Indeed. I just look at my position in each project. I have a long way to go to catch up with your third place position! One of these days I'm going to buy 50 graphics cards just to beat you.

LOL!!! This is overall in the World yesterday:
3 mikey 44,601,101 1,656,324,405,057 The Final Front Ear United States

Does this concern you? From your stats:
BOINC World position based on RAC: 16 out of 4,021,757
That means there are people catching you up.

Hang on, you've done 1960 times more work than me. How on earth is that even possible?

---

Always right around 26000 tasks to send and 500000 in progress.
Either the task generator is barely keeping up or it just always keeps 26000 tasks pending.
It would be really nice if I could figure out why AMd Opteron processors (6128 in particular) keep getting signal 11 errors on this project. Probably time to retire the old fella anyway but still.

The Tasks ready to send I assume are a buffer that the server maintains from which it can immediately service client requests for new work, with files staged ready for download. Total queued jobs on the front page is over 15 000 000 – so at a completion rate of around 25 000 per hour, we’re not at risk of running out just yet…

Signal 11 could be just about anything – faulty hardware, overheating, instability from overclocking, …
There do seem to be a lot of reports of trouble from hosts running Linux on AMD; I wonder whether there’s some obscure bug lurking somewhere.

The Tasks ready to send I assume are a buffer that the server maintains from which it can immediately service client requests for new work, with files staged ready for download. Total queued jobs on the front page is over 15 000 000 – so at a completion rate of around 25 000 per hour, we’re not at risk of running out just yet…

Signal 11 could be just about anything – faulty hardware, overheating, instability from overclocking, …
There do seem to be a lot of reports of trouble from hosts running Linux on AMD; I wonder whether there’s some obscure bug lurking somewhere.

The Ryzens appear to be fine and I had no problems with my Bulldozer but I couldn’t speak for the Opteron.

The Tasks ready to send I assume are a buffer that the server maintains from which it can immediately service client requests for new work, with files staged ready for download. Total queued jobs on the front page is over 15 000 000 – so at a completion rate of around 25 000 per hour, we’re not at risk of running out just yet…

Signal 11 could be just about anything – faulty hardware, overheating, instability from overclocking, …
There do seem to be a lot of reports of trouble from hosts running Linux on AMD; I wonder whether there’s some obscure bug lurking somewhere.

The Ryzens appear to be fine and I had no problems with my Bulldozer but I couldn’t speak for the Opteron.

I have one bulldozer and 2 Ryzen's with 1 Ryzen running Windows and the other 2 processors running Ubuntu 1804.
Right now I'm trying to figure out if running workunits for the default 8 hours or 24 hours is more worthwhile.
The Opteron 6128 and 4122 are getting signal 11 errors on this project but are working just fine on TN Grid.

even with intel CPU got 11 signal seen here

something strange with the 4.20 64bits app ... ever seen other errors with this one with wingmen ...

better try 32bit 4.21 app ?

Right now I'm trying to figure out if running workunits for the default 8 hours or 24 hours is more worthwhile.

There's not much difference in the ratio of credits you get between 8 hour tasks or the 24 hour tasks, you just get 3 times as many credits for the 24 hours tasks.

The Tasks ready to send I assume are a buffer that the server maintains from which it can immediately service client requests for new work, with files staged ready for download. Total queued jobs on the front page is over 15 000 000 – so at a completion rate of around 25 000 per hour, we’re not at risk of running out just yet…

Only Rosetta and Primegrid I've seen actually admit to that number, the rest of the projects hide it away.

---

Right now I'm trying to figure out if running workunits for the default 8 hours or 24 hours is more worthwhile.

There's not much difference in the ratio of credits you get between 8 hour tasks or the 24 hour tasks, you just get 3 times as many credits for the 24 hours tasks.

I think you get credits for the number of results you produce within the task. This has a random element (some tasks are more difficult), and is related to how fast your processor is and how long you run the task for. I think they've set it to 8 hours so they get about the right number of results for each task - I remember one of the scientists saying something about all the task results produce a big picture so if you run yours for longer you're in effect making one of the pixels sharper. If a lot of people started running them longer, they'd get too much information, so they'd turn down the setting to 7 hours standard.

---

Right now I'm trying to figure out if running workunits for the default 8 hours or 24 hours is more worthwhile.

There's not much difference in the ratio of credits you get between 8 hour tasks or the 24 hour tasks, you just get 3 times as many credits for the 24 hours tasks.

I think you get credits for the number of results you produce within the task. This has a random element (some tasks are more difficult), and is related to how fast your processor is and how long you run the task for. I think they've set it to 8 hours so they get about the right number of results for each task - I remember one of the scientists saying something about all the task results produce a big picture so if you run yours for longer you're in effect making one of the pixels sharper. If a lot of people started running them longer, they'd get too much information, so they'd turn down the setting to 7 hours standard.

