Man of Honour
Looks like about 4 days on my Xeon (well, it would have been, but I've just turned off HT on it).
Folding@Home Weekly Team News - 3rd February 2006
- Thread starter rich99million
- Start date
How very odd.
I wonder how my 2.4GHz Northwood manages to do them so much quicker?
Stan
Associate
Bigstan said:
How very odd.
I wonder how my 2.4GHz Northwood manages to do them so much quicker?
Stan
On the same wu I get 100ppd on my 2.4c @ 3ghz (with 2 client running of course)
On my opty I get 214ppd
For it to take 6 days there must either be something else using most of the cpu cycles or there is some serious thermal throttling issues.
I've got 2 of these GB 188-pointers,
XP1700@2050MHz
Avg. Time / Frame : 19mn 29s - 138.94 ppd
XP2500+ (stock 1833MHz)
Avg. Time / Frame : 19mn 45s - 137.07 ppd
now since those machines usually vary quite a bit in ppd (the XP1700 is usually 10-20% better off than the Barton due to the clock speed) I can only assume that these WUs are severely bad on memory bandwidth or something
if you are running dual clients try stopping one of them and give it a few hours then see what sort of time you are getting then
other than that make sure you are getting the SSE optimisation message at the beginning of work...
[04:51:19] Writing local files
[04:51:19] GB activated
[04:51:19] Extra SSE boost OK.
[04:51:20] Writing local files
[04:51:20] Completed 0 out of 12500000 steps (0)
XP1700@2050MHz
Avg. Time / Frame : 19mn 29s - 138.94 ppd
XP2500+ (stock 1833MHz)
Avg. Time / Frame : 19mn 45s - 137.07 ppd
now since those machines usually vary quite a bit in ppd (the XP1700 is usually 10-20% better off than the Barton due to the clock speed) I can only assume that these WUs are severely bad on memory bandwidth or something
if you are running dual clients try stopping one of them and give it a few hours then see what sort of time you are getting then
other than that make sure you are getting the SSE optimisation message at the beginning of work...
[04:51:19] Writing local files
[04:51:19] GB activated
[04:51:19] Extra SSE boost OK.
[04:51:20] Writing local files
[04:51:20] Completed 0 out of 12500000 steps (0)
Last edited:
For the sake of comparison I have listed all of my benchmarks for the 188 pointers below.
Project : 2306
Core : GBGromacs
Frames : 100
Credit : 188
2.4 P4 @ 2463MHz
Min. Time / Frame : 26mn 21s - 102.74 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 28mn 04s - 96.46 ppd
1.6 P4M Laptop
Min. Time / Frame : 24mn 25s - 110.88 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 25mn 25s - 106.51 ppd
A64 3500+ @ 2376MHz
Min. Time / Frame : 15mn 05s - 179.48 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 15mn 35s - 173.72 ppd
A64 4000+ @2592 MHz
Min. Time / Frame : 15mn 15s - 177.52 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 15mn 15s - 177.52 ppd
A64 X2 4400+ @ 2310 MHz (2 clients - other one has a 46 pointer
)
No Min. Time / Frame
Avg. Time / Frame : 14mn 22s - 188.44 ppd
As you can see the A64s take nearly half the time the P4s do but nowhere near 6 days.
MajorPart:
As Rich says, you may need to check that the optimisation is kicking in. Are you using the -forceasm flag?
Stan
Project : 2306
Core : GBGromacs
Frames : 100
Credit : 188
2.4 P4 @ 2463MHz
Min. Time / Frame : 26mn 21s - 102.74 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 28mn 04s - 96.46 ppd
1.6 P4M Laptop
Min. Time / Frame : 24mn 25s - 110.88 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 25mn 25s - 106.51 ppd
A64 3500+ @ 2376MHz
Min. Time / Frame : 15mn 05s - 179.48 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 15mn 35s - 173.72 ppd
A64 4000+ @2592 MHz
Min. Time / Frame : 15mn 15s - 177.52 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 15mn 15s - 177.52 ppd
A64 X2 4400+ @ 2310 MHz (2 clients - other one has a 46 pointer
)No Min. Time / Frame
Avg. Time / Frame : 14mn 22s - 188.44 ppd
As you can see the A64s take nearly half the time the P4s do but nowhere near 6 days.
MajorPart:
As Rich says, you may need to check that the optimisation is kicking in. Are you using the -forceasm flag?
