| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: The end of my advancing results returned stats |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 4
|
|
| Author |
|
|
RicktheBrick
Senior Cruncher Joined: Sep 23, 2005 Post Count: 206 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Here it is early in the morning and I have already returned 26 results for the day. Since I turn on two more computers during the day I should have between 60 and 70 results come evening. But instead of advancing I retreated 2 places and more important I went back a page as I was 800th position in page 16 on the stats but I am now 802th position or page 17 of the results returned stats. Points seem to me to be a very useless stats. I am around 800th position in both cpu time and results returned but I am 575th position in points. I have found members that have both more results and cpu time but are behind me in points. How can that be? Are my results or my cpu time somehow better than theirs? I thought points were invented to level off the field so that faster than average computers which would have less cpu time and more results would be equal to slower than average computers with more cpu time but less results. In my case I have less cpu time and results but better points. I think this is unfair so I do not put as much pride in my position in points as I would have if they were fair.
|
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
It can be RicktheBrick... it's all down to hardware, hardware power, hours in the day (after all you put it on early in the morning, so not 24/7), the mix of the jobs, the length of the jobs, when jobs validate etc. No not going to write an essay, just accept that like me, eventually you'll be going backward without upgrades, but that's not why we're crunching. Yes points are worthless, just a measure if you divide them by 700,000 as to how many Teraflops of computing you've contributed to finding for instance a cure.
----------------------------------------
WCG
----------------------------------------Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sekerob at Jun 1, 2009 2:34:18 PM] |
||
|
|
Steve WCG
Senior Cruncher Joined: May 4, 2009 Post Count: 216 Status: Offline |
Points equate to how much science a computer has processed.
If your computers are more powerful than mine and we both crunched an equal amount of time then yes, I would expect you to have more points than I do. The target number of hours per WU are different between projects (although they are trying to normalize them all) and this target seems to move around a bit. If the target was 4 hours 1 year ago and they are 6 hours now, then yes, the results count would be different for the same amount of time in different years. As for cpu time ... this is one that many people do not agree on ... my i7 crunches 8 WUs at a time (using HT) on 4 physical cores but they are all on 1 machine so what amount of CPU time do I get credited for? Today it is 8 hours cpu time per 1 hour of wall clock time. I would not care if tomorrow they changed it to 1. You have shown great dedication in the time and crunching results you have processed and I can only hope that I will stay around long enough to be able to contribute as much as you already have. Steve |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
11 months ago when I started on WCG, the person with the 5000th highest run time had about 2.5 years. Now the 5000th person has almost 6 years.
Even though I have a RAC of about 7,000 credits, I get passed almost every day by someone with more computing power than I have. Its all about faster hardware and more cores. |
||
|
|
|