Anyone who wants my credits or RAC can have them, because they mean nothing. I'm here to crunch as many WU's a day as I can to move the project along. Nothing more and nothing less!
It has nothing to do with RAC or credits. At this moment the Linux-Clients need more than 4times to crunch a WU than the optimized Windows-Clients. Linux-Users want to crunch at the same speed as Windows-users.
I would suggest QMC if anyone decides to 'defect'. Right now they don't have a quorum so there's no gripe about credit though they are trying to cut down on excessive 'bloated' credit. Perhaps there Linux can continue to whoop on Windows on speed.
-unless I'm mistaken that before Askof's apps that Linux was better speed wise or was it einstein and not projects in general? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Also like to give a kudos to those who have old boxes that take hours and hours to work one wu optimized or not. Alot of energy for less earned credit - thank you, you are appreciated here.
I would suggest QMC if anyone decides to 'defect'.
I am there.
Quote:
-unless I'm mistaken that before Askof's apps that Linux was better speed wise or was it einstein and not projects in general? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Linux & Windows had about the same speed, maybe a difference of +/-20%.
Also like to give a kudos to those who have old boxes that take hours and hours to work one wu optimized or not. Alot of energy for less claimed credit - thank you, you are appreciated here.
I currently have a Celeron 500 and P3 600 that do Einstein work. Each take many hours to finish a WU, but they keep working.
Also like to give a kudos to those who have old boxes that take hours and hours to work one wu optimized or not. Alot of energy for less claimed credit - thank you, you are appreciated here.
I currently have a Celeron 500 and P3 600 that do Einstein work. Each take many hours to finish a WU, but they keep working.
Did'nt wanna cut in all off this, but as I see your objections, then its not at all about a turboalbert, but about the Boinc CC ??
It's both, waste of energy on my Linux boxes and of cause cc is a problem. When I, some months ago, brought my first Linux box in the project (A64), I was a bit ashamed about the low cc, which sometimes pulled down other users. Compiling a 64Bit Boinc Client without any tricks nor any optimizations raised the cc from 3x to about 100. The WUs have been longer at that time and the app listend to the name einstein. The high cc was caused by a rather bad Linux app., with the launch of albert the cc almost normalzed to about 60.
Now my XP@2200MHz(Win) needs about 50min and the A64(Linux)@2400 about 4h for one of the long WUs. That's just dissapointing.
And yes, I'm in a top team and crunching is also a lot of fun for us.
Quote:
Meaning that in your opinion, then the CC should give equality to all.
Yes, afaik that is planned anyway on the base of counting the fp-ops. I think that's a good idea, because _if_ there is a virtual payback system, it has to be fair.
And from the ecological view it doesn't make sense to lure every old CPU 'that can't climb the next tree fast enough'*), into the project.
RE: If its about credits,
)
It's just not efficient. The Linux boxes need the same amount of power while the client is doing a fraction of the work.
RE: Anyone who wants my
)
It has nothing to do with RAC or credits. At this moment the Linux-Clients need more than 4times to crunch a WU than the optimized Windows-Clients. Linux-Users want to crunch at the same speed as Windows-users.
I would suggest QMC if anyone
)
I would suggest QMC if anyone decides to 'defect'. Right now they don't have a quorum so there's no gripe about credit though they are trying to cut down on excessive 'bloated' credit. Perhaps there Linux can continue to whoop on Windows on speed.
-unless I'm mistaken that before Askof's apps that Linux was better speed wise or was it einstein and not projects in general? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Also like to give a kudos to those who have old boxes that take hours and hours to work one wu optimized or not. Alot of energy for less earned credit - thank you, you are appreciated here.
I just installed Wine.
)
I just installed Wine.
RE: I would suggest QMC if
)
I am there.
Linux & Windows had about the same speed, maybe a difference of +/-20%.
RE: I am there. Great,
)
Great, it seems to be worthwhile program.
RE: Also like to give a
)
I currently have a Celeron 500 and P3 600 that do Einstein work. Each take many hours to finish a WU, but they keep working.
RE: I currently have a
)
Many hours :-) ROFL!
http://einsteinathome.org/host/54230/tasks
Many days!
RE: RE: Also like to give
)
I goofed, sub out 'claimed' for 'earned'.
RE: Hi Michael Did'nt
)
It's both, waste of energy on my Linux boxes and of cause cc is a problem. When I, some months ago, brought my first Linux box in the project (A64), I was a bit ashamed about the low cc, which sometimes pulled down other users. Compiling a 64Bit Boinc Client without any tricks nor any optimizations raised the cc from 3x to about 100. The WUs have been longer at that time and the app listend to the name einstein. The high cc was caused by a rather bad Linux app., with the launch of albert the cc almost normalzed to about 60.
Now my XP@2200MHz(Win) needs about 50min and the A64(Linux)@2400 about 4h for one of the long WUs. That's just dissapointing.
And yes, I'm in a top team and crunching is also a lot of fun for us.
Yes, afaik that is planned anyway on the base of counting the fp-ops. I think that's a good idea, because _if_ there is a virtual payback system, it has to be fair.
And from the ecological view it doesn't make sense to lure every old CPU 'that can't climb the next tree fast enough'*), into the project.
cu,
Michael
*) free translation of a German joke. ;)