- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Location
- Vancouver, WA
I've been crunching 1 WU on a core from my Q6600 for over a day now, 28 hours, and it still says it has 10 hours left. Whats the deal? Usually WU's crunch insanely fast on this rig.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
38 hour + WU?
- Thread starter zulfy26
- Start date
QuietIce
Disabled
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Location
- Anywhere but there
IDK - I got some odd 4-hour ones the other day. Look at it this way, it'll be worth a lot of credits ... 
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2004
- Location
- Auckland, New Zealand
Its been over 10hours.. how has the WU turned out? I just took a look at your pcs results and saw something weird..
594348667 149295438 19 Aug 2007 7:59:40 UTC 28 Aug 2007 22:19:57 UTC Over Success Done 6,955.67 63.98 63.98
594348663 149295432 19 Aug 2007 7:59:40 UTC 29 Aug 2007 3:46:11 UTC Over Success Done 20,497.47 63.98 63.98
how come a WU taking 7k seconds and one taking 20k seconds claims the same amount of credit? I thought (a long time ago) they changed it to work done = credits claimed, rather than bench+cputime = credits claimed.. confused
594348667 149295438 19 Aug 2007 7:59:40 UTC 28 Aug 2007 22:19:57 UTC Over Success Done 6,955.67 63.98 63.98
594348663 149295432 19 Aug 2007 7:59:40 UTC 29 Aug 2007 3:46:11 UTC Over Success Done 20,497.47 63.98 63.98
how come a WU taking 7k seconds and one taking 20k seconds claims the same amount of credit? I thought (a long time ago) they changed it to work done = credits claimed, rather than bench+cputime = credits claimed.. confused
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2007
- Location
- Folding in Ames, IA
work done does = credits claimed.
if it takes you a week to read a book for a class, and someone else does it in a day, you've both done the same amount of work, and will both claim an A+, even if it did take you a different amount of time.
if it takes you a week to read a book for a class, and someone else does it in a day, you've both done the same amount of work, and will both claim an A+, even if it did take you a different amount of time.
QuietIce
Disabled
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Location
- Anywhere but there
It's kind of interesting to look at the other computers that have confirmed your work units. I like to compare their times and CPUs to mine just to keep track of how I'm stacking up against the "competition".
But in the end it's all good fun for a good cause ...
But in the end it's all good fun for a good cause ...
- Joined
- May 15, 2006
I don't think it works like that. It doesn't matter if I turn in a work unit on the stock e6400 or my overclocked one. If it is the same WU, I get the same amount of points.work done does = credits claimed.
if it takes you a week to read a book for a class, and someone else does it in a day, you've both done the same amount of work, and will both claim an A+, even if it did take you a different amount of time.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2004
- Location
- Auckland, New Zealand
Then how come the same CPU, same speed, same setup etc etc does 2 different WU, takes different amounts of time to complete, and still end up claiming the same amount of credit? that 20k second WU.. was the CPU only doing 1 instruction every 3 cycles, and having 2 empty cycles inbetween? I think not. Just wondering how this is the case. I can understand if the difference in time taken was a couple of hundred seconds, but 13.5k seconds? That seems a little off to me, tbh.
QuietIce
Disabled
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Location
- Anywhere but there
I've seen times when the count-down will take 1 sec and my CPU counts 2 - some units are like that. But it doesn't do it for the whole WU, the CPU benches are better than that, though at first you might get some strange behavior as it adjusts slightly to your OC.
I guess I don't see the dilemma. Did your rig crunch 2 different WUs where one WU took 13k sec longer than the other and you got the same credit for both???? That is kinda' strange. Have you checked the other machine that validated yours ...?
I guess I don't see the dilemma. Did your rig crunch 2 different WUs where one WU took 13k sec longer than the other and you got the same credit for both???? That is kinda' strange. Have you checked the other machine that validated yours ...?
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2007
- Location
- Folding in Ames, IA
The work done isn't based on how long it takes to crunch the unit, it is based on the number of calculations to crunch the unit. So if my pentium II takes 12 hours to finish a unit, and an overclocked P4 at 6.0Ghz takes 1 hour on the same unit, then they have still done the same amount of work, because they have both done the same number of calculations.
If you are being paid $10 to move a pile of bricks from point A to point B, you will still be paid the same amount whether you finish in 1 minute or an hour.
If you get 60 credits for finishing a work unit, you will get the same amount whether you finish in 1 minute or 1 hour (or 36 hours).
I tried finding a link supporting this on the SETI forums, but I couldn't, so my evidence is that if you look in the result files, there is a value "flops = XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX"
In the end, I'm not 100% sure that I'm right, but it does explain why everyone ALWAYS gets the same amount of credit for the same work unit. If you have a link that proves me wrong, lemme see it.
