Folding Forum

For Bruce and derrickmcc......

It is now 4 hrs 20 min since 7.1.52 started.

Project 6896 is already at 5.61% with a TPF of 38 min 1 sec and ETA of 2.5 days.

Project 6888 is at 12.46% with TPF of 27 min 18 sec and ETA of 1.66 days.

Am I right that this appears to be better production than what was happening w/ 6.23 ?

Comments ?

barebear wrote:Project 6896 is already at 5.61% with a TPF of 38 min 1 sec and ETA of 2.5 days.

Project 6888 is at 12.46% with TPF of 27 min 18 sec and ETA of 1.66 days.

According to my calculations you're only just making it before the ETA. So provided there are no slowdowns, you should do fine

For iceman 1992.......

For project 6888 it shows an assigned of 5 1 12 and timeout of 5 15 12 and is already 18.66% complete after running for app. 6 hrs 45 min since started earlier at 2 PM today -- it's now 845 PM .

For project 6896 started and running for the same time, it shows assigned 5 1 12 and timeout of 5 28 12

Doesn't the ETA mean the estimated time frame in which the project will be complete ?

barebear wrote:Doesn't the ETA mean the estimated time frame in which the project will be complete ?

Whoopssss. Yes it does. Sorry about that.
I read the ETA as the deadline. Was quite busy so I wasn't concentrating. Sorry

Whew ! I was getting worried.

Yeah really sorry about that. I was also doing some college work so I misread your post
How's the progress?

For iceman1992.....

It is now about 18 1/2 hrs since installation/startup of the 2 jobs.

Project 6896 is at 25.54% TPF 38 min 16 sec and ETA of 1.98 days.

Project 6888 is at 52.54% TPF 27min 21 sec and ETA of 21 hr 37min.

Whatcha think compared to the 6.23 config ?

It appears to be better (considering it's folding 2 units). But the only performance info I know of your 6.23 config is

barebear wrote:project 6897 ( 392, 0, 78 ) with a TPF of 34-35 min.

That is from the 6.23, correct?

So it's not so clear, as different WUs even from the same project may have slight variations in TPF.
And did you try folding 2 uniprocessors on 6.23?

You are comparing SMP vs UNI projects which will have different TPF's and that makes for difficult comparisons. Rather, may I suggest using the total estimated PPD as the comparison statistic.

For P5-133XL and iceman1992.....

Thank you for helping!

iceman...

barebear wrote:project 6897 ( 392, 0, 78 ) with a TPF of 34-35 min.


That is from the 6.23, correct?

--- yes, and only 1 uniproc. on 6.23 -- Bruce had said somewhere else that it could be done but I didn't try because the procedure seemed too complicated.

For both of you...

Estimated PPD for project 6896 now is 622.08 with TPF of 3 min 7sec and ETA of 2hr 34 min and currently showing 50.80% complete.

Estimated PPD for project 6888 now is 10.94 with TPF of 1hr 30 min and ETA of 2.88 days and currently showing 54.36% complete.


The numbers seem to have radically changed for both from my earlier posts re these 2 projects ? !

Its 3PM ( 25 hrs since install/start ) and the numbers have changed again.

Project 6888 is now TPF 57 min 21 sec ETA 1.76 days and est PPD 17.32 55.90% complete

Project 6896 is now TPF 1 hr 55 min ETA 5.86 days and est PPD 16.78 27.24% complete

You should see the log to find the TPF. The client estimations are way off most of the time, it varies wildly.

Amazing !

The log TPF for 6888 is app. 23 min, for 6896 app. 26 min 45 sec

iceman1992 wrote:You should see the log to find the TPF. The client estimations are way off most of the time, it varies wildly.

Please provide details of your situation in a new topic. For me, the FAHContol reported TPFs are accurate after I've completed 3 or more frames unless the actual processing speed varies wildly.

bruce wrote:

iceman1992 wrote:You should see the log to find the TPF. The client estimations are way off most of the time, it varies wildly.

Please provide details of your situation in a new topic. For me, the FAHContol reported TPFs are accurate after I've completed 3 or more frames unless the actual processing speed varies wildly.

Okay will do