[ANN] CureCoin 2.0 is live - Mandatory Update is available now - DEC 2018

[r3animation]

Man, this coin is driving me nuts. After 5.5 hours, the folding operation finally finished. Then it just sat at 99.99% until it finally locked up the client and had to be restarted. It reset the folding operation to 3.8% and now it's going back through the 5.5 hour operation yet again.

this generally happens if you had a driver failure.  Ive come to figure out my 270x/270 and my 7870 all like running on medium.  same exact ppd as high but no crashing..  Also even at stock clocks some gpus can have issues.  Its best to underclock sometimes.  I have all mine set to 1000/1350 and still get 70k ppd each on medium.

Ive also found when it gets stuck sometimes you can pause the gpu (it can take 5+ minutes to pause sometimes) then hit resume.  Wait a few minutes and watch the log usually the GPU continues and works properly.  The status screen will still say 99.99% but it usually fixes itself after an hour or so and the log is always working more accurately.  I like to watch my log if it stops saving at every percent. then i usually restart my PC and generally dont lose much work.  Now that my gpus are underclocked and i run on medium everything seems better though. havent had nearly as many issues.

Looking through the log, it appears it had in fact stopped due to a driver crash (it'd be nice if the program would realize this and give some sort of notification). I am only folding at about half the speed as before though, now (40k PPD), but it is writing to the log file every percent...

yeah you may just want to underclock your gpu.  half speed is no good. at least get it to 75% speed .  maybe underclock and it will run without issues? just gotta find that happy median

I'm not sure what to underclock it to. My GPU (7950) is already at 925...

I didn't read earlier, are you running the latest catalyst drivers? 14.4?

[1714213490]

1714213490

[1714213490]

1714213490

[1714213490]

1714213490

[ranlo]

Man, this coin is driving me nuts. After 5.5 hours, the folding operation finally finished. Then it just sat at 99.99% until it finally locked up the client and had to be restarted. It reset the folding operation to 3.8% and now it's going back through the 5.5 hour operation yet again.

this generally happens if you had a driver failure.  Ive come to figure out my 270x/270 and my 7870 all like running on medium.  same exact ppd as high but no crashing..  Also even at stock clocks some gpus can have issues.  Its best to underclock sometimes.  I have all mine set to 1000/1350 and still get 70k ppd each on medium.

Ive also found when it gets stuck sometimes you can pause the gpu (it can take 5+ minutes to pause sometimes) then hit resume.  Wait a few minutes and watch the log usually the GPU continues and works properly.  The status screen will still say 99.99% but it usually fixes itself after an hour or so and the log is always working more accurately.  I like to watch my log if it stops saving at every percent. then i usually restart my PC and generally dont lose much work.  Now that my gpus are underclocked and i run on medium everything seems better though. havent had nearly as many issues.

Looking through the log, it appears it had in fact stopped due to a driver crash (it'd be nice if the program would realize this and give some sort of notification). I am only folding at about half the speed as before though, now (40k PPD), but it is writing to the log file every percent...

yeah you may just want to underclock your gpu.  half speed is no good. at least get it to 75% speed .  maybe underclock and it will run without issues? just gotta find that happy median

I'm not sure what to underclock it to. My GPU (7950) is already at 925...

I didn't read earlier, are you running the latest catalyst drivers? 14.4?

The latest (I think that's 14.4), as per some guides I read about it.

I'd also like to point out that at the moment my PPD is at 64k (it keeps jumping around -- sometimes as low as 15k, others up to 100k. The completion time also jumps between 3-7 hours).

I'm thinking the average of 64k is pretty low though (based on others saying it should get 110-120k)...

[RouletteRun]

biggest issue and working against a high price is that up to 10000 CURE have to be bought each day
and that wont change the next 4 years

instead of halve rewards all 4 years u could reduce them 25% each year

this still will be a hard first year

but better a hard year than hard 4 years

we did a similar change with diamond which had original a 8 years coin rollout plan with 1500 dmd each day

we changed it and rediced main coin rollout phase down to around 1 1/2 years and replace a lot of POW as major coin rollout mechanism with POS


for CURE u shouldnt reduce the folding component but u should rethink the sha256 mining part
and reduce the reward for that a bit and increase pos instead

u dont need big sha256 hashrate to secure network if u have a hybrid POW/POS coin concept

PPC's method or Yacoin's is the best, as stormia mentioned, full pos or less incentives for PoW mining don't work so well because you depend on every coin holder keeping their wallets open for minting, which never happens massively. Won't happen for now, since the 30 day wait period isn't done.

