Sharky Forums Folding Team

Quote:

---

Originally posted by schultz
well dangit! i keep pulling ahead and then falling behind again!!! :mad: :mad: dangit speedy!! ;) :D :) you know i'm just joking right. and i really think i should push up my oc. i don't think i'm going to be able to compete with you guys with only 2.1GHz...:(

---

Your dlt3c should be able to do at least 2.3ghz...have you found a max oc yet? And yes, it is kinda suspenseful as you pull ahead and then i do back and forth...and i know you're just joking around.:p :D

congrats on the marriage vertices!!:D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by speedyaxon
Your dlt3c should be able to do at least 2.3ghz...have you found a max oc yet? And yes, it is kinda suspenseful as you pull ahead and then i do back and forth...and i know you're just joking around.:p :D

congrats on the marriage vertices!!:D

---

i've actually had this chip up to 2525MHz and i think i can push it farther, i just get a little bit nervous with all that vcore...but it really is still in managalbe levels...so i guess i will just have to see.

oh...and i should have said this before!

congrats on the marriage vertices!!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by serotone9
i guess i can donate some spare cycles, now that the cooler weather's here. besides 34149 always was my lucky number. :p

i guess i got a 400? :eek: is that good or bad?

---------------------------------------

[03:19:30] Protein: p638_L939_K12M_ext
[03:19:30] - Run: 127 (Clone 83, Gen 6)
[03:19:30] - Frames Completed: 0, Remaining: 400
[03:19:30] - Dynamic steps required: 5000000

---

You got that because you don't have the client maximized. That's a 71 point WU admittedly but its going to take you almost two days to complete. Here's what you wanna do this should be a sticky: Close down the client and go to the Folding@Home folder and delete the FaH_65 Core. Now go to stanford's page and DL either the 3.25beta or perhaps the 4.00 beta though the jury is still out on this one. Save the beta to your Folding@home folder and make a shortcut of it. Cut and Paste the shortcut in your startup folder, Make the following adjustments to the shortcut by right clicking and selecting properties. Then make the highlighted line look like mine
https://www.sharkyforums.com/
Mind you this is for 3.25beta for 4.00beta instead of -forceasm make it -forceSSE. advmethods will enable you to receive and work on Gromacs Wu's which utilize SSE and have a far better WU points/time ratio than the Tinker WU's like the one you referenced above. forceasm or forceSSE keeps SSE active for AMD cpus. This is not necessary for Intel but it is for AMD cpus which support SSE. Re-boot is also probably necessary. Upon restart you should have a faH-78 core instead. These little tweaks will more than double and perhaps triple your weekly WU points.

For an Intel system would the 3.24 be just as fast as the 3.25 beta? Can you add -advmethods to 3.24?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashpool
Repost: I don't care if I'm 33+ pages late XP

Well, since I've only got a single rig to screw around with, I dunno if I should switch from SETI to F@H...

Hell, look at my stats! I've crunched over 6 solid months! I don't want to abandon it again! (I had a LONG hiatus awhile ago)

Edit: And does the same thing apply to F@H? Is the Console box faster than the graphic box?

---

Not at all. I tried a very little bit of SETI awhile back and used both Console and GUI and yes it was a significant difference. With Folding@Home the difference is minimal to non-existent. I've been reading up on this more and more trying to get the most accurate answer. When 100% of your cpu cycles can go to folding its thought by most that the minimzed GUI is equal to the console. Those few who disagree will give no more than a 1% edge to the console. Its during cpu usage where the debate looms. Many more people believe the console takes less of a hit than the minimzied GUI however unlike SET the GUI is actually the more stable of the two during heavy cpu usage. If you open the GUI display then of course the performance hit increases. How great the difference may or may not be is debateable. However, again we're talking about fractions here. The greatest console proponents will not promulgate more than a few % points advantage during heavy loads and at the end of the day how long are you really under heavy loads. I myself have read enough and did start with the console initially. I am convinced the difference is neglible. I will continue with the GUI until it is substantially proven to me that I am wrong and there is a moderate edge with the GUI.

Finally sure I want you to switch. I could make a persuasive list but in the end its your choice. I just hope you make the right, wise one and join us ;).

Quote:

---

Originally posted by KaoTiK
For an Intel system would the 3.24 be just as fast as the 3.25 beta? Can you add -advmethods to 3.24?

---

Yes and Yes. Every Folder should have advmethods. Since Intel doesn't need a special flag for SSE its a non issue but absolutely you want to be working with Gromacs WUs. While I was at work today I did 2 803's at home for 32 points a piece. 64 points in little over 13 hours from one rig. I love these 803's and those 549's; I think they're what's keeping me in your slipstream.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by sapasion
Yes and Yes. Every Folder should have advmethods. Since Intel doesn't need a special flag for SSE its a non issue but absolutely you want to be working with Gromacs WUs. While I was at work today I did 2 803's at home for 32 points a piece. 64 points in little over 13 hours from one rig. I love these 803's and those 549's; I think they're what's keeping me in your slipstream.

