This does not answer your already answered question, but I'm just curious.
My Q6600 running 3.006 GHz is needing about 150.5 CPU seconds/credit. Yours is needing only about 131.
So are you overclocking this 2.4GHz part to about 3.45? While my overclock is conservative, my motherboard won't go your speed, and my part would require pretty high CPU voltage and burn a lot of power to go that fast.
Im positive that qdemn is a serious overclocker :) I remember seeing his E6600 in the top20 computers, half a year ago or longer, no other dualcore above him in periods, must have been running at 3.6 or more at the time.
There's a fixed credit number for each individual workunit that will be granted by the server side BOINC processes no matter what platform or version of the client is used.
The debug code that slows down the newest app was included to identify one specific bug, when this is found the specific debug code will be removed again and the app will run faster again. Hopefully this will happen rather sooner than later.
Thanks for the explanation, Bikeman. However, I don't think it's fair to increase the time for a run by more than 10% without increasing the credit. Whenever rosetta or SETI get running again, I'm out of here until the apps are fixed or until S5R3. I usually don't base my decisions on credit, but fair is fair.
Thanks for the explanation, Bikeman. However, I don't think it's fair to increase the time for a run by more than 10% without increasing the credit. Whenever rosetta or SETI get running again, I'm out of here until the apps are fixed or until S5R3. I usually don't base my decisions on credit, but fair is fair.
Well, if you are strictly following this line of argumentation, then every speed-up of the app should be reflected in a credits change as well (by lowering them), right? It's unavoidable that during the evolution of the apps, they get faster most of the time and slower sometimes.
Well, if you are strictly following this line of argumentation, then every speed-up of the app should be reflected in a credits change as well (by lowering them), right? It's unavoidable that during the evolution of the apps, they get faster most of the time and slower sometimes.
CU
Bikeman
Ha, ha, good point! ;) Although perhaps one could argue that points are "sticky upwards", meaning that when you are dealing with cruncher psychology, upwards in points is always OK, but downwards is never really OK at all! ;)
But I do follow your argument, except I think in the case of BOINC there is a "symmetry violation" to your argument! ;D
New WUs 16% longer in CPU Time but same point value?
)
The new v4.38 app is slower. Read this thread.
OK, thanks for the help.
)
OK, thanks for the help.
This does not answer your
)
This does not answer your already answered question, but I'm just curious.
My Q6600 running 3.006 GHz is needing about 150.5 CPU seconds/credit. Yours is needing only about 131.
So are you overclocking this 2.4GHz part to about 3.45? While my overclock is conservative, my motherboard won't go your speed, and my part would require pretty high CPU voltage and burn a lot of power to go that fast.
Im positive that qdemn is a
)
Im positive that qdemn is a serious overclocker :) I remember seeing his E6600 in the top20 computers, half a year ago or longer, no other dualcore above him in periods, must have been running at 3.6 or more at the time.
Team Philippines
I hope some adjustment in
)
I hope some adjustment in credit is planned?
RE: I hope some adjustment
)
There's a fixed credit number for each individual workunit that will be granted by the server side BOINC processes no matter what platform or version of the client is used.
The debug code that slows down the newest app was included to identify one specific bug, when this is found the specific debug code will be removed again and the app will run faster again. Hopefully this will happen rather sooner than later.
CU
H-BE
Thanks for the explanation,
)
Thanks for the explanation, Bikeman. However, I don't think it's fair to increase the time for a run by more than 10% without increasing the credit. Whenever rosetta or SETI get running again, I'm out of here until the apps are fixed or until S5R3. I usually don't base my decisions on credit, but fair is fair.
RE: Thanks for the
)
Well, if you are strictly following this line of argumentation, then every speed-up of the app should be reflected in a credits change as well (by lowering them), right? It's unavoidable that during the evolution of the apps, they get faster most of the time and slower sometimes.
CU
Bikeman
RE: Well, if you are
)
Ha, ha, good point! ;) Although perhaps one could argue that points are "sticky upwards", meaning that when you are dealing with cruncher psychology, upwards in points is always OK, but downwards is never really OK at all! ;)
But I do follow your argument, except I think in the case of BOINC there is a "symmetry violation" to your argument! ;D