I'd also like to add in that the number of coins being created each day is not nearly as relevant as giving a reason for people to purchase the coins. If the coin was pushing for wide adoption and had money-generating businesses backing it, you could pull in millions a day. Waiting and hoping that investors will pop out of nowhere for a coin that has no true value is ludicrous.

I couldn't agree more, a coin doesn't have value just because it exists. This coin really need a team to promote it as a currency unto itself as a separate entity from the fact that it is minted by folding rather than mining, while that can be used as a beginning selling point, there hast to be more to it. I understand that the dev's are primarily concerned with the folding aspects, but I have to wonder if Standford doesn't have a buisiness/marketing school in their university that they might be able to get involved in this coin? If not, then maybe we need to form a team to work in conjunction with the coin dev's to make this coin work.

[cookiemonster7]

I used to be involved in folding at reached the top 100 a few years ago, I would like to know how I can be a part of curecoin. Wondering if there is any way to accept curecoin as payment to start a mercantile site.

[ranlo]

I used to be involved in folding at reached the top 100 a few years ago, I would like to know how I can be a part of curecoin. Wondering if there is any way to accept curecoin as payment to start a mercantile site.

You can accept Curecoin in the same way as anything else. Check out the guides for BTC for an example (as all the rest work the same way). It should help better understand implementation, and comes with guides for PHP and such.

[cameronpalte]

I used to be involved in folding at reached the top 100 a few years ago, I would like to know how I can be a part of curecoin. Wondering if there is any way to accept curecoin as payment to start a mercantile site.

To be a part of: https://www.cryptobullionpools.com/about

[ChasingTheDream]

For some reason I decided to go Google searching to see if anyone has noticed our teams rapid rise and what was being said about it.  I was in the forums of the teams currently ranked #1 and #2 as well as the several other teams that we have long since passed.

In short most of the comments are along the lines of WTF at the amount of power we brought to folding in such a short time.  However, there appears to be a lot of misunderstanding toward us and in some instances just plane hate.  For instance, time and again I've seen comments about how pointing your rigs at F@H for free is somehow better, nobler, holy-er, chose your word than if we point our rigs at F@H because we have a speculative chance for compensation.

I simply do not understand this line of thinking.  The key should be getting research done and I believe it is safe to say we are doing a hell of a lot of that.

Forgive me if I sound a bit negative here but what does this research lead to?  It leads to new drugs and other medical treatments.  Now maybe I'm naive but I don't recall receiving drugs and medical treatments for free.  We are talking about multi-billion dollar enterprises.  So if I have the opportunity to assist in research and possibly receive some compensation for doing it I don't feel guilty.  After all we paid (hardware, energy, and time) to participate in research that we will ultimately pay for again in the form of medical treatment and pharmaceuticals.  I just find the whole argument to be rather baffling personally.

The bottom line is it appears that most places believe CureCoin will implode within a few months.  Some predicted an implosion within a few days of launch.  I don't have a crystal ball so I can't see the future but I do hope we are able to maintain a very high PPD level indefinitely because I do believe we can change the world!  Full power to the folding computers!

[ranlo]

For some reason I decided to go Google searching to see if anyone has noticed our teams rapid rise and what was being said about it.  I was in the forums of the teams currently ranked #1 and #2 as well as the several other teams that we have long since passed.

In short most of the comments are along the lines of WTF at the amount of power we brought to folding in such a short time.  However, there appears to be a lot of misunderstanding toward us and in some instances just plane hate.  For instance, time and again I've seen comments about how pointing your rigs at F@H for free is somehow better, nobler, holy-er, chose your word than if we point our rigs at F@H because we have a speculative chance for compensation.

I simply do not understand this line of thinking.  The key should be getting research done and I believe it is safe to say we are doing a hell of a lot of that.

