Folding Forum

Posted: **Tue May 06, 2008 3:05 am**

Heads up for three *more* 'bonused' AMBER Core WUs coming online:
p4528, p4529, and p4530. As always, see: http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/fahproject?p=4528 for point details.

Vince
Pande Lab

Posted: **Tue May 06, 2008 4:38 am**

Once they projects appear on psummary, they'll automatically be added to fahinfo.org

Oops, I actually meant to add your cpu times. I should have been more clear. But it appears they may vary a bit in completion times anyway between different run/clone/gens. The Athlon XP, Athlon X2 and Pentium M I added to 4521 were all the exact same WU i moved around between machines, and it scaled about how I'd expect. The Pentium M is a bit lower than I thought, but it's never been known for its strong FPU.

Posted: **Wed May 07, 2008 2:46 am**

I noticed that on fahinfo.org that the penryn is getting a much higher score than conroe on the same 4521 WU 124.97 /ghz vs 74.14 /ghz. Differences between RCG? Bus speed? Radix-16 divider at work? Fluke? It's only 1 penryn score so who knows, but more evidence will come eventually.

Posted: **Wed May 07, 2008 4:59 am**

Jeff_Grant wrote:I noticed that on fahinfo.org that the penryn is getting a much higher score than conroe on the same 4521 WU 124.97 /ghz vs 74.14 /ghz. Differences between RCG? Bus speed? Radix-16 divider at work? Fluke? It's only 1 penryn score so who knows, but more evidence will come eventually.

Ambers do not use SSE optimizations, so it's all hard math to crunch, so Radix-16 may be coming in to play. Radix-16 does double the speed of some math calculations over Conroe. But no way to tell for sure if that is the reason, yet.

For those not familiar with Radix-16... Intel’s Radix-16 divider is a new divider technique providing double the divider speed over previous processors when handling math computations (both floating-point and integer operations): 4-bits processed per cycle in Penryn versus 2-bits per cycle in Conroe processors.

Posted: **Wed May 07, 2008 5:12 am**

Just to follow up on my post yesterday regarding the variability I was seeing in Project 4520 WUs. The 4 WUs in that post have now all completed and the variability (spread) was even greater than forecast yesterday. To recap, these 4 WUs were all started at the same time on the same dedicated folder, a Q6600 running the Linux 6.02beta1 client. All were Project 4520, Clone 66, Gen 2. Only the Run numbers were different. Their final times to completion were: (HH:MM:SS)
1) Run 22: 22:26:14
2) Run 17: 32:30:04
3) Run 24: 20:54:29
4) Run 20: 26:05:50
Note that the largest difference was 11:35:35 between #2 and #3, which took 55% longer than #2. I have only been folding just over a year, but that is rather more variability than I remember noticing before. Of course, Your Mileage May (and probably WILL) Vary.

Greg

Posted: **Wed May 07, 2008 5:26 am**

GTron wrote:Just to follow up on my post yesterday regarding the variability I was seeing in Project 4520 WUs. The 4 WUs in that post have now all completed and the variability (spread) was even greater than forecast yesterday. To recap, these 4 WUs were all started at the same time on the same dedicated folder, a Q6600 running the Linux 6.02beta1 client. All were Project 4520, Clone 66, Gen 2. Only the Run numbers were different. Their final times to completion were: (HH:MM:SS)
1) Run 22: 22:26:14
2) Run 17: 32:30:04
3) Run 24: 20:54:29
4) Run 20: 26:05:50
Note that the largest difference was 11:35:35 between #2 and #3, which took 55% longer than #2. I have only been folding just over a year, but that is rather more variability than I remember noticing before. Of course, Your Mileage May (and probably WILL) Vary.

Greg

Yes, these WUs are known to vary, but with the bonus, the points should be quite nice for the average times that you'll get after you've done serveral. Your average is 25:29:09. At 178.94 points each, that's 168.5 PPD average. How does that compare to other uniprocessor WUs on your hardware?