If nothing else, I think we can all agree that the credit system is really screwed up right now.
If you are being paid $10 to move a pile of bricks from point A to point B, you will still be paid the same amount whether you finish in 1 minute or an hour.
If you get 60 credits for finishing a work unit, you will get the same amount whether you finish in 1 minute or 1 hour (or 36 hours).
I tried finding a link supporting this on the SETI forums, but I couldn't, so my evidence is that if you look in the result files, there is a value "flops = XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX"
In the end, I'm not 100% sure that I'm right, but it does explain why everyone ALWAYS gets the same amount of credit for the same work unit. If you have a link that proves me wrong, lemme see it.
If nothing else, I think we can all agree that the credit system is really screwed up right now.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2004
- Location
- Auckland, New Zealand
The work done isn't based on how long it takes to crunch the unit, it is based on the number of calculations to crunch the unit. So if my pentium II takes 12 hours to finish a unit, and an overclocked P4 at 6.0Ghz takes 1 hour on the same unit, then they have still done the same amount of work, because they have both done the same number of calculations.
If you are being paid $10 to move a pile of bricks from point A to point B, you will still be paid the same amount whether you finish in 1 minute or an hour.
If you get 60 credits for finishing a work unit, you will get the same amount whether you finish in 1 minute or 1 hour (or 36 hours).
I tried finding a link supporting this on the SETI forums, but I couldn't, so my evidence is that if you look in the result files, there is a value "flops = XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX"
In the end, I'm not 100% sure that I'm right, but it does explain why everyone ALWAYS gets the same amount of credit for the same work unit. If you have a link that proves me wrong, lemme see it.
If nothing else, I think we can all agree that the credit system is really screwed up right now.
Im not saying youre wrong dude
Im just saying something isnt right. This isnt my pc we are talking about, Im just posting because Id like something clarified.My Venice 3000+ @ 2404MHz's result (reference)
Info:
-----
FLOPS: 27,142,307,606,717
CPU Time: 8219.65625 (seconds)
Claimed Credit: 89.5483526378989
Zulfy26's Q6600 @ 2478MHz's result (reference)
FLOPS: 25,827,370,602,827
CPU Time: 106875.71875 (seconds)
Credit Claimed: 85.2108868264556
Im not going to dispute the claimed credit vs FLOPs, I dont see a problem there, but I -do- see a problem with the time taken to complete Zulfy's reference WU. No CPU @ 2478MHz should take over 29hours to crunch a WU, least of all a Q6600. It doesnt seem to be a "miscount" of seconds, as Zulfy said it actually did take an insane amount of hours to complete, and I cant see why (or how) the CPU would sit there with its thumb up its *** and decide not to do anything intermittently, so, what could be up?
To set this out in a nice premise-conclusion form that philosophers like so much
1) CPU 1 is capable of 2.404billion ops/sec
2) CPU 1 takes 8000seconds to do 27trillion flops
3) CPU 2 is capable of 2.478billion ops/sec
4) CPU 2 takes 106000seconds to do 25trillion flops
therefore
5) CPU 2 is intermittently 'slacking off'
Last edited:
QuietIce
Disabled
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Location
- Anywhere but there
I couldn't get the second link to come up - "No such result" according to SETI?
Anyway, your first link I can see and it isn't over yet; "Over Success Done 8,219.66 89.55 pending". Since the last entry is "pending" you may not get all that credit once the other computer checks in (validates). I've seen several cases recently where "credit claimed" isn't the same as "credit granted".
I noticed that odd result, too, as I was looking over your other WUs. Let us know when it's validated - I'd like to see the final results on that one ...
Anyway, your first link I can see and it isn't over yet; "Over Success Done 8,219.66 89.55 pending". Since the last entry is "pending" you may not get all that credit once the other computer checks in (validates). I've seen several cases recently where "credit claimed" isn't the same as "credit granted".
I noticed that odd result, too, as I was looking over your other WUs. Let us know when it's validated - I'd like to see the final results on that one ...
OP
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Location
- Vancouver, WA
- Thread Starter
- #12
This is what it shows in the BIONC manager, sorry for the huge image -- don't have any JPEG compression software on this computer other than paint.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2007
- Location
- The Country of Texas
And that's on your quad?? Geez they must be throwing you some huge WUs! Most of the ones I get take between 4 and 16 hours on my various rigs. If I were you I consider dumping those units. Hate to see you waste all those cycles and the unit come out bad. Just my $.02.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2004
- Location
- Auckland, New Zealand
Yeah, sorry, SETI now has that crappy 1 day 'grace' period, after that the results get purged from the db. Should have taken a screenshot
Youre really missing my point though, Im not -at all- concerned with credit (whether it be pending or granted).. Im only concerned about the time taken vs FLOP count. If you see Zulfy's screenshot above, youll notice that the times are way off for a Q6600. Theres just absoultely no way the CPU would take that long to process a unit - unless it was worth about 1000 credit, which Ill prove wont be the case when I take a screenshot of the result ID when it gets sent back.