---

Wow, I'd love to get a few of those. Right now the Intel P4 2.85GHz that's working for me isn't using advmethods, I will get on that tomorrow. Right now I'm working on a 844 that's only going to give me 11.5 points... :mad:

OK, I broke the 4000 barrier last night, 300 more points should see me solidly into the 5% class.

Well, that didn't take long. 5% is history.:D :D :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Thermo
Since we are calling this a battle, I’ll take the liberty of flushing it out some.

Now that we are flush with the ecstasy of victory at Helms Deep, and embarking on a long tactical campaign to control middle earth, I think I’ll take Taskforce Thermodyne and make a flanking assault on the 5% bracket. I wouldn’t want my elite folders to get fat and lazy from a long drawn out infantry campaign. Then perhaps continue on with the goal of arriving at 10K in time to spend the winter holidays there.

---

The Thermolian hoards found 5% to be totally undefended. There was little glory to be had and even fewer honors. The fortifications fell in the dark of night as the resistance just dropped away. Perhaps I will let the folders loot and pillage awhile, as we await word of the next battle.

I'm in. I swapped from www.grid.org last night.

except i'm using linux. i'm not sure about the method to add those optimizations. i'll have to look around to see if there's any info on the web for maximizing performance with the linux client. or maybe colossus knows some tricks.

any other place than here to get the betas? :confused: that page is giving me 404 errors.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by sapasion
Save the beta to your Folding@home folder and make a shortcut of it. Cut and Paste the shortcut in your startup folder, Make the following adjustments to the shortcut by right clicking and selecting properties. Then make the highlighted line look like mine

Mind you this is for 3.25beta for 4.00beta instead of -forceasm make it -forceSSE. advmethods will enable you to receive and work on Gromacs Wu's which utilize SSE and have a far better WU points/time ratio than the Tinker WU's like the one you referenced above. forceasm or forceSSE keeps SSE active for AMD cpus. This is not necessary for Intel but it is for AMD cpus which support SSE. Re-boot is also probably necessary. Upon restart you should have a faH-78 core instead. These little tweaks will more than double and perhaps triple your weekly WU points.

---

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> it looks like you just add the -forceasm and -advmethods to the startup command, just like in windows. i have probably about a day and half to go, so if it's twice as fast guess i should kill this WU and start over with a gromacs and gain half a day. :D or should i finish the tinker one first?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by serotone9
any other place than here to get the betas? :confused: that page is giving me 404 errors.

---

yeah i just checked it too, none of the links work :confused:

Just remove the file name and it will give you a directory listing :)

http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/release/beta/

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Colossus
Just remove the file name and it will give you a directory listing :)

http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/release/beta/

---

:cool:

Colossus, why are you banned? and if you're banned, how are you posting? :p

Quote:

---

Originally posted by serotone9
:cool:

Colossus, why are you banned? and if you're banned, how are you posting? :p

---

Okay, not everyone was involved in the past inquiries. He's not banned, just playing around. He was real busy and stopped posting for a little bit and changed it. :)

[sarcasm]Congrats on your needing to use multiple pc's to pass me Vert![/sarcasm];) Seriously, you're gonna be another powerhouse on the team...i can't believe schultz is still with me after another day of 24/7 at 2.4...what is his computer on?:confused: but i see we broke into the 800's now, so that's cool. Stealing a line, CONQUER ON!!:p :D

are certain WU's associated with either the Tinker or Gromacs core? all 3 of my rigs have the 3.25 beta running with -advmethods -forceasm, but only 2 of them show the Gromacs core/"extra SSE boost OK" in the log file

the ones that do are currently working on a 254 and a 836, the one that isn't is working on a 638.

Yes here's the Points Listhere

[15:35:46] Protein: p353_unf_305_99
[15:35:46]
[15:35:46] Writing local files
[15:35:46] Extra SSE boost OK.
[15:35:46] Writing local files
[15:35:49] Completed 0 out of 2500000 steps (0%)
[15:43:40] Writing local files
[15:43:42] Completed 25000 out of 2500000 steps (1%)
[15:51:25] CoreStatus = 0 (0)
[15:51:25] Client-core communications error: ERROR 0x0
[15:51:25] Deleting current work unit & continuing...
------------------------------

:eek:

i guess i need to go back to non-optimized settings, or lower my OC a little. although i am only at 11x205 42C, it should be able to handle that no prob. ?