Posted: **Wed May 07, 2008 6:16 am**

Actually Bruce, I can't really say how the points for these 4 4520 WUs compare to other uniprocessor WUs on my hardware. I normally have my quads running SMP. This folder is a new build and when Vijay said "In the near future, we will be releasing some new projects which require a very rapid turn-around time. These are peptide fragment simulations which we are interested in simulating for a time-sensitive collaborative project involving protein structure prediction." (my emphasis), I took it as somewhat of a rallying cry for additional capable clients for a scientifically important cause. So it's now running the standard clients (though I would expect it to earn more points if it were folding SMP WUs).

In any case, I was posting about the variability to provide a, limited, quantitative view of it. It is all too easy to fold one WU of a project and expect the next WU of that project to take close to the same amount of time. In this case though, as you point out, one needs to take a longer view and consider how it averages out over a larger number of WUs. Call it managing expectations...

Fold On

Greg

Posted: **Wed May 07, 2008 6:25 am**

Yes, Dr. Pande is (more or less) making an "all-hands" call to get these AMBER projects going on as many clients as we can. They need to fold a really HUGE set of projects in a very short time.

The points analysis wasn't just for you. Other people read these threads, too.

Posted: **Thu May 08, 2008 10:32 pm**

bruce wrote:Yes, Dr. Pande is (more or less) making an "all-hands" call to get these AMBER projects going on as many clients as we can. They need to fold a really HUGE set of projects in a very short time.

Four of my six cores were folding AMBER units this morning. The other two had some jumbo-sized GROMACS WUs.

Posted: **Thu May 08, 2008 10:43 pm**

I can't seem to get them with my v6 CPU SysTray client, even after making a new shortcut to add -advmethods. Anyone else get them with a SysTray client?

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2008 3:55 am**

Just today I have three projects running on a Q6600 along with a Systray GPU2 client. With the Systray GPU client, I am not savy enough to get the 6.10 client to run as systray.

Project: 4530 (Run 52, Clone 16, Gen 1) 175 PPD
Project: 4530 (Run 23, Clone 47, Gen 0) 166 PPD
Project: 4530 (Run 23, Clone 42, Gen 0) 171 PPD

Along with Project: 4713 (Run 0, Clone 3, Gen 0) estimating 2200 PPD.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2008 4:55 am**

7im wrote:I can't seem to get them with my v6 CPU SysTray client, even after making a new shortcut to add -advmethods. Anyone else get them with a SysTray client?

It took me a long time to get the new WUs; I got the first one last week (on a v5 GUI client WITHOUT the advmethods or big flags), and only started receiving them on my advmethod console clients yesterday (one v5, one v6). Still none on the GUI v6 though so I guess I'm in the same boat.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2008 9:18 am**

Due to popular demand

, three *more* 'bonused' AMBER Core WUs are coming online:
p4531, p4532, and p4533.

Like before, points at: http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/fahproject?p=4531

Vince
Pande Lab

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2008 10:12 pm**

theMASS wrote:
sneakers55 wrote:I've got a WU that is running on AMBER.

What I'd love to get is more for DOUBLE GROMACS B. My T7800 gets HOT but I'm getting about 780 PPD per core!
I think you'd be better off running SMP. My T9300 (2.5 GHz) does 880-925 PPD/Core.

I've had problems with F@H running SMP (more like NOT running it).

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 12:26 pm**

Is this a Core issue or a network issue? (or another issue)

[12:01:13] - Error: Length of work/wuresults_01.dat (44968604) exceeds packet limit set (26213376)

