My WUs have dried up too after only 12.
Has anyone noticed that FAAH2 gives only 15 points per CPU hour whereas OET gives 20? Why are the points so frugal -it's playing merry hell with my averages.

I also noticed that the validator for FAHB is not running and that the trickle messages are not updating the work unit stats in Results Status.

I've noticed the same on mine. Running on two old laptops (one Win7 one Linux) with partially completed WUs. The project is correctly stopping the WUs because they won't finish in time, but latest trickle uploads are not reflected in results status page, and nothing will validate.

I mentioned this concern several times during beta testing in particular because there is, based on granted credits, significant performance differences between Win7-based hosts and Linux-based hosts.
I am not sure if this issue is only a question of credit or - worst case - if it is caused by a bad performance of the Linux application (usually Linux-based hosts tend to perform better than Windows-based hosts).

At this time, I did not receive any formal and justified answer. Uplinger promised to investigate this point. We will see after the launch phase if more members will observe a similar behavior.

Cheers,
Yves

With the validator not running for FAHB, there wont be any cutting of follow on tasks [but this is an assumption].

Forgot how to recognize them. Right from the start received only 001 and 002 with a final suffix of _0--. Understood if there's some substep follow on, something additional would show after the _N-- bit.

FAH2_ avx38672-ls_ 000087_ 0010_ 001_ 0--

None of the logs have steps other than 1000 of 100000 through 100000 of 100000.

Last 3 in PVal from the 6 FAHB concurrent show nothing but up to 100000.

Don't care about credit, but 360 for 11.5 to 13 hours on the 4770 does not appear to be too terrible, the 3rd last even got 400 for 13 hours [after 45 valid per the result archive], for subject device. Mean 11.61 hours.