WCG XS Team top hosts database

[Tom128]

Awe I submitted my two 2600k's yesterday and was hoping they would make it into the update. Next one I guess lol.

The new point system has definitely helped my systems pass 5K. My chips were getting towards the mark but the bump made it happen much faster, even when I forgot to turn on WCG for a few days after a re-boot on both machines.

[INFRNL]

What projects are you running?

Mine has been clocked at 5.0GHz since the big update.

Just chasing SNtoS till I get to sapphire then it will be back to all projects

Ive been wondering the same thing. I am not sure what i run on mine. I think its HCC HFCC. I need to get updated info for SAM, mine has been running @4.8ghz for some time now.

I also think some of it has to do with the way its oc'd or what the memory is running at. I recently stopped GPU grid to see if that boosts anything. might be hard to tell since the new points change.

The chart ir nice to have but not exactly fair since we all run different projects. also I am not in it for pts but for the hope to find cures for cancer, etc

[Bun-Bun]

Points ultimately don't matter. But I want to make sure my machine is contributing as much as it can and 300mhz more oc with lower timing 1600 ram and still lower rac makes me feel something is not right and I coulda be contributing more.

[D_A]

I don't know what's going on with those machines, but a THOUGHT is that's it's related to IO speed. Having a slow HDD can negatively impact crunching performance to varying degrees depending on the exact projects being run, CEP2 being the worst afaik. If that super scoring machine is running a screaming fast RAID 0 array or something like THIS it might make a difference.

[Bun-Bun]

My machine got cep2 sapphire super fast. It's the rig in my sig. data folder is on my raid 0 array. Maybe i should move it the ssd?

[INFRNL]

I honestly do not think its the HDD"S but I could be mistaken. All 3 of my rigs run SSD's. My 5670 machine is running raid0 with 3 crucial M4's. 5645 rig is running single C300 and I cant recall what the 2600K is running, I think its a C300. I have the slight tweaks setup. I think OC's rig is on steroids. He is running 100mhz less than me(according to chart) but getting way more production. I noticed some people with higher wet/dry scores as well, I wonder if that makes a difference and I am not sure how you can get those better.

BB; I run Mushkin 1600, not sure of timing, but nothing special.

I would really like to find a definite answer of why we have such different scores and how can we make them better.

[Bun-Bun]

Slight tweaks?

[stoneageman]

Updated

[INFRNL]

Thanks for all your contributed work SAM!!! What happened to My Dog, looks like he lost his top 2 systems

@ Bun-Bun: somewhere here there are a few minor adjustments to make to make sure you are running at optimum. Nothing to really worry about, but may help. Basically makes sure you are runningyour cpu's 100%, plenty of cache, not writing to HDD more than necessary, etc.

You should be happy; you are above me at same speed; I just want to get close to Old Chap; I do not know how he's doing it. 8k is more than half of what my 5670's do and 1/3 of the processors/threads. Pretty sad to see 1 2600K producing half of 2 hexcores If only it was possible to hit 4.5-4.8 on these chips Too expensive to look for better chips for the sr-2 I think. Maybe later this year with SR-X

[Bun-Bun]

Yeah he is a full 2000 rac higher than my chip and I am clocked at 5.1GHz right now. I just switch to nothing but SNtS and its finally worked through the 3 day cache and is now cruncing nothing but that... lets see what my numbers do.

[INFRNL]

What projects are you running?

Mine has been clocked at 5.0GHz since the big update.

Yeah he is a full 2000 rac higher than my chip and I am clocked at 5.1GHz right now. I just switch to nothing but SNtS and its finally worked through the 3 day cache and is now cruncing nothing but that... lets see what my numbers do.

I am really curious what the changes will be. I am not sure how long it will take to see full potential though. I imagine at least a month to see your rac updating to acceptable levels. I will definitely keep an eye on you. Keep up all your recent great work!

