Why? Is it because they realize they can't rise up in the ranks? It's disappointing to see so many users listed and only a small percentage actually ACTIVE. I hope I don't get sick of this stuff as I would seem to be like all those other people who gave up on folding... If all those inactive member became active with at least one processor, would we all rise the ranks to at least the top 10? (This is assuming processors at least 1GHZ)
F@H...
- Thread starter imported_goku
- Start date
Good question goku. did a quick comparison on extreme overclocking stat page and our percentage of active to total users is a little better than most other teams. Suprisingly the knights had the best percentage but much fewer in total.
It might be an idea to see how many of the inactive crunchers are still using anandtech's forums. I bet most of the inactive probably have moved on and don't hang around the forums anymore and have lost interest.
For those still around we will have to maybe make a "please come back" appeal on the off topic forum and get the moderators approval to post same appeal in the other forum topics.
It might be an idea to see how many of the inactive crunchers are still using anandtech's forums. I bet most of the inactive probably have moved on and don't hang around the forums anymore and have lost interest.
For those still around we will have to maybe make a "please come back" appeal on the off topic forum and get the moderators approval to post same appeal in the other forum topics.
GLeeM
Elite Member
- Apr 2, 2004
- 7,199
- 128
- 106
F@H has been around for a long time, so you will see more inactive members than in newer Projects. I think I read somewhere about this happening in DC and that it was normal and the TeAm was right around the "Active" percent that was quoted as normal.
Some have wanted to try other projects and are still active on the TeAm.
Some have only done just a few WUs and stopped. Maybe a TeAmmate helped fix their computer and asked that they run F@H for a while in payment, but had them use their own name in the hopes they might continue.
Things can go wrong with a WU and you might not get credit for many hours crunch time, this can upset some.
Some haven't liked the way Stanford has handled adding new technology and the extra points added to the new techonlogy WUs to entice people to volunteer to crunch them.
There must be a thousand reasons!
Some have wanted to try other projects and are still active on the TeAm.
Some have only done just a few WUs and stopped. Maybe a TeAmmate helped fix their computer and asked that they run F@H for a while in payment, but had them use their own name in the hopes they might continue.
Things can go wrong with a WU and you might not get credit for many hours crunch time, this can upset some.
Some haven't liked the way Stanford has handled adding new technology and the extra points added to the new techonlogy WUs to entice people to volunteer to crunch them.
There must be a thousand reasons!
bunker
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2001
- 10,572
- 0
- 71
I just came back after 2 years and the only reason I did was because of a new computer build and I wanted to test the stability.
Needless to say, I'm back for a while now
. I like the project and it's goals.
I originally left because with folding, you don't get instant gratification like you do with some other projects, for instance, I have 4 processors going now and haven't had a WU submitted in 2 days. For some reason that doesn't bug me as much now as it used to.
Also, at least for me, it didn't seem like my contribution was "worth it" when I only had one processor to devote to it.
Well, there's my 2¢
Needless to say, I'm back for a while now
. I like the project and it's goals.I originally left because with folding, you don't get instant gratification like you do with some other projects, for instance, I have 4 processors going now and haven't had a WU submitted in 2 days. For some reason that doesn't bug me as much now as it used to.
Also, at least for me, it didn't seem like my contribution was "worth it" when I only had one processor to devote to it.
Well, there's my 2¢
I ran it for a year or so but went to BOINC. I like having verity and the ability to split projects. F@H on a rig only gives you the option of F@H. The graphic client in F@H was limited and sucked on slower computers freezing some. Also the F@H client doesn't truly work like others on dual processor computers. Installing two clients in separate folders ands doing other special tasks to get them to work isn't feasible.
When F@H goes BOINC I'll switch back but the news on that subject has dried up and the web pages taken down. This is just my angle on things.
When F@H goes BOINC I'll switch back but the news on that subject has dried up and the web pages taken down. This is just my angle on things.
BlackMountainCow
Diamond Member
- May 28, 2003
- 5,759
- 0
- 0
I quit F@H back in the days after 200 completed WUs to give FaD a try and liked FaD better, especially because you were able to cache WUs. Back then, for me and my 2,8k dialup modem it was just not possible to be online each time F@H wanted a new WU - sometimes at 4 o'clock in the morning. Thus I felt like wasting cycles and stuck with FaD.
Now, when the BOINC client for F@H is released, that' gonna be different again. At least I hope that they will allow to cache WUs. If not, they lost a big opportunity.
And, as others said, F@H has been around for such along time that it's only natural that many people got inactive. I mean, did you ever check how many inactive people we had in SETI classic? Far and way more than active ones.
BTW, is there an ETA for F@H BOINC yet?
Now, when the BOINC client for F@H is released, that' gonna be different again. At least I hope that they will allow to cache WUs. If not, they lost a big opportunity.
