Printable View
I was just comparing my rigs real output with D_A's list and his theoretical numbers, and while most rigs were pretty consistent, but the Harpers are not.
They should claim around 47-48k per day, but what they are generating is 41-44k/d. Looking at the screen below, I kinda know why :shakes:
Why are they constantly getting less credit than they claim? That rig is 100% stable, no errored out WUs, nothing. Is it that dreaded "quota" system D_A mentioned? If so, that system sucks :down:
I'm not really knowledgeable of this specific aspect, but how do harpers stack up against clovers in the benchmark?
I'd suspect that the synthetics scale from the improvements better than the real work, or else it's just the fact that the benchmark and real work done plain don't scale the same, as they're quite different workloads for the system. Either way, yes, it's the effects of the quota system, which is their attempt at equalizing the sometimes large differences between the benchmark results and real work done.
I get nailed the same way on frankenserver (farm-12).
.....And this machine is only clocked out to 3.6. On the WU where I only got 68 points, the other person in the quorum only claimed 68 so I got his score.....
Bob
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...rm12qourum.jpg
I've got an AMD system that runs into that all the time but only on HCC units, getting about HALF what it claims. The Intel(P4) sitting next to it does just fine. On HPF2 the AMD gets much closer to what it claims. I don't know why but there's some silliness in the points quorum system regarding the HCC units.
Fast machines usually lose against slow.My AMD run FAAH,My Intel run HCC.Quote:
Originally Posted by D_A