2 weeks ago you needed a RAC of 490 to get in the top 100 participants ... today you need 615. Team-wise it's even harder.

That's great news for the Rosetta project! Looks like we are getting really nice and competitive. We'll get to that million mark in no time, David ;-)

---

Team CFVault.com
http://www.cfvault.com

2 weeks ago you needed a RAC of 490 to get in the top 100 participants ... today you need 615. Team-wise it's even harder.

That's great news for the Rosetta project! Looks like we are getting really nice and competitive. We'll get to that million mark in no time, David ;-)

615 is still to low.... More will come over.... ;-))

---

Teddies....

2 weeks ago you needed a RAC of 490 to get in the top 100 participants ... today you need 615.

Yeah, I've been crunching about 1,000 a day for the past week and am having trouble staying in the top 50 (am still #1 in Australia though :-) But as you indicated, it's good for the project having all that crunching power.

---

*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***

Its probably all us FaD guys coming over!

---

And most of us have only one or two computer testing it out and then most the team isn't accross either...

Things will probably hot up again just after 16th December when FaD finaly closes :(

or ~ 15th December if the seti-classic people start to come as well

---

Team mauisun.org

Its probably all us FaD guys coming over!

Yes, I've noticed! ;-D And wellcome!

---

[b]"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me[/b]

2 weeks ago you needed a RAC of 490 to get in the top 100 participants ... today you need 615. Team-wise it's even harder.

That's great news for the Rosetta project! Looks like we are getting really nice and competitive. We'll get to that million mark in no time, David ;-)

615 is still to low.... More will come over.... ;-))

yes 615 is way low ;-))

---

2 weeks ago you needed a RAC of 490 to get in the top 100 participants ... today you need 615. Team-wise it's even harder.

That's great news for the Rosetta project! Looks like we are getting really nice and competitive. We'll get to that million mark in no time, David ;-)

615 is still to low.... More will come over.... ;-))

yes 615 is way low ;-))

Just hope they have enough work to feed us....
After FAD closes I'll put all on Rosetta....
Still testing for now... ;-))

---

Teddies....

Oh you people are making my RAC of 245 look low, but still holding onto 20th place in the best team that there is BOINC Synergy. Why not come and join us at BOINC Synergy, all are welcome to join the best group of crunchers around.
Cheers
Ray

---

Pizza@Home Rays Place Rays place Forums

One of our Team from FaD has an RAC of 1,400 and there is more to come!

---

Sigh. It was nice being up high in the rankings for a little while! :)

I'm also glad to see all the new people and resources coming over to Rosetta. I just hope that the project team doesn't drown in their own success!

---

Well we managed to crunch way to fast over at Find-a-Drug and when we had to do a Malaria target quickly a couple of days ago (it a Virtual Screening project by the way) for a potential collaborator we err did it in less than 24hrs. Ok so that was only 3500 molecules (about 3.5yrs CPU Time for that target) That's also only a part of the members doing it.
I think it's around 175,000,000 GFlop/day (probably more useful ~200,000 hrs/day CPU Time... err that ~22yrs CPU Time every 24hrs :eek: never really looked before)

Don't know how that compares to other projects and I know some has gone to WCG, some to Folding@Home and most may be coming here...


Think I'll check the times with other parts in the stats, seems rather large

---

Team mauisun.org

hey all, I'm here. just thought I'd poke my head in and see where my cycles are going.

tony

---

2 weeks ago you needed a RAC of 490 to get in the top 100 participants ... today you need 615. Team-wise it's even harder.

That's great news for the Rosetta project! Looks like we are getting really nice and competitive. We'll get to that million mark in no time, David ;-)

Now it is 860 ....

Anders n

---

2 weeks ago you needed a RAC of 490 to get in the top 100 participants ... today you need 615. Team-wise it's even harder.

That's great news for the Rosetta project! Looks like we are getting really nice and competitive. We'll get to that million mark in no time, David ;-)

Now it is 860 ....

Anders n

And I hope it will climb again after dec 16th.... ;-))

---

Teddies....

Okay, I'm hosed. My RAC is only 258, giving everything I can to Rosetta from my one Windows box until the next Mac version comes out, and after 29 days of a pretty steady climb (average 70 places/day), I turned in 255 credits today and DROPPED 6 places. I'm sitting at #490 (by credit; 412 by RAC), still just _barely_ in the top 500... that's not going to last long! And I really need to turn Einstein on again, I haven't turned in hardly ANY credits over there lately...

Darn all you FaD people! :-)

---

Sorry about that.....560 by credit and 299 by RAC for me.....but I only have 2 PC....

Okay, I'm hosed. My RAC is only 258, giving everything I can to Rosetta from my one Windows box

Bill, just out of curiosity. Your Athlon 64 3700+ has an integer speed that's roughly 35% higher than mine. My 3700+ is a socket 939 (San Diego core) with 1MB L2 cache, on an ABIT UL8 board, overclocked to 2.7GHz (11*245). What speed is yours running at?

EDIT: I found your specs in another post. My machine should be faster than yours but the benchmarks seem to show the opposite.

---

*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***

Remember all the people coming from FaD and the reason we are... we so outchrunched the projects that they ran out of what they could do as new work.

Right now most of us are slowly comming over myself i am one of the people who fully came over since i wanted a little headstart and see how high i can get before the rest push me down. but of corse when i had 5 computers running i was barely able to get up to and hold about 180th position there i am now down to 4 computers (oldest computer retired and passed to a friend with no computer). I am also running a lot of difrent projects out there seeing what i can do.

Hate to say it but dec 16th is going to shock alot of people who run Boinc as well as all the other Distribute computing programs out there

oh and blame your Admin people they came over and posted on FaD what they were and about and invited us.

---

Bill, just out of curiosity.

You got me curious too - I'm overclocked, but with cheap RAM, so not quite as far as you, roughly 2.6GHz (still playing with different settings, so it still may be different every day). ASUS MB, only 512MB of that RAM. I just ran the benchmarks a couple of times and they came out pretty close to the same, within the normal variation. I _think_ I'm running the "stock" BOINC client... I was running Trux 5.3.1 on this box for a while and the benchmarks were something like 2500/8500, but Rosetta was only getting 10% of this computer. I took that off when I detached Rosetta from my Macs and bumped it to 50% share on the PC, as I didn't think the optimized BOINC was "fair" with Rosetta being the primary project. However... I've had any number of optimized clients and apps on the PC, plus any number of downloads from the dev directory, testing different ones... I thought I put back the "standard" 5.2.7 boinc.exe, but it's possible that I'm still running one of the optimized versions. They all seem to increase the integer value more than the FP value on this chip. Looking at other 3700's (I know Tony's is almost exactly like mine, even to the overclocking, although he has much better RAM) I'm seeing benchmarks of more like 2400/4500 running the stock client, where mine is 2400/6500, so you're right, mine does indeed seem high. Couldn't see yours as it's hidden. (Pet peeve - hiding them makes it hard to give help sometimes, as we can't look at the results, etc... and there's nothing "critical" displayed to others if they aren't hidden...)

I'll download the new 5.2.8 this afternoon after turkey, and overwrite the whole thing to make sure I get a "clean" install. If that changes the benchmarks, I'll post back here. I certainly don't intend to be asking for too much credit!

Does anybody have a good idea of what the "average" credit really is per result? I know the times vary all over the map, so it's real hard to tell. The 263 results currently available (from this PC) average out to be 18.4 credits each. The average time per result is 1:02:52, so that's real close to 18 credits/hour. SETI is running 24 credits/hour, same PC, but optimized science app. Predictor is 18, Einstein 16... so I don't think I'm _very_ far off...

---