Credits to DC projects are like points in a video game. Sure, you can't spend either one and have no real value.

But, take the point systems out of video games and see what happens to the market. The same could be said about DC projects. Here on Rosetta were not only in a sort of points race, but the race itself lends itself to something far more valuable than a victory in a video game.

It would be interesting if a study group were allowed by a given arcade to go in a yank out and disable all scoreboards from all machines for one day and see how customers respond.

I am glad you two (Keith and Kid) are cooling down a bit to realize that what binds us here at Rosetta is more than the freaking credits . Lets face the dedication and commitment of most if not all of the pople to this Project is cult-like :) . Show me a p[roject where in the middle of a major heat wave people responded and crunched more when asked.

Credits to DC projects are like points in a video game. Sure, you can't spend either one and have no real value.

But, take the point systems out of video games and see what happens to the market. The same could be said about DC projects. Here on Rosetta were not only in a sort of points race, but the race itself lends itself to something far more valuable than a victory in a video game.

It would be interesting if a study group were allowed by a given arcade to go in a yank out and disable all scoreboards from all machines for one day and see how customers respond.

WELL SAID - I have been trying to figure out a way to put the need for credits in words -
Perfectly said !

---

SETI.USA

Kevint, I apologize as well. I lost my temper and I dont like to do that... May I ask where your getting a kentsfield? Cuz as you prolly know they wont hit retail for another year or so.

I still have a few connections at intel and other places, in another lifetime I was a serious techno geek.

Problem is, I am going to have to run it on an intel MB.

---

SETI.USA

Kevint, I apologize as well. I lost my temper and I dont like to do that... May I ask where your getting a kentsfield? Cuz as you prolly know they wont hit retail for another year or so.

I still have a few connections at intel and other places, in another lifetime I was a serious techno geek.

Problem is, I am going to have to run it on an intel MB.

Kevin: Stop in at XtremeSystems forum. We can make your move into Kentsfield a lot easier..<BG> www.XtremeSystems.com
Boards for Kentsfields:
Intel Bad AXE..Get at least ver 3.04<-Known working
Asus P5W DH Deluxe<-Known working, but can be finicky
GIGABYTE DS3<-Conroe only so far
Thanks for your time,
Movieman

---

Kevint, I apologize as well. I lost my temper and I dont like to do that... May I ask where your getting a kentsfield? Cuz as you prolly know they wont hit retail for another year or so.

I still have a few connections at intel and other places, in another lifetime I was a serious techno geek.

Problem is, I am going to have to run it on an intel MB.

EEEck an Intel mb for a Kentfield. I can feel the pain :(

Kevint, I apologize as well. I lost my temper and I dont like to do that... May I ask where your getting a kentsfield? Cuz as you prolly know they wont hit retail for another year or so.

Problem is, I am going to have to run it on an intel MB.

EEEck an Intel mb for a Kentfield. I can feel the pain :(

Yep, that is about the only way I could get Intel to release them to me - but it does not mean that I have to leave it that way after I get them in. - know what I mean, nudge nudge, wink wink...

---

SETI.USA

After doing some WU's over @ the Ralph Project if this is going to be the New Wave Credit System I don't think theres going to be very many takers.

I have yet to get over 8 Credits for 1 WU processing them @ 1 hour Preferences with a P4 3.2 Ghz CPU PC, some were as low as 2 Credits. Yet I see other People with 1.8 Ghz CPU PC's getting 40 & 50 Credit's Per hour.

If this is what is called equalizing the Credits among the Participants I can Live without it ... 0_o

After doing some WU's over @ the Ralph Project if this is going to be the New Wave Credit System I don't think theres going to be very many takers.

I have yet to get over 8 Credits for 1 WU processing them @ 1 hour Preferences with a P4 3.2 Ghz CPU PC, some were as low as 2 Credits. Yet I see other People with 1.8 Ghz CPU PC's getting 40 & 50 Credit's Per hour.

As has been explained many times, the 2 credits per model on RALPH is for testing only. When the system is moved to Rosetta, a slow WU will get a lot more than 2 credits per model, while a fast WU will get less. Thus, the number of credits per hour that a given machine will get won't depend on the type of WU.

Kevint, I apologize as well. I lost my temper and I dont like to do that... May I ask where your getting a kentsfield? Cuz as you prolly know they wont hit retail for another year or so.

Problem is, I am going to have to run it on an intel MB.

EEEck an Intel mb for a Kentfield. I can feel the pain :(

Yep, that is about the only way I could get Intel to release them to me - but it does not mean that I have to leave it that way after I get them in. - know what I mean, nudge nudge, wink wink...

You sly dog!!!!!! :)

blah de blah blah,

Crunch3rs source code for 5.5.0 is available if you know where to look.
It's basically just the 5.5.0 code compiled with Intel & Micorosoft stuff

blah de blah blah



as a side, I have to stop a few of my computers now :-(
but that's because I've eventually moved into my house which means I now can use the broadband I've been paying for for 10 months <grrr> :-)

So I can click Ralph back on the ones that are still running, though they've been down clocked to keep them quite for now.



But if anyone is really bothered about the credit system, get your arse over to [url=
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/]Ralph[/url], give your ideas and feedback there!

and maybe go read something more interesting than this thread has turned

---

Team mauisun.org

I agree with the need to change the credit granting process. Change it going forward. If you change it going backwards, then I believe many will leave. This isn't the only worthy DC project. I've run UD, D2OL, and FaD. And now Rosetta. I've put alot of my own resources into these projects, both in terms of hardware expenditures and $$ for power. To go and negate credit based on past crunching is xtremely distasteful to me. If that is what my contributions to this project get me, I would have to seriously reconsider my up-til-now loyalty to this project, as much as I like it and respect the science being done.

