Low points

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Post Reply
russell hayward
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:59 am

Low points

Post by russell hayward »

Had a few very low points returns lately. Can a mod check if there is a problem ?

Code: Select all

23:20:51:WU00:FS00:Final credit estimate, 7514.00 points
23:20:51:WU00:FS00:Cleaning up
23:23:45:WU01:FS00:0xa4:Completed 2500 out of 250000 steps  (1%)
05:09:45:WU01:FS00:0xa4:Completed 245000 out of 250000 steps  (98%)
05:09:45:WU00:FS00:Connecting to assign3.stanford.edu:8080
05:09:46:WU00:FS00:News: Welcome to Folding@Home
05:09:46:WU00:FS00:Assigned to work server 128.143.231.202
05:09:46:WU00:FS00:Requesting new work unit for slot 00: RUNNING cpu:4 from 128.143.231.202
05:09:46:WU00:FS00:Connecting to 128.143.231.202:8080
05:09:47:WU00:FS00:Downloading 3.67MiB
05:09:51:WU00:FS00:Download complete
05:09:51:WU00:FS00:Received Unit: id:00 state:DOWNLOAD error:NO_ERROR project:8580 run:0 clone:3 gen:107 core:0xa3 unit:0x0000056d0a3b1e595122609dd209ba40
05:13:14:WU01:FS00:0xa4:Completed 247500 out of 250000 steps  (99%)
05:16:46:WU01:FS00:0xa4:Completed 250000 out of 250000 steps  (100%)
05:16:47:WU01:FS00:0xa4:DynamicWrapper: Finished Work Unit: sleep=10000
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:Finished Work Unit:
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:- Reading up to 1567212 from "01/wudata_01.trr": Read 1567212
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:trr file hash check passed.
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:- Reading up to 1758704 from "01/wudata_01.xtc": Read 1758704
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:xtc file hash check passed.
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:edr file hash check passed.
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:logfile size: 27968
05:16:57:WU01:FS00:0xa4:Leaving Run
05:17:01:WU01:FS00:0xa4:- Writing 3363312 bytes of core data to disk...
05:17:02:WU01:FS00:0xa4:Done: 3362800 -> 3245242 (compressed to 96.5 percent)
05:17:02:WU01:FS00:0xa4:  ... Done.
05:17:02:WU01:FS00:0xa4:- Shutting down core
05:17:02:WU01:FS00:0xa4:
05:17:02:WU01:FS00:0xa4:Folding@home Core Shutdown: FINISHED_UNIT
05:17:04:WU01:FS00:FahCore returned: FINISHED_UNIT (100 = 0x64)
05:17:04:WU01:FS00:Sending unit results: id:01 state:SEND error:NO_ERROR project:8702 run:6 clone:23 gen:20 core:0xa4 unit:0x000000166652edb35196ea18e16e8b51
05:17:04:WU01:FS00:Uploading 3.10MiB to 171.67.108.35
05:17:04:WU01:FS00:Connecting to 171.67.108.35:8080
05:17:04:WU00:FS00:Starting
05:17:04:WU00:FS00:Running FahCore: "C:\Program Files (x86)\FAHClient/FAHCoreWrapper.exe" C:/Users/russell.ELCONMENA/AppData/Roaming/FAHClient/cores/www.stanford.edu/~pande/Win32/AMD64/Core_a3.fah/FahCore_a3.exe -dir 00 -suffix 01 -version 703 -lifeline 6820 -checkpoint 15 -np 4
05:17:04:WU00:FS00:Started FahCore on PID 396
05:17:04:WU00:FS00:Core PID:9000
05:17:04:WU00:FS00:FahCore 0xa3 started
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:*------------------------------*
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Folding@Home Gromacs SMP Core
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Version 2.27 (Dec. 15, 2010)
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Preparing to commence simulation
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:- Looking at optimizations...
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:- Created dyn
05:17:05:WU00:FS00:0xa3:- Files status OK
05:17:06:WU00:FS00:0xa3:- Expanded 3850447 -> 4387808 (decompressed 113.9 percent)
05:17:06:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Called DecompressByteArray: compressed_data_size=3850447 data_size=4387808, decompressed_data_size=4387808 diff=0
05:17:06:WU00:FS00:0xa3:- Digital signature verified
05:17:06:WU00:FS00:0xa3:
05:17:06:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Project: 8580 (Run 0, Clone 3, Gen 107)
05:17:06:WU00:FS00:0xa3:
05:17:06:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Assembly optimizations on if available.
05:17:06:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Entering M.D.
05:17:10:WU01:FS00:Upload 16.15%
05:17:12:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Mapping NT from 4 to 4 
05:17:13:WU00:FS00:0xa3:Completed 0 out of 500000 steps  (0%)
05:17:16:WU01:FS00:Upload 32.31%
05:17:22:WU01:FS00:Upload 48.46%
05:17:28:WU01:FS00:Upload 66.63%
05:17:34:WU01:FS00:Upload 82.78%
05:17:40:WU01:FS00:Upload 100.00%
05:17:41:WU01:FS00:Upload complete
05:17:41:WU01:FS00:Server responded WORK_ACK (400)
[b][size=150]05:17:41:WU01:FS00:Final credit estimate, 906.00 points[/size][/b]
05:17:41:WU01:FS00:Cleaning up
bollix47
Posts: 2965
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:04 am
Location: Canada

