Forums :
General Topics :
Cosmology@Home credit discussion
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 13 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
arcturus Send message Joined: 28 Aug 07 Posts: 35 Credit: 666,900 RAC: 0 |
My last statement about getting less short Wu's dropping granted credit has come true. Your completion times seem unusually long, more in line with an Opteron at 1.8 ghz vs stock of 2.6 on your Opteron 285. I would take a close look at other running processes to see what's going on unless you're deliberately underclocking. edit: perhaps there's some cpu throttling enabled like C&Q in bios. |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 28 Aug 07 Posts: 169 Credit: 1,280,875 RAC: 0 |
My last statement about getting less short Wu's dropping granted credit has come true. Computer is OK and no throttling in place. I believe it is the Work Units themselves, as others are now saying how long Wu's are taking (over 4 hours on Core 2 Duo in another thread). It is causing my RAC to reverse direction. Credit on a per WU basis for the length of time and amount of work done would be better, but I think Scott said there was problems with doing this. |
![]() Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester ![]() Send message Joined: 25 Jun 07 Posts: 508 Credit: 2,282,158 RAC: 0 |
I am curious to know if those people that say they are getting more credits than "x"."y",or"z" projects are taking into consideration that their times crunching are being lowered and their credit claims appear higher on reboots and restarts.If you reboot or don't leave in memory you may have crunched 5 hours rebooted took another hour and reported only 1 hour of work. Credit per time can only be calculated here taking into account that when reported a wu might say it took 1 hour when it really took 6.You have to run ALL work to completion every time due to the wrapper.Averages taken off the website don't mean didly because almost all of them are lower credit claimed,longer crunch times than reality. So when people give "averages" I just roll my eyes ;-)~ |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 28 Aug 07 Posts: 169 Credit: 1,280,875 RAC: 0 |
I am curious to know if those people that say they are getting more credits than "x"."y",or"z" projects are taking into consideration that their times crunching are being lowered and their credit claims appear higher on reboots and restarts. >>> In some instances this may be the case. As far as I have seen the times on the Web Site have matched pretty well with the time the WU took to process. I am in a number of active projects and have very rarely seen what you have described, I have also read the forums for issues like this, so would not say it was as common as you imply. If I had 100 completed Work Units of a project, containing both short length and long length work units, I am not going to list them all for people to see the differences. I will do an overall average of these WU's to see the effective output of my computer for that particular project, so "average" it must be. If I have a problem with a certain WU then I will list that WU. There is a list of projects comparing one to the other and the respective cobblestone per second of each project (I have forgotten its name and have lost the link), is in effect just "averaging" the work units from each project to get those results. Sorry but you will have to keep rolling your eyes when I say average, I don't see another way to describe it. |
Nothing But Idle Time Send message Joined: 27 Aug 07 Posts: 84 Credit: 148,380 RAC: 0 |
P4HT, Windows XP, 5.10.13, multi-project: Roughly 15% of all the CaH Wus I've ran claim more than 50 credits. Conversely it means 85% claim less than 50 credits, so I'm happy.Recent longer WUs have changed my stats shown above: Instead of 15% of completed tasks claiming more than 50, it has risen to 30%. My last returned result took 9.3 hours. |
![]() Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester ![]() Send message Joined: 25 Jun 07 Posts: 508 Credit: 2,282,158 RAC: 0 |
Hey Conan the CAMB application at present works off of a windows wrapper,in other words it doesn't communicate with Boinc except through the wrapper therefore Boinc doesn't see CAMB's checkpoints or progress even though it is saved.When restarted cosmo picks up where it left off even though boinc says it restarts at 0 ...that is why you say the cp's failed but didn't.This is the only way cosmo works at the moment see here Now if you understand how cp's work here now you will understand what I mean especially for someone who turns off their machine or reboots a lot. Their average times will be skewed. |
arcturus Send message Joined: 28 Aug 07 Posts: 35 Credit: 666,900 RAC: 0 |
Computer is OK and no throttling in place. The facts aren't adding up. Your system should run 2.6 ghz yet your primary wingman, host 4357, continues to complete 25% - 30% quicker even on the new ones. This could be explained by an extreme overclock on his system which is hidden, but, let's look at other wingman. Here's a Sempron 3000 (stock 1.7 ghz approx) that nearly beats you: http://www.cosmologyathome.org//workunit.php?wuid=444590 Here's one that runs 2.0 ghz stock: http://www.cosmologyathome.org//workunit.php?wuid=568391 2 running at 2.4 ghz stock: http://www.cosmologyathome.org//workunit.php?wuid=559990 http://www.cosmologyathome.org//workunit.php?wuid=567619 Finally one running at 2.6 ghz stock: http://www.cosmologyathome.org//workunit.php?wuid=577979 All complete more quickly and by a substantial margin. While there's a chance that all wingmen examined here are overclocked I believe this to be unlikely. Any explanation for this? |
