Folding Forum

Posted: **Tue May 19, 2015 6:06 am**

I'm slightly confused (not unusual, some would say)- according to this announcement of over a week ago and the spec of my clients I think I should be receiving at least a few Core_18 WUs amongst all the Core_17s, but I'm not getting them.

I realise this could be just a matter of luck, but usually I seem to get anything new fairly promptly and I'd like some reassurance that I haven't set something wrongly if possible?

(I'd like to keep an eye on at least the first few to make sure there are no problems)

edit- I'm also uncertain as to the status of Core_21, mpharrigan's post here rather implies it's out of beta.

General spec (3 PCs) is 64-bit Linux Mint 17.1, 2x GTX 980, 1x GTX 780Ti, drivers NV346.35, FAHClient v7.4.4, all clients set to advanced, sample config:

Code: Select all

12:44:06:************************* Folding@home Client *************************
12:44:06:    Website: http://folding.stanford.edu/
12:44:06:  Copyright: (c) 2009-2014 Stanford University
12:44:06:     Author: Joseph Coffland <joseph@cauldrondevelopment.com>
12:44:06:       Args: --child --lifeline 1529 /etc/fahclient/config.xml --run-as
12:44:06:             fahclient --pid-file=/var/run/fahclient.pid --daemon
12:44:06:     Config: /etc/fahclient/config.xml
12:44:06:******************************** Build ********************************
12:44:06:    Version: 7.4.4
12:44:06:       Date: Mar 4 2014
12:44:06:       Time: 12:02:38
12:44:06:    SVN Rev: 4130
12:44:06:     Branch: fah/trunk/client
12:44:06:   Compiler: GNU 4.4.7
12:44:06:    Options: -std=gnu++98 -O3 -funroll-loops -mfpmath=sse -ffast-math
12:44:06:             -fno-unsafe-math-optimizations -msse2
12:44:06:   Platform: linux2 3.2.0-1-amd64
12:44:06:       Bits: 64
12:44:06:       Mode: Release
12:44:06:******************************* System ********************************
12:44:06:        CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4430 CPU @ 3.00GHz
12:44:06:     CPU ID: GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 60 Stepping 3
12:44:06:       CPUs: 4
12:44:06:     Memory: 3.82GiB
12:44:06:Free Memory: 3.28GiB
12:44:06:    Threads: POSIX_THREADS
12:44:06: OS Version: 3.13
12:44:06:Has Battery: false
12:44:06: On Battery: false
12:44:06: UTC Offset: 1
12:44:06:        PID: 1531
12:44:06:        CWD: /var/lib/fahclient
12:44:06:         OS: Linux 3.13.0-37-generic x86_64
12:44:06:    OS Arch: AMD64
12:44:06:       GPUs: 1
12:44:06:      GPU 0: NVIDIA:5 GM204 [GeForce GTX 980]
12:44:06:       CUDA: 5.2
12:44:06:CUDA Driver: 7000
12:44:06:***********************************************************************
12:44:06:<config>
12:44:06:  <!-- Client Control -->
12:44:06:  <fold-anon v='true'/>
12:44:06:
12:44:06:  <!-- Folding Slot Configuration -->
12:44:06:  <gpu v='false'/>
12:44:06:
12:44:06:  <!-- HTTP Server -->
12:44:06:  <allow v='127.0.0.1 192.168.1.0/24'/>
12:44:06:
12:44:06:  <!-- Network -->
12:44:06:  <proxy v=':8080'/>
12:44:06:
12:44:06:  <!-- Remote Command Server -->
12:44:06:  <command-allow-no-pass v='127.0.0.1 192.168.1.0/24'/>
12:44:06:
12:44:06:  <!-- Slot Control -->
12:44:06:  <power v='full'/>
12:44:06:
12:44:06:  <!-- User Information -->
12:44:06:  <passkey v='********************************'/>
12:44:06:  <user v='[removed]'/>
12:44:06:
12:44:06:  <!-- Work Unit Control -->
12:44:06:  <next-unit-percentage v='100'/>
12:44:06:
12:44:06:  <!-- Folding Slots -->
12:44:06:  <slot id='0' type='CPU'>
12:44:06:    <client-type v='advanced'/>
12:44:06:    <cpus v='3'/>
12:44:06:  </slot>
12:44:06:  <slot id='1' type='GPU'>
12:44:06:    <client-type v='advanced'/>
12:44:06:  </slot>
12:44:06:</config>

Posted: **Mon May 25, 2015 9:07 pm**

bruce and vijay have urged caution on rolling out the new version (for windows users). To ease our cognitive load, this unfort. means the linux rollout will also be slowed.

