How close does each project's WUs estimated completion time come to actual time? For various types of hosts?
Kind of an important number as the servers use it to determine how many WUs to send your host.

By way of comparison, try checking a simple math equation.

On any one of your hosts that is doing multiple projects...
1. Write down the estimated completion time of any project's unstarted WU (from the gui [work] tab, To completion colum).
2. Write down the actual average completion time.
(you can look on the web on your "Your Account -> My computers -> [some host] -> Results" link. These are listed in seconds.)
3. Divide the estimated by the actual (probably easier converted to seconds).
4. Now do steps 1 to 3 for any other project.

What numbers do you come up with?
Project, Estimate, Actual avg, CPU type, Mhz speed, Hyperthread/etc.

Project: Seti@Home
Estimate: 17,267 sec (4.80 hrs)
Actual avg: 12,541 sec (3.48 hrs)
Est/Actual: 1.38
CPU: AMD Athlon 2100+ 1.73GHz

Project: Seti@Home
Estimate: 27,052 sec (7.51 hrs)
Actual avg: 17,242 sec (4.80 hrs)
Est/Actual: 1.57
CPU: Intel P4 2.4C, Hyperthreaded

Project: Seti@Home
Estimate: 55,980 sec (15.55 hrs)
Actual avg: 56,054 sec (15.57 hrs)
Est/actual: 1.00
CPU: Intel Celeron 566MHz


Use www.google.com for time conversion. Enter this into the searchfield: ## hours ## minutes in seconds

> What numbers do you come up with?
> Project, Estimate, Actual avg, CPU type, Mhz speed, Hyperthread/etc.

As best as I can come up with for my 7 computers of 5 types it looks like this:

Computer     CPU Information     Speed   Cache  HT? 
--------  --------------------  -------  -----  --- 
Xeon      Xeon "Nocona"         3.4 GHz  2M     Yes 
EQ-1/P4a  P4 "Prescott"         3.2 GHz  1M     Yes 
EQ-2/P4b  P4 "Northwood"        3.0 GHz  512K   Yes 
RAID Svr. P4 "Northwood"        2.8 GHz  512K   No  
G5a       G5 PowerPC 970 (2.2)  2.0 GHz  512K   No 

            Predictor@Home          SETI@Home           Einstein@Home   
          ------------------   -------------------   ------------------- 
Computer  Time Seconds Ratio   Time  Seconds Ratio   Time  Seconds Ratio 
--------  ---- ------- -----   ----  ------- -----   ----  ------- ----- 
Xeon      3:43 13,380  2.43    5.11  18,600  1.97    7:26  26,760  0.727 
EQ-1      4:06 14,760  2.19    5:43  20,580  1.96    8:12  29,520  0.756 
P4a       4:01 14,460  2.14    5:36  20.160  1.92    8:02  28,920  0.741 
EQ-2      4:31 16.260  2.13    6:19  22,740  1.65    9:02  32,420  0.834 
P4b       4:13 15,180  1.99    5:54  21,240  1.54    8:27  30,420  0.785 
RAID Svr. 3:46 13,560  2.91    5:16  18,960  1.66    7:33  27,180  0.912 
G5a       5:03 18,180  3.49    7:04  25,440  2.77    10:07 36,420  1.30

all of the predictions are high, which is better than being too low of course ...

Worst predictions (overall) are for the PowerMac, which may simply be due to the current emphasis on the Windows versions. Not knowing for sure what the breakdowns are for the processor types I can only guess what the fraction is ...

You can, of course, look at my computers through the account page, but the actual times are best seen in my tracking tables (the Xeon numbers are more limited of course as I only have had it running a couple of days now and have not posted the updates needed to the live site yet).

Also of interest if you plan to tilt more at this windmill is the old benchmark study which contains benchmarks for my older HT and non-HT machines including BOINC's benchmark and a synthetic benchmark program ... enjoy ...

:)

---

You should also include the BOINC core client version number since the benchmarking changes from some versions to another and this will change your completion estimate times.

BOINC 4.19
Project: Seti@Home
Estimate: 17,609 sec (4 hours, 53.5 minutes)
Actual avg.: 7,600 sec (2 hours, 11 minutes)
Est / Actual: 2.32
CPU: Intel Pentum M 1.8 (2MB L2 cache)

---

>
>
> Use www.google.com for time conversion. Enter this into the searchfield: ##
> hours ## minutes in seconds
>
>
LOL! Be lazy....
'xx hours nn minutes in seconds' = 30 keystrokes
'xx*3600[M+]Cnn*60[M+][MR]' = 17 keystrokes

---

Several systems so far, but only Paul's has multiple projects.
- but really the average should be weighted for Qty of cpu type participating.
(example. If 70% of CPUs are Pentium IV then that should be factored into avg ratio)

Seti average ratio so far: 1.79
Predictor avg: 2.47
Einstein avg: 0.87

Paul, do your G5s really estimate 17:37 to complete a predictor WU?

