2241sec diff. time & 25.7 diff. Credits!

Questions and Answers : Wish list : 2241sec diff. time & 25.7 diff. Credits!
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
SETI User

Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 02
Posts: 369
Credit: 0
RAC: 0
Germany
Message 468063 - Posted: 29 Nov 2006, 10:45:05 UTC
Last modified: 29 Nov 2006, 11:00:34 UTC

Hello!

2241 sec. different time, and 25.7 different Credits!

I think it'll be better if Berkeley will think about the Credit- system...
The Credit- assignment more in relation of the time (and computing power).

At our SETI.Germany- board we had a discussion about this...
My experiences now, if the Credit- system will be like at other projects, we will get more user for S@H.
Because some people looking very much to the Credits!


Greetings!


(The results are from one PC!)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU time 25586.281266
stderr out
<core_client_version>5.3.12.tx36</core_client_version>
<stderr_txt>
Optimized SETI@Home Enhanced application

Optimizers: Ben Herndon, Josef Segur, Alex Kan, Simon Zadra
Version: Windows SSE 32-bit 'Ni!' based on seti V5.15 'Chicken Good!'
Rev: (R-2.0|QxK|FFT:IPP_SSE|Ben-Joe)
CPUID: 'AMD K7x Athlon XP (Thoroughbred)'
cpus: 1 cores: 1 threads: 1 cache: L1=64K L2=256K L3=0K
features: mmx 3Dnow 3Dnow+ sse
speed: 1200 MHz -- read megs/sec: L1=6757, L2=2682, RAM=498

Work Unit Info
True angle range: 0.730345

Spikes Pulses Triplets Gaussians Flops
8 0 1 0 8510954124557
</stderr_txt>
Validate state Initial Claimed credit 32.9996485153551
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU time 27827.984677
stderr out
<core_client_version>5.3.12.tx36</core_client_version>
<stderr_txt>
Optimized SETI@Home Enhanced application

Optimizers: Ben Herndon, Josef Segur, Alex Kan, Simon Zadra
Version: Windows SSE 32-bit 'Ni!' based on seti V5.15 'Chicken Good!'
Rev: (R-2.0|QxK|FFT:IPP_SSE|Ben-Joe)
CPUID: 'AMD K7x Athlon XP (Thoroughbred)'
cpus: 1 cores: 1 threads: 1 cache: L1=64K L2=256K L3=0K
features: mmx 3Dnow 3Dnow+ sse
speed: 1200 MHz -- read megs/sec: L1=6756, L2=2684, RAM=496

Work Unit Info
True angle range: 0.064112

Spikes Pulses Triplets Gaussians Flops
3 3 0 0 15137817448915
</stderr_txt>
Validate state Initial Claimed credit 58.69408385864
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ID: 468063 · Report as offensive
Aurora Borealis
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Jan 01
Posts: 3075
Credit: 5,631,463
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 468124 - Posted: 29 Nov 2006, 13:06:50 UTC
Last modified: 29 Nov 2006, 13:19:50 UTC

I agree that there is still discrepancies at the very high and very low angle range. Data continues to to accumulated on this and minor adjustment are likely to continue to be made to compensate and reduce this variance. I very much doubt that a flat line can ever be achieved. It is very difficult to find a formulae to resolve this problem which is inherent to the data. It is the nature of the beast. Every projects face this in one form or an other and try to come up with solutions that best fits their needs and produce as a fair result within their project and across the Boinc community as a whole.

But, there comes a time when the energy put into accomplishing this goal reaches a point of diminishing returns and would best be redirected elsewhere. I personally think that too much time has already been devoted to satisfy the needs and wishes of a small vocal minority of users to the detriment of advancements to the overall project.

There will always be complaints about the credits here and at other projects no matter what approach is taken. Some users have even suggested getting rid of the credit system entirely to quite the din. That too would not likely work. Nothing is ever completely fair. These are the fact of life, as I see it, and there is not much to do but accept it and let the chips far were they may.

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470
ID: 468124 · Report as offensive
Profile mikey
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Dec 99
Posts: 4215
Credit: 3,474,603
RAC: 0
United States
Message 468457 - Posted: 29 Nov 2006, 22:07:32 UTC - in response to Message 468063.  

Hello!

2241 sec. different time, and 25.7 different Credits!
I think it'll be better if Berkeley will think about the Credit- system...
The Credit- assignment more in relation of the time (and computing power).
At our SETI.Germany- board we had a discussion about this...
My experiences now, if the Credit- system will be like at other projects, we will get more user for S@H.
Because some people looking very much to the Credits!

I see you are already using Chicken optimized version but are you using the LATEST version? It is purported to spped it up even more. If credits are what people want they need to keep up. Personally I would like to see them reset every month. Stop all this fighting about I got .0005 credits less than get back to what is important, the finding of ET.

ID: 468457 · Report as offensive

Questions and Answers : Wish list : 2241sec diff. time & 25.7 diff. Credits!


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.