System Light Dark

xentr_theme_editor

xentr_page_setup xentr_appearance xentr_sidebar

  • xentr_page_width

    xentr_toggle_page_width

    xentr_page_width_description

    xentr_color_pickers

    xentr_toggle_color_picker

    xentr_toggle_color_picker_description

    xentr_typography

    xentr_select_the_font_you_want_to_use

    xentr_node_layout

    xentr_grid_layout

    xentr_grid_layout_description

  • Style variation

    xentr_select_the_style_variation_you_want_to_use
    System Light Dark

  • xentr_sidebar

    xentr_toggles_sidebar

    xentr_sidebar_description

    xentr_sticky_sidebar

    xentr_sticky_sidebar_description
    xentr_sidebar_position
    Left
    Right
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

HWC Folding@Home Project PPD Database

G777 said:
To give you an idea:

3960X @4.5Ghz 2133memory running linux via virtualbox (-smp 11):

Project ID: 6903
Core: GRO-A5
Credit: 22706
Frames: 100


Name: 3960X Virtual Box
Path: \\192.168.1.103\fah\
Number of Frames Observed: 149

Avg. Time / Frame : 00:43:13 - 93,213.2 PPD

Project ID: 6904
Core: GRO-A5
Credit: 31541
Frames: 100


Name: 3960X Virtual Box
Path: \\192.168.1.103\fah\
Number of Frames Observed: 143

Avg. Time / Frame : 00:54:43 - 107,244.9 PPD
Click to expand...

Impressive numbers... Unfortunately they will be obsolete by the time I can afford one :blarg:
 
G777 said:
To give you an idea:
3960X @4.5Ghz 2133memory running linux via virtualbox (-smp 11):
Project ID: 6903 Core: GRO-A5 Credit: 22706
Frames: 100 Name: 3960X Virtual Box
Path: \\192.168.1.103\fah\
Number of Frames Observed: 149

Avg. Time / Frame : 00:43:13 - 93,213.2 PPD

=============================

How about doing SMP alone so we can have an idea how will it change after January 12?
Click to expand...
 
MARSTG said:
How about doing SMP alone so we can have an idea how will it change after January 12?
Click to expand...

Here's some more results done in windows, -smp 11 again @4.0Ghz

Project ID: 6097
Core: GRO-A3
Credit: 1593
Frames: 100


Name: 3960X
Path: C:\FAH\
Number of Frames Observed: 99

Min. Time / Frame : 00:05:48 - 38,617.4 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:06:06 - 35,803.9 PPD

Project ID: 6098
Core: GRO-A3
Credit: 1593
Frames: 100


Name: 3960X
Path: C:\FAH\
Number of Frames Observed: 43

Min. Time / Frame : 00:05:20 - 43,795.3 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:05:30 - 41,819.7 PPD

Project ID: 6099
Core: GRO-A3
Credit: 1588
Frames: 100


Name: 3960X
Path: C:\FAH\
Number of Frames Observed: 300

Min. Time / Frame : 00:05:15 - 44,701.4 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:05:39 - 40,039.4 PPD

Project ID: 7136
Core: GRO-A3
Credit: 585
Frames: 100


Name: test
Path: \\FAH\fah\
Number of Frames Observed: 11

Min. Time / Frame : 00:02:05 - 38,211.4 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:02:05 - 38,211.4 PPD

Project ID: 7155
Core: GRO-A3
Credit: 591
Frames: 100


Name: 3960X
Path: C:\FAH\
Number of Frames Observed: 100

Min. Time / Frame : 00:01:53 - 45,190.2 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:01:54 - 44,596.9 PPD
 
So I have some more numbers to add to the stock 3930k stuff....I'll get em up in a bit.

I'll start a new group , 3930k stock -smp 10. ( I have the 3x 580's bangin away now.)

This brings me to a comment g777 : From what I've read , the smp client doesnt always 'like' odd numbers in the -smp # processor assignment flag.Pandegroup advises against it in the case of -smp 11...but don't take this as gospel or anything , it's obviously working for you......they say it may only error out with certain units etc....