Re: Low points

Post by bollix47 »

If you post the System Info and Config sections of your log as explained here we will have a look.

The work unit in your log was updated successfully:

Hi Russell_Hayward (team 173855),
Your WU (P8702 R6 C23 G20) was added to the stats database on 2013-07-04 23:04:18 for 997.037 points of credit.

The a4 work units are currently enjoying a 10% bonus which is why the actual points credit was more than what the client reported.

Was your PPD lower than what you normally see? On the surface it doesn't appear that anything is wrong ... just a smaller work unit.
russell hayward
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:59 am

Re: Low points

Post by russell hayward »

Have 3 machines running fairly similar PPD according to the clients

If you look at my stats history it seems one ? is returning 900 points which doesnt seem correct ?
kiore
Posts: 924
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 5:45 pm
Location: USA

Re: Low points

Post by kiore »

russell hayward wrote:Have 3 machines running fairly similar PPD according to the clients

If you look at my stats history it seems one ? is returning 900 points which doesnt seem correct ?
Not really much to comment on, what kind of machines, what OS, configured how, running for how long..
You could try following the advice in the previous post and give us some details so we can help.

edit Oh I see this:
23:20:51:WU00:FS00:Final credit estimate, 7514.00 points and you got 900. Looks like you did not receive a quick return bonus, do you have a passkey and have you 'qualified it?
2nd edit ok maybe you are referring to this one:
05:17:41:WU01:FS00:Server responded WORK_ACK (400)
05:17:41:WU01:FS00:Final credit estimate, 906.00 points .. a smaller unit or one that was delayed or something. I see you have another answer below so will leave this.
Last edited by kiore on Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:50 am, edited 2 times in total.
Image
i7 7800x RTX 3070 OS= win10. AMD 3700x RTX 2080ti OS= win10 .

Team page: https://www.rationalskepticism.org/viewtopic.php?t=616
bollix47
Posts: 2965
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:04 am
Location: Canada

Re: Low points

Post by bollix47 »

I've looked at your last returns for your three machines and can see nothing wrong. They all appear to be receiving the proper bonus.

Let's assume for the sake of an example that your clients are each getting 2000 PPD and all 3 computers are running 24 hours a day.

Machine A gets a work unit that takes a day to complete and should receive around 2000 points credit.
Machine B gets a work unit from a different project that only takes 12 hours. The credit for that work unit would be around 1000 points but because you can do two of them in 24 hours your PPD is still 2000.
Machine C gets a work unit that it can complete in 8 hours. The credit will be around 666 points but for these you can complete 3 in a day so your PPD is still 2000.

If you look at the Project Summary (link at top of forum page) you will see the list of projects and their respective points. Different projects earn different points and take different amounts of time to complete depending on the project, the specs of the computer involved and the number of hours per day that your computer is running folding@home. Without knowing the computer specs and your configuration info we cannot be more specific with our help.

If all three computers are similar take a look at the Config section for each one to see what, if anything, is different. Please remember that it is PG who decides which projects they want run and as such any project can be given a higher priority at any time.
Post Reply