before the error it seems i was doing 1% per 8 minutes = 13.3 hours, which is triple the non-optimized rate. :cool: so maybe i should just reduce the memory timings a little, or crank up the vcore a notch?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by serotone9
[15:35:46] Protein: p353_unf_305_99
[15:35:46]
[15:35:46] Writing local files
[15:35:46] Extra SSE boost OK.
[15:35:46] Writing local files
[15:35:49] Completed 0 out of 2500000 steps (0%)
[15:43:40] Writing local files
[15:43:42] Completed 25000 out of 2500000 steps (1%)
[15:51:25] CoreStatus = 0 (0)
[15:51:25] Client-core communications error: ERROR 0x0
[15:51:25] Deleting current work unit & continuing...
------------------------------

:eek:

i guess i need to go back to non-optimized settings, or lower my OC a little. although i am only at 11x205 42C, it should be able to handle that no prob. ?

before the error it seems i was doing 1% per 8 minutes = 13.3 hours, which is triple the non-optimized rate. :cool: so maybe i should just reduce the memory timings a little, or crank up the vcore a notch?

---

Talk with Saps about it. IIRC, he added some vcore to get it a little more stable.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by serotone9
[15:35:46] Protein: p353_unf_305_99
[15:35:46]
[15:35:46] Writing local files
[15:35:46] Extra SSE boost OK.
[15:35:46] Writing local files
[15:35:49] Completed 0 out of 2500000 steps (0%)
[15:43:40] Writing local files
[15:43:42] Completed 25000 out of 2500000 steps (1%)
[15:51:25] CoreStatus = 0 (0)
[15:51:25] Client-core communications error: ERROR 0x0
[15:51:25] Deleting current work unit & continuing...
------------------------------

:eek:

i guess i need to go back to non-optimized settings, or lower my OC a little. although i am only at 11x205 42C, it should be able to handle that no prob. ?

before the error it seems i was doing 1% per 8 minutes = 13.3 hours, which is triple the non-optimized rate. :cool: so maybe i should just reduce the memory timings a little, or crank up the vcore a notch?

---

Yes I found I needed to add .05v to my OC to make it stable. Folding punishes your cpu like nothing else I've ever used. 3DMark, SuperPi whatever are nothing. There are even warning about folding with an OC'd cpu; especially an OC'd AMD cpu running with SSE. When you think about you're asking your cpu to run full load 24/7. 9 out of 10 says if you add .05v you'll stabilize that OC. And as you found out first hand the gains are worth it

Quote:

---

Originally posted by sapasion
And as you found out first hand the gains are worth it

---

as you predicted. :p

i bumped down to 203x11 and it seems stable, though i've been on my laptop for a while and haven't checked it since 4%. but i lost a minute per step, from 8 to 9. the thing is, i'd just hate to get 1/2 done with a WU and lose it. :mad:

when this one's finished, i'll bump back up and increase the voltage, see how it does. i may even have to retire the trusty AX-7 and invest in an SLK + ceramique. :D

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
new slogan suggestion:

We Came, We Crunched, We Conquered!
:D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by serotone9
as you predicted. :p

i bumped down to 203x11 and it seems stable, though i've been on my laptop for a while and haven't checked it since 4%. but i lost a minute per step, from 8 to 9. the thing is, i'd just hate to get 1/2 done with a WU and lose it. :mad:

when this one's finished, i'll bump back up and increase the voltage, see how it does. i may even have to retire the trusty AX-7 and invest in an SLK + ceramique. :D

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
new slogan suggestion:

We Came, We Crunched, We Conquered!
:D

---

And that's another thing to keep in mind. I was folding at 2.4Ghz and 1.95v when I started getting problems also my PSU was crapping out which didn't help. Anyway, in hindsight at 1.95v I now realize 2.35Ghz is probably the limit of my stability. As aforementioned I bumped up .05v to 2v and now its quite stable. So my counsel is this. Either bump the vcore and IMO with an AX-7 and a decent fan you can very safely run your Barton at 1.9v. Or drop your OC a few Mhz. Personally, I'd do the vcore up. But if you should to clockdown remember if you drop from say 2.2Ghz to 2.1Ghz that's still just a few % and its better to be stable at a lower speed and always finish WU's than dropping WU's at a higher speed.

alright, i'll buy into the -advmethods thing (though even without the tag i've only been given gromacs so far) on pure faith in sapasion. but does it matter whether i choose to crunch for folding or genome?

Your faith shall be rewarded. Since I went to advmethods I don't believe I've had any tinkers; though some report they still get thru sometimes. Without advmethods you can get Gromacs but you also can get Tinkers. Also its probably best to select Folding@Home as your client type.

but WHY should i select folding over genome? is it just a what-project-do-you-want-to-solve issue, or are there significant computational/scoring ramifications?