Average CPU efficiency

tullio
tullio
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 2,090
Credit: 61,387,341
RAC: 15,991
Topic 190830

If I go to my account, Results, and click on a result I see two new entries like this in both SETI and Einstein:
Average CPU efficiency 0.747387
Result duration correction factor 0.83622
Can anybody explain them?
Tullio

Michael Karlinsky
Michael Karlinsky
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 888
Credit: 23,502,182
RAC: 0

Average CPU efficiency

Quote:
If I go to my account, Results, and click on a result I see two new entries like this in both SETI and Einstein:
Average CPU efficiency 0.747387

Percentage of CPU cycles BOINC is getting when allowed to run.
There is no WIKI article :(

Quote:

Result duration correction factor 0.83622

WIKI

Quote:

Can anybody explain them?
Tullio

Michael

tullio
tullio
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 2,090
Credit: 61,387,341
RAC: 15,991

RE: RE: If I go to my

Message 25433 in response to message 25432

Quote:
Quote:
If I go to my account, Results, and click on a result I see two new entries like this in both SETI and Einstein:
Average CPU efficiency 0.747387

Percentage of CPU cycles BOINC is getting when allowed to run.
There is no WIKI article :(

Quote:

Result duration correction factor 0.83622

WIKI

Quote:

Can anybody explain them?
Tullio

Michael


Tnanks Michael. There are my SETI parameters:
Average CPU efficiency 0.802106
Result duration correction factor 0.362711
From what I understand from the WIKI article my Pentium II Deschutes at 400 MHz with SuSE Linux 9.3 OS performs better in SETI than in Einstein. As a matter of fact, I am using an optimized client in SETI.

Michael Karlinsky
Michael Karlinsky
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 888
Credit: 23,502,182
RAC: 0

RE: Tnanks Michael. There

Message 25434 in response to message 25433

Quote:

Tnanks Michael. There are my SETI parameters:
Average CPU efficiency 0.802106
Result duration correction factor 0.362711
From what I understand from the WIKI article my Pentium II Deschutes at 400 MHz with SuSE Linux 9.3 OS performs better in SETI than in Einstein. As a matter of fact, I am using an optimized client in SETI.

The low RDCF is due to the optimized SETI app. ACPUE should be nearly identical on all projects.

Michael

Alinator
Alinator
Joined: 8 May 05
Posts: 927
Credit: 9,352,143
RAC: 0

The RDCF was incorporated as

The RDCF was incorporated as a feedback mechanism so your work cache can be more accurately filled. Previously this was calculated directly from the benchmark data which can be wildly inaccurate. This generally resulted in faster machines not getting enough and slower ones getting too much work for a given cache setting. The RDCF provides the factor needed to correct for actual host performance.

HTH,

Alinator

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.