
|
Hi Bruno, My cpu its a bit older than yours but im crunching 2x times faster than you the seti wus and that makes me believe you are using the stock application or an old seti client , or whatever,or perhaps its something else. My crunching times for the SETI and MW wus are almost the same, but while SETI grants me 44 or 45 or 47 or even in some cases 55 credits for the big one wus the MW grants me always between 39-42 credits. The point is, the very good optimized MW stock APPLICATION (optimized client from MW crunchers) now grants lower credit per wu than the SETI optimized client and something near to the SETI stock application. By the way, at this point id like to thanks the users Milksop at try and Crunch3r for the work they've done to optimize the MW client and their help to this project.  
|
|
Send message Joined: 4 Oct 08 Posts: 1734 Credit: 64,228,409 RAC: 0  
|
Bruno's SETI scores would be better if he was using the SSSE3 optimized app than the SSE2 version on that Q9300. I agree with Labbie, the SSSE3x client (here) is the most appropriate client but you could also use the SSE4.x client (here) OK. From other analysis on the use most productive client between SSSE3 and SSE4 on a Penryn (45nM) class CPU. There appeared to be very little difference. |
Dan T. Morris Send message Joined: 17 Mar 08 Posts: 165 Credit: 410,228,216 RAC: 0
|
By the looks of things many have left this project.. Why can't I find that Boinc rules....Maybe its not there.. |
|
Send message Joined: 1 Sep 08 Posts: 520 Credit: 302,525,188 RAC: 0 
|
For that matter, if, instead of an Intel processor, he was running AMD processors, the comparison with SETI optimized is a lot closer. See my earlier stats on that in this thread. The thing is, if SETI followed 'rules' it might not allow it's own optimized application to be public (which it is). It is sort of foolish to act as if there are 'rules' or 'laws' regarding credits as then there would be all sorts of headaches. Heck, we could get really off the wall with rules and establish some factor for the actual research being done with the results from each project (Malaria research is more 'valuable' than SETI research, therefore it should offer more credits per CPU cycle). My way of thinking is that it isn't unreasonable for newer projects to offer somewhat enhanced credit awards -- in part to attract users to the newer projects. While I can accept some sense of 'in the ballpark' handling of credits across projects, as it is, I see the ratio of say SETI optimized to some of the other projects is significantly greater than the ratio of the current Milkyway application to the SETI optimized client on my workstations. It's all a lot of noise to try to make them really at a par with one another. On the other hand, I do understand the earlier whining from DA and others in particular with the exceedingly high credits that the optimized Milkyway client was getting back in August - October. Bruno's SETI scores would be better if he was using the SSSE3 optimized app than the SSE2 version on that Q9300. 
|
Arion Send message Joined: 10 Aug 08 Posts: 218 Credit: 41,846,854 RAC: 0 
|
FWIW, I think the credits here are just fine. Travis cut the max cedits in 1/2... Seems to me that brought the credits within a reasonable amount.  
|
Bruce Send message Joined: 28 Apr 08 Posts: 1415 Credit: 2,716,428 RAC: 0 
|
THERE ARE NO "BOINC" RULES REGARDING CREDIT! The credits here seem quite reasonable to me. If you dont like the way credits are awarded here, go elsewhere. Thats pretty simple isnt it. |
|
petros Send message Joined: 3 Aug 08 Posts: 89 Credit: 255,801 RAC: 0
|
By the looks of things many have left this project.. I don't know if thats true,I hope not, but let us wait till the dust settles.
|
GalaxyIce Send message Joined: 6 Apr 08 Posts: 2018 Credit: 100,142,856 RAC: 0
|
By the looks of things many have left this project.. Where did they go? |
|
petros Send message Joined: 3 Aug 08 Posts: 89 Credit: 255,801 RAC: 0
|
One thing its mostly sure, near all the moonbats they screamed 'round against MW now they participating for other projects..ok its their right to do what they want with their computers, but they didn't came to MW back. Somehow it's clear now that they wasn't friends of MW never.
|
|
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 07 Posts: 280 Credit: 2,442,757 RAC: 0
|
This project is still in the Alpha phase anyway. Once it reaches Beta I'm sure some news trackers will pick up on it and we'll see more users, but right now I don't think we really need anymore, at least until we get significantly longer WUs or a second server :P |
|
Send message Joined: 4 Oct 08 Posts: 1734 Credit: 64,228,409 RAC: 0
|
I agree Emanuel The current user base seems balanced, with work available and relatively steady number of WUs in progress. This suggests the current WU length for the current user base is about right. |
DoctorNow Send message Joined: 28 Aug 07 Posts: 146 Credit: 10,703,601 RAC: 0 
|
Well, of course the project stats at BOINCstats look horrible, but I think this is more due to the reason, that there are no WUs for Milksops app anymore which could give overwhelming credit. But if you look at the user stats you see a slight increase of active users in the last two days. It's not representative in this short time of course, but I don't think much users have given up on this project. When, then only the "credit whores" who enjoyed their time. ;) Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA! My BOINCstats |
|
petros Send message Joined: 3 Aug 08 Posts: 89 Credit: 255,801 RAC: 0
|
... Most of 'em came here , i think, thanks to the noise ''credit wh****'' they made out there, from the other side all discussions everywhere over MW gived some popularity to this project. The question is can this trend hold up in the long run, or MW it gonna turn to be another one small boinc project? I think only the MW Suite can take the big decision.It's up to 'em.
|
|
Send message Joined: 21 Nov 08 Posts: 90 Credit: 2,601 RAC: 0 
|
By the looks of things many have left this project.. I'm setting up CREDITS@HOME here. Everyone can get 1,000,000 credits per workunit, but theres a special bug in the server that wont let anyone download any. |
|
Labbie Send message Joined: 29 Aug 07 Posts: 327 Credit: 116,463,193 RAC: 0
|
By the looks of things many have left this project.. Ooh, I want some of those. Where do I sign up? Calm Chaos Forum...Join Calm Chaos Now |
|
GalaxyIce Send message Joined: 6 Apr 08 Posts: 2018 Credit: 100,142,856 RAC: 0
|
By the looks of things many have left this project.. I've signed up, but it keeps saying this; 07/12/2008 18:53:12|Credits@home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 0 new tasks What am I doing wrong? Do I need to detatch/re-attach? What app do I need? Help! |
|
petros Send message Joined: 3 Aug 08 Posts: 89 Credit: 255,801 RAC: 0
|
By the looks of things many have left this project.. Oh yeah ..gimme the money $$$ 
|
©2024 Astroinformatics Group