This makes sense. I have a few tasks that, regardless of the machine, get 66 credits or there about. I'm assuming this is the base credit a task can produce. I guess it depends on the specific task type to go by decoy count - some get 20, some get over 100.
Left it at the default 8 hours. I'd guess they know best as far as what they want.

Left it at the default 8 hours. I'd guess they know best as far as what they want.

From a purely selfish point of view, I prefer ones with a variable time (fixed amount of processing), then I can see them flying through on a faster machine!

---

Left it at the default 8 hours. I'd guess they know best as far as what they want.

From a purely selfish point of view, I prefer ones with a variable time (fixed amount of processing), then I can see them flying through on a faster machine!

I can see that for sure.
It's hard to figure out amount of work done proportionate to each machine on this project since the credits vary so drastically from one type of workunit to the next. How is it my i3-2130 is making more credits on work than an i7-4790 which is averaging about 90 or 100 credits per WU. I guess as long as science is being done that's what matters.

Left it at the default 8 hours. I'd guess they know best as far as what they want.

From a purely selfish point of view, I prefer ones with a variable time (fixed amount of processing), then I can see them flying through on a faster machine!

I can see that for sure.
It's hard to figure out amount of work done proportionate to each machine on this project since the credits vary so drastically from one type of workunit to the next. How is it my i3-2130 is making more credits on work than an i7-4790 which is averaging about 90 or 100 credits per WU. I guess as long as science is being done that's what matters.

Try running a benchmark on the i7, it might just help :-)

How is it my i3-2130 is making more credits on work than an i7-4790 which is averaging about 90 or 100 credits per WU.

That’s at least in part because the i7 hasn’t sent Rosetta its performance measurements yet.

Advanced view » Tools menu » Run CPU benchmarks

How is it my i3-2130 is making more credits on work than an i7-4790 which is averaging about 90 or 100 credits per WU.

That’s at least in part because the i7 hasn’t sent Rosetta its performance measurements yet.

Advanced view » Tools menu » Run CPU benchmarks

This is supposed to be done automatically by Boinc. Both when you install it, when hardware changes, and periodically. Looks like yet another Boinc bug.

---

How is it my i3-2130 is making more credits on work than an i7-4790 which is averaging about 90 or 100 credits per WU.

That’s at least in part because the i7 hasn’t sent Rosetta its performance measurements yet.

Advanced view » Tools menu » Run CPU benchmarks

This is supposed to be done automatically by Boinc. Both when you install it, when hardware changes, and periodically. Looks like yet another Boinc bug.

In my experience, installing BOINC on Windows or Linux always seems to run the benchmark at start. It also reruns it periodically. My Linux Mint install did so just yesterday.
However, when I ran a few cloud instances, I had to run the benchmark manually (OS was always Ubuntu Server 18.04/20.04), otherwise the host would simply report those 1000/1000 default values.

Maybe something specific to the Ubuntu Server BOINC Install.

---

How is it my i3-2130 is making more credits on work than an i7-4790 which is averaging about 90 or 100 credits per WU.

That’s at least in part because the i7 hasn’t sent Rosetta its performance measurements yet.

Advanced view » Tools menu » Run CPU benchmarks

This is supposed to be done automatically by Boinc. Both when you install it, when hardware changes, and periodically. Looks like yet another Boinc bug.

In my experience, installing BOINC on Windows or Linux always seems to run the benchmark at start. It also reruns it periodically. My Linux Mint install did so just yesterday.
However, when I ran a few cloud instances, I had to run the benchmark manually (OS was always Ubuntu Server 18.04/20.04), otherwise the host would simply report those 1000/1000 default values.

Maybe something specific to the Ubuntu Server BOINC Install.

What is a cloud instance?

---

This is supposed to be done automatically by Boinc. Both when you install it, when hardware changes, and periodically.

It’s not unconditional. AFAICT from the code, it’s not done on first installation or on a hardware change; only every 30 days or when the client version changes. Even then it only checks at startup – meaning if you install, attach a project and start crunching 24×7, the benchmarks will never get run automatically…

A cloud server, like at Google Cloud Engine or Amazon AWS.

---

How is it my i3-2130 is making more credits on work than an i7-4790 which is averaging about 90 or 100 credits per WU.

That’s at least in part because the i7 hasn’t sent Rosetta its performance measurements yet.

Advanced view » Tools menu » Run CPU benchmarks

This is supposed to be done automatically by Boinc. Both when you install it, when hardware changes, and periodically. Looks like yet another Boinc bug.

ORRR a setting put in by the user to stop it? You can put a line in the cc_config.xml file to stop the benchmarks.