Hi

AMD Athlon XP 2800+ @2,1GHZ WinXP SP1.

Seti estimate 4.05
actual 3.4

Einstein estimate 5.46
actual 6.12

greetz Mike

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

P4 1.8ghz, Winxpsp2, Boinc 4.27

Einstein
estimated 13:00:01
actual 13:11:53
actual 13:08:18

PPAH
Estimated 06:30:00
actual 05:05:10
actual 05:05:42
actual 04:54:53
actual 00:24:12
actual 05:01:53

Seti
Estimated 09:04:33
actual 00:03:29
actual 05:15:31

Athlon XP2200, Winxpsp1, Boinc 4.27

PPAH
Estimated 06:11:30
actual 02:28:57

Sorry, I just automatically sent in this morning work before checking the time.
more later

tony

AMD Athlon XP 2200+, WIN XP SP1, Boinc4.25:
(Benchmarks: 1664/2785)
(Last results first)

Seti
estimate: 4:30
Real:
3:48
3:25
4:13
3:14
3:42
3:38
4:15
0:02
4:10
3:38
3:40
4:16
4:07
4:04

Predictor
estimate: 3:20
Real:
1:27
1:14
1:36
1:15
1:41
1:14
1:14
1:30
1:16
1:11
1:34
1:13
3:01

Einstein:
estimate: 6:40
Real:
7:32
10:01
7:52
10:02
7:50
7:47
9:53
9:44
7:52
9:51
7:49
7:50
9:60
7:44

> Paul, do your G5s really estimate 17:37 to complete a predictor WU?

Where do you see 17:37?

In the table I see it is 05:03 ...

I just got some work in LHC@Home, though I am not sure that these will be usable as a metric in that the models are known unstable ...

And I can see where my dat might be confusing, the times in the table are all the estimates, estimated time in clock form, the estimated time in seconds, then the ratio ... the average time used to get the ratio is from my tables on the web page I quoted ...

---

Can I stick my oar in here, I'm new to Boinc but have processed Classic Seti since 18 May 1999.

For those of you with HT P4's are you processing one or two units, My machine is slow a Dual P3 866MHz, (I'm on Hand me downs from my sons machines and it's fast enough for what I do). The predicted time is reasonable if I only process one unit but if I do two then the time is about 20% off. i.e. so far with mine prediction is 9:47, one unit processing varies from 9:20 to 10:40 and with two units going they take about 12hrs.

Operating systems used win2000, win2003 server ent, winXP pro.

---

> In the table I see it is 05:03 ...

Sorry Paul - Was reversing the ratios. The two columns of times you list are predicted (identical hh:mm and seconds values), and the ratio is used to determine actual.

Updated ratio Averages (unweighted):

Seti@Home: 1.72
Einstein : 0.89
Predictor: 2.31

Without the Macintosh G5:
Seti@Home: 1.63
Einstein : 0.86
Predictor: 2.16

I can add my home system to this little experiment:

BOINC 4.19
Project: Einstein@Home
Estimate: 20,528 sec (5 hours, 42 minutes)
Actual avg.: 22,500 sec (6 hours, 15 minutes)
Est / Actual: 0.91
CPU: AMD XP 2600+

---

> You should also include the BOINC core client version number since the
> benchmarking changes from some versions to another and this will change your
> completion estimate times.

I'm using BOINC 4.25 on all 3 machines I've listed in my previous post.

> > In the table I see it is 05:03 ...
>
> Sorry Paul - Was reversing the ratios. The two columns of times you list are
> predicted (identical hh:mm and seconds values), and the ratio is used to
> determine actual.

Yes. I thought I made that clear ... but probably not ... I have been doing REAL bad the last couple days so my thinking is none too clear.

Actually the ratio was cvalculated FROM the actuals ... do you want the paper I scribbled my notes on? :)

The other reason I referred to the page for the actuals is that page is updated on a weekly basis to my current actuals (if you want to track that). You can look at my computers and see the benchmark scores too ...

And since I have 2 pairs of nearly identical machines you can see that there are differences between the two pairs ...

The EQ-1/P4a are using A-Bit IC7-G MB with P4 3.2 GHz processors and the EQ-2/P4b are using Intel D875PBZ MB with P4 3.0 GHz processors.

---