![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
6701 Sucks!
- Thread starter lehmann
- Start date
CraftyOtter
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2004
- Messages
- 663
These are a brutal kick in the PpD pants.
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2007
- Messages
- 6,105
Yes by all means, they suck. They also are dominating the SMP2 world right now it seems, I get them nearly all the time on any systems I have running SMP2 and they just eat my q9450 PPD and they eat my e8400 alive to the tune of literally doing 1 WU per day (1 single 6701).
Again I say - PG is losing their minds with this crap lately man.
They at some point decided that since everyone is running higher computational rigs now for the most part, they should just go overboard on the size and undercut the credit for these things.
Again I say - PG is losing their minds with this crap lately man.
They at some point decided that since everyone is running higher computational rigs now for the most part, they should just go overboard on the size and undercut the credit for these things.
Trust me, I definitely know how crappy these things are. Out of the four Q6600s I have running, these shitty work units probably take up 75% of my CPU time at the minimum. I've gone from doing 7000-7500PPD per machine on average down to around 4500PPD.
As someone already mentioned, these things are even worse than the 6040s and 6041s and those were bad enough. At least those work units gave me close to Linux A2 work unit performance which was around 6000-6400PPD. An almost 3k PPD drop is unacceptable as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately, there is little to nothing I can do about it.
As someone already mentioned, these things are even worse than the 6040s and 6041s and those were bad enough. At least those work units gave me close to Linux A2 work unit performance which was around 6000-6400PPD. An almost 3k PPD drop is unacceptable as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately, there is little to nothing I can do about it.
Yes by all means, they suck. They also are dominating the SMP2 world right now it seems, I get them nearly all the time on any systems I have running SMP2 and they just eat my q9450 PPD and they eat my e8400 alive to the tune of literally doing 1 WU per day (1 single 6701).
Again I say - PG is losing their minds with this crap lately man.
They at some point decided that since everyone is running higher computational rigs now for the most part, they should just go overboard on the size and undercut the credit for these things.
Yeah, but at least we know that the 6701 A3's are rock solid stable unlike those pesky 2684 A3 bigadv work units. At least for me, lower points don't bother me so long as I know that it will work and finish. After all, we are all doing this for the science and nothing upsets me more than having spent time and electricity only to see something your rig has worked on for days crash and flush.
This is a very good point. Haven't had one of them crash on me.
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 5,840
Takes me from 40k to 25k on Skynet, good to see I'm not the only one
but it was stable, that's a plus right?
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
but it was stable, that's a plus right?
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
Absolutely. With the ongoing 2684 debacle, any stability is welcome even on a slow WU.
Actually, stability is not a plus. Stability should be the baseline. If more and more people look at stability as a plus, the more screwed we're going to get by Stanford. Simply put, the work units should be stable and that's all there is to it. If instability is later found, the work unit should be immediately pulled.
I really don't want to get into the points discussion again but the way points have fluctuated is pure BS. Explanations have been made that the reason for points fluctuating is the bonus system. However, that doesn't hold up considering we have people running rigs a lot better than the baseline rig who are seeing nasty point reductions. It just doesn't add up. In this case, it's even worse because the 6701s are similar in size and scope to the previous 6040s and 6041s and yet still do fewer points. This is what I have a problem with.
Yes, you're right, I didn't intend to appear that I was saying stability was an added feature. Rather, it has been a refreshing change from processing WUs that one doesn't know if they'll flush on the first frame, or after day 1, day 2, day 3, etc. What you say is 100% true, stability should always be a given through stringent prior beta testing and eventually released to -advmethods. After all the initial procedural testing, then it can be released to all folders, but only after it has been confirmed stable by the initial steps. I think that's how other major DC projects go about it or at least hope they do, but someone can correct me if I'm wrong about that.
I totally agree. The credit system has always been a source of major controversy and this is no different. Whatever Stanford says about their evaluation process, it seems to lead to disparities. Case in point, the P2665 I previously mentioned. An A1 WU released at a time when the high-point accruing P2653 WUs were common and relished among SMP folders. Then, along comes the P2665 and its horrid initial value of ~1700pts. A whole lot of gnashing of teeth ensued in countless threads across every team forum. Stanford later revised the value of the P2665 to 1920pts. Some people weren't here at that time but I remember this all too well. It's the exact same situation, with the sole difference this time around being the new bonus factor, but in all other respects it's the same situation.
