I got bored today and built a new 5.4.10 boinc client that increased the wetstone score about %50 higher and the drystone about %300 higher than the stock 5.4.9 boinc client on my laptop. To use these binaries you must have windows xp/2000 and a SSE2 capable processor. The binaries can be downloaded at https://boese.kicks-ass.net:7000. Enjoy!!!

---

I got bored today and built a new 5.4.10 boinc client that increased the wetstone score about %50 higher and the drystone about %300 higher than the stock 5.4.9 boinc client on my laptop. To use these binaries you must have windows xp/2000 and a SSE2 capable processor. The binaries can be downloaded at https://boese.kicks-ass.net:7000. Enjoy!!!

What purpose does this have apart from increasing the benchmarks and credits claimed?

---

CIC1=CC=C(C2=N[C@@H](CC(OC(C)(C)C)=O)C3=NN=C(C)N3C4=C2C(C)=C(C)S4)C=C1

The main reason I made the build is just for something to do though I have noticed that the boincmgr gui seems more responsive and to lag less than before with the new build (probably also partly due to also optimizing wxWidgets build). I also wanted a snapshot of the code more recent than 5.4.9 (build was off of CVS head on 7/29/06). The one bad thing is of couse the size of the dlls and exe went up some but they do perform better I feel. I will run it until at least the next official release but the whole edge to open source is being able to push the envelope especially as long as it doesnt affect the main priority which is the science.

---

The main reason I made the build is just for something to do though I have noticed that the boincmgr gui seems more responsive and to lag less than before with the new build (probably also partly due to also optimizing wxWidgets build). I also wanted a snapshot of the code more recent than 5.4.9 (build was off of CVS head on 7/29/06). The one bad thing is of couse the size of the dlls and exe went up some but they do perform better I feel. I will run it until at least the next official release but the whole edge to open source is being able to push the envelope especially as long as it doesnt affect the main priority which is the science.

Yeah you've posted this to a lot of forums, since you're initial post highlighted the huge increase in benchmarking I've gotta say that the rest of your rationalisations don't wash. Sorry mate, but using an optimised app to alter your benchmarks is just the same as hand modifying the xml files. Its cheating.

---

CIC1=CC=C(C2=N[C@@H](CC(OC(C)(C)C)=O)C3=NN=C(C)N3C4=C2C(C)=C(C)S4)C=C1

I'm just glad that the projects are moving away from using the benchmarks to grant credits (mostly because of cheats like this).

---

I'm just glad that the projects are moving away from using the benchmarks to grant credits (mostly because of cheats like this).

Yes, the sooner the better, this is despicable. I hope anyone using it gets named and shamed. Mike

---

The fact of the matter is so many people are using optimized clients anyway there is just a lot of haters when someone releases one publicly. Like I said boinc credits rate right up there with $ in video game to me. At least I didnt change the source unlike a lot of other people. If people want to use an inefficient lowest common denominator binary so be it. I guess that is why you still see i386 linux kernels.

---

The fact of the matter is so many people are using optimized clients anyway there is just a lot of haters when someone releases one publicly. Like I said boinc credits rate right up there with $ in video game to me. At least I didnt change the source unlike a lot of other people. If people want to use an inefficient lowest common denominator binary so be it. I guess that is why you still see i386 linux kernels.

There's a big difference between a client that processes a WU more efficiently and claim the same credit for the work and the manager which is specifically skewed to produce to fraudulent claim on the credits you receive for that WU.

No matter how you try to justify or rationalize or defend it, it is designed to obtain a higher score for the same amount of work done. That, by definition is cheating and anyone using it would have to be clasified a cheater.

---

Boinc V 7.4.36
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB NVidia 470

dumas777 wrote:

The main reason I made the build is just for something to do though I have noticed that the boincmgr gui seems more responsive and to lag less than before with the new build (probably also partly due to also optimizing wxWidgets build). I also wanted a snapshot of the code more recent than 5.4.9 (build was off of CVS head on 7/29/06). The one bad thing is of couse the size of the dlls and exe went up some but they do perform better I feel. I will run it until at least the next official release but the whole edge to open source is being able to push the envelope especially as long as it doesnt affect the main priority which is the science.

The fact of the matter is so many people are using optimized clients anyway there is just a lot of haters when someone releases one publicly. Like I said boinc credits rate right up there with $ in video game to me. At least I didnt change the source unlike a lot of other people. If people want to use an inefficient lowest common denominator binary so be it.

Give it a try: Optimize the whole Boinc code except the benchmarking routines. You will gain the better GUI responsiveness and there will sure be no heaters if you release such executables.

Peter

Ethically you maybe right and I would do so but it is more work and then no one would download my client. It aint a crime if dont get caught, just kidding :).

---