Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 10:06 pm
Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
I have a 3930k oc'd to 4.2ghz running on medium load in Client Control 7.3.6 and my estimated ppd is reporting as 37212 PPD. I ran at full load on the first 1.5 days and now well into the second day with workload changed to medium my total points are only 4644 Points. Am I doing something wrong to be hitting such low ppd? Score 4644 - # of WU = 7
-
- Posts: 2948
- Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:36 am
- Hardware configuration: Machine #1:
Intel Q9450; 2x2GB=8GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460; Windows Server 2008 X64 (SP1).
Machine #2:
Intel Q6600; 2x2GB=4GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460 video card; Windows 7 X64.
Machine 3:
Dell Dimension 8400, 3.2GHz P4 4x512GB Ram, Video card GTX 460, Windows 7 X32
I am currently folding just on the 5x GTX 460's for aprox. 70K PPD - Location: Salem. OR USA
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
Do you have a passkey configured into the client?
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 10:06 pm
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
My passkey is configured properly. Says, Passkey Valid: Entries Match
http://s17.postimg.org/5m1thftcf/F_H_Example.png
http://s17.postimg.org/5m1thftcf/F_H_Example.png
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
You need 10 completed WUs before you start earning bonus points.
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 10:06 pm
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
I did read that somewhere. Does that mean that bonus points outweigh actual points?
-
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:45 am
- Hardware configuration: Core i7 3770K @3.5 GHz (not folding), 8 GB DDR3 @2133 MHz, 2xGTX 780 @1215 MHz, Windows 7 Pro 64-bit running 7.3.6 w/ 1xSMP, 2xGPU
4P E5-4650 @3.1 GHz, 64 GB DDR3 @1333MHz, Ubuntu Desktop 13.10 64-bit
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
On fast processors running 24/7, the bonus can be several times the base points.LoneThistle wrote:I did read that somewhere. Does that mean that bonus points outweigh actual points?
-
- Posts: 2948
- Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:36 am
- Hardware configuration: Machine #1:
Intel Q9450; 2x2GB=8GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460; Windows Server 2008 X64 (SP1).
Machine #2:
Intel Q6600; 2x2GB=4GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460 video card; Windows 7 X64.
Machine 3:
Dell Dimension 8400, 3.2GHz P4 4x512GB Ram, Video card GTX 460, Windows 7 X32
I am currently folding just on the 5x GTX 460's for aprox. 70K PPD - Location: Salem. OR USA
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
10 completed with your passkey while maintaining at least an 80% successful return rate.k1wi wrote:You need 10 completed WUs before you start earning bonus points.
The QRB (Quick return Bonus) gives points exponentially dependent upon how fast the WU is returned and yes, it can be many times the base points.
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
PPD from my understanding means the estimated guess of points you would get from that particular WU if you got it for a straight 24hours periodLoneThistle wrote:I have a 3930k oc'd to 4.2ghz running on medium load in Client Control 7.3.6 and my estimated ppd is reporting as 37212 PPD. I ran at full load on the first 1.5 days and now well into the second day with workload changed to medium my total points are only 4644 Points. Am I doing something wrong to be hitting such low ppd? Score 4644 - # of WU = 7
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
My points suddenly dropped off from 2,500-12,000 pu to 222 pu sometime in early May 2013.
I don't have a passkey, I'm using 7.3.6 now and just moved to High from Medium load. The machine has an Intel i5-3450 CPU 3.10 GHz 3.10 GHz.
It is not processing any slower - the units per day seems the same.
I don't have a passkey, I'm using 7.3.6 now and just moved to High from Medium load. The machine has an Intel i5-3450 CPU 3.10 GHz 3.10 GHz.
It is not processing any slower - the units per day seems the same.
-
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:45 am
- Hardware configuration: Core i7 3770K @3.5 GHz (not folding), 8 GB DDR3 @2133 MHz, 2xGTX 780 @1215 MHz, Windows 7 Pro 64-bit running 7.3.6 w/ 1xSMP, 2xGPU
4P E5-4650 @3.1 GHz, 64 GB DDR3 @1333MHz, Ubuntu Desktop 13.10 64-bit
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
There was a glitch in the stat system that was giving bonuses to many (all?) people without passkeys. The glitch was corrected around that time, at which point everyone without a passkey started seeing much lower point totals. Request a passkey here and complete 10 bonus-eligible WUs, and you'll start seeing the PPD you used to.
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
Hope my earlier results were fair. Ten units won't take long.
Re: Estimated PPD much higher than Actual.
"Fair"?
The error was caused by the servers temporarily failing to follow the QRB policy. (1) You didn't do anything wrong and (2) apparently everybody without a passkey benefited equally so I'd call it "fair." Moreover, it seems to have awakened a number of people, causing them to seek out information on the QRB, in ways that were not as effective as previous announcements. I'd say that probably was a net benefit to FAH.
The error was caused by the servers temporarily failing to follow the QRB policy. (1) You didn't do anything wrong and (2) apparently everybody without a passkey benefited equally so I'd call it "fair." Moreover, it seems to have awakened a number of people, causing them to seek out information on the QRB, in ways that were not as effective as previous announcements. I'd say that probably was a net benefit to FAH.
Posting FAH's log:
How to provide enough info to get helpful support.
How to provide enough info to get helpful support.