And, as others said, F@H has been around for such along time that it's only natural that many people got inactive. I mean, did you ever check how many inactive people we had in SETI classic? Far and way more than active ones.
BTW, is there an ETA for F@H BOINC yet?
Insidious
Diamond Member
- Oct 25, 2001
- 7,649
- 0
- 0
I folded for a very long time and will join the chorus that says F@H is a good project with good goals.
I took a break from F@H and am working various BOINC projects (mainly Rosetta which is similar in goal as F@H.)
I built 3 brand new AMD A64X2 machines and was a little disappointed in the scoring methods at F@H... (I don't think 2 cores of an X2 @ 2.5GHz should be out produced by a P4 @ 3GHz) That is what led me to explore other roads for a while.
Believe me... when F@H is ready to let these babies shine as only X2s can...... I'll be back.
-Sid
I took a break from F@H and am working various BOINC projects (mainly Rosetta which is similar in goal as F@H.)
I built 3 brand new AMD A64X2 machines and was a little disappointed in the scoring methods at F@H... (I don't think 2 cores of an X2 @ 2.5GHz should be out produced by a P4 @ 3GHz) That is what led me to explore other roads for a while.
Believe me... when F@H is ready to let these babies shine as only X2s can...... I'll be back.
-Sid
They're only slower because they're not allowed to use SSE enhancements, maybe you should use TINKER instead? Maybe that'd run faster as it isn't heavily optimized..
Insidious
Diamond Member
- Oct 25, 2001
- 7,649
- 0
- 0
Thanks goku. I guess you might not know just how involved with F@H I was. I really am pretty familiar with the situation in scoring, how it came to be and why.
Would you want to do F@H if the only thing you could crunch were 2 year old Tinkers?
-Sid
Well the projects nowadays are low point count anyways except the tinkers... I've only seen a few 600point projects and I've yet to recieve one...
- May 13, 2003
- 13,704
- 7
- 81
BlackMountainCow
Diamond Member
- May 28, 2003
- 5,759
- 0
- 0
The support for AMD CPUs is still a matter of the F@H guys. If they just port the current F@H algorithms to BOINC, AMD CPUs will still get less points and they waste a big opportunity to gain new or to reactivate old members.
But more than that, yes, it's convenience. I Just like the idea of having only ONE application installed but at the same time I'm able to run anything from one to 17 DC projects - IIRC that's how many BOINCS are out there.
But more than that, yes, it's convenience. I Just like the idea of having only ONE application installed but at the same time I'm able to run anything from one to 17 DC projects - IIRC that's how many BOINCS are out there.
kb3edk
Senior member
- Jul 11, 2004
- 494
- 0
- 0
QFT Sid! :thumbsup:
I significantly scaled back my F@H involvement last October when I joined TeAm Anandtech Sentinel (TAS). Right now I only have one cruncher full time on F@H, an A64 3200+ Clawhammer box that I built for my dad and runs over at his house (so I never have easy access to it to switch projects every month as part of TAS).
No other DC project has a more persistent air of melodrama about it than F@H. The controversies about using optimized clients for BOINC or sending in faked WUs for SETI-classic pale in comparison to the bitter flamewars I read on other forums about how wacked out F@H scoring is.
That said, however, in my opinion no other DC project has accomplished more in real life than F@H. I'm talking leading-edge, tangible, peer reviewed research in premier scientific journals here. And that's why I still stay involved.
Hear, hear. That's how I chose F@H, and I run it for that reason, not for petty scoring comparisons, meaningless graphics, screen savers, etc.
I have two instances running on my X2 pretty much all the time, as well as on other machines. Run it and forget about it works just fine for me; at least my computers are doing something useful even when I'm not..
I think I did F@H for a little while but didn't really enjoy it so I moved on to something else. Now, I do E@H and will continue at least until I hit 1,000,000 - and then I'll probably move on to something else.
Just because members are inactive in one project doesn't mean they're inactive in all projects.
Just because members are inactive in one project doesn't mean they're inactive in all projects.
Aye, much better support for SMP than other non-BOINC projects, with a few exceptions like RC5/OGR.
GLeeM
Elite Member
- Apr 2, 2004
- 7,199
- 128
- 106
This is simply not true. AMD CPUs get more points per day, than equivilent Intel CPUs, on ALL currently running WUs!!!!!!!
There used to be ONE experimental new technology WU that could only be run with optimized libraries on Intel CPUs because of an Intel licensing issue.
Stanford had to abide by the license for obvious reasons.
They had this new technology that they felt would further their research faster. It was not a typical DC computer usage WU. It used far more resources than other WUs so they gave it a bonus to get people to volunteer to help them test this new technology. No one would have volunteered otherwise.
Well I don't know about the qmd's ppd because I don't have any Intel rigs, but I know that my X2 3800 can rack up over 400+ ppd on each core if given the right wu. Were the Intel/QMD rigs getting better than 800 ppd?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter