I tried this project over the last 48hrs and it seems to give horrifically bad credit for a 48hr period of work... (as in just under 3,000 for all my machines go all out for 48hrs)
I tried this project over the last 48hrs and it seems to give horrifically bad credit for a 48hr period of work... (as in just under 3,000 for all my machines go all out for 48hrs)
IIRC Rosetta just gives really low credit. So if they did upgrade the server code CreditNew probably would not have an impact.Originally Posted by DAD
...or be an improvement.
Rosetta/Ralph needs CreditNew to bring the pay higher. You can't be "fair" one way and not the other.
6r39 7r199
I'm all for just doing something for science, but I'd like some decent form of recognition for it, and 3K for 48hrs of 4 computers going non stop.... meh.
A long run of GPU grid WU on one of my GPUs is 40-60K LOL and it only takes 10-18 hrs (depending on the GPU it's on)
If you like credits, Rosetta just flat out sucks. The little I crunched there was during a Pentathlon for a few days, and it took me a lot of rigs to get the little bit that I have there. I said never again!...unless...it's for a good competition that is.
Yeah, Rosetta has always had low credits, way before creditnew came around.
Perhaps this link will help you figure out which projects give good credit.
http://boincstats.com/stats/project_cpcs.php
Too bad there wasn't an easy way to detect which projects ran creditnew as well.
Consider what it took me to get to 3.3M thenThough I was one of the first people to run Rosetta when it was released ->userid=71
If you like credits, Rosetta just flat out sucks. The little I crunched there was during a Pentathlon for a few days, and it took me a lot of rigs to get the little bit that I have there. I said never again!...unless...it's for a good competition that is.
Personally I don't care what the Credit at a Project is as long as I get Credit for the Work I do, I do tend to migrate to the better paying Project's though but I will run the lower Paying Project's at times too. It's the same for everybody at a Project so what's the Difference what you get, don't like the Credit then don't run the Project is all you can do.
What I don't like is what is going on at the Voplex Project, all the wasted time spent running the Wu's & getting hardly anything in return for it. The Wu's usually end with a "Error while computing" or "Didn't Need" weird thing is you do get some credit for both ending's at times, really weird ...
Very true. And I do agree with it. For me the issue isn't the credit any particular project grants but rather a project that has has been giving (X) credit while I was doing work for it/them, suddenly starts granting (Y) credit which equals a fraction of (X). The core issue is that BOINC began with an "Open" policy (whether intentional or not) that allowed a project to grant credit as THEY see fit. DA's plan is to remove that possibility.Personally I don't care what the Credit at a Project is as long as I get Credit for the Work I do, I do tend to migrate to the better paying Project's though but I will run the lower Paying Project's at times too. It's the same for everybody at a Project so what's the Difference what you get, don't like the Credit then don't run the Project is all you can do.
What I don't like is what is going on at the Voplex Project, all the wasted time spent running the Wu's & getting hardly anything in return for it. The Wu's usually end with a "Error while computing" or "Didn't Need" weird thing is you do get some credit for both ending's at times, really weird ...
This is a tangent but relevant; DA claims to care about the science hence his desire for cross-project/cross-platform parity. If this is so true then why is SETI@Home still running?
If you check into the full history of that project, which he started, you will discover that it is now a total farce. That project hasn't used any new data in years. And the data that they keep reusing, claiming a new or better detection method for analyzing said data, is a total crock because all of it has already been proven to be completely corrupt and not worth the tapes it is stored on.
At best DA's stance on the purity of science is hypocritical, at worst delusional. My opinion of him leans towards the latter.
Every 4 months or so, I look at the project at the bottom of my credit list and I feel like I am neglecting it. So I run a few WU's and then get frustrated with the return, and then move back off the project. Repeat.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
