Bigadv points change

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

road-runner
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:01 am
Location: Willis, Texas

Re: Bigadv points change

Post by road-runner »

Stanford has dangled the carrot several times over the years to get folks to upgrade hardware for more points but this is the final straw for me. Its been fun at times, aggravating, and expensive. Oh well time to move on life's to short for this crap, I hope the work I done helps someone somewhere down the road...
Image
Jester
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:03 pm

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by Jester »

soya_crack wrote:I just wanted to thank the whole F@H team. It proved that one can talk to pandegroup and they are listening to their community. Even though it was a only a small change, I hope it can motivate people to put their GPUs and their smaller CPUs back to work and help process science. Meanwhile I will put my sandy back to work on some bigadvs.

Thanks guys.

That'll be great,
if you overclock it hard enough it'll make up some of the shortfall on my rigs alone,
You really expect me to fire up several Gpu clients to try and do that ?
maybe we should now whine for the slower Bigadv rigs to be "eased out" to reduce the return times,
how about a 12 core minimum ?
Zagen30
Posts: 823
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:45 am
Hardware configuration: Core i7 3770K @3.5 GHz (not folding), 8 GB DDR3 @2133 MHz, 2xGTX 780 @1215 MHz, Windows 7 Pro 64-bit running 7.3.6 w/ 1xSMP, 2xGPU

4P E5-4650 @3.1 GHz, 64 GB DDR3 @1333MHz, Ubuntu Desktop 13.10 64-bit

Re: Bigadv points change

Post by Zagen30 »

Nathan_P wrote: It probably would have gone down better if the new points structure had been put in place for new projects ratehr than modifying existing ones. At the moment there are some mightly upset -bigadv folders who may end up pulling their hardware
Wouldn't that have introduced the aggravation of having projects running concurrently with wildly different PPD values? From past experience people don't like that, either, though the forewarning would probably have mitigated some of the snap judgments it seems people are making.
Image
mdk777
Posts: 480
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:12 am

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by mdk777 »

I just wanted to thank the whole F@H team. It proved that one can talk to pandegroup and they are listening to their community. Even though it was a only a small change, I hope it can motivate people to put their GPUs and their smaller CPUs back to work and help process science. Meanwhile I will put my sandy back to work on some bigadvs.
Time will certainly tell.

My guess is that production will fall. The number of people adverse to normalization will outpace those who embrace it.

Sure would be handy to have a continuous graph of TFOPS client statistics for just such occasions. :wink:

native 4376 And x86 6945 out of 459043 donors today.

Of course, this is down due to weather and holiday....had been pushing 9000 x86 TFLOPS for a while....
Last edited by mdk777 on Sat Jul 02, 2011 6:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Transparency and Accountability, the necessary foundation of any great endeavor!
orion
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:45 pm
Hardware configuration: 4p/4 MC ES @ 3.0GHz/32GB
4p/4x6128 @ 2.47GHz/32GB
2p/2 IL ES @ 2.7GHz/16GB
1p/8150/8GB
1p/1090T/4GB
Location: neither here nor there

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by orion »

Jester wrote:how about a 12 core minimum ?
That can be worked around.

How about shorter deadlines?
iustus quia...
Jester
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:03 pm

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by Jester »

orion wrote:
Jester wrote:how about a 12 core minimum ?
That can be worked around.

How about shorter deadlines?
That would certainly weed out the "pretend" Bigadv systems and reduce the demand for Bigadv,
are you sure they would all go back to the regular Wu's like good little Folders ?
Nathan_P
Posts: 1164
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:22 pm
Hardware configuration: Asus Z8NA D6C, 2 x5670@3.2 Ghz, , 12gb Ram, GTX 980ti, AX650 PSU, win 10 (daily use)

Asus Z87 WS, Xeon E3-1230L v3, 8gb ram, KFA GTX 1080, EVGA 750ti , AX760 PSU, Mint 18.2 OS

Not currently folding
Asus Z9PE- D8 WS, 2 E5-2665@2.3 Ghz, 16Gb 1.35v Ram, Ubuntu (Fold only)
Asus Z9PA, 2 Ivy 12 core, 16gb Ram, H folding appliance (fold only)
Location: Jersey, Channel islands

Re: Bigadv points change

Post by Nathan_P »

Zagen30 wrote:
Nathan_P wrote: It probably would have gone down better if the new points structure had been put in place for new projects ratehr than modifying existing ones. At the moment there are some mightly upset -bigadv folders who may end up pulling their hardware
Wouldn't that have introduced the aggravation of having projects running concurrently with wildly different PPD values? From past experience people don't like that, either, though the forewarning would probably have mitigated some of the snap judgments it seems people are making.
We have already had that issue with 2684 and again when 6903/6904 came out. We also see it across regular SMP projects as well.
Image
Nathan_P
Posts: 1164
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:22 pm
Hardware configuration: Asus Z8NA D6C, 2 x5670@3.2 Ghz, , 12gb Ram, GTX 980ti, AX650 PSU, win 10 (daily use)

Asus Z87 WS, Xeon E3-1230L v3, 8gb ram, KFA GTX 1080, EVGA 750ti , AX760 PSU, Mint 18.2 OS

Not currently folding
Asus Z9PE- D8 WS, 2 E5-2665@2.3 Ghz, 16Gb 1.35v Ram, Ubuntu (Fold only)
Asus Z9PA, 2 Ivy 12 core, 16gb Ram, H folding appliance (fold only)
Location: Jersey, Channel islands

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by Nathan_P »

orion wrote:
Jester wrote:how about a 12 core minimum ?
That can be worked around.

