Folding Forum

I'm just asking myself which project enjoys higher contribution, which project is "bigger", not better.

Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding@home ) says that FAH has an approximate speed of nearly 100 P-FLOPS, whereas Rosetta has a speed of 200 T-Flops ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta@home ).
According to the official FAH stats F@H has "only" approx. 106 T-Flops.

Sounds confusing to me - which project has the bigger capacity?!

I just looked at the fah stats and it says 106 PFlops (106215 TFlops) - So that makes fah about 500 times bigger

You left off part of the number, the F@H total is listed as 106,215 TFlops, or approximately 500 times as many as Rosetta.

You know what :
In Europe 106,215 means 106 DECIMAL 215 and not 106215 as one number.

Thank you for clarification!

The US standard punctuation format for large numbers is a decimal point to indicate the fractional part and commas to separate between hundreds, thousands, millions and so.

I heared that misunderstanding several times on the forum. Maybe to be more international the folding website wants to change that to have just 106215?

... or using the regional settings of browser used by user ...

No that would be even more confusing because then you would have english text with e.g. german numbers

It's not a "European" thing. UK is still part of Europe, even if only for a few years, and UK standard matches USA. It is certain countries (maybe even most countries) within Europe that use a comma as a decimal point.

The only solutions I have found it to either write 106215 as one number. or as 106 215 but either one needs some brainpower to interpret. Even the unambiguous 106 P-FLOPS vs 200 T-Flops takes some though.

The contribution by users to rosetta@home on boinc platform may be the same as folding@home.

The reason why folding@home has 500 times the tflops is: it uses GPUs - rosetta does not.

I'm not sure how you're defining "contributions"

Does a fast CPU contribute more than a slow one?

If you measure contributions in terms of hours the computer is processing a WU, maybe the contributions are the same, but if you measure the contributions based on the amount of scientific computations completed (i.e.-approximately the number of FLOPs completed, they're not the same. CPUs can process tens of operations in parallel; GPUs can process hundreds or thousands of operations in parallel, so during one second (hour, day, whatever), the work completed by the GPU far exceeds the work completed by the CPU.

davidcoton wrote:It's not a "European" thing. UK is still part of Europe, even if only for a few years, and UK standard matches USA. It is certain countries (maybe even most countries) within Europe that use a comma as a decimal point.

Following up on a vague memory of something I read in the past, a bit of online research indicates it appears to be tied to language. English speaking countries and those connected to them have used the decimal point. That has been the US, UK, Canada and former colonies and territories. Many non-English speaking countries adopted the decimal comma instead.