There are a lot of threads about the credit system right now and there is something
I would like to check. I will take out my calculator and see what the average is for
the last 100 granted credits. In principle we should all have about the same average
Right? I am using two completely different machine, one PC and one MAC, one
being twice as fast as the other. The last 100 granted credits would surely include both
Machine’s results. I am not counting bad results being granted 0,29 or 1,9 king of credits

Here is the result and basically that’s about what we should all have.

30,56

Regards
Marc

---

<img src="http://boinc.mundayweb.com/one/stats.php?userID=2384&amp;trans=off"><img src="http://img98.exs.cx/img98/1999/hamradio.gif"><img src="http://img54.exs.cx/img54/3872/cqkey.gif">

> There are a lot of threads about the credit system right now and there is
> something
> I would like to check. I will take out my calculator and see what the average
> is for
> the last 100 granted credits. In principle we should all have about the same
> average
> Right? I am using two completely different machine, one PC and one MAC, one
> being twice as fast as the other. The last 100 granted credits would surely
> include both
> Machine’s results. I am not counting bad results being granted 0,29 or 1,9
> king of credits
>
> Here is the result and basically that’s about what we should all have.
>
> 30,56
>
> Regards
> Marc

That's about right - close to the same here.

Marty

For the record, I have counted up 117 of my results where the granted credit was greater than zero, and my average was 38.92.

I think as time goes on we'll see these numbers converge.

- Matt

---

-- BOINC/SETI@home network/web/science/development person
-- "Any idiot can have a good idea. What is hard is to do it." - Jeanne-Claude

> For the record, I have counted up 117 of my results where the granted credit
> was greater than zero, and my average was 38.92.
>
> I think as time goes on we'll see these numbers converge.
>
> - Matt

Thanks Matt,

If I had counted all above zero results my average would have been
more like 25 I think. I have skiped a lot of 0 and 1, something.
Taking that into account, Your average number is about 35% Higher
then mine!

It might be just a coincidence, doing an average count with more
granted credits might be more accurate. I don't know.

We will see as more users do the test.

Regards
Marc

Just take a look at this and you'll see that all comes down to the version of the client...

And here i was lucky that 2 out of 3 were windows...

---

Aloha, Uli

> Just take a look at <a> href="http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=2796993">this[/url] and
> you'll see that all comes down to the version of the client...
>
> And here i was lucky that 2 out of 3 were windows...
>

You are right. Hazard play an important role here but since this
"rule" applies to all users we should be equally granted in the long
run. I guess...

> You are right. Hazard play an important role here but since this
> "rule" applies to all users we should be equally granted in the long
> run. I guess...
>

...i hope you're right...

---

Aloha, Uli

I'm making mine have an average of 35.

P2 Celeron
Duron 800
P3 866
P3 1000
Athlon 1800+
P4 2.4Gig
P4 2.66
P4 2.6 HT

(Note: I do some IT work, so when I say mine, I mean servers & user machines I manage)

---

I was very skeptical when I first read this post, but I did my own calcualtion (using only 43 points because I was too lazy to enter more into my calculator - yes, I did it by hand)...

35.49

But I also find that recently I've been getting a lot more 50 cobbler units... again, this might have to do with which CC I was using, I didn't bother checking...

Good job!

---

Actualy I think I will have to do it again because so far everybody
seem to have an average credit per WU of 35-38. I might have made a
calculation mistake. I will also go through more results. But not now,
It's bed time. Ciao !

Did some calculation on one of my computers that processed a couple of hundred WUs so far! My average is 36.7
I dumped out the files to an excel sheet and removed all "Pending" and WUs = 0.

---

Happy crunching

Thought I might mention that if you are trying to get a current actual average, I think it would be necessary to only use wu's that were credited with all using the current 4.05 client. The would be some wide spreads with 4.03 vs 4.05 due to the time differences.

My average is 35,38.
Running P4 HT 2.6GHz and Amd64 3200+.
Last 100, only granted and >2 (to don't count errornous WU's like too noisy) credits WU's.

---

ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD!
Potrebujete pomoc?
My Stats

I have an average of 34.50 (last 100 units greater than 2 credits). Running on 4 Macs and 1 PC.

---

-Aardvark

Very good ! So far we are all averaging 35-38 per WU. Could this
confirm that the credit system is being working well ? I mean, it
seems to be quite fair on a relatively long period of time.

> Very good ! So far we are all averaging 35-38 per WU. Could this
> confirm that the credit system is being working well ? I mean, it
> seems to be quite fair on a relatively long period of time.
>

Yup! I agree on that.

---

Happy crunching

On last 100 results I have 32.80.

Using P4 2.4@2.88 and HT.

Texasfist has mentioned the fact that we have results from
4.03 and 4.05 and he his right that it could induce variation
by calculating both results. This might be one of the reasons
of the 33-38 average. The other being hazard and "luck"

If we were having an average ranging from 20-60 then we could
complain that the credit system isn't working and being fair,
but it shows that it is working well. Our individual average
credits will tend to be more and more equal in time.

@eberndl

> I was very skeptical when I first read this post, but I did my own calcualtion...

Hey wait a second ! Who could you dare being skeptical when I say something ?

> Good job!

Thank you.

lol

Edit:

Rethinking what I posted

---