Pande Team PPD!!!

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

shiryunaga
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:51 am
Hardware configuration: Intel Core i3 2100 3092.91 MHz (99.77 x 31.0)
Location: indonesia
Contact:

project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by shiryunaga »

see psummary page http://fah-web.stanford.edu/psummary.html and found this list :twisted:
kasson
Pande Group Member
Posts: 1459
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:37 pm

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by kasson »

Yes. It also takes 3 days to run on a dedicated 8-core box. If you have such hardware and are interested in helping with these work units, let me know.
toTOW
Site Moderator
Posts: 6359
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France
Contact:

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by toTOW »

This WU shouldn't be displayed on psummary :? ... also, the server doesn't appear on the server status page ...
Image

Folding@Home beta tester since 2002. Folding Forum moderator since July 2008.
Leoslocks
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:20 am
Hardware configuration: Q6600 | P35-DQ6 | Crucial 2 x 1 GB ram | VisionTek 3870
GPU2 Version 6.20| CPU three 6.20 Clients

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by Leoslocks »

These projects study how influenza virus recognizes and infects cells.
This is real important work with the viral climate in the world today. I am happy to get the regular Influenza WUs on a recent foray into VMware an ubuntu running SMP

Are the Linux machines the only ones getting these WUs?
bruce
Posts: 20824
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by bruce »

Leoslocks wrote:Are the Linux machines the only ones getting these WUs?
For now, it's Linux and MacOS. It turns out that there are a fair number of high-powered Macs containing dual quads. I don't think there many machines of that class running Windows that could be dedicated to FAH, but if there are, I'm sure Kasson would be happy to hear about them. If the resource is out there, the Pande Group does a good job of figuring out how to use it.
TomJohnson
Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:29 am
Hardware configuration: iMac Pro Xeon W 16 core, i7 3.20 GHz, 64 GB RAM, OS V 10.14.5, ! TB SSD
iMac i5-7500 8 core 3.4 GHz, 8 GB RAM, OS V 10.14.5, 1 TB Fusion HD
Mac Pro X5675 12 core, i7 3.06 GHz, 52 GB RAM, OS 10.13.6, 1 TB HD, Cinema 30" + 23"
Mac Pro Intel Xeon Dual Quad 3.2 GHz, 16 GB RAM, OS 10.10.5, 512 GB HD
plus 44 more
Location: Oak Harbor, WA

p2681

Post by TomJohnson »

How are these WUs being assigned ???
Last edited by kasson on Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Threads merged--K
iMac 15,1 27" 5K Retina Intel i7 4.0 GHz Dual Quad 24 GB RAM 1 TB Fusion OS 10.10
Mac Pro 5,1 3.06 GHz 12 Core 52 Gig RAM OS 10.9.5 -- Plus 20 more
Image
.Ak47
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 8:05 pm

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by .Ak47 »

how long would this take on a mac mini?
kasson
Pande Group Member
Posts: 1459
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:37 pm

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by kasson »

You can't run it on a mac mini. It requires 8 or more cores. Sorry.
Brian Redoutey
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:09 pm
Hardware configuration: Dual Processor 2Ghz G5 Rev. A (video production system)
AthlonXP 2800 Asus A7n8X-X (3D modeling system)
only a poor artist blames their tools.
Location: Michigan

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by Brian Redoutey »

Those units look insane. According to the math, 265 points an hour. I'm going to guess a half gig of RAM per thread, maybe more. If they're pushing the hardware as hard as I think, it's worth the points :>

The only thing I can think of that would run these is stuff in a film/animation studio or hooked up to a CT/MRI scanner. The highest end Mac systems would run them.
I forgot what i had in here last time.
bruce
Posts: 20824
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by bruce »

Brian Redoutey wrote:Those units look insane.
Maybe, but science keeps asking questions that are harder and harder to answer.
smASHer88
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:33 pm
Location: Shepparton, Victoria, Australia
Contact:

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by smASHer88 »

call me dumb.. but can't these sorta work units be 'cut down to size' ? Like i would think it'd be better to have work units that take less than a day to process continually being returned rather than large work units which only increase the chance of it not being returned (errors during processing... power outages etc.). I know with the PS3 client i'd rather receive 4 x 250 point WUs than one of the 32hr 1,250 point WUs simply if i have a power outage.. my PPD goes way down.. but also, the WU has to be re-dealt and keeps delaying it's return.
Cheers

Aussie Rules Footy | Team 52735
smASHer88 - AMD64 3500+ 2.2GHz 2GB WinXP Pro SP2 5.04
Lahm_Family - Apple MacBook Pro 13" 2.26GHz 2GB SMP
smASHer88_PS3 & Lahm_Family_PS3 - both 40GB PAL PS3s
Image
7im
Posts: 10179
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by 7im »

Yes, but splitting up the WUs in to smaller chunks increases the work load at Stanford. First to split them, then the server load to send them out, and get them back, and then to reassemble. If you split that big WU in to 4 chunks, the load increases exponentially. And what happens if 1 of those 4 pieces (or all 4) goes to a slower computer? Or goes to a fast computer that is overclocked just a bit too much, and EUEs that same WU 3 times...? So it isn't always faster to send out more or smaller pieces.

Look at it this way... if the SMP client, which currently defaults to using 4 cores is better and faster at processing larger chunks of data than a single core CPU client, then a work unit which requires 8 cores probably improves the size and speed again.

Also consider that after folding this Really Big WU for 3 days, you get 25K+ points. What's your SMP client get in 3 days time? ;)
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
bruce
Posts: 20824
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by bruce »

smASHer88 wrote:call me dumb.. but can't these sorta work units be 'cut down to size' ?
I notice that this project does not show the number of atoms. I suspect that the number is very large, in comparison to the projects that we're used to running. There's no doubt that many interesting proteins are much larger than we've been processing and there's no way to fold half a protein. If I'm right about the number of atoms, the simple answer will be: No.

Time to buy some new hardware. ;)
jack57000
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:25 pm
Hardware configuration: http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/ ... =&u=129842
quad opteron 8354 on s4985-si // qx 6850 // dual opteron 2352 ....
Location: Indian ocean

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by jack57000 »

is there some available ?

i am interested to try

16 cores under linux

Image Image
Brian Redoutey
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:09 pm
Hardware configuration: Dual Processor 2Ghz G5 Rev. A (video production system)
AthlonXP 2800 Asus A7n8X-X (3D modeling system)
only a poor artist blames their tools.
Location: Michigan

Re: project 2681 = 25403 point

Post by Brian Redoutey »

Wow. That is a NICE mobo.....and I'm pretty sure it's not consumer level. Which makes me want to ask, is it a Tyan? What northbridge are you running? The RAM slot positions are somewhat a give away :) you don't play Solitaire on something like that ;)
I forgot what i had in here last time.
Post Reply