Code: Select all

[09:40:29] Project: 4411 (Run 26, Clone 14, Gen 80)
[09:40:29] 
[09:40:29] Assembly optimizations on if available.
[09:40:29] Entering M.D.
[09:40:35] Protein: p4411_Seq_46_unf_AMBER
[09:40:35] 
[09:40:35] Writing local files
[09:42:36] Extra SSE boost OK.
[09:42:36] Writing local files
[09:42:36] Completed 0 out of 150000 steps  (0%)
[09:43:58] Writing local files
[09:43:58] Completed 1500 out of 150000 steps  (1%)
[09:45:19] Writing local files
[09:45:19] Completed 3000 out of 150000 steps  (2%)
[09:46:41] Writing local files
[09:46:41] Completed 4500 out of 150000 steps  (3%)
[09:48:03] Writing local files
[09:48:03] Completed 6000 out of 150000 steps  (4%)
[09:49:26] Writing local files
[09:49:26] Completed 7500 out of 150000 steps  (5%)
[09:50:48] Writing local files
[09:50:48] Completed 9000 out of 150000 steps  (6%)
[09:52:10] Writing local files
[09:52:10] Completed 10500 out of 150000 steps  (7%)
[09:53:32] Writing local files
[09:53:32] Completed 12000 out of 150000 steps  (8%)
[09:54:55] Writing local files
[09:54:55] Completed 13500 out of 150000 steps  (9%)
[09:56:16] Writing local files
[09:56:16] Completed 15000 out of 150000 steps  (10%)
[09:57:40] Writing local files
[09:57:40] Completed 16500 out of 150000 steps  (11%)
[09:59:02] Writing local files
[09:59:02] Completed 18000 out of 150000 steps  (12%)
[10:00:24] Writing local files
[10:00:24] Completed 19500 out of 150000 steps  (13%)
[10:01:46] Writing local files
[10:01:46] Completed 21000 out of 150000 steps  (14%)
[10:03:09] Writing local files
[10:03:09] Completed 22500 out of 150000 steps  (15%)
[10:04:31] Writing local files
[10:04:31] Completed 24000 out of 150000 steps  (16%)
[10:05:53] Writing local files
[10:05:53] Completed 25500 out of 150000 steps  (17%)
[10:07:15] Writing local files
[10:07:15] Completed 27000 out of 150000 steps  (18%)
[10:08:38] Writing local files
[10:08:38] Completed 28500 out of 150000 steps  (19%)
[10:10:01] Writing local files
[10:10:01] Completed 30000 out of 150000 steps  (20%)
[10:11:23] Writing local files
[10:11:23] Completed 31500 out of 150000 steps  (21%)
[10:12:45] Writing local files
[10:12:45] Completed 33000 out of 150000 steps  (22%)
[10:14:08] Writing local files
[10:14:08] Completed 34500 out of 150000 steps  (23%)
[10:15:31] Writing local files
[10:15:31] Completed 36000 out of 150000 steps  (24%)
[10:16:53] Writing local files
[10:16:53] Completed 37500 out of 150000 steps  (25%)
[10:18:15] Writing local files
[10:18:15] Completed 39000 out of 150000 steps  (26%)
[10:19:36] Writing local files
[10:19:36] Completed 40500 out of 150000 steps  (27%)
[10:20:58] Writing local files
[10:20:58] Completed 42000 out of 150000 steps  (28%)
[10:22:19] Writing local files
[10:22:19] Completed 43500 out of 150000 steps  (29%)
[10:23:42] Writing local files
[10:23:42] Completed 45000 out of 150000 steps  (30%)
[10:25:06] Writing local files
[10:25:06] Completed 46500 out of 150000 steps  (31%)
[10:26:28] Writing local files
[10:26:28] Completed 48000 out of 150000 steps  (32%)
[10:27:49] Writing local files
[10:27:49] Completed 49500 out of 150000 steps  (33%)
[10:29:11] Writing local files
[10:29:11] Completed 51000 out of 150000 steps  (34%)
[10:30:33] Writing local files
[10:30:33] Completed 52500 out of 150000 steps  (35%)
[10:31:55] Writing local files
[10:31:55] Completed 54000 out of 150000 steps  (36%)
[10:33:17] Writing local files
[10:33:17] Completed 55500 out of 150000 steps  (37%)
[10:34:41] Writing local files
[10:34:41] Completed 57000 out of 150000 steps  (38%)
[10:36:03] Writing local files
[10:36:03] Completed 58500 out of 150000 steps  (39%)
[10:37:26] Writing local files
[10:37:26] Completed 60000 out of 150000 steps  (40%)
[10:38:47] Writing local files
[10:38:47] Completed 61500 out of 150000 steps  (41%)
[10:40:10] Writing local files
[10:40:10] Completed 63000 out of 150000 steps  (42%)
[10:41:32] Writing local files
[10:41:32] Completed 64500 out of 150000 steps  (43%)
[10:42:55] Writing local files
[10:42:55] Completed 66000 out of 150000 steps  (44%)
[10:44:17] Writing local files
[10:44:17] Completed 67500 out of 150000 steps  (45%)
[10:45:36] Writing local files
[10:45:36] Completed 69000 out of 150000 steps  (46%)
[10:46:52] Writing local files
[10:46:52] Completed 70500 out of 150000 steps  (47%)
[10:48:16] Writing local files
[10:48:16] Completed 72000 out of 150000 steps  (48%)
[10:49:38] Writing local files
[10:49:38] Completed 73500 out of 150000 steps  (49%)
[10:51:01] Writing local files
[10:51:01] Completed 75000 out of 150000 steps  (50%)
[10:52:24] Writing local files
[10:52:24] Completed 76500 out of 150000 steps  (51%)
[10:53:47] Writing local files
[10:53:47] Completed 78000 out of 150000 steps  (52%)