Forgive me if I sound a bit negative here but what does this research lead to?  It leads to new drugs and other medical treatments.  Now maybe I'm naive but I don't recall receiving drugs and medical treatments for free.  We are talking about multi-billion dollar enterprises.  So if I have the opportunity to assist in research and possibly receive some compensation for doing it I don't feel guilty.  After all we paid (hardware, energy, and time) to participate in research that we will ultimately pay for again in the form of medical treatment and pharmaceuticals.  I just find the whole argument to be rather baffling personally.

The bottom line is it appears that most places believe CureCoin will implode within a few months.  Some predicted an implosion within a few days of launch.  I don't have a crystal ball so I can't see the future but I do hope we are able to maintain a very high PPD level indefinitely because I do believe we can change the world!  Full power to the folding computers!

Let people complain all they want; it's their own opinion and has no impact on what we do or how we do it. If people want to volunteer, that's their choice. If people want to be compensated (and compensation is an option), that's their choice. What others think shouldn't be any concern to you; you do what you do, and they will do what they do.

[r3animation]

For some reason I decided to go Google searching to see if anyone has noticed our teams rapid rise and what was being said about it.  I was in the forums of the teams currently ranked #1 and #2 as well as the several other teams that we have long since passed.

In short most of the comments are along the lines of WTF at the amount of power we brought to folding in such a short time.  However, there appears to be a lot of misunderstanding toward us and in some instances just plane hate.  For instance, time and again I've seen comments about how pointing your rigs at F@H for free is somehow better, nobler, holy-er, chose your word than if we point our rigs at F@H because we have a speculative chance for compensation.

I simply do not understand this line of thinking.  The key should be getting research done and I believe it is safe to say we are doing a hell of a lot of that.

Forgive me if I sound a bit negative here but what does this research lead to?  It leads to new drugs and other medical treatments.  Now maybe I'm naive but I don't recall receiving drugs and medical treatments for free.  We are talking about multi-billion dollar enterprises.  So if I have the opportunity to assist in research and possibly receive some compensation for doing it I don't feel guilty.  After all we paid (hardware, energy, and time) to participate in research that we will ultimately pay for again in the form of medical treatment and pharmaceuticals.  I just find the whole argument to be rather baffling personally.

The bottom line is it appears that most places believe CureCoin will implode within a few months.  Some predicted an implosion within a few days of launch.  I don't have a crystal ball so I can't see the future but I do hope we are able to maintain a very high PPD level indefinitely because I do believe we can change the world!  Full power to the folding computers!

We're not folding for pharmaceuticals but for Universities like Stanford who are doing the research.

We may not get the treatment for free but at least there's treatment which can be better then whats available right now.

[ranlo]

I'm back to having issues again. My first folding job finished (after another multi-hour run). It submitted fine. The next one is folding at a rate of only 2k PPD (as opposed to the 90k I started the first one with and the 60k for the second one). It's been running for 30 minutes now and says it has an ETA of over 10 days. Here's the log:

Code:

04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:*********************** Log Started 2014-05-25T04:39:04Z ***********************
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Project: 13000 (Run 1394, Clone 8, Gen 5)
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Unit: 0x0000000a538b3db7531125e7c3cc426f
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:CPU: 0x00000000000000000000000000000000
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Machine: 1
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file state.xml
04:39:06:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file system.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file integrator.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file core.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Digital signatures verified
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Folding@home GPU core17
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Version 0.0.52
04:44:23:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 0 out of 5000000 steps (0%)
04:44:23:WU00:FS01:0x17:Temperature control disabled. Requirements: single Nvidia GPU, tmax must be < 110 and twait >= 900
04:54:38:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 50000 out of 5000000 steps (1%)
05:04:34:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 100000 out of 5000000 steps (2%)

I'm just baffled because the log shows it being 1/3 the speed of the last fold, though the client itself claims it's less than 1/40th the speed. Along with this, why would it even be 1/3 the speed? Nothing has changed.

