I know, that points in BOINC are topic of very hot discussion, but I have an impression that Universe@Home gives to many points for work...

What you think - how many points will be reasonable for current app and don't generate "points inflation"?

---

Krzysztof 'krzyszp' Piszczek

Member of Radioactive@Home team
My Patreon profile
Universe@Home on YT

hello

halve :)

I know, that points in BOINC are topic of very hot discussion, but I have an impression that Universe@Home gives to many points for work...

What you think - how many points will be reasonable for current app and don't generate "points inflation"?

I have always thought that credit should be awarded on per work unit basis. Those who have newer/faster systems will be awarded more, but they will have earned (read: paid for) it. Simply find a number that woks for you for the current app, and there it is.

I know, that points in BOINC are topic of very hot discussion, but I have an impression that Universe@Home gives to many points for work...

I don't think so.
IMO, Point inflation is something from the past. Crossproject comparison does not make sense anymore since the upcoming of GPU Apps, Bitcoin Utopia or some very "generous" projects.

Crunchers are only able to compare themselves in a reasonable way with others within the same project. F.e. comparing the Points of MindModeling with those of Einstein@home just makes no sense.

From this point of view, all you have to do to be "fair" is, to keep the U@H credits per App in reasonable relations within U@H.

In the beginning of U@H, you would have been free to choose any amount of point per wu - the people with much production would be on the top, the guys with less production below.
Changing the amount of points NOW would mean to touch a running credit system, where very much people have already collected points in the times of higher creditratios, while others who joined later won't be so lucky.

---

"I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States..."

I know, that points in BOINC are topic of very hot discussion, but I have an impression that Universe@Home gives to many points for work...

I don't think so.
IMO, Point inflation is something from the past. Crossproject comparison does not make sense anymore since the upcoming of GPU Apps, Bitcoin Utopia or some very "generous" projects.

Crunchers are only able to compare themselves in a reasonable way with others within the same project. F.e. comparing the Points of MindModeling with those of Einstein@home just makes no sense.

From this point of view, all you have to do to be "fair" is, to keep the U@H credits per App in reasonable relations within U@H.

In the beginning of U@H, you would have been free to choose any amount of point per wu - the people with much production would be on the top, the guys with less production below.
Changing the amount of points NOW would mean to touch a running credit system, where very much people have already collected points in the times of higher creditratios, while others who joined later won't be so lucky.

Well said. Spot on...

The project is finally working great & crunchers are happy, the forums are almost empty why would you want to change anything and risk alienating crunchers that have stuck with you? It makes no sense.

Put it this way have you ever heard anyone sayi "i'm leaving this project because it gives good credit?"

Just to make a point this is a link to a guys host at asteroids@home(as close as you can get to a direct peer) http://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/results.php?hostid=37104&offset=0&show_names=0&state=4&appid=
His computer is 255th fastest. There getting get almost twice what we get here. If you look for haswell based CPU's that use optimised AVX app there even 20% faster again for same credit.

I guess it all depends on what you call to much? As there are clearly some that give much more. In my point of view the credits here are perfect.

+1

I agree that the credit given is working and not to bad, I am quite happy with it.

My 64 Bit AMD Phenom Linux systems do a WU between 6,100 and 6,300 seconds.
My 32 Bit AMD Phenom and FX 8350 systems do a work unit between 10,300 and 12,700 seconds.

So halving the awarded credit like it was suggested above would really punish my Windows hosts, whilst still giving me a pretty good return on the my Linux hosts.

If you think it is too high then just lower it a little from 222.22 per WU to say 200.00 per WU.
It drops the amount awarded but it is still a good reward for those of us running older, slower systems.

In my case as I also use an older BOINC Client I have the extra issue of the thousands of downloading files that fill up my logs, even downloading when a WU has not started yet.
This causes a lot of traffic on my systems so I think that the bit extra credit makes up for that.

My thoughts

Conan

Ok, then I will not touch credit system :)
Thank everybody for feedback.

---

Krzysztof 'krzyszp' Piszczek

Member of Radioactive@Home team
My Patreon profile
Universe@Home on YT