![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
The first thing I did was check to see if this person was an "official" beta tester, he is not.
Yeah, making everyone else running anything less look like they're still folding with Socket-7 Pentiums from the '90s. Well, I guess we're well on our way to the launchpad of infinity... /shakes headHow did you put it - "glances at his i7 920 and whistles"? If these are them there are going to be some SR-2 posting silly numbers
)Your calculations are right on par with my quick mental extrapolation. My projection came out to 240-245K PPD.
The WUs are on a set factor for bonus calculations. These WUs are just faster processing and so produce that much more points. The hyperbolic bonus graph scaling is the cause of the disproportionate increase.
I'd like to say more on this but I can't but there is more that I'd like to say. We will just have to wait and see what happens when they are released.
I am 90% there with what is already public release. I haven't made big upgrades since A3 was released because my future in the project is hazy. I have at least 20 clients and none are classic low producing clients. I just don't see why this person with a single SMP client (I don't care what CPU he's running) is producing 75% of my farm. It just doesn't make sense no matter how one cuts it. I care as much for the research as anything else. If I am producing scarcely that much more science with my entire farm than his one system, then I'm definitely doing something wrong or involved in the wrong DC project.
They need to do more than that. Even if they 'normalize' the P2689's production, the whole bonus system's structure is still problematic. When new architecture, especially multi-socket, will become available, we'll be back in the same conundrum.
So Xilikon/DAB... so take it from someone with a lot to gain, this is not what we want! Proving the point about the silliness of complete beta secrecy - leaks/mistakes like this are a very good thing to head off problems like this before they happen.That is obviously wrong. Just about every system that depends on a work-reward curve to attract participants uses a non-linear system.
It may seem wrong to you but F@H had one decade without one and all was fine. The examples you cited are apples to oranges and my arguments still stand.
EXACTLY. You nailed it. A non-linear system creates greater and greater disproportion the higher up the curve one goes. A linear bonus structure accomplishes what's intended from the outset without needless exaggeration.
Is it? I haven't any similar hardware to compare with. I don't know what's going on if you're right.
True. I posted all the way back in the summer that Pandora's Box has been opened. There is a way to accomplish this and mitigate the absurdness while satisfying most of the single client big producers. Flattening the bonus line isn't going to hurt anyone _that much_ (depending on the gradient decided) but it could prevent the huge discrepancies we are seeing now and into the future. Unfortunately, any worthwhile solution is the lesser of two evils because it comes after the fact.
I respectfully disagree. The bonus in and of itself satisfies the additional incentives requirement. There was no bonus adjustment prior to -bigadv, and hardware had always been upgraded dependent on what was available at the time. Heck, I experienced my most fervent upgrade phase of recent times a year or two before -bigadv ever went public.
So, those who can already afford or through uncommon professional privilege have access to high-end hardware, be granted further favor by sole virtue of their station, is that what you're postulating? Isn't it sufficient to meet the financial diminishing returns mitigation of stated concerns by the implementation of any form of bonus accruement to the incentives system? Wouldn't it be more sensible to simply adjust the degree of a straight line to attain a 'sweet zone' in an attempt to avoid hyperbole and excessive remuneration while maintaining gracious compensation?