Care of the 'not always accurate' wiki
Of all the major distributed computing projects involved in protein research, Folding@home is the only one to not use the BOINC platform. Both Rosetta@home and Folding@home research protein misfolding diseases (e.g. Alzheimer's disease), but Folding@home does so much more exclusively. Instead of using structure- or design-based methods to predict amyloid behavior, for example, Folding@home uses molecular dynamics to model how proteins fold (or potentially misfold, and subsequently aggregate). In other words, Folding@home's strength is protein folding, while Rosetta@home's strength is protein design and prediction of structure and docking. The two projects also differ significantly in their computing power and host diversity. Averaging about 2 petaFLOPS (2000 teraFLOPS) with a host base that includes the Playstation 3 and graphics processing units, Folding@home has more than a 30-fold advantage in computing power over Rosetta@home, which averages 66 teraFLOPS with a host base consisting only of PC-based CPUs.
You're taking this waaaaaay too seriously, dude
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8852d/8852d2062d7110393ceea768b048b31c5d4853ef" alt="Stick Out Tongue :p :p"