Folding Forum

u get that feeling of doubt they hit the finish button and waited... cuz they're in the business of other stuff. Yet if u zoom in u can make out the PRGC and so u check... and nothing shows in the WU app site but their powerful GPU should've completed it long ago, or u see usernames that completed it that are definitely not who you're watching. Tech channels, c'mon bruh, u should know better.

Maybe the tech channel couldn't get a stable enough system to fold the WU? With the influx of Youtube and everyone thinking they are an expert on everything.... it could happen.

PPD (points per day) is a fairly good number for checking if your system is a good folding rig, but PPD is a terrible benchmark for A-B comparisons of systems and configurations, because the PPD is very dependent on how quickly you return the WU and the Quick Return Bonus, as well as variance between projects. If you run the same WU twice, the second time will give you a lower PPD estimate because you're later in the alloted time for returning it.

If you want to benchmark with Folding@Home, you should look at the TPF (time per frame) number on the same project, and ideally you should fold the exact same WU on several computers if you want a fair benchmark. And as you say they should fold the WU to completion and upload the results on at least one computer before the Timeout time, because anything else ties up the science by making the project wait.

Actually if you want to benchmark with FaH then far better to take a copy of the working folder for a WU you are completing and run the Fahcore from command line "offline" ... You can use the same wu time and time again on all kit and have a direct comparison of performance ... also useful if one feels the need to tweak settings and wants to ensure FaH is still stable without risking stuffing up the science ... no points as such for running wu this way (never actually connects/sends the results simply runs/loads the kit) but does far less damage.