Let me know how these are crunching here.

---

I see I have a number of these WUs in the cache (11 ps_s21s and 5 ps_s20s).

It looks like they will not crunch for 30 minutes of so. So, unless something bombs out, if there is no drama I will assume they crunch normally.

I see I have a number of these WUs in the cache (11 ps_s21s and 5 ps_s20s).

It looks like they will not crunch for 30 minutes of so. So, unless something bombs out, if there is no drama I will assume they crunch normally.

They'll take a bit longer to crunch, but they should be awarding around 18.5 credit, as opposed to the ~12 for stripes 79, 82 and 86.

---

They're Taking about 37 min on my system all s82 just over 15 credit each..

---

I've just reported:

ps_s21_2 (441 seconds, 18.52 credits)
ps_s21_4 (447 seconds, 18.52 credits)

Both on a C2D E6750, clocked to 3.2GHz

Works out at approx 150 credits/hour for this sytem on those wu.

---

Yup. They're nearly half longer than previous WUs. Been awarded 18,52 points for the last couple of WUs.

Just catched a returning ps_s21 result in my list... *grin*
It took a tad under 10 minutes on my C2D lappy with the SSSE3 opti-app 0.19 and I got also 18.52 credits for it. ;-)

---

Lovely greetings, Cori

Looks as though the ssse3 app is the one to have im just emptying my cache then going to get it going

---

Q6600 @ 2.64 GHz

A) With 0.16 opt.

1) WU other than s20 and s21: 6m for processing it - 12.28 credits - http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=4255970

2) s20 WU: 8m49s for processing it - 18.52 credits - http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=4263228

B) With 0.19 opt.

1) WU other than s20 and s21: 6m 12 for processing it - 12.66 credits - http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=4414720

2) s20 WU: 8m 49s for processing it - 18.52 credits - http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=4414915


Hope this helps...

On the other way, v0.19 doesn't show a lot of improvement in my case...

On the other way, v0.19 doesn't show a lot of improvement in my case...

In case of the optimized windows app the computational part of the 0.16 and 0.19 and is exactly the same (actually since 0.07). Only some diagnostic output was added (look at the task details). The crunch times should be the same for 0.16 and 0.19.

1. Why does everyone keep comparing credit with the opt app? THAT'S APPLES TO ORANGES!!!! The credit needs to be based on the STOCK MW App to the STOCK SETI app. Just because a majority of MW crunchers are smart enough to install the optimized app and the SETI lemmings are not, doesn't mean MW should be penalized.

2. Why are there andy additional adjustments if the credit is calculated per the flops being done? Is it based on flops or isn't it?

3. If you want to get the credit back in line, my suggestion would be to lower the credit from 12 to 1 for anyone on the LAF team. Just kidding!

Just because a majority of MW crunchers are smart enough to install the optimized app and the SETI lemmings are not, doesn't mean MW should be penalized.

I agree. We're smart ;)

---

[quote]Just because a majority of MW crunchers are smart enough to install the optimized app and the SETI lemmings are not, doesn't mean MW should be penalized.

That is because MW participants have had LOTS and LOTS of practice installing optimized apps sometimes twice a day :)

---

.

[quote]Just because a majority of MW crunchers are smart enough to install the optimized app and the SETI lemmings are not, doesn't mean MW should be penalized.

That is because MW participants have had LOTS and LOTS of practice installing optimized apps sometimes twice a day :)

Let's say all crunchers are equal. But these with opti apps are more equal ;)

All ps_s21_X i've got so far were crunched smoothly.

[quote]Just because a majority of MW crunchers are smart enough to install the optimized app and the SETI lemmings are not, doesn't mean MW should be penalized.

That is because MW participants have had LOTS and LOTS of practice installing optimized apps sometimes twice a day :)

Let's say all crunchers are equal. But these with opti apps are more equal ;)

All ps_s21_X i've got so far were crunched smoothly.

Whatever I'm crunching is rattling through faster than a line of 'Vegas fruit machines spewing out dimes after all hitting jackpots.

When do we get to the dollar machines? :P

---

Just because a majority of MW crunchers are smart enough to install the optimized app and the SETI lemmings are not, doesn't mean MW should be penalized.

I agree. We're smart ;)

Smart enough to use opt apps on all projects where available.

---

me@rescam.org

Just had this result that was still running at 5 Hours 56 Minutes at 100%.

I waited a while, and still at High Priority, it was still running so I aborted it.

Strange that the result account data says it ran for Zero seconds (0 seconds) which is not true.

Exit status -197 (0xffffffffffffff3b)
Computer ID 45548
Report deadline 1 Mar 2009 20:11:36 UTC
CPU time 0
stderr out

<core_client_version>5.10.21</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
aborted by user
</message>
]]>

Validate state Invalid
Claimed credit 0
Granted credit 0
application version 0.18

It was an s20 type work unit.

---

Looks like the WU was completed successfully on another computer.

Still getting work units that are taking many times normal processing times.

Have just completed two 's20' type work units that took 9,409 and 9,932 seconds respectfully. Had another running for 58 minutes at 27% so I aborted that one.

There have been a number of these recently, all on the same machine. Can't say I have noticed it on the other AMD machines I have only the Intel P4.

It reduces my amount per work unit down to 10 and under per hour.

A normal 's20' work unit should take between 20 and 30 minutes on this machine.

It would not be a problem if it was only one WU every now and again but when you get 3 or more in a row like I did on this single core machine it really kills output.

Machine is running at stock speed and acts as print server and my network monitoring computer, so does have to do much work.

---