[10:55:10] Writing local files
[10:55:10] Completed 79500 out of 150000 steps  (53%)
[10:56:33] Writing local files
[10:56:33] Completed 81000 out of 150000 steps  (54%)
[10:57:57] Writing local files
[10:57:57] Completed 82500 out of 150000 steps  (55%)
[10:59:21] Writing local files
[10:59:21] Completed 84000 out of 150000 steps  (56%)
[11:00:45] Writing local files
[11:00:45] Completed 85500 out of 150000 steps  (57%)
[11:02:07] Writing local files
[11:02:07] Completed 87000 out of 150000 steps  (58%)
[11:03:30] Writing local files
[11:03:30] Completed 88500 out of 150000 steps  (59%)
[11:04:52] Writing local files
[11:04:52] Completed 90000 out of 150000 steps  (60%)
[11:06:15] Writing local files
[11:06:15] Completed 91500 out of 150000 steps  (61%)
[11:07:37] Writing local files
[11:07:37] Completed 93000 out of 150000 steps  (62%)
[11:09:01] Writing local files
[11:09:01] Completed 94500 out of 150000 steps  (63%)
[11:10:24] Writing local files
[11:10:24] Completed 96000 out of 150000 steps  (64%)
[11:11:47] Writing local files
[11:11:47] Completed 97500 out of 150000 steps  (65%)
[11:13:11] Writing local files
[11:13:11] Completed 99000 out of 150000 steps  (66%)
[11:14:33] Writing local files
[11:14:33] Completed 100500 out of 150000 steps  (67%)
[11:15:57] Writing local files
[11:15:57] Completed 102000 out of 150000 steps  (68%)
[11:17:19] Writing local files
[11:17:19] Completed 103500 out of 150000 steps  (69%)
[11:18:42] Writing local files
[11:18:42] Completed 105000 out of 150000 steps  (70%)
[11:20:05] Writing local files
[11:20:05] Completed 106500 out of 150000 steps  (71%)
[11:21:29] Writing local files
[11:21:29] Completed 108000 out of 150000 steps  (72%)
[11:22:52] Writing local files
[11:22:52] Completed 109500 out of 150000 steps  (73%)
[11:24:15] Writing local files
[11:24:15] Completed 111000 out of 150000 steps  (74%)
[11:25:37] Writing local files
[11:25:37] Completed 112500 out of 150000 steps  (75%)
[11:27:00] Writing local files
[11:27:00] Completed 114000 out of 150000 steps  (76%)
[11:28:23] Writing local files
[11:28:23] Completed 115500 out of 150000 steps  (77%)
[11:29:45] Writing local files
[11:29:45] Completed 117000 out of 150000 steps  (78%)
[11:31:07] Writing local files
[11:31:07] Completed 118500 out of 150000 steps  (79%)
[11:32:30] Writing local files
[11:32:30] Completed 120000 out of 150000 steps  (80%)
[11:33:52] Writing local files
[11:33:52] Completed 121500 out of 150000 steps  (81%)
[11:35:15] Writing local files
[11:35:15] Completed 123000 out of 150000 steps  (82%)
[11:36:37] Writing local files
[11:36:37] Completed 124500 out of 150000 steps  (83%)
[11:37:59] Writing local files
[11:37:59] Completed 126000 out of 150000 steps  (84%)
[11:39:22] Writing local files
[11:39:22] Completed 127500 out of 150000 steps  (85%)
[11:40:45] Writing local files
[11:40:45] Completed 129000 out of 150000 steps  (86%)
[11:42:07] Writing local files
[11:42:07] Completed 130500 out of 150000 steps  (87%)
[11:43:30] Writing local files
[11:43:30] Completed 132000 out of 150000 steps  (88%)
[11:44:52] Writing local files
[11:44:52] Completed 133500 out of 150000 steps  (89%)
[11:46:16] Writing local files
[11:46:16] Completed 135000 out of 150000 steps  (90%)
[11:47:38] Writing local files
[11:47:38] Completed 136500 out of 150000 steps  (91%)
[11:49:01] Writing local files
[11:49:01] Completed 138000 out of 150000 steps  (92%)
[11:50:25] Writing local files
[11:50:25] Completed 139500 out of 150000 steps  (93%)
[11:51:47] Writing local files
[11:51:47] Completed 141000 out of 150000 steps  (94%)
[11:53:09] Writing local files
[11:53:09] Completed 142500 out of 150000 steps  (95%)
[11:54:31] Writing local files
[11:54:32] Completed 144000 out of 150000 steps  (96%)
[11:55:54] Writing local files
[11:55:54] Completed 145500 out of 150000 steps  (97%)
[11:57:17] Writing local files
[11:57:17] Completed 147000 out of 150000 steps  (98%)
[11:58:39] Writing local files
[11:58:39] Completed 148500 out of 150000 steps  (99%)
[12:00:01] Writing local files
[12:00:01] Completed 150000 out of 150000 steps  (100%)
[12:00:01] Writing final coordinates.
[12:00:01] Past main M.D. loop
[12:01:01] 
[12:01:01] Finished Work Unit:
[12:01:01] - Reading up to 377616 from "work/wudata_09.arc": Read 377616
[12:01:01] - Reading up to 169592 from "work/wudata_09.xtc": Read 169592
[12:01:01] goefile size: 0
[12:01:01] logfile size: 19222
[12:01:01] Leaving Run
[12:01:02] - Writing 1191293 bytes of core data to disk...
[12:01:02] Done: 1190781 -> 592033 (compressed to 49.7 percent)
[12:01:02]   ... Done.
[12:01:02] - Shutting down core
[12:01:02] 
[12:01:02] Folding@home Core Shutdown: FINISHED_UNIT
[12:01:04] CoreStatus = 64 (100)
[12:01:04] Sending work to server


