| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Support
Forum: Suggestions / Feedback
Thread: Granted credits way too low... |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 9
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hi all,
----------------------------------------I'm not a Crediholic, if I was, I wouldnt support WCG at all. To me, WCG is the best project around. But: Not only in my team WCG is one of the least supported projects. [Granted Credit comparison on a AMD X2 4600+ 2.4GHz per day per core: BOINC! ] SETI@Home opt. app: 711  ABC@Home: 558 Einstein: 526 SIMAP: 466 SETI Beta: 366 WCG: 293  Yes, I know its not about credits, and maybe this has been discussed many times before! But I'm asking again to change the credit system. I know that the BOINC Credits are 1/7th of the Grid Points. It would be fairly easy to change it to 1/4th (Appr. like Einstein or SIMAP - instead of 293 points it would be 512  ).But I heard now so many times that people are just not supporting this great project because of credit issues. Maybe you think that you have enough people/hosts supporting the Grid. But if the projects aims are really to help fight Cancer and AIDS, you should do everything necessary to get as many supporters as possible. Best regards, Steffen Grundmann aka Shai Hulud [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Apr 3, 2007 4:48:43 PM] |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Hi Steffen,
----------------------------------------Just to remove unclarity, are you talking points generated with the WCG client or BOINC attached to WCG, else i can not place the 1/4 over 1/7 proposal. The 'claim' per hour at WCG on BOINC is identical to any you make at any project. On average the WCG credit should be close to your claim average. The BOINC credit principle is 100,000 to 1 teraflop of computation if my memory serves me correctly. That would translate to 700,000 UD points.
WCG
----------------------------------------Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! [Edit 2 times, last edit by Sekerob at Apr 3, 2007 5:02:10 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
The BOINC developers are looking at ways of making different projects give the same credit for equal work. In theory, they should already (except the optimised SETI, which really does do more work, so gets more credit).
WCG have been strictly scrupulous in sticking with the standard credit baseline. Other projects have allowed "credit drift". This happens when a project comes out with a new, faster version of their client. In theory, they should be awarding less credit per unit, because they complete quicker. The daily average will stay the same. In practice, they tend to adjust the awarded credit so that the same credit is awarded per workunit - and the daily credit skyrockets. And that is how some projects have drifted so far from the "Cobblestone" baseline. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hi Steffen, Just to remove unclarity, are you talking points generated with the WCG client or BOINC attached to WCG, else i can not place the 1/4 over 1/7 proposal. The 'claim' per hour at WCG on BOINC is identical to any you make at any project. On average the WCG credit should be close to your claim average. The BOINC credit principle is 100,000 to 1 teraflop of computation if my memory serves me correctly. That would translate to 700,000 UD points. Hi Sekerob, I'm talking about the points with BOINC attached to WCG. Right now I have 11977 cobblestones/credits (83844 UD points). To get these 12000 credits my AMD X2 4600+ DualCore had to run 20.5 days. With Einstein for example, it would only take 11.5 days. So especially for those people who have a higher priority on getting credits and/or to get more people attached to WCG (via BOINC), 100000 BOINC credits should not only translate to 700000, but to - lets say - 400000 (to equal to Rosettas granted credits, the ratio would be appr. 100000 to 600000 - Still to little, imho). Best regards, Steffen |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
The BOINC developers are looking at ways of making different projects give the same credit for equal work. In theory, they should already (except the optimised SETI, which really does do more work, so gets more credit). WCG have been strictly scrupulous in sticking with the standard credit baseline. Other projects have allowed "credit drift". This happens when a project comes out with a new, faster version of their client. In theory, they should be awarding less credit per unit, because they complete quicker. The daily average will stay the same. In practice, they tend to adjust the awarded credit so that the same credit is awarded per workunit - and the daily credit skyrockets. And that is how some projects have drifted so far from the "Cobblestone" baseline. Hi Didactylos, so you are saying that the WCG BOINC credit system is correct, and other projects are simply overgranting. Hmm, I think I understand. But in the end, credits are just credits. And if more credits (per hour) are making more people happier, WCG might want to adjust credits as well (until this whole BOINC credit system has been fixed and it doesnt matter if i crunch for SETI or WCG. If the credits arent as important anymore, people would look more at the scientific outcome, which is much, much higher at WCG than SETI ) (I love SETI, but it is highly unlikely that Aliens are transmitting exactly to earth with a signal we'd be able to understand  )Best regards, Steffen |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
That's about the size of it.
I wouldn't go so far as to say the other projects are over-granting. Projects can (and do) award whatever they want. I'm hoping the cross-project discussions will find an equitable solution. |
||
|
|
retsof
Former Community Advisor USA Joined: Jul 31, 2005 Post Count: 6824 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
The BOINC statistics services that show results from multiple projects have their own mechanisms for assigning their own cross-project "credits". Here is an example of my own case, too large for a normal signature:
----------------------------------------
SUPPORT ADVISOR
----------------------------------------Work+GPU i7 8700 12threads School i7 4770 8threads Default+GPU Ryzen 7 3700X 16threads Ryzen 7 3800X 16 threads Ryzen 9 3900X 24threads Home i7 3540M 4threads50% [Edit 2 times, last edit by retsof at Apr 3, 2007 9:07:04 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Going back to the cross-project credit question:
it seems that the problem has been vastly overstated. Good news, everyone! WCG and nearly all other projects award exactly the same amount for work done. It's uncanny: in some cases, the ratios between projects are 1 to two decimal places! http://boinc.netsoft-online.com/e107_plugins/boinc/get_cpcs.php As you can see, the only significantly erroneous projects are Nano-Hive@Home and Einstein@Home. I recall hearing that Einstein@Home had suffered credit inflation. I don't know what happened at Nano-Hive@Home. (SETI also suffered inflation in the past, but they fixed it.) |
||
|
|
knreed
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: Nov 8, 2004 Post Count: 4504 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Didactylos,
Thanks for that link. We updated the server to the new code that provided those stats about a month ago (when we went from 5.07 to 5.09 on the server side). I knew that someone would be building a site that compared that info but I hadn't found it yet so thanks for providing it. Kevin |
||
|
|
|