Search results

2004-01-07 17:06:36 User Smoky Team [H]ardOCP (id # 33) Score 53 User Rank 186398 WU 2 Project WU 252 1 681 1 Today, almost 3 years later, I passed 100 000... Man it's been a long ride, but I finally have my orange [H] :)

Just passed fifty thousand points... And moving steadily towards the 700th position... From the 600th :D And I guess i get a nicer badge too :p :p:

The 478 and the 775 processors are based on the same core, so both their performance and power consumption should be within a couple of percent, even less... Pentium M is a much better solution, if you can afford it - the CT-479 adapter alows you to use a Pentium M with a few Asus boards (the...

ICE_9, Celeron D's are decent performers, but as they are based on Prescott, they put out quite a lot of heat... So an old Northwood P4 or a brand new Sempron is probably a better idea :)

PPatBoyd, FahMon is a good choice to replace EM3 in your case... It starts quickly and shuts down quickly and should work for a shared folder, Samba or not :)

'cause Google gets Tinkers only ;) :D :D

Yay! Next - get that top spot back... Just came to the forums to post this thread myself... And there was one already. LPerry, you are *fast* :D

I too think the high value [H]'s should be more impressive, with a bit more red maybe :p Otherwise: :D

20k points and 600th in the [H]... Probably won't go much higher at my production :)

And then there are 500-framers, distributed to Google clients only :cool:

I suppose you are using WinXP... So go to the Power Settings in the Control Panel, there is a setting that tells the computer what to do when you close the lid... Edit: Boy, am I dumb... XP on an Apple :rolleyes:

I hate to spoil your enthusiasm, but the thread at FoldingCommunity is about two years old and that issue should be long gone :) Tinkers are a bit (about 5-10% according to different reports) slower on Linux because of the lack of a good optimising compiler for FORTRAN. However, if what...

That Celeron should be no slower than a P III 800 in Folding...

10K... Hooray :D

SmokeRngs, sorry to hear that :( It looks like the TINKER servers have enough WUs (about 12500 for each .143 and .120), but only port 80 and Google clients are assigned to them. So you know what to do ;) :D

I would get the Xeons :) There is no other way you could get 2.66GHz of SSE folding power for a hundred bucks (I mean real GHz, not P4 :p ). The 2800+ alone costs more than that... A Mobile 2600+ could give you comparable speed, but with decent cooling and a decent MB (which means more $$$)...

It should take 22-24 hours of CPU time... Could be much more if your client doesn't use SSE. If it doesn't, run it with the -forceasm flag...

Damn me for beeing so stupid :mad: I was thinking to bump that thread just before the purge... And then forgot... There was more of the story in the thread... I recall that relic tried to replace the components... 3COM replaced a stepped-on NIC with no questions asked... A support engineer...

Switching Athlons to Tinker WU's will probably be quite helpful as well...

What makes you think that a $500 GPU will fold slow? GPUs are designed specifically to push geometry data blindingly fast. Folding, by some weird coincidence, is all about geometry data too. So the potential is definitely there, but the appropriate tools aren't... For the time being.

Yeah, this was discussed at the Folding-community forums... Stanford is keeping a close eye on general purpose computing on GPUs, but as of today there is nothing stable and convinient enough :)

I've been visiting the ServerStats page at Stanford quite frequently and recently noticed that almost all servers are out of WUs. Even the mighty 143 (aka The sTINKER Mamoth) is in the yellow as of today. The most of the other servers are in the red, and the only well stocked are 108 (Timeless...

Preferred: 30 days Final deadline: 50 days Points: 70.90 You might also want to check http://folding.stanford.edu/psummary.html (currently at http://vspx27.stanford.edu/psummary.html ) for a listing of the points and deadlines of all WUs ;)

p563_BBA5_ext - 5h15m48s - 1800+ @ 2220MHz 3.42 PPH, 82.13 PPD, 574.9 PPW

Well, it's not write-behind caching... Just borked an hour of folding while testing this :D :D :D This issue may be the straw that breaks the camel's back and makes me switch to Win2k pro... Little_Kenny, I too am a fan of 98 :) Damn, I don't even need antivirus software these days - nobody...

I'm currently wondering whether this could be an issue caused by the write-behind caching algorithms of Win98. I just disabled it but I'll wait a couple of hours before testing whether this is a solution as i just passed 50% on the current WU :D

So here's the deal: I'm folding on my 1800+@2220 under Win98. Things are fine until I get a hardlock caused by something I run, and have to use the Reset button on my case. Then, F@H shows a "Checksums don't match" message and restarts the whole WU :( The FahLog entries from before the reboot...

There is something wrong with F@H's checkpoint system... For some reason, a hard reboot without first shutting down the client results in a restarted WU. Nothing is stored in the logs and probably in the work files...

I really think someone should post ot the folding-community.com forums to request better remote administration capabilities...:)

Do upgrade the MB :) Then you can clock the thing to, say, 2.2 and get a 10% boost... for the [H]orde :D

As it is a SSE enabled CPU, it's probably a good idea to add "-advmethods" too... But using the SSE (Gromacs units) brings the temperature up a bit, so this may be a concern...

Damn... A p917_v2180pf909 just EARLY_UNIT_END-ed on frame 63. It seems there is some kind of problem with these... Or is it my OC? SSE? 1800+ @ 2300, forcesse, advmethods... Maybe someone should post about this on folding-community.org...

If Stanford released a SMP version of the client, there would probably be a way to utilize those old machines as a cluster (Beowulf or something), all working together on a single WU...