100 years of time devoted to WCG is nothing to sneeze at. You should be proud of your contribution. Remember, only one project here relies on GPU, the rest still need CPU cycles. Crunch on.
Cheers

I agree with much of the above. I consider myself an "old timer" cruncher (not to be confused with a "big hitter") - I've been running an average of between 12 and 15 cores for years, and most of them are crunching 24x365.

Stats-wise, I was (by points) just about to hit the top 1,500 worldwide, and the top 50 in the UK. Then the GPU project was released, and I've been slipping back ever since.

I crunch mostly for the science, and clearly the fact that people with powerful GPUs are now able to utilise them for cancer research is a very good thing.

But it's a shame for us stats lovers that we suddenly start falling back so suddenly. Given that most projects can only be done on a CPU, maybe it's time CPU and GPU had separate points/credit scores?

Dittos to that--its good to see folks with staying power--hopefully all this will help with sickness in the world

Some people use their own HW to accumulate points/credits/run time/results (and pay bills for electricity), some not. Do we have to split also this kinds of crunching? Do we have to split crunchers rankings also based on OS? And based on CPU (e.g. your CPU's Jozef_J are much more powerful than CPU's of majority of crunchers, so don't put yourself in the same bag with other users with lower CPU's)? And based on internet connection? Laughable.

Points and credits are points and credits. Regardless on OS, CPU nor any other valid HW.

Just keep smiling and crunching.

Cheers and NI!

RicktheBrick all my congratulations.
100 years is a major milestone.

You are 416th for runtime on over 600'000 members. You are in the top 0.0007 %. That is really excellent.

I feel here that GPU crunching has created some frustration in terms of points ranking.

Let us see the two sides of the issue:

1) The Crunchers

When you go on the member statistics you are free to check your rank either on points, runtime or results. Everybody should find the suitable ranking system they want to use.

Badges are given not on points but on years of runtime which are less dependent on the number of results or points, which is correct as you get rewarded for the time you make your CPU available fast or slow.

What is frustrating for many is that there are no more badges for over two years of runtime. For those under that limit, badge collection is a nice and motivating target. But when the 2 years milestone is passed no more badges. What remains is points and results. These last two are correlated.

In GPU Grid you have badges related to credits (boinc points) but up to an enormous number of 10 Billion. It is normal because you have only GPU and only Nvidia so everybody has the same standard that is points. That is a total of 20 badges.
This make it challenging and motivating for everybody at every level.

In WCG we could very well keep the badges on runtime but add many more for example 5, 10, 25, 50, 75, 100, 250, 500, 750 up to 1000 years. This would keep the runtime ranking motivation indipendently of points and results.

Why consider dicsriminating GPU crunchers from CPU crunchers. After all we should then also discriminate between those having a unique standard 4 core CPU against those having double socket hexa cores or octo cores. Between two CPU only rigs you can go from 10'000 to 100'000 points a day. It is a ten time difference, GPU style.
And why not discriminate between those who only crunch with their desktop with Boinc set up as a screen saver only, and those that have in their home multiple desktop farms or clusters running 24/7.


2) The Scientists
Let's say that they are the most important. They bring projects do the science and the research and need our crunching help.

They do not care about runtime, points, badges. The only thing they care is to have their project done as quickly as possible.
In short to have their WUs crunched as quickly as possible. They care to get the most "results". And indeed results are correlated with points, but this is purely a by-product. Results are important points are not.
Now the scientist in fact does not really care how you crunch it. If he can use a GPU to get more crunching power and work done he will use it if he can, and be grateful to any cruncher small, large, GPU, CPU you name it who simply contributes according to his means and will.

3) Conclusion
I would like to mention that there are a large number of members that contribute regularly over the years, and since many years on the various projects. You do not see them, they often do not appear in the forums, but they bring an invaluable contribution because there is a large number of them.
The total amount of WUs crunched by each of them may not seem very large but what is important for them is the simple fact of contributing. They have their own personal motivations and do not care at all about any measurement or ranking system.

Those of you that are frustrated because of the ranking, the points etc. give importance to a form of competition, otherwise you would not care. This is also an excellent and powerful form of motivation to crunch more and more. Then if as I understand competing with points is important to you welcome to the race, do not whine and complain but act.