![]() Volunteer tester ![]() Send message Joined: 22 May 07 Posts: 110 Credit: 353,577 RAC: 12 |
I am curious to know if those people that say they are getting more credits than "x"."y",or"z" projects are taking into consideration that their times crunching are being lowered and their credit claims appear higher on reboots and restarts. A reboot is about once a week at most, so no need to take this into consideration. Usually I look what's running and wait that little bit if a reboot seems necessary. |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 25 Sep 07 Posts: 17 Credit: 1,471,530 RAC: 0 |
I agree 100% with Conan Now do this. It will make your eyes roll! Open BOINC manager and look at a cached “ready to start” wu at the bottom and note the “To completion” time. Come back in a few hours and look at the “To completion” time again for the same wu. ??? On my old PC (2.8 Celeron) this time increased from 03:28 to 06:42 in one day and the average time to complete a wu from 3hours to 6 – 9 hours. (A Pentuim II can produce more than 50 points in 9 hours crunching any other project) I’m enabeling “No new tasks”, wait for cache to run dry, revert back to my old project and “Roll my eyes”. Maybe Scott can give the real explaination for this. I understand this is an Alpha project but JRenkar rolling his eyes won’t solve this bug P.S. I also reboot about once a week at most. |
![]() Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester ![]() Send message Joined: 25 Jun 07 Posts: 508 Credit: 2,282,158 RAC: 0 |
I agree 100% with Conan I think you misunderstood me...I 'roll my eyes' when people say they get too much credit on average, because restarts cut down on what you claim versus how long it really took.So 'averages' don't work here unless you never reboot in the middle of a unit. :) |
![]() Volunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer ![]() Send message Joined: 1 Apr 07 Posts: 662 Credit: 13,742 RAC: 0 |
http://www.cosmologyathome.org/forum_thread.php?id=231&nowrap=true#3288 Scott Kruger Project Administrator, Cosmology@Home |
![]() Volunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer ![]() Send message Joined: 1 Apr 07 Posts: 662 Credit: 13,742 RAC: 0 |
I'm increasing the credits for the new WUs to 100, since run times seem to have doubled in most cases. I'd rather err on the side of too many credits than too few. Please tell me any concerns. Scott Kruger Project Administrator, Cosmology@Home |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 28 Aug 07 Posts: 169 Credit: 1,280,875 RAC: 0 |
I'm increasing the credits for the new WUs to 100, since run times seem to have doubled in most cases. I'd rather err on the side of too many credits than too few. That's great news Scott, Thanks for that, even with you giving out 70 per job, the longer ones were only giving low/medium returns. With your great reponse to your crunchers concerns, (and even pre-empting them as in this example), is the reason I added another 2 computers to the project. Thanks again. |
Scott Send message Joined: 31 Oct 07 Posts: 3 Credit: 108,180 RAC: 0 |
Hi! Can someone check wu's 629084 and 627646? I would think credit would be given anyway, not zero credit? Thanks in advance, Scott |
The Gas Giant Send message Joined: 12 Dec 07 Posts: 5 Credit: 15,100 RAC: 0 |
Just a quick comparison on my 3.0GHz P4 with HT on running XP. So far on only 2 Cosmology wu which have been granted 100c each, this machine is getting basically the same amount of credit as the optimised S@H app per day. Which is just under twice as much as I get on MalariaControl.net, (i.e MC only give 50% of the credit as I get here). Is the Cosmology app an optimised app based on processor capabilities or just a basic \'doze app? Live long and BOINC! Paul. |
![]() Send message Joined: 13 Dec 07 Posts: 1 Credit: 283,900 RAC: 0 |
500 credit in just over 24 hours....LOVE it. 2.6GHz with 1.5GB of RAM ![]() |
Soriak Send message Joined: 24 Aug 07 Posts: 17 Credit: 177,330 RAC: 0 |
Here\'s a credit comparison: http://boincstats.com/stats/project_cpcs.php Cosmology@Home is #3 behind TPS(?) and RieselSieve, but is still comfortably ahead of the remaining projects. I\'d say a good trade-off, especially since it\'s still in beta. ;) |
![]() Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester ![]() Send message Joined: 15 Jun 07 Posts: 345 Credit: 50,500 RAC: 0 |
Is the Cosmology app an optimised app based on processor capabilities or just a basic \'doze app? Just a standard application, Paul. No CPU specific optimizations. |
XSDiabloLegion Send message Joined: 22 Dec 07 Posts: 3 Credit: 13,900 RAC: 0 |
The Credit Uniformity Train Members dont give up easy. Yeez. PS: Hi Saenger |
XSDiabloLegion Send message Joined: 22 Dec 07 Posts: 3 Credit: 13,900 RAC: 0 |
Honestly: I do not understand how credits are granted here. I find that the claimed credits are granted fairly enough so there is no need to add more to reach the magic (and not understandable) and uniform 100. |