[ChasingTheDream]

I'm back to having issues again. My first folding job finished (after another multi-hour run). It submitted fine. The next one is folding at a rate of only 2k PPD (as opposed to the 90k I started the first one with and the 60k for the second one). It's been running for 30 minutes now and says it has an ETA of over 10 days. Here's the log:

Code:

04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:*********************** Log Started 2014-05-25T04:39:04Z ***********************
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Project: 13000 (Run 1394, Clone 8, Gen 5)
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Unit: 0x0000000a538b3db7531125e7c3cc426f
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:CPU: 0x00000000000000000000000000000000
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Machine: 1
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file state.xml
04:39:06:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file system.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file integrator.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file core.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Digital signatures verified
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Folding@home GPU core17
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Version 0.0.52
04:44:23:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 0 out of 5000000 steps (0%)
04:44:23:WU00:FS01:0x17:Temperature control disabled. Requirements: single Nvidia GPU, tmax must be < 110 and twait >= 900
04:54:38:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 50000 out of 5000000 steps (1%)
05:04:34:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 100000 out of 5000000 steps (2%)

I'm just baffled because the log shows it being 1/3 the speed of the last fold, though the client itself claims it's less than 1/40th the speed. Along with this, why would it even be 1/3 the speed? Nothing has changed.

The WU has changed.  Different work units have different difficulties which impacts the time it takes to do the work.  I have found the client displays to be completely unreliable.  I always look at the logs.  As long as your percent complete in the logs keeps moving up everything is fine as far I know.

Edit:  Additionally if you are looking at the client to determine the estimated PPD that is also very unreliable.  Check the points that are awarded after the WU is uploaded.  It is often much higher than what the PPD estimate is in the client based on what I have seen.

[ranlo]

I'm back to having issues again. My first folding job finished (after another multi-hour run). It submitted fine. The next one is folding at a rate of only 2k PPD (as opposed to the 90k I started the first one with and the 60k for the second one). It's been running for 30 minutes now and says it has an ETA of over 10 days. Here's the log:

Code:

04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:*********************** Log Started 2014-05-25T04:39:04Z ***********************
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Project: 13000 (Run 1394, Clone 8, Gen 5)
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Unit: 0x0000000a538b3db7531125e7c3cc426f
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:CPU: 0x00000000000000000000000000000000
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Machine: 1
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file state.xml
04:39:06:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file system.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file integrator.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file core.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Digital signatures verified
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Folding@home GPU core17
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Version 0.0.52
04:44:23:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 0 out of 5000000 steps (0%)
04:44:23:WU00:FS01:0x17:Temperature control disabled. Requirements: single Nvidia GPU, tmax must be < 110 and twait >= 900
04:54:38:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 50000 out of 5000000 steps (1%)
05:04:34:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 100000 out of 5000000 steps (2%)

I'm just baffled because the log shows it being 1/3 the speed of the last fold, though the client itself claims it's less than 1/40th the speed. Along with this, why would it even be 1/3 the speed? Nothing has changed.

The WU has changed.  Different work units have different difficulties which impacts the time it takes to do the work.  I have found the client displays to be completely unreliable.  I always look at the logs.  As long as your percent complete in the logs keeps moving up everything is fine as far I know.

Hmm, looking at the past one, it seems you are right:

Code:

03:39:14:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2125000 out of 2500000 steps (85%)
03:42:41:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2150000 out of 2500000 steps (86%)
03:46:26:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2175000 out of 2500000 steps (87%)
03:49:53:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2200000 out of 2500000 steps (88%)
03:53:40:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2225000 out of 2500000 steps (89%)
03:57:07:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2250000 out of 2500000 steps (90%)
04:00:52:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2275000 out of 2500000 steps (91%)
04:04:21:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2300000 out of 2500000 steps (92%)
04:08:05:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2325000 out of 2500000 steps (93%)
04:11:35:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2350000 out of 2500000 steps (94%)
04:15:19:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2375000 out of 2500000 steps (95%)
04:18:48:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2400000 out of 2500000 steps (96%)
04:22:30:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2425000 out of 2500000 steps (97%)
04:26:00:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2450000 out of 2500000 steps (98%)
04:29:44:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2475000 out of 2500000 steps (99%)
04:33:20:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2500000 out of 2500000 steps (100%)

This new one appears to be 2x as many steps. Why that means it takes 3x as long confuses me though. But does this also mean that the new one is worth at least 2x as many points and therefore, while the time is a lot longer, the reward is better to compensate?

