Folding@Home Weekly Team News - 25th January 2007

joeyjojo said:
All sorted now Stan. A common bug, something to do with me changing the machine name from localhost(?)
Click to expand...

Good stuff.

joeyjojo said:
Any idea how many points an 805d at about 3.7 could get on smp?
Click to expand...

None.

It won't work on non "Core" Intel chips (trust me, I've tried (same CPU) - It told me it couldn't work because it wasn't an AMD chip :( ).

Stan :)
 
joeyjojo said:
Ah of course. Damn.

I bet you tried, squeeze a bit more power out of the farm :)
Click to expand...

Damn right I tried :p

Still going to try the M1710 - it's a Core Duo so, hopefully, it should work. I'll wait until tomorrow though - no point starting it tonight if I have to change clients tomorrow.

Stan :)
 
Bigstan said:
Because I can run 2 at the same speed, or faster than I can run 1 on most of my AMD rigs.

On the E6600, 1 client was running at 5m 40s a frame, 2 run at 9m 30 a frame. Some of my AMD rigs are running 1 client at 10m 30s a frame.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I don't run linux, I use the mac SMP client and it makes very effective use of the CPU, so I didn't realise. I should have known better than to question it really - knowing you, it would have been well thought out.
 
A.N.Other said:
Fair enough. I don't run linux, I use the mac SMP client and it makes very effective use of the CPU, so I didn't realise. I should have known better than to question it really - knowing you, it would have been well thought out.
Click to expand...

Well, yes and no.

I'm not really familiar with Linux but using simple maths, I worked out that; since the preferred deadline is 24 hours, a client must be able to complete a frame in 14m 24s (24*60/100). If a dual core rig can run one client at 5m 40s per frame at 80% usage, then in theory, it should be able to run 2 clients at 9m 04s at 100% (5.667*2*80/100). In reality, it will never achieve 100% usage, (hence my actual figure of 9m 30s) which is well within the limit. As you can see, it's not a matter of knowing the system - it's purely maths :)

Using those formulae, it would appear that my CPU is working at 95% ((9.04x60)/(9.5x60))x100) - not too shoddy :cool:

I have no idea how the OSX client works, so I can't possibly comment but, try using the maths to work out if you could possibly run a second client.

I have no problem with this as I am returning 2 WUs in 15.83 hours (9.5x100/60) running 2 clients as opposed to 2 WUs every 18.89 hours running 1 client (5.667x100/60*2) and therefore am actually contributing more to the project and well within the time frame set by Stanford

Phew - that took me ages to explain (probably due to the silly quantity of Balvenie Doublewood consumed ;) ).

Stan :)
 
Last edited:
Well explained mate. Even with the belly of whisky :)

So slower than 7 mins would be cutting it a bit fine by your estimation? The time less than doubles though. So what is the limit? 8 mins? 9?
 
joeyjojo said:
Well explained mate. Even with the belly of whisky :)

So slower than 7 mins would be cutting it a bit fine by your estimation? The time less than doubles though. So what is the limit? 8 mins? 9?
Click to expand...

My opty 170 is doing a single at about 8 mins but I'm reluctant as it may not always work as well as it should.

I would think (depending on single client usage) that anything less than 7 minutes should be reasonably safe but anything over that, is inadvisable.

IMO - of course :)

Stan :)
 
A.N.Other said:
A fine beverage. The Balvenie whiskys are excellent.

:)
Click to expand...

One of my favourite "ordinary" (i.e. under £30) malts. Try the 15yo, it's a little more expensive at about £35 a bottle but well worth it :)

Stan :)

PS: Look at The Graph now :D
 
A.N.Other said:
A fine beverage. The Balvenie whiskys are excellent.

:)
Click to expand...

I second that! Tis bloody gorgeous :D The Founder's Reserve is also excellent in case you ever get to your supermarket and there are no DWs left :(

SiriusB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom