Great care has been taken to attempt to keep the s@h-enhanced scoring the same as was awarded for the standard s@h application. Ofcourse this will be less than was achieved for those that followed and used the improvements offered by all the optimised clients. Those optimisations are now incorporated into s@h-enhanced so that everyone takes advantage of those optimisations for generating more science. To keep everything fair, the credits have been rationalised to what they were before the x6 optimised clients inflated the credits rates by x6 of what most other participants (unoptimised) were being awarded.

The unoptimized folks who were in a quorum got the same credits as everyone else in the quorum. ... That was the equalizer. So whether you were optimized or not is irrelevant. And please tell me where you came up with X6? I never saw that kind of increase in the entire time I ran optimized. Most of my awarded credits were in the neighborhood of 23-30. Are you insinuating that granted credits should have been only 4-5? ...

Maintaining a reasonable quorum claim was why there were 'optimised' Boinc-clients with the benchmarking adjusted to match the performance seen with the optimised s@h project clients... Hence, if you got it right, the quorum claims were also about right. However, a few people didn't get that right for whatever reasons... So the quorum claims could be a little 'wild'...

The "x6" was that you could process up to x6 the number of WUs over a given time period over that possible with the standard app. The credit claim per WU should remain the same, however you instead work through the WUs x6 times faster and so gain x6 the credit over a given time period. Same credits, you just got them faster.

And "RAC" uses a variable time period to calculate its rate! See if you can meaningfully work that one out!!!


Please be patient for the optimisers to do their magic on the present s@h-enhanced client.

Or you could try helping them with the optimisation code!

Happy crunchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

The unoptimized folks who were in a quorum got the same credits as everyone else in the quorum. If they were awarded low credits, then even the optimized folks in that quorum got low credit.

While the optimized clients got the same per work unit as everyone else, they did the work units much faster. If you were averaging 25 credits per WU (just to pick a random number between 22 and 30 from your message) and you were averaging 3 times as many work units per day, then that was an advantage.

Note, I did not say "unfair advantage" or "cheat" -- it wasn't unfair, and it was not cheating.

It was temporary.

You may be able to get this advantage again if Hans Dorn and Howard Naparst, and TMR and Crunch3r (and others that I should name, but don't know) can find a way to make the enhanced app faster.

---

Sarge...........

I'm sure you remember the happy day you discovered "optimized" seti clients and installed them. Do you not remember that the number of work units you were able to crunch each day was increased by a factor of 5 or 6 because of the reduced time required to crunch each work unit? THAT is the advantage you received by moving to the optimized app. The credits received were nearly the same as you have pointed out for each work unit but you suddenly were crunching 5 to 6 times more work units.

That advantage you previously enjoyed no longer exists, well not to the same degree anyway! Now the standard Seti app is itself optimized and the available optimized apps do not have the 5 to 6 times advantage as before.

[edit]I also got caught in this and have seem my RAC drop from 6500 to it's present number. Now it's a level playing field and that is good! Also a deeper search is now done on the data, also good![/edit]

Even on my fastest machines I did not see 5 or even 6 times as many WUs a day. I do not know where those figures came from but they are way out of line, at least in my case. I did see a decrease in the time to do a WU, but I think at most it was cut in half on the older machines and maybe by 1/3 on the newer fast machines. And that was good for the science, but undoubtedly bad for Berk's servers.

---

Please be patient for the optimisers to do their magic on the present s@h-enhanced client.

Or you could try helping them with the optimisation code!

Happy crunchin',
Martin

Why should they bother? If they manage to speed things up again, we will just start overloading the servers and Berkeley will find another way to slow us down. I really do not mind the longer WUs (though some of them are to the extreme). To change the credit system in mid stream is what I am against. I am liking the earlier suggesion of starting over again (since the method changed drastically) more and more.

---

Sarge...........

I'm sure you remember the happy day you discovered "optimized" seti clients and installed them. Do you not remember that the number of work units you were able to crunch each day was increased by a factor of 5 or 6 because of the reduced time required to crunch each work unit? THAT is the advantage you received by moving to the optimized app. The credits received were nearly the same as you have pointed out for each work unit but you suddenly were crunching 5 to 6 times more work units.

That advantage you previously enjoyed no longer exists, well not to the same degree anyway! Now the standard Seti app is itself optimized and the available optimized apps do not have the 5 to 6 times advantage as before.

[edit]I also got caught in this and have seem my RAC drop from 6500 to it's present number. Now it's a level playing field and that is good! Also a deeper search is now done on the data, also good![/edit]

Even on my fastest machines I did not see 5 or even 6 times as many WUs a day. I do not know where those figures came from but they are way out of line, at least in my case. I did see a decrease in the time to do a WU, but I think at most it was cut in half on the older machines and maybe by 1/3 on the newer fast machines. And that was good for the science, but undoubtedly bad for Berk's servers.

