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)
Printable View
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by DAD
...or be an improvement. >:PQuote:
Originally Posted by Fire$torm
Rosetta/Ralph needs CreditNew to bring the pay higher. You can't be "fair" one way and not the other. (%)
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. :D :cool:
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 then :) Though I was one of the first people to run Rosetta when it was released ->userid=71 :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPop
Before I run any Project I check the Top Computers Lists & try to find similar Computers to mine to see what kind of Credit I can expect. You can also compare the Measured floating point speed & Measured integer speed to computers similar to yours to see if their Overclocked or running Stock Speeds ...Quote:
Originally Posted by spingadus
Good point. I've done it a few times, but what I would really want is an official list of projects that run creditnew. That way I would know to steer clear. A list might be a good way to help deter the use of creditnew as everyone could avoid those projects that use it. Low user participation might be enough incentive for projects to avoid creditnew and DA may eventually just give up on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by STE\/E
We could call it the 'We're the 99% crunchers against Creditnew list' :P
That's actually not a bad idea...Mad Matt has some kind of Crunchers Consortium he's trying to get off the ground that might be a similar thing. I still need to read all the stuff he sent me ahhhh...just to have the time here. Anyway, I would join a "Crunchers against CreditNew" group in a heart beat. I think so would anyone who's got a few $ invested in "good"as rigs. :p
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 ... :confused:
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by STE\/E
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.
Over a year later, I am wondering, what is our team current position on Rosetta?
Are we just letting it go due to very low credit return and maintain on the silent member base to peck away at it?
I had to put a machine on it that I never check so I wouldn't feel so bad. I finally hit my 500K goal. Took a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by denim
If I remember correctly, Rosetta was my first 1M project.
Ok, I will just peck at it from time to time.
I still crunch some rosetta on one of my machines.