Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
Me too now,
13420 (5363, 23, 0)
13420 (4786, 34, 0)
but also one fastish one
13420 (7724, 28, 0)
13420 (5363, 23, 0)
13420 (4786, 34, 0)
but also one fastish one
13420 (7724, 28, 0)
single 1070
-
- Posts: 1996
- Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 5:52 pm
- Hardware configuration: 1: 2x Xeon E5-2697v3@2.60GHz, 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, Win10 Ent 20H2, Quadro K420 1GB, FAH 7.6.21
2: Xeon E3-1505Mv5@2.80GHz, 32GB DDR4, NVME, Win10 Pro 20H2, Quadro M1000M 2GB, FAH 7.6.21 (actually have two of these)
3: i7-960@3.20GHz, 12GB DDR3, SSD, Win10 Pro 20H2, GTX 750Ti 2GB, GTX 1080Ti 11GB, FAH 7.6.21 - Location: UK
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
In my case standard length ones return 200% expected ppd .. I have had one or two slower ones giving 50-75% expected ppd ... overall for time spent folding all these project I am around 175% ppd.
@HaloJones from your posts 17 odd standard and a couple of slower ones ... what ppd are you getting for standard and slower compared to what you would expect from your kit?
@HaloJones from your posts 17 odd standard and a couple of slower ones ... what ppd are you getting for standard and slower compared to what you would expect from your kit?
2x Xeon E5-2697v3, 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, W10-Ent, Quadro K420
Xeon E3-1505Mv5, 32GB DDR4, NVME, W10-Pro, Quadro M1000M
i7-960, 12GB DDR3, SSD, W10-Pro, GTX1080Ti
i9-10850K, 64GB DDR4, NVME, W11-Pro, RTX3070
(Green/Bold = Active)
Xeon E3-1505Mv5, 32GB DDR4, NVME, W10-Pro, Quadro M1000M
i7-960, 12GB DDR3, SSD, W10-Pro, GTX1080Ti
i9-10850K, 64GB DDR4, NVME, W11-Pro, RTX3070
(Green/Bold = Active)
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
John has a new staff member who has been assigned the responsibility for looking at all the performance reports for anomalies.
Posting FAH's log:
How to provide enough info to get helpful support.
How to provide enough info to get helpful support.
-
- Posts: 1996
- Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 5:52 pm
- Hardware configuration: 1: 2x Xeon E5-2697v3@2.60GHz, 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, Win10 Ent 20H2, Quadro K420 1GB, FAH 7.6.21
2: Xeon E3-1505Mv5@2.80GHz, 32GB DDR4, NVME, Win10 Pro 20H2, Quadro M1000M 2GB, FAH 7.6.21 (actually have two of these)
3: i7-960@3.20GHz, 12GB DDR3, SSD, Win10 Pro 20H2, GTX 750Ti 2GB, GTX 1080Ti 11GB, FAH 7.6.21 - Location: UK
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
@bruce ... nice to know ... I'll wind my neck in !!
2x Xeon E5-2697v3, 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, W10-Ent, Quadro K420
Xeon E3-1505Mv5, 32GB DDR4, NVME, W10-Pro, Quadro M1000M
i7-960, 12GB DDR3, SSD, W10-Pro, GTX1080Ti
i9-10850K, 64GB DDR4, NVME, W11-Pro, RTX3070
(Green/Bold = Active)
Xeon E3-1505Mv5, 32GB DDR4, NVME, W10-Pro, Quadro M1000M
i7-960, 12GB DDR3, SSD, W10-Pro, GTX1080Ti
i9-10850K, 64GB DDR4, NVME, W11-Pro, RTX3070
(Green/Bold = Active)
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
According to HFM Benchmark Viewer:Neil-B wrote:In my case standard length ones return 200% expected ppd .. I have had one or two slower ones giving 50-75% expected ppd ... overall for time spent folding all these project I am around 175% ppd.
@HaloJones from your posts 17 odd standard and a couple of slower ones ... what ppd are you getting for standard and slower compared to what you would expect from your kit?
Code: Select all
Name: i7-1070x2 Slot 00
Path: 192.168.0.27:36330
Proc: GPU / GeForce GTX 1070 (Linux Mint 18, NVidia drivers 415.27)
Number of Frames Observed: 300
Min. Time / Frame : 00:02:15 - 1,199,697 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:02:35 - 975,156 PPD
Cur. Time / Frame : 00:03:15 - 688,529 PPD
R3F. Time / Frame : 00:03:15 - 688,529 PPD
All Time / Frame : 00:03:14 - 692,221 PPD
Eff. Time / Frame : 00:03:16 - 684,878 PPD
Anything below 800K ppd on these water-cooled, overclocked 1070s is a bad day. Generally they're chunking along at 1m or thereabouts.
single 1070
-
- Pande Group Member
- Posts: 467
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:59 pm
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
My hope is that since these WUs are short, the variation will average out and we ended up getting the base points about right on average!
