| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: FightAIDS@Home
Thread: Points Awarded with BOINC agent. |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 5
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
How are points awarded with the new faah work units. In some cases I see points awarded between the 2 results but in most cases it appears the machine returning the lowest score is used for both results.
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Kevin answered this earlier. This is what he said:
The standard BOINC way of awarding claim when there is a quorum of 2 is to simply award the lower of the claimed credits. This doesn't account for some computers which claim low incorrectly for many reasons. As a result we are using a different policy. If the two 'claimed' credits are similar, then the credit granted will be the average of the two values. However, if the two claimed credits are far apart, then BOINC will check the 'recent credit per cpu sec' value for each computer and compare it against the claimed credit/cpu time for the result. Which ever computer is closer to their recent average will be used to assign the granted credit for the quorum. |
||
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3715 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Hello robert1p!
----------------------------------------I have only had 10 new FAAH WUs validated so far, so that cannot be taken as meaningful statistics, only as an example that things may look completely the other way: out of these 10 results there is one low, four averages and five highs. Maybe the next ten will be like what you have seen. Personally I would just trust the system and the rule... Cheers. Jean. |
||
|
|
Protego
Cruncher Joined: Apr 26, 2007 Post Count: 33 Status: Offline |
I run on some slow machines; my faah work units take typically 14 hours, and not 3-6 hours like on your fast machine! I have noticed that my machines normally claim a much higher figure for the Points than other machines. I then mostly get the lower figure, but sometimes the work unit, of the other machine, is rewarded with my, much higher, figure.
----------------------------------------Why cannot fast machines get rewarded fully for their work, it is the same work done? I would like to put in a picture here to show you... How about if we all take effort and bring all possible slow machines on-line!   |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Why 'slow' machines claim hi is because in general the CPU is faster than the rest of the hardware build around it. The benchmark only takes place in the CPU most of the times ignoring the other run time factors. Slow machines are thus often over-claimers, which preferably should be retired, the hard truth, because of energy efficiency considerations. Multiple threads exist already on that topic, so referring you to those for that discussion.
----------------------------------------The WCG philosophy is to only crunch when the PC has to be on for use, really using the spare / idle cycles not used while e.g. typing. My inefficient desktop both in speed and energy, a regular hi claimer, is put in hibernation when I'm shut eye or away for longer hours. Hibernation allows resume without a second of crunch-time loss. Soon a New BOINC version will come which has a "Power Saving" mode, able to allow automatic shut down, stand by or hibernate the PC.
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
|