[12:01:04] + Attempting to send results
[12:01:09] + Results successfully sent
[12:01:09] Thank you for your contribution to Folding@Home.
[12:01:09] + Number of Units Completed: 186

[12:01:13] - Error: Length of work/wuresults_01.dat (44968604) exceeds packet limit set (26213376)
[12:01:13] - Error: Could not transmit unit 01 (completed May 9) to work server.
[12:01:13] - Error: Length of work/wuresults_01.dat (44968604) exceeds packet limit set (26213376)
[12:01:13]   Could not transmit unit 01 to Collection server; keeping in queue.
[12:01:13] - Preparing to get new work unit...
[12:01:13] + Attempting to get work packet
[12:01:13] - Connecting to assignment server
[12:01:13] - Successful: assigned to (171.64.65.65).
[12:01:13] + News From Folding@Home: Welcome to Folding@Home
[12:01:13] Loaded queue successfully.
[12:01:25] - Error: Length of work/wuresults_01.dat (44968604) exceeds packet limit set (26213376)
[12:01:25] - Error: Could not transmit unit 01 (completed May 9) to work server.
[12:01:25] - Error: Length of work/wuresults_01.dat (44968604) exceeds packet limit set (26213376)
[12:01:25]   Could not transmit unit 01 to Collection server; keeping in queue.
[12:01:25] + Closed connections
[12:01:25] 
[12:01:25] + Processing work unit
[12:01:25] Core required: FahCore_78.exe
[12:01:25] Core found.
[12:01:25] Working on Unit 00 [May 13 12:01:25]
[12:01:25] + Working ...
[12:01:25] 
[12:01:25] *------------------------------*

Folding Forum

New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Re: New Bonus Amber Core WU's [-advmethods option]

Length of work exceeds packet limit