How about shorter deadlines?
12 cores is not enough, i have a pair of 24 core machines (12c/24t) and a fair few on one of the teams i fold for have far more powerful machines than that.

12 cores should be for regular -bigadv, and 24 for the big -bigadv
Image
Jonazz
Posts: 353
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:08 pm

Re: Bigadv points change

Post by Jonazz »

road-runner wrote:Stanford has dangled the carrot several times over the years to get folks to upgrade hardware for more points but this is the final straw for me. Its been fun at times, aggravating, and expensive. Oh well time to move on life's to short for this crap, I hope the work I done helps someone somewhere down the road...
Man, that's selfish. Sure you might earn less points than before, but the science being done is 100% the same! I can understand all the fuss here, but come on, we're all folding for the science right? I have no problem running a unicore client because I know it's helping them fighting these horrible diseases.
orion
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:45 pm
Hardware configuration: 4p/4 MC ES @ 3.0GHz/32GB
4p/4x6128 @ 2.47GHz/32GB
2p/2 IL ES @ 2.7GHz/16GB
1p/8150/8GB
1p/1090T/4GB
Location: neither here nor there

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by orion »

Jester wrote:That would certainly weed out the "pretend" Bigadv systems and reduce the demand for Bigadv,
are you sure they would all go back to the regular Wu's like good little Folders ?
Who knows? It's up to the individual what he/she wants to do with their systems, if they are in it for the points or for the science.

As far as "pretend" bigadv systems go, if they make the preferred deadline they make the preferred deadline. If PG wanted to eliminate them fully they would have shortened the deadlines.
iustus quia...
Jester
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:03 pm

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by Jester »

Nathan_P wrote:
orion wrote:
Jester wrote:how about a 12 core minimum ?
That can be worked around.

How about shorter deadlines?
12 cores is not enough, i have a pair of 24 core machines (12c/24t) and a fair few on one of the teams i fold for have far more powerful machines than that.

12 cores should be for regular -bigadv, and 24 for the big -bigadv
I could easily go along with that too....
All my rigs including the SR-2 are running Win7/64 anyway as they do on occasion other tasks from time to time,
Those new big-bigadv units are Linux only anyway.... :)
road-runner
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:01 am
Location: Willis, Texas

Re: Bigadv points change

Post by road-runner »

JonazzDJ wrote:
road-runner wrote:Stanford has dangled the carrot several times over the years to get folks to upgrade hardware for more points but this is the final straw for me. Its been fun at times, aggravating, and expensive. Oh well time to move on life's to short for this crap, I hope the work I done helps someone somewhere down the road...
Man, that's selfish. Sure you might earn less points than before, but the science being done is 100% the same! I can understand all the fuss here, but come on, we're all folding for the science right? I have no problem running a unicore client because I know it's helping them fighting these horrible diseases.
Rather selfish the way they treat the folks that support them, I have been down to just one rig running anyway so its no big deal they wont even miss me. There will be new folks come along that will spend big money every time to upgrade for the things stanford wants done. Hey at least they didnt just drop it all together this time, people are still able to use the hardware and get something.

I a all for helping diseases just doing it with a different project...
Image
orion
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:45 pm
Hardware configuration: 4p/4 MC ES @ 3.0GHz/32GB
4p/4x6128 @ 2.47GHz/32GB
2p/2 IL ES @ 2.7GHz/16GB
1p/8150/8GB
1p/1090T/4GB
Location: neither here nor there

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by orion »

Nathan_P wrote:12 cores is not enough, i have a pair of 24 core machines (12c/24t) and a fair few on one of the teams i fold for have far more powerful machines than that.

12 cores should be for regular -bigadv, and 24 for the big -bigadv
What you have is a pair of 12 core machines that run 24 threads each.

I bet Intel doesn't market them as 12 core cpu’s :wink:
iustus quia...
Jester
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:03 pm

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by Jester »

orion wrote:
Jester wrote:That would certainly weed out the "pretend" Bigadv systems and reduce the demand for Bigadv,
are you sure they would all go back to the regular Wu's like good little Folders ?
Who knows? It's up to the individual what he/she wants to do with their systems, if they are in it for the points or for the science.

As far as "pretend" bigadv systems go, if they make the preferred deadline they make the preferred deadline. If PG wanted to eliminate them fully they would have shortened the deadlines.
don't give them any more "good idea's" right now though,
Ok....
orion
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:45 pm
Hardware configuration: 4p/4 MC ES @ 3.0GHz/32GB
4p/4x6128 @ 2.47GHz/32GB
2p/2 IL ES @ 2.7GHz/16GB
1p/8150/8GB
1p/1090T/4GB
Location: neither here nor there

Re: point system is getting ridiculous...

Post by orion »

Jester wrote:don't give them any more "good idea's" right now though,
Ok....
Don't worry, they ignore me anyway.

I'm the big bad AMD x6 bigadv guy :lol:
iustus quia...
Post Reply