LHC@home

I see huge increase of credits for the new 2.01 app. It will probably drop after a while as 'credit new' starts to 'learn' these new tasks.

---

But we are back to 2.00. So, once again with the points.

https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/results.php?userid=75468&offset=0&show_names=0&state=2&appid=
3:06 UTC today waiting for Credit (one Task)

https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/results.php?userid=75468&offset=0&show_names=0&state=2&appid=
4:02 UTC today waiting for Credit (two Task)

Interesting development of credits allocation between yesterday and today (crunched on the same machine, no changes whatsoever inbetween):

Upload date/time / total runtime / CPU time / credit points

7 Mar 2023, 9:10:07 UTC - 121,382.46 - 120,750.00 - 1,996.63

8 Mar 2023, 13:39:59 UTC - 107,433.44 - 106,845.40 - 211.93

can anyone offer a logical explanation for a such huge difference?

P.S.: I noticed just now:
In case of the 1.996,63 credit points, stderr under "max FLOPS of device" shows 37,11 GFLOPS,
in case of the 211.93 credit points, it shows 4,65 GFLOPS.

How can this come about? As said, we are talking about the same machine and the same environment.
Further, the indicated GFLOPS are never ever in alignment with the runtims / CPu times of the tasks.
So, something seems to be rather wrong with the various calculation in the ATLAS code :-(

Seeing no difference (10 Cpu's) one hour runtime and about 1k points.

Seeing no difference (10 Cpu's) one hour runtime and about 1k points.

???

350 Atlas-Tasks a day with 1k are 350k, sorry this is possible.
Number one and two of our Computer stats.
https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/top_hosts.php

In case of the 1.996,63 credit points, stderr under "max FLOPS of device" shows 37,11 GFLOPS,
in case of the 211.93 credit points, it shows 4,65 GFLOPS.

How can this come about? As said, we are talking about the same machine and the same environment.
Further, the indicated GFLOPS are never ever in alignment with the runtims / CPu times of the tasks.
So, something seems to be rather wrong with the various calculation in the ATLAS code :-(

Nope, it is not the Atlas code, but something on your machine.

The BOINC-Client makes Benchmarks from Time to Time, and the latest Benchmark was done, when the machine was not really idle or the older one was wrong.

Enshure that your machine is real idle and then initiate BOINC to benchmark again.

Maybe this fixes your problem

---

Supporting BOINC, a great concept !

It's (nearly) a factor of 8 between 37.11 and 4.65.
This makes me guess you modified the #cores at the prefs page:
8 (or unlimited) -> 1

The server will compensate this step by step if you keep the setting stable but it will take a while.

It's (nearly) a factor of 8 between 37.11 and 4.65.
This makes me guess you modified the #cores at the prefs page:
8 (or unlimited) -> 1

Well, you are perfectly right :-) I found out about this lateron.