Hang tight!

Posted: **Mon May 25, 2015 9:16 pm**

Ok thanks, no problem.

mpharrigan wrote:To ease our cognitive load

I like that phrase, I'm sure I can find a use for it elsewhere

Posted: **Mon May 25, 2015 10:33 pm**

billford wrote:I'm also uncertain as to the status of Core_21, mpharrigan's post here rather implies it's out of beta.

As you've probably heard before, the Pande Group never gives a prediction of when software will be released. Apparently mpharrigan forgot about that policy when he said "throughout this week."

Rest assured that Core_21 will be rolled out soon. The Work Servers that will soon distribute projects for that core currently show that they're not issuing WUs. It would be imprudent of me to suggest that nobody wanted to roll out anything new just before a holiday weekend, but that would suggest that my use of the word "soon" means "really soon" and I do not know that to necessarily be true.

Posted: **Mon May 25, 2015 10:40 pm**

Understood, thanks.

Posted: **Fri May 29, 2015 5:26 pm**

Sorry for the confusion. cxh and I have made announcements regarding rollout of core18 and core21

Posted: **Tue Jun 09, 2015 9:00 am**

I've been getting a few core_18 WUs on Linux and it's safe to say that the PPD is much worse than core_17, getting nearly 20% less PPD. Is this something that's likely to improve? I fold under Linux in order to avoid core_15 so I'll be a little upset if core_18 turns out to be its successor.

Posted: **Tue Jun 09, 2015 9:51 am**

BestPony wrote:I've been getting a few core_18 WUs on Linux and it's safe to say that the PPD is much worse than core_17, getting nearly 20% less PPD. Is this something that's likely to improve? I fold under Linux in order to avoid core_15 so I'll be a little upset if core_18 turns out to be its successor.

I'm not sure it's safe to say that it's much worse than Core_17, but it's certainly a lot more variable and possibly card-dependent. I'm also using Linux with 346.35 drivers.

On my GTX 780Ti (Kepler) a Core_17 would typically return ~220K PPD, Core_18s range from 210K-245K, ie about the same. Core_21s run at ~325K-350K, ie about 50% high.

A GTX 980 (Maxwell) on Core_17 was typically ~410K, Core_18s range from 335K (very low) to 580K (insane!). Core_21s run about the same as Core_17s but with a much wider variation (+/- 40K).

On the distribution of WUs I've had so far my overall PPD seems within a few percent of what it was before.

Posted: **Tue Jun 09, 2015 3:34 pm**

Cores 17. 18, 21 cannot be considered a successor to the lower PPD of Core 15 (at least lower on a fast machine). Core 15 gets a constant number of points no matter how quickly you finish it. (Half the time = double the PPD). The others get bonus points, where the total points awarded increases with speed. (twice the speed = MORE than double the PPD).

Posted: **Tue Jun 09, 2015 4:34 pm**

It's very simple. The work units are benchmarked on X hardware. If you have Y hardware, Y will run some work units faster than X, and some work units slower that X. Not all work units are the same size or same code. Some work units like the faster memory on X, and on some work units it makes no difference. Some work units like the bigger cache size on Y and run faster than X, and on some work units, it doesn't matter.

If you don't have the same hardware as X, the PPD will always vary. Nothing to be concerned about, or anything that can be done about it.

Posted: **Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:17 pm**

BestPony wrote:I've been getting a few core_18 WUs on Linux and it's safe to say that the PPD is much worse than core_17, getting nearly 20% less PPD. Is this something that's likely to improve? I fold under Linux in order to avoid core_15 so I'll be a little upset if core_18 turns out to be its successor.

Which GPU do you use to fold ?

Posted: **Wed Jun 10, 2015 5:22 pm**

You might want to go into the Advnced section under config (pause client first) and remove the GPU = False flag

Folding Forum

Linux Core_18

Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18

Re: Linux Core_18