Folding with BOINC

[zlojack]

I think it must have something to do with it because my points went up when my OC went from 4.2GHz to 4.4GHz

[sswilson]

Sure wish I could find a better description of how "granted credit vrs claimed credit" works.

Have a look at the output of this rig.... Tasks for computer

That's a single instance of boinc running alongside the Nvidia FAH GPU client on an E8400 @ 4g. One core is solid 100% from the GPU client, and the other fluctuates between 70% and 80% (never goes above 80%). That's a hell of a lot of extra "granted credit" for something that isn't working full out. (Wish I could get the rest of my boinc clients working that well.... :) ).

BTW... the average credit is only now starting to creep up as it's only been up for a few days... looking at the averages I'm expecting it to be up around what my quad is putting out on two cores.

[Tazer-[X]]

I know this is the wrong place to ask, but, can anyone join the World COmmunity Grid?
Team Tazer

[zlojack]

I'm slowly creeping up towards 2,000 points average credit.

[encorp]

I'm dl'ing the client as we speak :D

[matsta31]

Welcome to the team :)

Did someone try the Nvidia for Boinc ?

I am curious about it.

[FreqE1]

Originally Posted by zlojack

I'm slowly creeping up towards 2,000 points average credit.

That kicks azz zlojack! Full speed ahead.
Same goes to you encorp, we can use more members.

I'll finally be getting my 2nd processor in October so my DDR3 rig can crunch too.

[LCB001]

Originally Posted by sswilson

Sure wish I could find a better description of how "granted credit vrs claimed credit" works.

Have a look at the output of this rig.... Tasks for computer

That's a single instance of boinc running alongside the Nvidia FAH GPU client on an E8400 @ 4g. One core is solid 100% from the GPU client, and the other fluctuates between 70% and 80% (never goes above 80%). That's a hell of a lot of extra "granted credit" for something that isn't working full out. (Wish I could get the rest of my boinc clients working that well.... :) ).

BTW... the average credit is only now starting to creep up as it's only been up for a few days... looking at the averages I'm expecting it to be up around what my quad is putting out on two cores.

I was also wondering about the "Granted Credit vs Claimed Credit" parameters and found these threads : The new credit system explained and Rosetta@Home FAQ (work in progress)

One Interesting Quote from the FAQ: "From a user stats point of view each WU represents a single result when it is turned in. The longer it runs the more credit it will claim. But from a science point of view each "model" represents a single result so each of your turned in results can represent anywhere from 1 - 100+ science results. That is why the default time is set to 8 hours (more science per WU). In most cases this will return between 1 and about 100 results depending on protein size. The faster the system the more models it can run in the alloted time. Because the models differ in size there is no way to calculate the number of credits per model. It is possible to make an estimate of credits per hour per system. The work unit itself has no bearing on this at all."

[sswilson]

Heh... I've seen the first one for sure. I get all glassy eyed by about the third sentence of the first paragraph. :)

[LCB001]

Originally Posted by sswilson

Heh... I've seen the first one for sure. I get all glassy eyed by about the third sentence of the first paragraph. :)

You are not the only one, I was hoping someone could distill it down to a few simple paragraphs. Seems completely different from F@H . From what I can understand, instead of one WU = set amount of points, its one WU = set points X the # of models of that WU you process. The longer time you give it per WU the more models it can process. Oh well, more reading to do I guess...