"Claimed Credit" - What's Up?
30 Sep 2005 3:53:04 UTC
Topic 189950
(moderation:
Starting on 9/26/2005 my claimed credits dropped from a typical 70+ to 58 for doing the same amount of work. Has the system been recalibrated or is this some type of bug?
There are only 10 kind of people in the world, those that understand binary and those that don't!
"Claimed Credit" - What's Up?
)
Claimed credit is calculated by BOINC Manager on your computer, based on the benchmarks that run every five days. Most likely cause for a sudden drop like this is that the last time the benchmarks ran, something very CPU intensive happened to be running at the same time. You can look at the values on the "your computer" page and see if they look low. If so, you can make sure nothing else is running but BOINC, and choose "Run benchmarks" from the menu, then hit "Update" on the projects to send the new values to the servers.
RE: Claimed credit is
)
This fixed my problem - Thanks.
There are only 10 kind of people in the world, those that understand binary and those that don't!
I have noticed that results
)
I have noticed that results in a quorum often vary widely in claimed credit. (An example is shown in this WU - http://einsteinathome.org/workunit/2258857.) Notice that one result (mine) claims 107.61 credit with only 32,160.40 cpu sec while another claims only 67.66 credits but used a lot more time - 39,204.44 cpu sec. Is this a "Benchmarking" issue or is there some other explanation?
Claimed Credit explained in
)
Claimed Credit explained in the Boinc WIKI.
RE: I have noticed that
)
Stick,
Long story short - Your benchmarks are nearly twice what the other has, and so your claimed credit/crunchtime ratio is nearly twice as high, also.
microcraft
"The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice" - MLK
RE: RE: I have noticed
)
So, if I understand this correctly, the other guy's computer was supposedly benchmarked at a time when it was also busy doing something else (and therefore got a low score) but it crunched its WU at a time when it wasn't so busy. I didn't notice this to begin with, but the other computer is listed as having 2 cpu's. I wonder if that could have anything to do with it. That is, could there be a bug/flaw in the benchmarking process that doesn't account for multiple cpu's properly?
RE: RE: RE: I have
)
All CPUs benchmark differently, determined by their speed and other factors (architecture, etc). The other computer lists as 2 AMDs, but not as dual-core, and not as Athlon MP, so I am at a loss there. They are either rather old (slow) processors, or they are bottlenecked by some shared resource, or, as you suggest, it may have benchmarked while under intensive use.
The benchmark process is pretty straightforward, simply measuring Dhrystones and Whetstones, as do several other apps you can find, free or otherwise, on the net.
microcraft
"The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice" - MLK
RE: All CPUs benchmark
)
Michael,
Thank you for your help and explanations (both here and on the Cruncher's Corner : Automatic Benchmarking thread which I just found and read through). Now, I think I know why there was such a big difference in claimed credit in the example I cited. It's not the other computer, it's mine. A couple of weeks ago, I decided to try out one of Seti's optimized apps (which BTW cut my average Seti processing time nearly in half). While I was at it, I also installed an optimized 4.45 core client. Although I didn't "notice" any difference in operation after the change, from what I just read on the Automatic Benchmarking thread, the optimized CC yields higher benchmarking scores - thereby facilitating higher claimed credits.
Stick
RE: Starting on 9/26/2005
)
Don't complain, be just happy!
here is a box which claimed ZERO credits ...
He is too humble to ask for
)
He is too humble to ask for thanks!
Happy crunching
Chris
-----
*Die Signatur befindet sich aus technischen Gründen auf der Rückseite dieses Beitrages!*