I don't know where the 5 to 6 came from. I personally believe it was closer to 4 times. At any rate it was a dramatic increase at that time that created that advantage. I personally agree with what has happened. It was not fair to everyone for some of us to use that advantage even though it was perfectly legal. I much prefere the level playing field now. If you want to increase your RAC now you must bring more cpu's to the party!

---

Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....

I don't know where the 5 to 6 came from. I personally believe it was closer to 4 times. At any rate it was a dramatic increase at that time that created that advantage. I personally agree with what has happened. It was not fair to everyone for some of us to use that advantage even though it was perfectly legal. I much prefere the level playing field now. If you want to increase your RAC now you must bring more cpu's to the party!

So because some people either chose not to take advantage of the technology or just never paid attention to it, those of us who did have to suffer? I am sorry but that is not what I call fairness.

---

I don't know where the 5 to 6 came from. I personally believe it was closer to 4 times. At any rate it was a dramatic increase at that time that created that advantage. I personally agree with what has happened. It was not fair to everyone for some of us to use that advantage even though it was perfectly legal. I much prefere the level playing field now. If you want to increase your RAC now you must bring more cpu's to the party!

So because some people either chose not to take advantage of the technology or just never paid attention to it, those of us who did have to suffer? I am sorry but that is not what I call fairness.

ok......your obviously very angry over this. This is the way it's going to be so get over it!

---

Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....

Please be patient for the optimisers to do their magic on the present s@h-enhanced client.

Or you could try helping them with the optimisation code!

Happy crunchin',
Martin

Why should they bother? If they manage to speed things up again, we will just start overloading the servers and Berkeley will find another way to slow us down. I really do not mind the longer WUs (though some of them are to the extreme). To change the credit system in mid stream is what I am against. I am liking the earlier suggesion of starting over again (since the method changed drastically) more and more.

... because that's the way you got the higher credit rate under 4.x and that's the only way you'll get higher credit under 5.x.

---

I don't know where the 5 to 6 came from. I personally believe it was closer to 4 times. At any rate it was a dramatic increase at that time that created that advantage. I personally agree with what has happened. It was not fair to everyone for some of us to use that advantage even though it was perfectly legal. I much prefere the level playing field now. If you want to increase your RAC now you must bring more cpu's to the party!

So because some people either chose not to take advantage of the technology or just never paid attention to it, those of us who did have to suffer? I am sorry but that is not what I call fairness. Or even on your fastest computer the most common units would be taking 30 hours to crunch.

Think you might have just shot yourself in the foot there, with both barrels. Everybody now has access to the technology, because most of the optimisation is now included within Enhanced, thats fairness.

I don't know where the 5 to 6 came from. I personally believe it was closer to 4 times. At any rate it was a dramatic increase at that time that created that advantage. I personally agree with what has happened. It was not fair to everyone for some of us to use that advantage even though it was perfectly legal. I much prefere the level playing field now. If you want to increase your RAC now you must bring more cpu's to the party!

So because some people either chose not to take advantage of the technology or just never paid attention to it, those of us who did have to suffer? I am sorry but that is not what I call fairness.

Must agree :)
Strange is that people who has RAC under 100 are so strongly after the Enhanced ;)
If you take average SETI geek he will not be happy to be cut down in the chase.
There are some people who had ex 100.000 credits already half a year ago and RAC of ex 2.000. If you started half a year ago with RAC of ex 2.500 you got in mind that you will some day catch up with them and overtake them :>
I know that some people don't care - so let it be but if you got 30 credits for ex 1h of crunching and now you get ~12 for the same period you could feel unhappy :D
The positive things when it comes to people obsessed with SETI is that they tend to have their application optimised - so work is going faster. Why should I care about SETI servers? They supposed to be happy when they get more WUs/day crunched...
It is only the suggestion but the fair thing would be to clear the scores :P

---

Must agree :)
Strange is that people who has RAC under 100 are so strongly after the Enhanced ;)
If you take average SETI geek he will not be happy to be cut down in the chase.
There are some people who had ex 100.000 credits already half a year ago and RAC of ex 2.000. If you started half a year ago with RAC of ex 2.500 you got in mind that you will some day catch up with them and overtake them :>
I know that some people don't care - so let it be but if you got 30 credits for ex 1h of crunching and now you get ~12 for the same period you could feel unhappy :D
The positive things when it comes to people obsessed with SETI is that they tend to have their application optimised - so work is going faster. Why should I care about SETI servers? They supposed to be happy when they get more WUs/day crunched...
It is only the suggestion but the fair thing would be to clear the scores :P

Everyone on instinct looks at the world and "how does this effect me?" You have to remember that EVERYONE who was using optimized apps for 4.xx is seeing the same thing. Every one of them is seeing the same reduction on their RAC and daily totals. Any chance you had to overtake someone else who was also using the same advantage should still exist!