The only thing I can think of is that the CPU is severely underclocked, which I know isnt the case, as the result ID confirms the CPU is running 2478mhz
Odd result? care to link? I have to admit, all this talk about WU has really rekindled my love for the OCF SETI team
EDIT: Not that I ever stopped loving you guys
QuietIce
Disabled
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Location
- Anywhere but there
Ah! It's obvious when you see it that way!
This is what it shows in the BOINC manager, sorry for the huge image -- don't have any JPEG compression software on this computer other than paint.
Yea - that's messed up. I'd make a BU of the BOINC folder and reinstall the new client (5.10.x) into the BOINC folder then add in the new apps (if you haven't already) before starting any units. If the system doesn't re-run the benches force it to.
Keep us updated and Good Luck!
BTW: http://bluefive.pair.com/pixresizer.htm
From your page 2 (now):
602311653 152951748 30 Aug 2007 20:59:35 UTC 31 Aug 2007 18:40:53 UTC Over Success Done 9,777.28 52.22 pending
602311625 152951741 30 Aug 2007 20:59:35 UTC 31 Aug 2007 1:58:16 UTC Over Success Done 4,264.27 22.06 pending
602311407 152951636 30 Aug 2007 20:59:35 UTC 31 Aug 2007 4:46:31 UTC Over Success Done 9,849.03 52.24 pending
602008927 152811866 30 Aug 2007 11:36:05 UTC 30 Aug 2007 21:55:45 UTC Over Success Done 8,219.66 89.55 pending
That last WU is a "little" out of balance with the rest - I'd like to see if it corrects when the other computer validates it ...
Last edited:
OP
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Location
- Vancouver, WA
- Thread Starter
- #16
Yeah this is really strange. The estimated times seem to drop surprisingly fast when the BOINC manager is unminimzed, whereas when it is minimized to the task bar as an icon, it doesn't seem to actually be doing anything but my CPU will be under load.
Another thing I forgot to mention is I'm using the KWSN_2.4_SSE3-Core2 SETI client
Rerunning the CPU benchmarks gives 2387 floating point MIPS per CPU and 5196 integer MIPS per CPU.
Another thing I forgot to mention is I'm using the KWSN_2.4_SSE3-Core2 SETI client
Rerunning the CPU benchmarks gives 2387 floating point MIPS per CPU and 5196 integer MIPS per CPU.
Last edited:
OP
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Location
- Vancouver, WA
- Thread Starter
- #17
594425798 149331907 19 Aug 2007 12:06:52 UTC 1 Sep 2007 23:07:19 UTC Over Client error Compute error 171,995.41 38.10
594425646 149331862 19 Aug 2007 12:06:52 UTC 2 Sep 2007 0:01:37 UTC Over Success Done 158,899.34 85.21 85.20
594425580 149331806 19 Aug 2007 12:06:52 UTC 1 Sep 2007 23:34:12 UTC Over Client error Compute error 142,187.64 85.21 ---
Those are insane computation times, when its usually between 6 and 20 thousand seconds.
594425646 149331862 19 Aug 2007 12:06:52 UTC 2 Sep 2007 0:01:37 UTC Over Success Done 158,899.34 85.21 85.20
594425580 149331806 19 Aug 2007 12:06:52 UTC 1 Sep 2007 23:34:12 UTC Over Client error Compute error 142,187.64 85.21 ---
Those are insane computation times, when its usually between 6 and 20 thousand seconds.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2004
- Location
- Auckland, New Zealand
Oh, sure thing man
Ill let you know what happens with it. Its weird, I have like 1100 pending credit.. Id usually only see massive backlogs of 1000+ pending when the validators werent running, but these results just dont seem to have been returned at all by other clients.. guess the MB WU are a little more CPU intensive than 'normal' SETI units.The benchmarks seem fine to me.. that really doesnt explain the insanely high CPU times though.. thats really, really weird. I dont know what to suggest Im sorry. Anyone else wanna have a crack at it? lol
QuietIce
Disabled
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Location
- Anywhere but there
I wasn't so shocked by those comp times until I looked at the validations and they're waaayy under your times. Something is definitely wrong there.
Have you looked at your Task Manager to double check your CPU activity? Do all four apps show 24-25 ...?
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2002
I did read that there are a few multi beam work units being distributed, and that they take far longer to complete, and that they get the same relative number of points per hour.