[erikbranslof]

well EMC2 more decent than this crap coin

[ChasingTheDream]

I'm back to having issues again. My first folding job finished (after another multi-hour run). It submitted fine. The next one is folding at a rate of only 2k PPD (as opposed to the 90k I started the first one with and the 60k for the second one). It's been running for 30 minutes now and says it has an ETA of over 10 days. Here's the log:

Code:

04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:*********************** Log Started 2014-05-25T04:39:04Z ***********************
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Project: 13000 (Run 1394, Clone 8, Gen 5)
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Unit: 0x0000000a538b3db7531125e7c3cc426f
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:CPU: 0x00000000000000000000000000000000
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Machine: 1
04:39:05:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file state.xml
04:39:06:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file system.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file integrator.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Reading tar file core.xml
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Digital signatures verified
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Folding@home GPU core17
04:39:07:WU00:FS01:0x17:Version 0.0.52
04:44:23:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 0 out of 5000000 steps (0%)
04:44:23:WU00:FS01:0x17:Temperature control disabled. Requirements: single Nvidia GPU, tmax must be < 110 and twait >= 900
04:54:38:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 50000 out of 5000000 steps (1%)
05:04:34:WU00:FS01:0x17:Completed 100000 out of 5000000 steps (2%)

I'm just baffled because the log shows it being 1/3 the speed of the last fold, though the client itself claims it's less than 1/40th the speed. Along with this, why would it even be 1/3 the speed? Nothing has changed.

The WU has changed.  Different work units have different difficulties which impacts the time it takes to do the work.  I have found the client displays to be completely unreliable.  I always look at the logs.  As long as your percent complete in the logs keeps moving up everything is fine as far I know.

Hmm, looking at the past one, it seems you are right:

Code:

03:39:14:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2125000 out of 2500000 steps (85%)
03:42:41:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2150000 out of 2500000 steps (86%)
03:46:26:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2175000 out of 2500000 steps (87%)
03:49:53:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2200000 out of 2500000 steps (88%)
03:53:40:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2225000 out of 2500000 steps (89%)
03:57:07:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2250000 out of 2500000 steps (90%)
04:00:52:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2275000 out of 2500000 steps (91%)
04:04:21:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2300000 out of 2500000 steps (92%)
04:08:05:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2325000 out of 2500000 steps (93%)
04:11:35:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2350000 out of 2500000 steps (94%)
04:15:19:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2375000 out of 2500000 steps (95%)
04:18:48:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2400000 out of 2500000 steps (96%)
04:22:30:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2425000 out of 2500000 steps (97%)
04:26:00:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2450000 out of 2500000 steps (98%)
04:29:44:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2475000 out of 2500000 steps (99%)
04:33:20:WU01:FS01:0x17:Completed 2500000 out of 2500000 steps (100%)

This new one appears to be 2x as many steps. Why that means it takes 3x as long confuses me though. But does this also mean that the new one is worth at least 2x as many points and therefore, while the time is a lot longer, the reward is better to compensate?

I can't say you will get double the points but you should get more points.  There is a time element to this that impacts the awarded points as well.

I edited the post above while you was posting this it seems so I'm going to post that paragraph here as well.  If you are looking at the client to determine the estimated PPD that is also very unreliable.  Check the points that are awarded after the WU is uploaded.  It is often much higher than what the PPD estimate is in the client based on what I have seen.

[ChasingTheDream]

well EMC2 more decent than this crap coin

ROFL.  You had to create a new account just to troll this forum huh?

[ranlo]

I can't say you will get double the points but you should get more points.  There is a time element to this that impacts the awarded points as well.

I edited the post above while you was posting this it seems so I'm going to post that paragraph here as well.  If you are looking at the client to determine the estimated PPD that is also very unreliable.  Check the points that are awarded after the WU is uploaded.  It is often much higher than what the PPD estimate is in the client based on what I have seen.

Thanks for being patient with me while I try to learn all of this. On the checking the points that are awarded, how is this done?

Do you mean like this line:

Code:

04:34:09:WU01:FS01:Final credit estimate, 15500.00 points

Or on the site? Because the site appears to be updated once a day or so.