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2007
- Messages
- 6,105
True, the SMP2 client can take a helluva lot more abuse than a linuxrouter VM doing a 2684, that's really par for the course though - I don't recall anyone really having issues with the SMP2 client (other than the initial setup).
AMEN Brother!!
![[H]ugh_Freak](/data/avatars/m/65/65895.jpg?1580525148){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2003
- Messages
- 1,133
I would just be happy if my Q9550 @ 3.8 would stop getting those super-fan-crapalistic 6013s that take for some reason 45 minutes per frame and only net around 1900 points after the whole day it would take to fold them.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2003
- Messages
- 1,133
If it was only one I wouldn't mind. Its been every single 6013 that the machine has pulled down for the last 2 weeks. The other 3 SMP boxes I have only get a bad one every 5th or 6th 6013 they get.
[H]ugh_Freak;1035886249 said:
The only 6013s I have gotten in the last couple of weeks were the bad ones. They would take more than an hour per frame on a Q6600@3.4 and would take over 5 days to complete. Every time I see them, I kill them. I think I've only gotten one or two of these on the other three systems combined and none of them have been "good" 6013s. The 6013s are another case of work units which should have been pulled long before now.
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2007
- Messages
- 6,105
[H]ugh_Freak;1035886132 said:
Guess I'm lucky and I got one of the not so bad ones then... my q9450@3.6 is crunching one now and my TPF is a fraction of what yours is. I'm getting 05:13 TPF for a credit of 2009 pts according to HFM.net.
Code:
[02:04:08] + Processing work unit
[02:04:08] Core required: FahCore_a3.exe
[02:04:08] Core found.
[02:04:08] Working on queue slot 08 [June 29 02:04:08 UTC]
[02:04:08] + Working ...
[02:04:08]
[02:04:08] *------------------------------*
[02:04:08] Folding@Home Gromacs SMP Core
[02:04:08] Version 2.19 (Mar 12, 2010)
[02:04:08]
[02:04:08] Preparing to commence simulation
[02:04:08] - Looking at optimizations...
[02:04:08] - Created dyn
[02:04:08] - Files status OK
[02:04:09] - Expanded 4302218 -> 10427873 (decompressed 242.3 percent)
[02:04:09] Called DecompressByteArray: compressed_data_size=4302218 data_size=10427873, decompressed_data_size=10427873 diff=0
[02:04:09] - Digital signature verified
[02:04:09]
[02:04:09] Project: 6013 (Run 0, Clone 115, Gen 193)
[02:04:09]
[02:04:09] Assembly optimizations on if available.
[02:04:09] Entering M.D.
[02:04:17] Completed 0 out of 250000 steps (0%)
[02:09:31] Completed 2500 out of 250000 steps (1%)
[02:14:46] Completed 5000 out of 250000 steps (2%)
[02:19:54] Completed 7500 out of 250000 steps (3%)
[02:25:07] Completed 10000 out of 250000 steps (4%)
[02:30:24] Completed 12500 out of 250000 steps (5%)
[02:35:28] Completed 15000 out of 250000 steps (6%)
[02:40:18] Completed 17500 out of 250000 steps (7%)
[02:45:07] Completed 20000 out of 250000 steps (8%)
[02:49:58] Completed 22500 out of 250000 steps (9%)
[02:54:50] Completed 25000 out of 250000 steps (10%)
[02:59:41] Completed 27500 out of 250000 steps (11%)
[03:04:29] Completed 30000 out of 250000 steps (12%)
[03:09:21] Completed 32500 out of 250000 steps (13%)
[03:14:14] Completed 35000 out of 250000 steps (14%)
[03:19:29] Completed 37500 out of 250000 steps (15%)
[03:24:45] Completed 40000 out of 250000 steps (16%)
[03:30:03] Completed 42500 out of 250000 steps (17%)
[03:35:14] Completed 45000 out of 250000 steps (18%)
[03:40:18] Completed 47500 out of 250000 steps (19%)
[03:45:20] Completed 50000 out of 250000 steps (20%)
[03:50:22] Completed 52500 out of 250000 steps (21%)
[03:55:27] Completed 55000 out of 250000 steps (22%)
[04:00:30] Completed 57500 out of 250000 steps (23%)
[04:05:32] Completed 60000 out of 250000 steps (24%)
[04:10:35] Completed 62500 out of 250000 steps (25%)
[04:15:40] Completed 65000 out of 250000 steps (26%)
[04:20:42] Completed 67500 out of 250000 steps (27%)
[04:25:43] Completed 70000 out of 250000 steps (28%)
[04:30:45] Completed 72500 out of 250000 steps (29%)