---

Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....

I don't know where the 5 to 6 came from. I personally believe it was closer to 4 times. At any rate it was a dramatic increase at that time that created that advantage. I personally agree with what has happened. It was not fair to everyone for some of us to use that advantage even though it was perfectly legal. I much prefere the level playing field now. If you want to increase your RAC now you must bring more cpu's to the party!

Hi Don,

the 6x faster originaly came from the linux app. which was extremly slow... Later the code was ported to windows which was 1.5 to 2x faster using the standard app.

---

Join BOINC United now!

I don't know where the 5 to 6 came from. I personally believe it was closer to 4 times. At any rate it was a dramatic increase at that time that created that advantage. I personally agree with what has happened. It was not fair to everyone for some of us to use that advantage even though it was perfectly legal. I much prefere the level playing field now. If you want to increase your RAC now you must bring more cpu's to the party!

Hi Don,

the 6x faster originaly came from the linux app. which was extremly slow... Later the code was ported to windows which was 1.5 to 2x faster using the standard app.

Hi Crunch.......nice to see you and thanks for the clarification!

---

Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....

Everyone on instinct looks at the world and "how does this effect me?" You have to remember that EVERYONE who was using optimized apps for 4.xx is seeing the same thing. Every one of them is seeing the same reduction on their RAC and daily totals. Any chance you had to overtake someone else who was also using the same advantage should still exist!

Of course it exists - I have no doubt - and I believe that there will be again the optimised Enhanced Seti application which will be quicker than Enhanced alone :)

It's like in real life - we got inflation and deflation on money.. ee.. credits market :> my buying power is decreasing - I got less credits for harder work - and this is fair? How will I live now on 700 RAC instead of 1000 RAC. Anyone who can lend me spare RAC is wanted :D

Cruncher's life is much easier on less populated and less popular projects ;))) but not that interesting :)

---

I don't know where the 5 to 6 came from. I personally believe it was closer to 4 times. At any rate it was a dramatic increase at that time that created that advantage. I personally agree with what has happened. It was not fair to everyone for some of us to use that advantage even though it was perfectly legal. I much prefere the level playing field now. If you want to increase your RAC now you must bring more cpu's to the party!

So because some people either chose not to take advantage of the technology or just never paid attention to it, those of us who did have to suffer? I am sorry but that is not what I call fairness.

Think you might have just shot yourself in the foot there, with both barrels. Everybody now has access to the technology, because most of the optimisation is now included within Enhanced, thats fairness.

Some not most and definitely not all. And as has been said in a previous post, I could accept that if there was a reset and we all started over at zero. That would be a truly level playing field. Anything short of that is unfair to those of us who spent a lot of time and effort building up what we had.

---

I wasn't in most of yesterday and then forgot to send a reply.

Here are some statistics that I have pulled together from 3 different computers using different versions of the Seti app:

Genuine Intel (R) Pentium(R) 4 650 CPU 3.40GHz running Microsoft Windows XP Professional Edition, Service Pack 2, (05.01.2600.00)

5.3.12.tx36 BOINC client and standard Seti V4.18 (average of 23 work units)
CPU time = 2,072.61 sec., Claimed credit = 16.81 CS/hr., Granted credit = 23.30 CS/hr.

You must ask yourself why if this computer was running a calibrated client why was it claiming so low.

5.3.12.tx36 BOINC client and Crunch3r’s Seti SSE3 V4.11 (average of 97 work units)
CPU time = 3,110.58 sec., Claimed credit = 34.90 CS/hr., Granted credit = 29.81 CS/hr.

Why was this one claiming so high, the 'magic' figure of 32/unit was for the reference unit which takes 20% to 30% longer than an average 4.18 unit. It should be claiming on average 24 credits

5.3.12.tx36 BOINC client and Crunch3r’s Seti SSE3 V5.11 (average of 34 work units)
CPU time = 12,654.50 sec., Claimed credit = 40.92 CS/hr., Granted credit = 15.71 CS/hr.

Why were you using an old app the first app that should have been used for enhanced was 5.12. Even if you didn't know Crunch3r knew that this app over claimed by 7:3.25. (Why is it still listed on his site?)

5.3.12.tx36 BOINC client and Crunch3r’s Seti SSE3 V5.12 (average of 31 work units)
CPU time = 13,751.11 sec., Claimed credit = 14.38 CS/hr., Granted credit = 14.13 CS/hr.

Got it right at last I see.

