Athlons, and especially Athlon64s were highly competitive when they came out. I should have switched to Intel, though, with my second-last rebuild. It was long past time. Mind, the FX 8350 isn't a bad chip, but the reduced FPU count was just plain stupid. Even my Athlon II hex core was not match for an i5 quad of its day, though it came closer, and the six full cores were useful.

EDIT: I knew AMD was really screwing up (and screwed) when they started laying off engineers at their Austin campus. Even before that, I think the ATI purchase was a mistake. They tied up too much capital, and maybe bit off more than they could chew on the technical front.

[QUOTE=kladner;356408]Athlons, and especially Athlon64s were highly competitive when they came out. I should have switched to Intel, though, with my second-last rebuild. It was long past time. Mind, the FX 8350 isn't a bad chip, but the reduced FPU count was just plain stupid. Even my Athlon II hex core was not match for an i5 quad of its day, though it came closer, and the six full cores were useful.

EDIT: I knew AMD was really screwing up (and screwed) when they started laying off engineers at their Austin campus. Even before that, I think the ATI purchase was a mistake. They tied up too much capital, and maybe bit off more than they could chew on the technical front.[/QUOTE]

They did it their way... :smile:

Luigi

[QUOTE=kladner;356408]Athlons, and especially Athlon64s were highly competitive when they came out. I should have switched to Intel, though, with my second-last rebuild. It was long past time. Mind, the FX 8350 isn't a bad chip, but the reduced FPU count was just plain stupid. Even my Athlon II hex core was not match for an i5 quad of its day, though it came closer, and the six full cores were useful.

EDIT: I knew AMD was really screwing up (and screwed) when they started laying off engineers at their Austin campus. Even before that, I think the ATI purchase was a mistake. They tied up too much capital, and maybe bit off more than they could chew on the technical front.[/QUOTE]
The Athlon IIs are roughly comparable to Core 2s.

[QUOTE=henryzz;356769]The Athlon IIs are roughly comparable to Core 2s.[/QUOTE]

OK, thanks. I had trouble either with the Athlon II chip, or the motherboard it was on. That's when I ended up with the FX. I should test it again. It really was a solid performer, even if it's a generation behind in comparison with Intel.

Ahh... gpu72 you thief what are you doing with some of my credit?? :razz:

(Just kidding.)

[QUOTE=kracker;356874]Ahh... gpu72 you thief what are you doing with some of my credit?? :razz:[/QUOTE][URL="http://www.mersenne.ca/credit.php?worktype=LL&exponent=38103407"]49.216 is correct credit amount[/URL]. Or at least it should be... :smile:

Hmm... Do I have a few stuck assignments or something preventing me?

[code]
Sorry kracker, but you already have too many assignments. Since you joined the project you have done on average 7.62 GHz Days of P-1 Factoring work per day.
You currently have 119 assignments totalling 368.56 GHz Days of work assigned, or 48 days worth based on your history. The oldest is 7 days old.
In order to have access to additional assignments, please complete some more of the work already assigned, or [URL="https://www.gpu72.com/contact/"]Contact Us[/URL] and explain why you should be exempted from this automated policy.

[/code]


I can do much, [I]much [/I]more than 7.62 GHz days...

No stuck assignments (in 7 days? c'mon! stuck is after 60 days or so!) and nobody has nothing against you. The server computes a 30 days moving average with each of your work type. If you don't do a type of work for a while, you lose the "score". This way gpu72 guards itself against idiots who reserve work "just because is fun to reserve work" and never do any real crunching. Which, of course, it is not your case, but the server doesn't know "yet". Some guy can't reserve more work than he can digest for a delimited period.

One solution is that you report your results as soon as they come out from the pipe for few days (i.e. don't delay the reports!), which will increase your recorded "average ability" to do P-1. Once the numbers raise, they stay high, the server "learns" that you [U]can do[/U] work, and will let you reserve more and more work. I think you are already doing this, if I look to your stats, your limits are already increasing, I can see them growing, waaaa....hehe...

Second solution is that you contact Chris and convince him to put you in the (short) list with exceptions. I am on that list, because Chris knows the hardware I have, and the fact that I don't produce "continuously". I have "periods" when the hardware gets free and I get the mood, and push it high, lots of reservations, and periods when I am busy with other things and the numbers decrease. I used to get this message often when I tried to reserve work after periods of "hibernation". I will tell you how I convinced Chris to add me to the exception list: I told him that if I try to reserve work and I can't, I turn my attention to something else, ignoring gpu72 for a while :razz:, so he got scared... :razz: Maybe you can tell him the same...

A minor nitpick about the GPU to 72 website: on the "Completed Assignments" page, the count should say "1000[COLOR="Red"]+[/COLOR] (or [COLOR="Red"]>[/COLOR]1000) Assignments completed" if the user has submitted more than 1,000 results.

[QUOTE=LaurV;358955].[/QUOTE]

Well the point is, not all my machines are in continuous work/submitting. I don't like submitting manually every day for those computers which I don't have access to 24/7...So I give them a "list" :smile:

The "Work Done By <Username>" graph X axis labels are running over each other:
[url]http://www.gpu72.com/graphs/worker/56f1b7572536a14513b08c88b2ba9578/[/url]