| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Teams
Thread:  Team JTS2... For those who are "Just Testing Something"! |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Locked Total posts in this thread: 501
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hello Matt,
I meant no offense to anyone so please don't take any. I'm just a little p.o'd at the way points are figured by the UD software we use on this project. Your graph shows clearly that RAM is the bigger factor over anything else in "earning" the most points. Adding as much RAM as I would have to would be a rather expensive solution to something that shouldn't be a problem. Results should matter more to any project of this sort than worthless points but UD told me a couple of years ago that results didn't really matter to them; they were more interested in cpu time. I didn't get it then and still don't today. Anyway, everyone seems to be fixated on points as a measure of progress and success rather than results, which are supposed to be the reason we're all doing this. But then again, what do I know? Cheers |
||
|
|||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Results are certainly my Favorite stat
  |
||
|
|||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hello Matt, I meant no offense to anyone so please don't take any. I'm just a little p.o'd at the way points are figured by the UD software we use on this project. Your graph shows clearly that RAM is the bigger factor over anything else in "earning" the most points. Adding as much RAM as I would have to would be a rather expensive solution to something that shouldn't be a problem. Results should matter more to any project of this sort than worthless points but UD told me a couple of years ago that results didn't really matter to them; they were more interested in cpu time. I didn't get it then and still don't today. Anyway, everyone seems to be fixated on points as a measure of progress and success rather than results, which are supposed to be the reason we're all doing this. But then again, what do I know? Cheers - weren't points started when UD were giving away prizes to those who got lots of them as an incentive?  - weren't points then decided to be rubbish and are now only used as bragging rights on the forums?  - I only use points to compare as then its slightly more rounded idea of contribution; I would think, as it takes into account time donated, results, and spec. of rigs - your completely right, results are really the only thing that matters in the end, but between start and finish we need something else to chat about PC man's here to fit a new floppy drive to the old HP in the other room, back to talk in a bit ebuyer refunded mobo money so i'm looking for a new 'investment', maybe 64-bit this time [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Aug 22, 2005 11:08:28 AM] |
||
|
|||
|
rendition54
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Aug 16, 2005 Post Count: 2609 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Results are certainly my Favorite stat Me too!!!!!!!!! I don't understand the emphasis on points. I was in the top two spots on my Grid team for over a year. The other person had 1.5 million more points than me but I had 15,000 more results. Who was in first? I always sorted on the results column so the answer was clear to me! But I also suspect mine was a minority opinion. I consider results the real work and points are just an amusing sideline. Kind of like the difference between winning a Grammy and getting the most votes on American Idol. (US-centric analogy) [Edit 1 times, last edit by Cousin Caterpillar at Aug 22, 2005 11:06:54 AM] |
||
|
|||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
PC man's here to fit a new floppy drive to the old HP in the other room, back to talk in a bit - he came, he saw, he complained that I had taken out the FDD and not put all the pins back in, he fitted, he left |
||
|
|||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hi hi
A few minor comments/observations. 1: Please don't resize the pages..........aargh   2: To me the points are merely a couple of minor things......an excuse to wind other teams/members up, in a nice way.....to add competition and ergo.....more production for a project. They are also a visual/recorded means of measuring one's personal contribution. 3: Matt/John.......I think the comments about slower rigs etc was just meant as humour. I am sure no offence was taken by anyone 4: Just a note for those wishing to max out........for getting maximum points allocation for ram takes 1.25 gb......that will give you the 300 point limit. 5: Of course, hardware has moved on a lot since the client was written. The 10gb disc allocation max, for example appears very dated. For example.....my raid 0 has 312gb but can only allocate 10gb Hopefully, someday a new client will be written that better correlates with hardware for the second half of this decade 6: Stars......Yes I like them too 7: I think everyone knows I am a results kinda guy.....but then, I think it is in our nature to prefer the category that our systems are most capable in. No doubt, if I were running a dozen p3's I woulds lean more towards cpu time as a fave stat. But results = work for the scientists so I instinctively have always considered them the most important thing. But then, as long as we are doing the work.....regardless of hardware capability..... the only important stat is.......active users I hope some of my comments are of use......but it's me so they may not be Anyway, great crunching everyone |
||
|
|||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
What is it about floppy drives? Haven't used one since I don't know when but prefer one to be installed so all but two of my desktops have one. The two have no opening on the front faceplate to allow for one. The two notebooks were designed without them as well. Good thing we have USB flash drives.
