3 Week Folds

[localguru]

I checked out a 300mhz machine today it had downloaded a work unit april 2 and was on 385 of 400. didn't someone say the slow machine get's more points for folding? this machine isnt on all the time so I understand why it's takinbg so long

[Overclocker16]

There is a set amount of points for each WU.

 

That 400 frames is like 48.something points.

[andrusk]

its different for each WU. heres a list of the points assigned to each one.

[justinal]

so the longer it takes isnt better but every little bit helps keep up the good work

[NyCUnDaGroUnD]

thats not true local. The scores are based on how fast you can finish a particular WU. So the faster u finish a WU, the more bonus points u get.

[justinal]

that makes alot more since

[andrusk]

if thats true how can they assinge a paticular ammount of credits per project without saying that the faster you get it done the more points you get?. like it says on this page. I still dont agree with the fact that the faster you get it done the more points you get. Its obviously a set thing.

[cptkook]

But if that were true why does the console benchmark your system? I was under the impression that the slower benchmark gave more points per WU to keep up with faster machines pumping out more WU to even things out.

[andrusk]

i found this on the folding at home website

Before putting out any new work unit, we benchmark it on a dedicated 500MHz Celeron machine (this machine does not have SSE/3DNow). We plug the results of this into the following formula:

 

points = 2 * multiplier * (daysPerWU)

 

where daysPerWU is -- no surprise -- the number of days it took to complete the unit.

Basically what this is trying to say is that The number of points are determined by running a wu on a dedicated 500mhz celeron and, then after the wu is complete, they take the days it took to complete the wu x 2. so for example project 626 is worth 73 points because it took about 36.5 days to complete on their 500 mhz system.

 

also heres how they determine the deadline.

Each work unit is benchmarked on a dedicated 500 MHz Celeron machine without SSE/3DNow. We look at how many days it takes, and multiply this by 2.5. This corresponds to requiring such a machine to fold less than 10 hours a day in order to meet the deadline. From our experience, the majority of donor machines are faster than our benchmarking machine, and virtually none are slower, so this shouldn't be a problem (if a machine is slower, it may need to fold more hours a day). Occassionally, deadlines may be set longer than the above calculation indicates, but the reason for having deadlines at all is that the sooner we get back work units, the sooner we can put the results to good use. We are looking into, in the very near future, having the assignment server take machine speed into account in making assigments, thereby allowing slower machines to receive smaller work units.

 

No where in here does it state that slower machines get more points or vica versa. It does say however that in the future the speed of your machine may determine how big of a wu you get. I think the only reason they bench your system when F@H starts is so that F@H can gather info on how fast the computers are that are running their program. Like the guy said, from their experience most of the machines folding are faster than their banchmark system. Now how would they know that unless the benchmark told them so. I think theyll put that benchmark to more use in the future but right now it doesnt really do anything.

 

So due to all this data i have just gathered i am going to stick by my original thought that the points per wu do not go up or down with the speed of your computer.

[Trakfast11]

very nice research andrusk B)

[andrusk]

its in the job description B)

[Overclocker16]

LOL.

 

Oh well. I am going to be busy as h3ll these next few weeks.

 

LMFAO I am watching the Osbournes right now. Ozzy is throwing knives at tree trunks LMAO.