Going by the chart there is about 6months work left for NRW, and there are some suggestions it could be sooner.
I have just landed the Green Badge, so I think if I want to get to Blue I had better start putting the work back into NRW, and sooner rather than later - just in case!
So I have changed most of my profiles to NRW. When I get HCC to Green I will bring the rest of my systems here for a while, and see how I get on between now and the new year.

I have already messed up my badge collection 3 times. First I had to rejoin the WCG as I used an email account that no longer exists and forgot the password for here; not using the forums much. After rejoining I did not pick up that there were badges; still not using the forums, and this year I had no idea when WCG Projects were finishing. So I ended up 47days short of Green for the CEP (missed last orders) and overshoot IADS by 100days.

So, this time I want that badge.
I had started to aim for an HPF Blue, it being my first project, but I see no point in going for that first. It is due to end mid 2011, not mid 2010.

NRW Jun 2010
HFCC Mar 2011,
HPF Jun 2011,
HCMD2 Dec 2011,
HCC Dec 2011,
FAAH Dec 2011

Martin, I think your analysis could well be more accurate for the projects that are closer to ending. Thanks, I will take that into account.

As for the CMD2 project, your argument (in itself) sort of defeats itself.
You did not take account of the fact that when the other projects end, people will move to this project and the throughput of work will suddenly rise! That said there could be 5 more projects added over the next year, and it could move out to 2015.

You are quite right to raise the point about computer power (performance) rising. The general rule of transistor count per wafer area doubling every 2 years (Moores Law) has not gone away. As this effects processing performance/speed you are right to affirm that CPU Power will continue to rise.
Over time this is fairly linear, but over small periods of time, months to years there can be jumps, and we are experiencing one now.
This year both AMD and Intel have released a number of mainstream Quad core CPUs that have, and will continue to contribute enormously to the WCG Project.

AMD released the Phenom II series some time after the release by Intel of their much envied i7 series.
Recently AMD released the Quad core Athlons and Intel released the quad core i5 and i7s, capable of running on (Land Gate Array) LGA 1156 motherboards.

Supporting the top end CPUs are the mid-range AMD Tripple cores, Intel€s highly clocked (and clockable) Core 2 Duos, and even a few quad core CPUs for laptops.

This performance jump is set to be continued by Intel with the release of the i9 CPU, with 6 cores and 12 threads. Although AMD have already released a Hex core CPU, it is not mainstream. It is designed for data centres and cluster servers; concentrating on performance per Watt rather than overall CPU Power - that said there are a few here, towards the top of the systems leaderboard, along with the odd i9 Engineering Sample.

Sekerob and Uplinger Thanks

[Very OT]More credits = More work... a nice theory we play along with, the last revelation, a too fast pre-test HFCC benchmark (and thus FAAH too) gives less credit, ergo a slow benchmark more credit... that's why the present system is on the shovel, BOINC world wide. [/Very OT]

I definitely agree that the point system could if properly executed inspire optimization through competition and an attempt to secure points.

But it is difficult to execute properly...