You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Gridcoin - State of the Network - 3 February 2018
Nice job! This was a fun read. I'm especially interested in the addition of computing power statistics. So most projects give this information on their webpage? Any idea how the project admins calculate it?
I found an estimate for SETI@home GigaFLOPS here on BOINCstats. I vaguely remember hearing somewhere that SETI actually calculates credits in a fixed, well-defined relation to FLOPS. Maybe someone else can help me out here.
Also, the GigaFLOPS for Universe@home over the past few weeks (from here) seem larger than your estimate. Am I missing something?
Thanks @h202, great you like the update.
I don't know how the admins calculate the computing power but it is a feature in the BOINC software so I guess this is the closed we can get to these numbers. If you take BOINCStats for example, they use Computing power = RAC / 200 (GFlops) for all BOINC projects, which I find a bit strange.
Concerning Universe@home, team Gridcoin 'only' produces 40% of the total output so it should be substantially lower than the chart because that is the total output.
Right, I made the silly mistake thinking you had given the GFlops for the whole project. Well, eventually the difference will be so small it won't matter, right? ;)
That is strange about BOINCstats. Actually, it's pretty ridiculous because credits are assigned so arbitrarily from project to project. So Collatz looks like it has a humongous output when it really is quite small.
If it's a feature of the BOINC software it would be interesting to dig a bit deeper. At the very least, unless someone here already knows the answer, I plan on figuring out the precise RAC --> FLOPS conversion I thought I had heard about for SETI.
*Also, I vaguely remember having a similar conversation already before with someone from Gridcoin. My apologies if I really am that forgetful!
I have been looking into this a great deal too recently, it's not very clear to me. I've done some calculations and the results were way off, but it wasn't very thorough; I'm planning to get around to a better analysis soon.