Page 2 of 3
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 12:16 pm
by Hisuichan
Heh, looking at my EOC stats, I'm at 101 WUs for Februrary so far. At this rate I might not be the last one after all
http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/ ... =&u=352741
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:02 pm
by Ravage7779
803 so far this month.
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:56 am
by Napoleon
Count of Wus:
- toTOW: 1780 (EOC)
- Grandpa_01: 1300 (EOC)
- MtM: 1082 (EOC)
- Ravage7779: 899 (EOC)
- Greywhiskers: 741 (EOC)
- bruce: 423 (EOC)
- Napoleon: 164 - 3 failed WUs == 161 (EOC)
- Hisuichan: 142 (EOC)
- Nathan_P: 125 (EOC #1 + EOC #2)
PPWU:
- MtM: 409
- Ravage7779: 505
- Napoleon: 871
- bruce: 1140
- Hisuichan: 1238
- Greywhiskers: 1884
- toTOW: 3946
- Grandpa_01: 19470
- Nathan_P: 45352
I can now confirm that there will be a very attractive reward for the February Champion: a week's worth of folding on a 32-core Interlagos gear! I will update the details about the reward in the OP soon, keep your eyes peeled. What better reason to wring every last WU out of your setup(s)? Remember, core 78 WUs are as easy a prey as ever, and now would be a good time to bring back any mothballed GPUs you may have, too.
Honorary mentions go to MtM and Ravage7779 for taking the 3rd and 4th places, respectively, MtM with "a bunch of rather obsolete parts" to boot. That's the spirit, your valiant efforts are duly noted - 1st and 2nd places in the PPWU side betting for you, by a wide margin. Best of luck for the rest of the tournament.
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:41 pm
by PinHead
looks like toTOW is the Super Count(ess) of Wus so far.
Now where's the "turbo" button on this pc!
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 2:22 am
by MtM
Comparing PPWU I shouldn't say 'bunch of obsolete parts' as it's not even *that* bad compared to Ravage777
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 8:09 pm
by Napoleon
Final standings for February tournament:
- toTOW: 2036 (EOC)
- Grandpa_01: 1443 (EOC)
- MtM: 1245 (EOC)
- Ravage7779: 1025 (EOC)
- Greywhiskers: 898 (EOC)
- bruce: 486 (EOC)
- Hisuichan: 186 (EOC)
- Napoleon: 183 - 3 failed WUs == 180 (EOC)
- Nathan_P: 141 (EOC #1 + EOC #2)
PPWU:
- MtM: 422
- Ravage7779: 520
- Napoleon: 891
- bruce: 1139
- Hisuichan: 1222
- Greywhiskers: 1793
- toTOW: 3752
- Grandpa_01: 21724
- Nathan_P: 47287
Further announcements will follow soon...
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:08 am
by MtM
Napoleon, you're deducting failed wu's but not deducting them from everyone? I have about 30 failed work unit's ( 92% success rate over past month or so ).
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 2:35 pm
by Grandpa_01
I know of 3 but they were not returned to the server they were GPU WU's but that does not mean there were not more, I have 2 many clients running and I can miss them. Congrats to Count toTOW I bow to the count.
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 2:48 pm
by toTOW
I don't think I lost any WUs ...
Anyway, next month, I will not likely be able to compete at the same level ... so the challenge will be open
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 5:28 pm
by Napoleon
MtM, I deducted 3 failed WUs from myself simply because I was aware of them. I have to rely on the contestants to inform me if the WU count in EOC (or Kakao) stats needs to be adjusted. Hence, rule 4 in the OP:
Please be chivalrous. Edit your submission so that I may deduct any EUEd or otherwise failed WUs from your total WU count. I want to include succesfully completed and submitted WUs only
I don't really know of any way to track down failed WUs for other participants. One of the reasons why I kept track of PPWU was to spot entirely unrealistic WU counts. Such as
this, for example, viewtopic.php?f=20&t=20926&start=0 for more info. If I've missed some convenient way of keeping track, please let me know.
Now that toTOW has assured us that his success rate is 100% as far as he can tell, he's the undisputed champion. I will correct the final tally soon though, according to the info you all have provided, just to keep the records straight. I can only assume 100% success rate unless I'm notified otherwise, so my thanks to those who have taken the extra effort of keeping an eye on success rate.
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 5:41 pm
by MtM
I guessed to high, most eue's where not from february
I'll have this functionality ready in the next public release of FAHWatch, people who want to participate could use it to check their eue count for any period.
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:46 pm
by Grandpa_01
Which is a very good function I believe mine says I have a 99.57% success rate (SMP) with 463 WU's completed and 99.12% (GPU) with 228 WU's completed. I really like that feature MtM you can actually see how stable your rigs are. Thanks
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:02 pm
by MtM
Overall I'm at 1866wu's in the db, 55 failed which gives 97.08% sausages uhm success rate
I'm thinking of adding more features, like the ability to check failed work units against an online source for known issues ( like the nvidia's wu's, certain drivers and powersaving ). But I've got enough on my plate already ( though is a good feature and I'll add it when the time comes ). Most of my failed wu's are either configuration problems or restarts -> missing work files.
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:04 pm
by bruce
MtM wrote:I'll have this functionality ready in the next public release of FAHWatch, people who want to participate could use it to check their eue count for any period.
In V7, Ticket #837 (accepted enhancement) is scheduled for Milestone: Public Release.
Re: Count(ess) of Wus, February 2012
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:25 pm
by Grandpa_01
MtM wrote:Overall I'm at 1866wu's in the db, 55 failed which gives 97.08% sausages uhm success rate
I owe you one
They were good though