[ChasingTheDream]

Let people complain all they want; it's their own opinion and has no impact on what we do or how we do it. If people want to volunteer, that's their choice. If people want to be compensated (and compensation is an option), that's their choice. What others think shouldn't be any concern to you; you do what you do, and they will do what they do.

I completely agree with you.  I can't say it concerns me.  It isn't like their opinion will change my behavior.  I just find the whole argument rather baffling.

We're not folding for pharmaceuticals but for Universities like Stanford who are doing the research.

We may not get the treatment for free but at least there's treatment which can be better then whats available right now.

I'm aware of who is running the research and hopefully it leads to cures as well as better treatments, but that really wasn't the point of my post.

[ChasingTheDream]

I can't say you will get double the points but you should get more points.  There is a time element to this that impacts the awarded points as well.

I edited the post above while you was posting this it seems so I'm going to post that paragraph here as well.  If you are looking at the client to determine the estimated PPD that is also very unreliable.  Check the points that are awarded after the WU is uploaded.  It is often much higher than what the PPD estimate is in the client based on what I have seen.

Thanks for being patient with me while I try to learn all of this. On the checking the points that are awarded, how is this done?

Do you mean like this line:

Code:

04:34:09:WU01:FS01:Final credit estimate, 15500.00 points

Or on the site? Because the site appears to be updated once a day or so.

Edited: I wrote what was happening essentially backwards so I fixed it below.

Yep that line you have is what I look at.  I have a computer where the line shown in the log is consistently double what is shown in the client.  They mismatch on the other computers as well but usually not as much.  The point is the log will tell you what is actually happening.

[ranlo]

I can't say you will get double the points but you should get more points.  There is a time element to this that impacts the awarded points as well.

I edited the post above while you was posting this it seems so I'm going to post that paragraph here as well.  If you are looking at the client to determine the estimated PPD that is also very unreliable.  Check the points that are awarded after the WU is uploaded.  It is often much higher than what the PPD estimate is in the client based on what I have seen.

Thanks for being patient with me while I try to learn all of this. On the checking the points that are awarded, how is this done?

Do you mean like this line:

Code:

04:34:09:WU01:FS01:Final credit estimate, 15500.00 points

Or on the site? Because the site appears to be updated once a day or so.

Yep that line you have is what I look at.  I have a computer where the line shown in the log is consistently less that half what is shown in the client.  They mismatch on the other computers as well but usually not as much.  The point is the log will tell you what is actually happening.

Ahh, got you. This explains a lot. And magically the client just updated to show the true timing and increased the PPD to 72k...

I'm not getting how some people have 100k+ with their 7950's though.

[ChasingTheDream]

I can't say you will get double the points but you should get more points.  There is a time element to this that impacts the awarded points as well.

I edited the post above while you was posting this it seems so I'm going to post that paragraph here as well.  If you are looking at the client to determine the estimated PPD that is also very unreliable.  Check the points that are awarded after the WU is uploaded.  It is often much higher than what the PPD estimate is in the client based on what I have seen.

Thanks for being patient with me while I try to learn all of this. On the checking the points that are awarded, how is this done?

Do you mean like this line:

Code:

04:34:09:WU01:FS01:Final credit estimate, 15500.00 points

Or on the site? Because the site appears to be updated once a day or so.

Yep that line you have is what I look at.  I have a computer where the line shown in the log is consistently less that half what is shown in the client.  They mismatch on the other computers as well but usually not as much.  The point is the log will tell you what is actually happening.

Ahh, got you. This explains a lot. And magically the client just updated to show the true timing and increased the PPD to 72k...

I'm not getting how some people have 100k+ with their 7950's though.

You won't know what your average PPD is until you have run for several days at least after you get the card tuned.  Remember when someone says they get 100K+ PPD that means points per day.  Not points per WU.  If you get a few work units that take a long time to complete you will end up with some work that was done but isn't awarded to the next day so-to-speak.  You need a few days to a week to let it all average out.

Edit:  I also noticed I messed up my previous reply.  I've got a computer where the log consistently shows points award that is twice what is shown in the client.  Not the other way around.  The log has the answers.  The client is not a reliable point of reference.