Also, credit based on what system is being reported instead of the amount of actual work being done is, in my opinion, going down the wrong road. I guarantee you, my x2 3800+, overclocked, is doing more work than a system with the same processor. The system that puts out more work should get more credit.

---

FYI, it's being discussed on the Ralph forum that backdating the current credits so they reflect the new system is indeed a possibility.

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=233

Personally, I dont care if they back date, zero, parallel or archive. But I know many others vehemently oppose this idea. If it's implemented, it will likely be very expensive in terms of human/volunteer capital if recent history is any indicator.

Secondarily, I'm frankly quite surprised that this system is going to be deployed without any prior advisement from the project administators detailing precisely the changes made, those still being considered, and in their best estimation how we, the users, and our machines and credits will be affected. Forgive me if such coherent and unadulterated correspondence exists, but if it does, I cant find it, and its not for the lack of looking. In my opinion, this effort falls far short of my expectations established by past precendent and represents a most unwelcome departure from the 'norm'.

Respectfully,

SS

---

What I'm concerned about is this:
If for the sake of argument, my DX3600 machine can do twice the work in a given timeframe than Jimmy Jones Dell P4-2000 will I be receiving twice the points that he does for the same timeframe? IE: Is this new system all based on work done?
I'd also like to comment on the idea of going back to February and changing all the point values.
I'm against it and for the following reasons:
The XS team busted their backsides for this project to a degree that I really can't describe here and to have that effort negated would leave a very bad taste in my teams mouth.
I usually speak for myself when posting here but in this post I'm speaking as the co-captain of the team and very sure that I speak for all 600 of them in this regard.
I've said this before but it bears repeating: We are a partnership with Rosetta and to deny that is avoiding reality.We( and I mean all the participants not just XS) contribute our time, machinery and money to this project just as much as if we wrote a check to Baker Labs. All that we ask back for this is courtesy, some communication, fair play, and an understanding that we are in this WITH you as a partner not just a faceless entity that turns on a machine for you daily. The competitions may not be valuable from where you sit, but I assure you that they are the prime reason that you have as much computational power devoted to this project as you currently have.
These competitions are the life blood of any DC project. The science is the main motivator but the competitions make this happen on this scale.
Think of us as a friend that is here to help you and we will both profit by this partnership.
Thanks for your time,
Movieman

---

FYI, it's being discussed on the Ralph forum that backdating the current credits so they reflect the new system is indeed a possibility.

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=233

Back Dating is an ex post facto aplication of the new credit system. Ex post fact applications of any rule is unfair as well as counter productive. I doubt our leaders at Rosetta @ Home will go this route: they promised fairness and I doubt they will complicate their very complicated lifes trying to deal with what would be the firestorm that will come from backdating.

So I expect a fair, straight forward system to be installed tommprrow. And Yes, I expect some glitches will show up and that they will be fixed.

If for the sake of argument, my DX3600 machine can do twice the work in a given timeframe than Jimmy Jones Dell P4-2000 will I be receiving twice the points that he does for the same timeframe? IE: Is this new system all based on work done?

Movieman: Getting a certain number of credits per model (the credit/model changes with each major WU) means that if you produce twice the models in a certain WU in the same time as another machine running the same certain WU, that you'll get twice the credits.

As for your comments on rescoring back to February - dekim was asking for feedback on the Ralph@Home forums. (See Jose's link.)

---

If for the sake of argument, my DX3600 machine can do twice the work in a given timeframe than Jimmy Jones Dell P4-2000 will I be receiving twice the points that he does for the same timeframe? IE: Is this new system all based on work done?

Movieman: Getting a certain number of credits per model (the credit/model changes with each major WU) means that if you produce twice the models in a certain WU in the same time as another machine running the same certain WU, that you'll get twice the credits.

As for your comments on rescoring back to February - dekim was asking for feedback on the Ralph@Home forums. (See Jose's link.)

Thanks for the info. I'm all for a work related credit system as I've been saying for months. This benchmark deal is a joke and a bad one.
Yes, caught the link and read it but after I'd posted here.
Thanks for your time,
Movieman

---

The XS team busted their backsides for this project to a degree that I really can't describe here and to have that effort negated would leave a very bad taste in my teams mouth.

Before anyone reads this and heads over there in a rage - nobody proposed "negating" it. They are proposing that all historical credit back to February reflect the new system - credits based on work done. *Huge* difference, and I hope everyone understands that. They have a more accurate measuring stick now, and have the opportunity to adjust credit back 6 months so it reflects how much work you did for the project.

XS will still be way out front, potentially more than they are now depending on how many people fluffed their stats.

If you have any thoughts, please head over to the Ralph forum and post them there.

Getting a certain number of credits per model (the credit/model changes with each major WU) means that if you produce twice the models in a certain WU in the same time as another machine running the same certain WU, that you'll get twice the credits.

That's the whole point. I know my boxes can't compete - ie. can't produce the same amount of work - with any of the big crunchers, but at least now if I can produce 12 models in an hour I will get the same amount of credits as someone who produces 12 models in 10 minutes. They will get 6 times the credit that I get in an hour but that is only fair as they will be producing 6 times the work.

---

Thanks for the info. I'm all for a work related credit system as I've been saying for months. This benchmark deal is a joke and a bad one.
Yes, caught the link and read it but after I'd posted here.
Thanks for your time,
Movieman

Hi Movieman / Scott (DCManiak)

What's your thoughts on the suggestion for the credits being backdated using the new work-done basis so they're consistent as far back as possible?

Whether the credits are back-dated or not, I think the competition will be more intense with the new credit system which can only be a good thing...

---