Thanks for the link Zyzzyx. I'll try this out later tonight.
:cool:
Printable View
Thanks for the link Zyzzyx. I'll try this out later tonight.
:cool:
Oh, yeah, I like this! Thanks. ;)Quote:
I guess I just like the flashy one betterQuote:
Originally posted by RealBeast
Oh, yeah, I like this! Thanks. ;)
Nice links. I really like the FAHStats, sweet how it gives you timeframes and everything.
I'm kinda curious if a Dual Pentium Pro 200Mhz would be worth putting into the F@H mix (as in, could it even complete a WU in the given timeframe?). I just need to pick up a cheap HDD and a KVM switch and I could have it running, otherwise it's just sitting around doing nothing, and what good is that!? :D
I'm wondering the same thing. I too have a P-Pro 200 dually sitting here. Nothing installed on it currently, been thinking of making it a Linux system to practice on.Quote:
Originally posted by JustWhitman
Nice links. I really like the FAHStats, sweet how it gives you timeframes and everything.
I'm kinda curious if a Dual Pentium Pro 200Mhz would be worth putting into the F@H mix (as in, could it even complete a WU in the given timeframe?). I just need to pick up a cheap HDD and a KVM switch and I could have it running, otherwise it's just sitting around doing nothing, and what good is that!? :D
As for whether its worth it, that depends on your mindset. To some folks an old system should at least manage 100 PPW to be worth the hassle. Other folks think that as long as it can finish the WU before the deadline, roll with it.
Personally, I lean more towards the 100 PPW reasoning. I remember having Folding going on my old K6-2/266 and finally deciding it wasn't really worth it. Actually, I think that one missed a couple WU deadlines. :(
simple question about [email protected] you need to share Installation the directories in order to use this?
However you want to access a network drive.Quote:
Originally posted by thebove
simple question about [email protected] you need to share Installation the directories in order to use this?
My FAHStats settings:
The M: drive is a mapped network drive to the D: drive on my Megamo system. The directory on Wallmount is accessed through the 'hidden' administrative share c$. This shows the C: drive on Wallmount. Note that for that style of access you need to use the \\ for the UNC naming. I think that's also how you'd access a shared directory.Code:"Megamo","M:\Apps\Folding\"
"WallMount","\\Wallmount\c$\Program Files\Folding\"
Shorter answer: No, you don't need to actively share the directory. You can get to it other ways.
Basically I'm too lazy to search through these some odd 100 pages to find what flags I should use on all my different machines, I checked out EOC though but couldn't find what I should use on two of my systems.. ;)
They are all running the 3.24 client.
2400+ XP - -local -advmethods -forceasm
1.6 P4 -
PII 450 -
Is what I have running on my AMD system right? and what should I be running on those uh *cough* intels ?
Looks good.Quote:
Originally posted by Foo_909
Basically I'm too lazy to search through these some odd 100 pages to find what flags I should use on all my different machines, I checked out EOC though but couldn't find what I should use on two of my systems.. ;)
They are all running the 3.24 client.
2400+ XP - -local -advmethods -forceasm
1.6 P4 -
PII 450 -
Is what I have running on my AMD system right? and what should I be running on those uh *cough* intels ?
Many folks say -local is always good to use, I've never had any problems NOT using it. <shrug>
-advmethods was originally to select more recent WUs, some still in beta. Generally this means you'd get more Gromacs cores instead of Tinkers, but that seems to have balanced out now. (depends who you talk to though) The problem of getting the chance of beta WUs is that some of them might not be stable, especially on AMD T'Breds using SSE. Which brings us to...
-forceasm doesn't do EXACTLY what it sounds like, but close. For AMD systems it forces the use of SSE, whether or not the client thinks its 'safe' or not to do so. On some WUs with various AMD T'Bred cores, this has led to lockups and crashes. Its been a rather tricky thing to track down though. Still, using SSE can boost production up to 3 times on an AMD. I've seen this myself. AMD T'Bred 1700 w/ SSE had a frame time of 15 min, AMD Thunderbird 1600 w/out SSE on the same WU had a frame time of 45 min. It still sucks without the SSE code.
But, if you want to use the -forceasm flag on an AMD, get the 3.25 client. The 3.24 client, iirc, will use SSE when flagged to, but only for the first WU. When it starts on the next WU it won't use SSE from the -forceasm flag. This is a known bug.
Now, for the Intel goodies, should be able to do just fine with -local and -advmethods. All Intel chips (well, ones worth having Folding) have SSE, and have it turned on by default.
Whew... that was a good ramble. Now to read it back, see if it makes any sense.
Some posts from the Folding-Community forums regarding -forceasm and the 3.24 client:
3.24 client not using SSE
Comments from Pandegroup about -forceasm, -advmethods, and overclocking
In general, I'd recommend folks that are really into Folding check out the Main Folding Forums. (I know I've seen Thermo listed on the 'whos online' list there)
Zyzzyx simply put, you kick ***..
I have been thinking about going to the 3.25 client when this WU finishes I guess I will try it out. Thanks!
Been running the 3.25 'beta' client since I heard it was available. Unless you have it already, you might have to get it from somewhere besides Stanford though, as I think they still have 3.24 up on the main download page, and the beta page now has the 4.00prerelease2 client.Quote:
Originally posted by Foo_909
Zyzzyx simply put, you kick ***..
I have been thinking about going to the 3.25 client when this WU finishes I guess I will try it out. Thanks!
I'm currently running the 4.00prerelease1 client on my P3-566. Its only completed 3 WUs with it, but no problems so far.
If ya need 3.25, lemme know, can email it to ya.
Yup drop me that 3.25, stanford definetly ditched me on that :(Quote:
Originally posted by Zyzzyx
Been running the 3.25 'beta' client since I heard it was available. Unless you have it already, you might have to get it from somewhere besides Stanford though, as I think they still have 3.24 up on the main download page, and the beta page now has the 4.00prerelease2 client.
I'm currently running the 4.00prerelease1 client on my P3-566. Its only completed 3 WUs with it, but no problems so far.
If ya need 3.25, lemme know, can email it to ya.
[email protected]
Thanks once again, and If I a go ahead and go to the 3.25 client in the middle of the WU I won't lose it/curropt/cuase an error ect. correct?. I should probably just stay with a 3.24's on the intel machines right?
I'd just swap over to 3.25 in the middle. Did that with mine, no problems. Changed my P3 over to 4.00 in the middle of a WU, no problem either.Quote:
Originally posted by Foo_909
Thanks once again, and If I a go ahead and go to the 3.25 client in the middle of the WU I won't lose it/curropt/cuase an error ect. correct?. I should probably just stay with a 3.24's on the intel machines right?
Alright thanks for getting me up and going, I should be pumping out atleast 1/4 more points :D from now on.Quote:
Originally posted by Zyzzyx
I'd just swap over to 3.25 in the middle. Did that with mine, no problems. Changed my P3 over to 4.00 in the middle of a WU, no problem either.