Cuz', Like the analogy of Grammy vs. American Idol. We Americans seem to love to make instant celebrities out of people who would otherwise go completely unnoticed (for good reason). |
||
|
|||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Oops......these smaller units catching me off guard.
Lilsmap's lil rig has been idle the last 12 hours cos she ran outta work.....must add a few more slots |
||
|
|||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
what processor do you need to get up to 300?
|
||
|
|||
|
gordoma
Veteran Cruncher Windsor, UK Joined: Jul 21, 2005 Post Count: 729 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Was going to post this before Vaio did his, but...
----------------------------------------John Galbraith wrote: I meant no offense to anyone so please don't take any. Oh don't worry, I didn't. I recognised the reference to a previous discussion and thought I'd post in the stats of my devices to help you with your issue. John Galbraith wrote: Your graph shows clearly that RAM is the bigger factor over anything else in "earning" the most points. Adding as much RAM as I would have to would be a rather expensive solution to something that shouldn't be a problem. I see your point. The fact that my P3-650 machine gets more points per hour than my P3-1000 because the former has an extra 384Mb of RAM. It seems a bit odd really!! John Galbraith wrote: Results should matter more to any project of this sort than worthless points but UD told me a couple of years ago that results didn't really matter to them; they were more interested in cpu time. I didn't get it then and still don't today. Anyway, everyone seems to be fixated on points as a measure of progress and success rather than results, which are supposed to be the reason we're all doing this. But then again, what do I know? It occurs to me that each result is a section of data that needs to be processed and each one that is completed is another step closer to the completion of the project, whereas CPU is something subjective dependent on the power of the machine in question and points are really only an abitary unit of measurement for healthy competition. vaio wrote: Please don't resize the pages Sorry... I tried to keep it smaller than Cuz's - with all you hardware junkies out there, I assumed I was the only one running at 1024x768 anyway! vaio wrote: To me the points are merely a couple of minor things......an excuse to wind other teams/members up, in a nice way.....to add competition and ergo.....more production for a project. They are also a visual/recorded means of measuring one's personal contribution. Yeah - I agree. The fact is, if I had just 4-5 powerful machines instead of all the slow ones then I would still be able to produce the same number of results probably for the same or slightly less points. My main stat is therefore the CPU time which is significantly increased. So part of me is happy that the focus is on points as my results total isn't great in comparison. At least I know that I am still crunching through about 15 or so results a day which I feel is a good enough contribution instigated by one person. vaio wrote: Matt/John.......I think the comments about slower rigs etc was just meant as humour. I am sure no offence was taken by anyone Not by me... apologies if it was taken like that. vaio wrote: The 10gb disc allocation max, for example appears very dated. For example.....my raid 0 has 312gb but can only allocate 10gb I believe that the 10Gb was allocated as the largest amount forseen as being needed by the agent for processing the WUs, rather than an indication of the typical size of hard-drives in a user's computer. Correct me if I'm wrong. vaio wrote: Stars......Yes I like them too You should do... you invented them. Well done! I like them too vaio wrote: I think everyone knows I am a results kinda guy.....but then, I think it is in our nature to prefer the category that our systems are most capable in. No doubt, if I were running a dozen p3's I woulds lean more towards cpu time as a fave stat. But results = work for the scientists so I instinctively have always considered them the most important thing. Yeah - As mentioned before, If I have 4-5 meaty OC'd top end boxes I'd be going for results too. CPU is my best stat, but I don't want to harp on about it - I agree that results are the things that count. vaio wrote: But then, as long as we are doing the work.....regardless of hardware capability..... the only important stat is.......active users Agreed. Any contribution is a good contribution, whether you've got a single old PC to several labs full of machines (you know who you are!) every result counts. Thanks - I'm done now! |
||
|
|||
|
|