We're still working hard to solve the variability problem though---thanks for bearing with us.
~ John Chodera // MSKCC
We're still working hard to solve the variability problem though---thanks for bearing with us.
~ John Chodera // MSKCC
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
just had back-to-back-to-back failures on 13420 on an RX 5500 - the work unit dies right away with "ERROR:Discrepancy: Forces are blowing up! 0 0"
meanwhile 13420 is chugging along on a GTX 1060...
meanwhile 13420 is chugging along on a GTX 1060...
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
I'll try and report here on the forums whenever there are outliers in terms of performance, including hardware used, in case the combination is important (and I think you can't see all those details on the collecting end.JohnChodera wrote:My hope is that since these WUs are short, the variation will average out and we ended up getting the base points about right on average!
We're still working hard to solve the variability problem though---thanks for bearing with us.
~ John Chodera // MSKCC
Here's are two more:
13420 (6696, 58, 0) with 420k PPD on GTX 1660S, normal would be 760k in my setup. TPF 4.14 instead of 2.51.
13420 (1808, 39, 0) similar to the above
CPU: Ryzen 9 3900X (1x21 CPUs) ~ GPU: nVidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Asus)
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
13421 (4308, 53, 0) is making about 10% more PPD than normally expected on my Radeon 7770 HD (TPF 1.36), so I'm guessing this is a normally performing WU that benefits from the boosted Base Credit since July 28th. Edit: After reaching 50% of the WU, PPD is down to about 90k (TPF 1.47) on the 7770 HD which is within what I'd normally expect.
13421 (7733, 52, 0) is making less than half the expected PPD on my RX 580 (TPF 1.13), so this might be a slow one.
13421 (7733, 52, 0) is making less than half the expected PPD on my RX 580 (TPF 1.13), so this might be a slow one.
Last edited by gunnarre on Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Online: GTX 1660 Super + occasional CPU folding in the cold.
Offline: Radeon HD 7770, GTX 1050 Ti 4G OC, RX580
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
13421 (5574, 53, 0) Extremely slow on the RX 580, TPF 3.13 (36928 PPD). So the 7770 HD is folding almost three times as fast as the RX 580 at the moment.
Online: GTX 1660 Super + occasional CPU folding in the cold.
Offline: Radeon HD 7770, GTX 1050 Ti 4G OC, RX580
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
Here is my history with the 134XX projects, on Windows 10 with a RTX 2060:
'Anomalous' defined as a step function longer to complete. Nominal is 4 hours, plus or minus a few minutes. The longer ones are all in the 12-13 hour range.
With respect to my machine, the 18 and 20 series appear to be more consistent.
Cheers,
Curt
Code: Select all
Project Total run Total anomalous Percent anomalous
13412 3 0 0%
13414 37 4 11%
13416 15 5 33%
13418 9 0 0%
13420 20 1 5%
With respect to my machine, the 18 and 20 series appear to be more consistent.
Cheers,
Curt
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
I'm seeing about 30%-40% greater ppd with 13420 than average and the project seems to love my standard GTX-1080, I've seen almost nothing but this project for about the last week.
Pylgrym
Pylgrym
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
13420 (5569, 98, 1) is also about 50% slower
CPU: Ryzen 9 3900X (1x21 CPUs) ~ GPU: nVidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Asus)
-
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:36 am
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
I have had 2 13420 units, first one took over 2 days, this current one says 1 day.
This is using an RTX2070 GPU.
CPU is an AMD 3900x with 64GB Ram.
Work units only run on GPU.
Current unit says 60500 credits for 1 days work.
Previous units were getting 150000 - 250000 for a few hours work, cannot recall which WU they were for comparison.
This is using an RTX2070 GPU.
CPU is an AMD 3900x with 64GB Ram.
Work units only run on GPU.
Current unit says 60500 credits for 1 days work.
Previous units were getting 150000 - 250000 for a few hours work, cannot recall which WU they were for comparison.
Re: Proj 13420 same variability as 13418
All projects run either entirely on the CPU threads or (almost) entirely on the GPU. [All GPU projects do require some support from a CPU thread but the heavy computing work is done entriely on the GPU.]
Projects 134xx are GPU projects.
See the 7th column on https://apps.foldingathome.org/psummary The last two digits are either _2n (for GPUs) or _An (for CPUs).
Projects 134xx are GPU projects.
See the 7th column on https://apps.foldingathome.org/psummary The last two digits are either _2n (for GPUs) or _An (for CPUs).
Posting FAH's log:
How to provide enough info to get helpful support.
How to provide enough info to get helpful support.