[OldChap]

Around the time of the change I was watching to see what differences there were.... For a while there each completed wu was claiming 80pts per hour but that that has now halved. I also now have a whole bunch of wu's on that machine that are queued up at 80% finished while priority units are completed. I guess that I am saying that my numbers are a distortion of what will be in a few weeks (till the rac calculation ignores the anomaly)

Lets be realistic, at 4.7 my 8 threads are not supposed to be in among the overclocked 12 threads. Ignore my rig for the purposes of this..... it will fall into line soon enough

(I just wish it could stay there)

[INFRNL]

Around the time of the change I was watching to see what differences there were.... For a while there each completed wu was claiming 80pts per hour but that that has now halved. I also now have a whole bunch of wu's on that machine that are queued up at 80% finished while priority units are completed. I guess that I am saying that my numbers are a distortion of what will be in a few weeks (till the rac calculation ignores the anomaly)

Lets be realistic, at 4.7 my 8 threads are not supposed to be in among the overclocked 12 threads. Ignore my rig for the purposes of this..... it will fall into line soon enough

(I just wish it could stay there)

I bet, you have the highest producing 2600K that makes the rest of us feel like we wasted our money or we are doing something seriously wrong. I am interested to see where you level off. IMO it appears that the 2600K is still the chip to have cost/production wise.
The new hexcore cpu's only have a slight production increase and 4 more threads for double the cost of a 2600K; not worth the premium IMO. I will be following TRNs new chips as well to see how they level out. I guess $600 is still better than what I dished out for my 5670's. But I got a killer deal on my 5645's, almost a steal and I thank the member that hooked me up with that deal.

[Bun-Bun]

Oldchap's numbers are still on the rise...

2600K is definitely where it's at. Even just using the system daily the 2600k is the smoothest overall system I have used and the most stable.

[OldChap]

http://boincstats.com/stats/host_gra...wcg&id=1574674 is starting to tell the story as does this;

[Bun-Bun]

wth! how is your 2600K having 100k days? This makes no sense...

[Tom128]

I finally get on to the list and then I realize sitting here away from my computers that one of them was re-started the other day and I didn't re-run WCG. doh!

[OldChap]

wth! how is your 2600K having 100k days? This makes no sense...

Like I said, and it was mentioned in forums at WCG in the GPU beta testing too, for a couple of days after the change there seemed to be some sort of glitch which made certain results appear to be worth approx. double the normal amount.

Also, Just remembered that all my machines are signed up to a single CEP too and that the move to SNtS happened 4 days after the project started due to my cache so there will be a certain skew to my results for some days while pendings were completed.

I believe that in a month there will be not a lot of difference to the relative position in the chart to that which I enjoyed maybe a month ago

[stoneageman]

Updated and added a 'World ranking for total credit' column to showcase the veteran hosts. Also helps me to decide which host to remove if the RAC drops below 5000. The higher up the ranking, the less chance of being removed

[Bun-Bun]

Oldchap's integer score is higher than the other 2600K's by quite a bit. What could be the reason?

[OldChap]

Nothing special about mine I'm afraid, it is just that glitch.

You are welcome to any info I might have but if you look at current results http://boincstats.com/stats/host_gra...wcg&id=1574674 you will see a list of results that is nothing special at all

[pfm3136]

Oldchap's integer score is higher than the other 2600K's by quite a bit. What could be the reason?

I think that it may be your integer performance that is a little on the low side, there are others with that kind of score on the list, maybe your pc was doing something else when it was benchmarked, as for the points, they vary wtih projects and the wingmans.
There's a wrong entry on the list, Pavuk's 2600k is a 980X.

My 2700K@5.0GHz has an even higher integer score.

[stoneageman]

Good spot. Must have had a senior moment

[Bun-Bun]

I think that it may be your integer performance that is a little on the low side, there are others with that kind of score on the list, maybe your pc was doing something else when it was benchmarked, as for the points, they vary wtih projects and the wingmans.
There's a wrong entry on the list, Pavuk's 2600k is a 980X.

My 2700K@5.0GHz has an even higher integer score.

The few I checked were around the same as mine.

I don't get it. I haven't run anything but WCG on this computer for the past 2 weeks and it is clocked at 5.1GHz.

[Movieman]

The few I checked were around the same as mine.

I don't get it. I haven't run anything but WCG on this computer for the past 2 weeks and it is clocked at 5.1GHz.

Heck, I'm happy at 5885 average at 4332MHz and that machine is my daily driver and also runs MJ12..