In past a MB AR=0.44x WU got 42.x credits.

Now the same MB AR get 38.x credits?


WHY ??

Old thread with new life..


We have now the double calculation time for the same AR (because of the change in past).

AR=0.44x WU got 42.x credits

Now 83.x credits. To compare with the old -> /2 = .. 41.5 credits.

[resultid=1435427364]

Yes, sure.. 'only' - ~ 0.5 Credits/AR 0.44x WU, this are - ~ 1.2 %.

This is now again a beginning of 'credit deflation'?

---

What's matter if SETI@home give less credits than other projects?

'Credit hunters' out there?

Take few seconds for to think about..

---

What's matter if SETI@home give less credits than other projects?

'Credit hunters' out there?

Take few seconds for to think about..

I agree with you but then I only crunch for Seti. Even if we don't find the signal at least we are trying. Others that do more projects probably have different views.

---

Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!

What's matter if SETI@home give less credits than other projects?

'Credit hunters' out there?

Take few seconds for to think about..

I agree with you but then I only crunch for Seti. Even if we don't find the signal at least we are trying. Others that do more projects probably have different views.

When it comes right down to it, if somebody wants to crunch for Seti, they will crunch for Seti.
Sure, I love the credit game, but I will not switch or select my project because of it. If my credits and RAC drop in half, so will everybody else's here. I still have a valid comparison of my contribution compared to others on this project.
I am not in this JUST to rack up credit numbers....a fun part of the involvement..but not the end game.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

What's matter if SETI@home give less credits than other projects?

'Credit hunters' out there?

Take few seconds for to think about..

Yes, do take a few seconds to think about it.

As a goal, all projects should pay as near the same amount of credit as practical.

If SETI pays a premium, then other projects have to increase their credit to match.

... or, SEIT@Home can take the high ground, and pay according to the cobblestone standard, not cause inflation, and hope the rest of the projects put out an effort to pay the same -- pay according to the standard.

So, unless you want a future where one second of computing is worth about a billion cobblestones, they're doing the right thing by trying to grant accurate credit.

---

IIRC, I started this thread because I saw that for the same AR WU - ~ 10 %.

Finally.. a mistake in the 'credit adjust script'.

Then the credits increased again.


Maybe this time also?


If I look to other projects.. I don't say which.. I guess it's known which projects pay much much more..

This is like an inflation of the credit system.


AFAIK, ATI GPUs are now welcome at SETI@home because of the kind opt. crew.
So, maybe more advertisement for to recruit more members..?

OTOH, not enough AP WUs available.

---

IIRC, I started this thread because I saw that for the same AR WU - ~ 10 %.

Finally.. a mistake in the 'credit adjust script'.

Then the credits increased again.

Maybe this time also?

Have you read the script, or the explanation of how it works?

Because Multibeam in particular does not grant a linear amount of credit (because the kind of floating point operations change with angle-range) a run of "high paying" or "low paying" work will cause the overall credit to adjust.

That isn't entirely what we'd like, but the good news is that whenever it adjusts away from the correct value, it'll adjust back later -- and in the longer term, we'll be paid what should be paid.

---

Have you read the script, or the explanation of how it works?
[...]

AFAIK, IIRC, because the GPU cruncher were counted also. So we got a deflation.

Then change of the script (only CPU PCs) and the credits increased again.

---

Have you read the script, or the explanation of how it works?
[...]

AFAIK, IIRC, because the GPU cruncher were counted also. So we got a deflation.

Then change of the script (only CPU PCs) and the credits increased again.
[/color]

The script hasn't been changed since September 2008 (at least the one in the BOINC source), so considers only CPU time. The way it works ignores the extremes at either end anyhow.

With about 293 thousand active hosts with a total RAC near 72.9 million, the average RAC is slightly under 250. I believe the median host would have a lower RAC than that, the average is unduly influenced by the few hosts with very high RAC. IMO, the median host isn't running CUDA so variation of the credit rate is still strictly related to the mix of ARs being split.

David Anderson's latest approach to a revised credit system is CreditNew. Some test code was checked in nearly a month ago, commented with "It seems to work!". It will be interesting if it is put into actual use.

                                                                 Joe

Have you read the script, or the explanation of how it works?
[...]

AFAIK, IIRC, because the GPU cruncher were counted also. So we got a deflation.

Then change of the script (only CPU PCs) and the credits increased again.
[/color]

The script hasn't been changed since September 2008 (at least the one in the BOINC source), so considers only CPU time. The way it works ignores the extremes at either end anyhow.

With about 293 thousand active hosts with a total RAC near 72.9 million, the average RAC is slightly under 250. I believe the median host would have a lower RAC than that, the average is unduly influenced by the few hosts with very high RAC. IMO, the median host isn't running CUDA so variation of the credit rate is still strictly related to the mix of ARs being split.

David Anderson's latest approach to a revised credit system is CreditNew. Some test code was checked in nearly a month ago, commented with "It seems to work!". It will be interesting if it is put into actual use.

                                                                 Joe

Some people in some other projects might reject this change outright, Me I'll wait and see.

---

The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's