| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Support
Forum: Website Support
Thread: Points earned confusion |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 9
|
|
| Author |
|
|
WPrion
Cruncher Joined: Apr 20, 2013 Post Count: 25 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
When I look at my tasks on the RESULTS page I see that each one earns about 70 points. 8 tasks returned for about 560 points.
----------------------------------------But when I look at my DEVICE it states 8 tasks returned (over 2 days) and about 4000 points rewarded. Why the mismatch and which one is accurate? Thanks.  |
||
|
|
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher USA Joined: Jul 4, 2006 Post Count: 7846 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
The 70 points listed in devices are BOINC points. The conversion factor from BOINC points to WCG points is 7. This stems from the old WCG point system prior to going with BOINC. 7 times 560 is 3920, about 4000.
----------------------------------------Cheers
Sgt. Joe
*Minnesota Crunchers* |
||
|
|
thunder7
Senior Cruncher Netherlands Joined: Mar 6, 2013 Post Count: 238 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
The whole points concept has me confused.
----------------------------------------The definition is What are points? Your device's contribution is shown in three measures: points, total run time and results returned. The term points is simply used as a way of measuring the amount of computation your device has contributed. For instance, if your device works for three days on one work unit, or in those same three days completes five work units, you will accumulate the same number of points assuming that your device worked at about the same level of effort in each scenario. but that doesn't seem to be of any use in these times where almost all contributing systems will have multiple cores. As a case, let's look at the situation in my country, where well known forum member Adri Verhoef and myself are top contributors. The Netherlands yesterday, Adri's systems contributed 44 cpu-days and 1211 results. My systems contributed 177 cpu-days and 1505 results. Adri gained 2,798,313 points, I gained 778,474 points. Since only MCM is active, I can't imagine we had radically different workunits. I'm not quite sure how you can measure the 'amount of computation' so doing less results in less time results in more points, unless they really think a device is a core and having a single core is the norm. I wonder what system would get you the most points. It almost seems like a single core heavily overclocked system with liquid nitrogen cooling or something like that would be the best option. [Edit 2 times, last edit by thunder7 at Nov 17, 2023 2:56:22 PM] |
||
|
|
TPCBF
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 2, 2011 Post Count: 2173 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
The 70 points listed in devices are BOINC points. The conversion factor from BOINC points to WCG points is 7. This stems from the old WCG point system prior to going with BOINC. 7 times 560 is 3920, about 4000. Sorry Joe, but no. ALL points shown on the WCG site are the "old WCG points" (BOINC x7).Cheers The Results page shows each returned result, for a specific device. The Devices list however shows the total points (and runtime) accrued over the time frame selected (on top of the first column), which defaults to "anytime (all devices)" and the lowest setting here is for the "last 3 days" (which of course shows only the devices that indeed have returned results in the last 3 days (or what ever time frame is selected). This would only be different for the OP if - he only crunshes for 7 days - he is showing in the Results page the validated results vs. the device page showing "returned" points. The description is not quite clear about that one. The infamous "7x" (/7) factor comes only in play when it is shown in a direct BOINC context (BOINC client or external stats site like BOINCStats) Ralf |
||
|
|
Bryn Mawr
Senior Cruncher Joined: Dec 26, 2018 Post Count: 384 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
The whole points concept has me confused. The definition is What are points? Your device's contribution is shown in three measures: points, total run time and results returned. The term points is simply used as a way of measuring the amount of computation your device has contributed. For instance, if your device works for three days on one work unit, or in those same three days completes five work units, you will accumulate the same number of points assuming that your device worked at about the same level of effort in each scenario. but that doesn't seem to be of any use in these times where almost all contributing systems will have multiple cores. As a case, let's look at the situation in my country, where well known forum member Adri Verhoef and myself are top contributors. The Netherlands yesterday, Adri's systems contributed 44 cpu-days and 1211 results. My systems contributed 177 cpu-days and 1505 results. Adri gained 2,798,313 points, I gained 778,474 points. Since only MCM is active, I can't imagine we had radically different workunits. I'm not quite sure how you can measure the 'amount of computation' so doing less results in less time results in more points, unless they really think a device is a core and having a single core is the norm. I wonder what system would get you the most points. It almost seems like a single core heavily overclocked system with liquid nitrogen cooling or something like that would be the best option. So Adri is averaging a task every 52 minutes whereas you are averaging a task every 2 hours 50 minutes. I’d suggest that Adri is doing a lot of OPNG tasks mixed in with the MCM and they generate maybe 1,000 points per task given the extra efficiency of the GPU. |
||
|
|
Boca Raton Community HS
Senior Cruncher Joined: Aug 27, 2021 Post Count: 209 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
The whole points concept has me confused. The definition is What are points? Your device's contribution is shown in three measures: points, total run time and results returned. The term points is simply used as a way of measuring the amount of computation your device has contributed. For instance, if your device works for three days on one work unit, or in those same three days completes five work units, you will accumulate the same number of points assuming that your device worked at about the same level of effort in each scenario. but that doesn't seem to be of any use in these times where almost all contributing systems will have multiple cores. As a case, let's look at the situation in my country, where well known forum member Adri Verhoef and myself are top contributors. The Netherlands yesterday, Adri's systems contributed 44 cpu-days and 1211 results. My systems contributed 177 cpu-days and 1505 results. Adri gained 2,798,313 points, I gained 778,474 points. Since only MCM is active, I can't imagine we had radically different workunits. I'm not quite sure how you can measure the 'amount of computation' so doing less results in less time results in more points, unless they really think a device is a core and having a single core is the norm. I wonder what system would get you the most points. It almost seems like a single core heavily overclocked system with liquid nitrogen cooling or something like that would be the best option. So Adri is averaging a task every 52 minutes whereas you are averaging a task every 2 hours 50 minutes. I’d suggest that Adri is doing a lot of OPNG tasks mixed in with the MCM and they generate maybe 1,000 points per task given the extra efficiency of the GPU. is there even a way to dictate getting more OPNG tasks than other people (within a certain margin of error)? I know they are really "spotty" right now, but isn't that true for everyone? |
||
|
|
TPCBF
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 2, 2011 Post Count: 2173 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
is there even a way to dictate getting more OPNG tasks than other people (within a certain margin of error)? I know they are really "spotty" right now, but isn't that true for everyone? Well, yes, kind of there is.Some pointw****s have figured out that if they schedule checking for OPN1 tasks within a few seconds after a new OPNG batch is being released, they can suck up most of what is available and leave a few morsels for the rest...  Today is actually the first day in at least two weeks that I got about 100 new OPNG tasks, between at least 3 different hosts, without playing such games.... Ralf |
||
|
|
Occam
Advanced Cruncher Joined: Jan 1, 2024 Post Count: 92 Status: Offline |
I would love to hear about the system you and Adri have to get those point! Also does anyone run a list of points for individuals who are not part of a team?
|
||
|
|
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher USA Joined: Jul 4, 2006 Post Count: 7846 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Sorry Joe, but no. ALL points shown on the WCG site are the "old WCG points" (BOINC x7). The Results page shows each returned result, for a specific device. Sorry TPCBF, but the results page shows BOINC points in the "Claimed/Granted" column. It is the only place I know of where the points are not the WCG points on the WCG web site, but BOINC points which need to be multiplied by 7 to get to WCG points. Everywhere else on the WCG website the points listed are WCG points. I hope this clarifies the matter. Cheers
Sgt. Joe
*Minnesota Crunchers* |
||
|
|
|