Originally Posted by Thumper
I thought that might be the issue Taeric, I found it amazing someone could "average" 170k in a day, unless someone hacked into Bank of America's servers to do it LOL
Sad we are loosing folders, we were doing so well a few months ago.
My wife and I are working on buying our first house right now, so all system builds are on hold until that is complete, but I am hoping on adding 2 quads to my farm early next year.........come on guys, fold with everything you got. Heck, I have a 1.4Ghz Socket 370 Celeron thay runs 24/7 doing what little it can.......
One other thought. I've also noticed that some long standing folders like aznchowboy, chozart, edge, sdumper, XMS, claymanhb, soloz2, amped, to name a few have stopped or are lower than before.
This could be due to the SMP explosion, and those with the older P4/AMD single cpu's just don't get the credit and support here or at Stanford for their collective efforts. There is absolutely no way a person with a folding farm of the older rigs can compete. QMopar is a perfect example. I feel most sorry from him and others like him. Such dedication over time, and with all those rigs going can't keep up with one overclocked SMP rig. I know it's technology, but some credit or delineation should be given. It's almost like two separate but un-equal forces going on.
I've advocated with Bruce and Pande at Stanford that the point system needs to be overhauled and the playing field leveled some. My argument is, What or who would be hurt if the older cpu folders got 100 point adders to each WU?? I know Stanford "originally" wanted or set it up for a 110ppd average for those rigs. Why would 220ppd be so bad???
Along with those arguments, I've added my take on the current points for the SMP's. The earlier 2604's and 2605's were given 1,760 each and could be completed with 24 hours in most cases. The newer versions, according to knitelife, take more cache and so take longer to complete. However, the 2608 = 1,385 and the 2609's and 2610's = 1,523... I just don't get it. My argument has been the computer they use for bench marking needs to reflect the average Joe's rig, not a pristine computer and OS. It seems to me that the later versions of the SMP should be more valuable not less. Their reply is always the same, and pretty steadfast if I might add that. It is what it is...
I also know from posts at Stanford there was attempt to give more to folders for the Beta testing of WU's - SMP's and GPU's. Perhaps when the beta testing is finished we'll see a more level playing filed. I've also commented to Stanford my concern that if the SMP's go down in points, people will not be happy. Those 4,000 to 8,000ppd totals can be and are intoxicating. I'll speak for myself, and they are for me. I really would like top get to a 5,000ppd average, no matter the circumstances.
With all of this said, there was some talk back in March about updating the point system and how points are determined. So far, not a lot has been done in that area.
The main concern back then were those Gromacs, the 24XX series, that took 4 days to complete but the highest value was 396 points with a range of 358-396. Today the 34XX series gives out between 186 to 206 points and take about two days. If you look at the averages, it's still the same 110ppd that Stanford originally initiated.
I hope all of this helped, :-)