Stan
I am running boinc in dual CPU, and two folding clients.. which is why it is so slow. last time i checked the cpu temp it was 41C
Over night it is now down to 4 Days 30nm. My 1800 XP seems to think it will do a 188 in 3 days..
But this is the slowest WU i've ever done (not done a 600 yet)
Over night it is now down to 4 Days 30nm. My 1800 XP seems to think it will do a 188 in 3 days..
But this is the slowest WU i've ever done (not done a 600 yet)
Permabanned
Right, small problem - I've lost the icon in the sys-tray
I know it's still working because F@H Mon says it is, BUT the other night it was pretty hot and the PC at 100% was heating my room up to the point I couldn't sleep so I dropped the limit to 50%
However, since then i've not seen the damn icon so i can change it back :O
Help me!!!
I know it's still working because F@H Mon says it is, BUT the other night it was pretty hot and the PC at 100% was heating my room up to the point I couldn't sleep so I dropped the limit to 50%
However, since then i've not seen the damn icon so i can change it back :O
Help me!!!
Last edited:
as far as i know the only way of getting it back is to restart - either restart the machine (or log off and back on or what-have-you) or end the winfah task (don't kill the core itself - that will usually damage the WU) and then when you see the core has finished it's stuff restart the GUI from the shortcutdivine_madness said:
unless of course WinXP has just hidden it for you - most likely explorer crashed for some reason and the icon wasn't re-drawn afterwards
Hey there guys. I'd just like to say hi-de-hi. Old-time seti-er, I started folding 2 weeks back, and almost completely forgot about it! Anyway, I have my nice new opty144 folding most days while it's on, and my folk's xp2500 whenever they use it. I'm contemplating folding on my epia m10000, but it's probably not worth it. Damn thing's hard pushed as it is anyway!
Top 50 here we come!
Top 50 here we come!
Hello sah. Welcome to Team 10. 
Any idea what's going on here? No idea why FahMons stopped reading the other 2 pcs properly:
FahMon can see what the Barton's working on but refuses to give info on what the other 2 pcs are doing. I've downloaded the latest project definitions. Fahmon is definately looking in the correct directories otherwise it wouldn't give a % complete.
FahMon can see what the Barton's working on but refuses to give info on what the other 2 pcs are doing. I've downloaded the latest project definitions. Fahmon is definately looking in the correct directories otherwise it wouldn't give a % complete.
Last edited:
Associate
hooneeawr said:
Indeed a very warm welcome Sir.
Associate
Trick said:
With me it's usually something daft like the SAMBA share hasn't updated, or I haven't opened Z:\ or whatever the other remote drive letter is.
Associate
Try using explorer to view the folders where F@H sits
BillytheImpaler said:
Yeah, I'll go ahead and call that an utter failure. I'll try to work on it this week. Getting around to taking the screenies for the Linux install is holding me back becasue my main Linux machine is under the weather with bad RAM that keeps crashing it. I suppose I'll download a Live distro and fire it up on another machine.
Do you think I need pictures to help the Windows GUI installation?
Associate
Hmm, personally I dunno. It depends how non-PC literate you reckon the readers will be.
Man of Honour
Uh I think i've joined. Just one question - my machine is not the beast it once was (xp2100+), and I was wondering how to reduce the percentage that is used? I remember in the setup dolarly we had an option of devoting 5-100%, can I just run it again?
Yes sir, that's exactly what you do. Go to services.msc and stop the sercive from runing. Then go to your executable and run it again, this time use the shortcut trick described in the new FAH guide. This time run with -configonly. It will run again and ask you everything all over again. This time tell it a lower % to use.
That said, it the machine is slow becasue of FAH it's probably not due to the CPU useage as Windows is pretty good about surrendering cycles to programs other than FAH. Usually the problem is causwed by having too little RAM.
I guess you'll just have to see and tell us how it goes.
That said, it the machine is slow becasue of FAH it's probably not due to the CPU useage as Windows is pretty good about surrendering cycles to programs other than FAH. Usually the problem is causwed by having too little RAM.
I guess you'll just have to see and tell us how it goes.
Last edited:
Associate
Yup I think F@H will just give up CPU cycles when windows asks for them back 
I find F@H just pauses itself (almost) when I'm playing BF2 or other games. I get the odd stutter when it writes something to RAM or to disk or something.
I find F@H just pauses itself (almost) when I'm playing BF2 or other games. I get the odd stutter when it writes something to RAM or to disk or something.