Authentic AMD AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+ running Linux 2.6.16-1.2108_FC4

5.3.12.tx36 BOINC client and Crunch3r’s Seti SSE3 V5.12 (average of 11 work units)
CPU time = 9,033.28 sec., Claimed credit = 13.56 CS/hr., Granted credit = 13.93 CS/hr.


Authentic AMD Athlon (tm) 64 Processor 3000+ running Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional Edition, Service Pack 4, (05.00.2195.00)

5.3.12.tx36 BOINC client and Crunch3r’s Seti SSE3 V5.11 (average of 26 work units)
CPU time = 11,120.90 sec., Claimed credit = 53.18 CS/hr., Granted credit = 20.08 CS/hr.

For these two see above.

From the above results, the out and out winner for all of those accused of being credit whores and cheats is the 5.3.12.tx36 BOINC client and Crunch3r’s Seti SSE3 V5.11 combination. This should light up a big bonfire under the backsides of all the self-righteous folks here.

For those using older BOINC clients such as 4.25, 4.43 and 4.45 here is an example of someone using the 4.45 BOINC client with the standard Seti 5.15 app:

Genuine Intel (R) Pentium(R) M processor 1600MHz running Microsoft Windows XP Professional Edition, Service Pack 2, (05.01.2600.00)
CPU time = 79,523.20 sec., Claimed credit = 8.81 CS/hr., Granted credit = 2.56 CS/hr.

NOTE: This was right from WinterKnight’s second example (5.12 14,287s granted 56.46 = 14.23/hr wu id=78922770). So who’s the big bad credit whore and cheat now???

Used standard app and client how can I cheat, I just use a properly configured desktop computer, even if it does have a mobile cpu fitted, no heat no noise. And I gave link to my reference show me yours.

Fun aside; it would be nice if those of us that are running other projects could post their CS/hr here so that we may all compare the data. For the comparison, it would be best that TruXoft’s 5.3.12.tx36 BOINC client and computers as close to the ones mentioned above be used. Averages of 25 to 50 work units would great and more would be better.

My RAC has dropped from 1980 to 1334.

Franz

I assume you will withdraw your accusation.

regards

Andy

Must agree :)
Strange is that people who has RAC under 100 are so strongly after the Enhanced ;)
If you take average SETI geek he will not be happy to be cut down in the chase.
There are some people who had ex 100.000 credits already half a year ago and RAC of ex 2.000. If you started half a year ago with RAC of ex 2.500 you got in mind that you will some day catch up with them and overtake them :>
I know that some people don't care - so let it be but if you got 30 credits for ex 1h of crunching and now you get ~12 for the same period you could feel unhappy :D
The positive things when it comes to people obsessed with SETI is that they tend to have their application optimised - so work is going faster. Why should I care about SETI servers? They supposed to be happy when they get more WUs/day crunched...
It is only the suggestion but the fair thing would be to clear the scores :P

Everyone on instinct looks at the world and "how does this effect me?" You have to remember that EVERYONE who was using optimized apps for 4.xx is seeing the same thing. Every one of them is seeing the same reduction on their RAC and daily totals. Any chance you had to overtake someone else who was also using the same advantage should still exist!

Yes, but at a much greater time period. Prior to the change I may have had a chance of catching X in 1 year. But with the change that will now take about 3 years or more. And that is assuming that I can maintain the same rate of production. If I do not lose computers for one reason or another.


On an aside, if RAC is meaningless can someone tell me why it is included in the "author's stats" in this forum? Just a curious question here.

---

And as has been said in a previous post, I could accept that if there was a reset and we all started over at zero. That would be a truly level playing field. Anything short of that is unfair to those of us who spent a lot of time and effort building up what we had.

Agree 100%! If they are not going to fix this new abortion called a credit system, at least reset the stats!

---

http://www.setiusa.net

My daily average for each week has always been within 10-15% of my RAC so let's look at it. Oh my goodness, my daily average for the week is dropping at about the same rate as my RAC.

You must be looking at different graphs to what i am.

Okay, let's look at my daily production numbers. Hmmm, daily production has dropped much faster than my RAC or my daily average. Either way you look at it my claim is the same.

*deep sigh*
Daily production isn't a good indicator as it is very dependant on server outages & will be affected considerably by the variable processing times.
Weekly or monthly will give a better idea of what the average daily or hourly crunching is like.
And once again, as mentioned by Eric, those that have been using Optimised applications will see a greater reduction in credit per hour than thouse using the standard application, as the standard application is what his efforts were based on.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

I am liking the earlier suggesion of starting over again (since the method changed drastically) more and more.

The drastic change has only been for a small percentage of people. For most people there has been little, if any, change.

---

Grant
Darwin NT