I might give -smp 11 a shot myself , I'd certainly prefer to.

:thumb:
 
BrainEater said:
So I have some more numbers to add to the stock 3930k stuff....I'll get em up in a bit.

I'll start a new group , 3930k stock -smp 10. ( I have the 3x 580's bangin away now.)

This brings me to a comment g777 : From what I've read , the smp client doesnt always 'like' odd numbers in the -smp # processor assignment flag.Pandegroup advises against it in the case of -smp 11...but don't take this as gospel or anything , it's obviously working for you......they say it may only error out with certain units etc....

I might give -smp 11 a shot myself , I'd certainly prefer to.

:thumb:
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info BrainEater, interestingly I'm not sure it's really running -smp 11... cpu usage of the virtual box is pretty bang on 83% which would seem to be 10/12 cores. 11/12 cores should be ~92%. Not sure what's going on there...
 
Ah yes.

That tells me everything.My -smp 10 runs at 83 % .

Read the smp console , specifically where it says "mapping NT from 11 to 10"
If it was working , it would say " mapping NT from 11 to 11"

That last core is not being used.You are doing -smp 10.

:thumb:

edit : this need to be tested tho , from what pande says , it sometimes works.
 
I plan on trying to sort it out once current WU finishes. Kinda weird:sad:

From log:


--- Opening Log file [December 10 17:19:19 UTC]


# Linux SMP Console Edition ###################################################
###############################################################################

Folding@Home Client Version 6.34

Folding@home - Main

###############################################################################
###############################################################################

Launch directory: /usr/local/fah
Executable: ./fah6
Arguments: -bigadv -verbosity 9 -smp 11

[17:19:19] - Ask before connecting: No
[17:19:19] - User name: Gav777 (Team 37412)
[17:19:19] - User ID: 1C991B8A08987EF0
[17:19:19] - Machine ID: 1
[17:19:19]
[17:19:19] Loaded queue successfully.
[17:19:19] - Preparing to get new work unit...
[17:19:19] Cleaning up work directory
[17:19:19] + Attempting to get work packet
[17:19:19] Passkey found
[17:19:19]

And HFM:
 

Attachments

  • hfm ss.webp
    hfm ss.webp
    162.4 KB · Views: 619
Yep.....setting -smp 11 does not mean it actually running with 11 cores.

We should find test unit for regular windows smp.I'll do -smp 10 , you do -smp 11 .If we both run at 83 % cpu , and the ppd is the same , -smp 11 aint helpin.

From what I've read tho , it depends on the core , they *can* be optimized to actually so -smp 11 etc....and I have no idea about the -bigadv units , it's quite possible they ARE optimized for it.

:thumb:
 
K.....

Intel 3930k , stock clocks ,win7, -smp 10

--

Project : 7134
credit : 4984
client : -smp 10
PPD : 28,140

Project : 7140
credit : 4947
client : -smp 10
PPD : 27,570

Project : 6944
credit : 4776
client : -smp 10
PPD : 27,300

Project : 7136
credit : 4831
client : -smp 10
PPD : 27,000


-----

:thumb:
 
Finally got things switched around so thought I'd post a little more info

3960X @4.5Ghz 2133 ram running linux via virtualbox -smp 12


Project ID: 6904
Core: GRO-A5
Credit: 31541
Frames: 100


Name: 3960X
Path: \\192.168.1.105\fah\
Number of Frames Observed: 15

Min. Time / Frame : 00:52:17 - 114,818.4 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:52:46 - 113,244.4 PPD
Cur. Time / Frame : 00:52:33 - 113,316.8 PPD
R3F. Time / Frame : 00:52:27 - 113,618.4 PPD
All Time / Frame : 00:52:46 - 112,667.9 PPD
Eff. Time / Frame : 00:55:28 - 105,075.8 PPD

The Eff. Time/ Frame is lower because the first half dozen or so frames were done on 10 threads, the average of 113,000 PPD should be pretty accurate


Way To Fold
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

xentr_legal_notice_title

xentr_legal_notice_description

Back
Top