[04:35:50] Completed 75000 out of 250000 steps (30%)
[04:40:51] Completed 77500 out of 250000 steps (31%)
[04:45:51] Completed 80000 out of 250000 steps (32%)
[04:50:53] Completed 82500 out of 250000 steps (33%)
[04:55:57] Completed 85000 out of 250000 steps (34%)
[05:01:02] Completed 87500 out of 250000 steps (35%)
[05:06:02] Completed 90000 out of 250000 steps (36%)
[05:11:05] Completed 92500 out of 250000 steps (37%)
[05:16:43] Completed 95000 out of 250000 steps (38%)
[05:22:02] Completed 97500 out of 250000 steps (39%)
[05:27:11] Completed 100000 out of 250000 steps (40%)
[05:32:13] Completed 102500 out of 250000 steps (41%)
[05:37:17] Completed 105000 out of 250000 steps (42%)
[05:42:20] Completed 107500 out of 250000 steps (43%)
[05:47:25] Completed 110000 out of 250000 steps (44%)
[05:52:27] Completed 112500 out of 250000 steps (45%)
[05:57:32] Completed 115000 out of 250000 steps (46%)
[06:02:33] Completed 117500 out of 250000 steps (47%)
[06:07:38] Completed 120000 out of 250000 steps (48%)
[06:13:30] Completed 122500 out of 250000 steps (49%)
[06:18:43] Completed 125000 out of 250000 steps (50%)
[06:23:55] Completed 127500 out of 250000 steps (51%)
[06:29:09] Completed 130000 out of 250000 steps (52%)sirmonkey1985
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2008
- Messages
- 22,412
something else is wrong because my phenom II 940 @ 3.6ghz does the 6013 WU's with a 5:31 TPF.. one of the lowest TPF WU's there are for my processor
It's been so long since I had a "working" 6013 that I don't remember the frame times but they were probably below 5:30 and more than likely around 5:15 but the ones I've gotten lately have been "bad". Before the current batch of 6013s I never had a problem with them. I don't know what the deal is, but there is something wrong with many of the current crop. I've had bad ones on other systems than just that one and they have no trouble with any other work units.
sirmonkey1985
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2008
- Messages
- 22,412
ahh.. well i havent run the smp client in over a month so i wouldnt know about that..
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 5,840
Skynet is still getting them. 15k drop on one rig, today I'll fire back up my big adv rig and see where she takes me, if it doesnt get a big unit and I get this I could be near a 25k drop on just two rigs, I feel you man
The only good thing is everyone is getting hit the same as us so the point loss is universal, overtakes in the big picture won't change much
The only good thing is everyone is getting hit the same as us so the point loss is universal, overtakes in the big picture won't change much
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2003
- Messages
- 1,133
I've done this many, many times...
Yet it still completes the 6701s in a shade over 17 hours but requires over 8 hours more to finish the 6013s?
This +1
Here's a list they started to compile on the folding forum of the good and bad ones:
http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=14997
When I got one, I would delete it but then I'd get assigned the same exact one after starting the client back up. It probably took me a good 20 minutes to get a different WU.
http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=14997
When I got one, I would delete it but then I'd get assigned the same exact one after starting the client back up. It probably took me a good 20 minutes to get a different WU.
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2007
- Messages
- 6,105
Well I got one of these POS ones.
e8400@stock (3ghz), 4gb ddr2 800 - HFM.net reports 51:20 TPF, 258.4 PPD, 921 credit.
Off to sabotage this one...
Code:
[12:00:14] Project: 6701 (Run 85, Clone 13, Gen 20)Off to sabotage this one...
I came home to see 4 of my 5 machines crunching these. Some note:
- These thing really kill my dual E5530 machine - 15.5K ppd on these versus close to 25K ppd on other A3s
- Memory speed helps - same clock speed I7's, memory at 1520 is 1500 ppd better tham memory at 1440, still down 4 - 5K ppd from other A3s
- 1K or so ppd drop on a stock speed I7
- On the up side, they seem rock stable on my machines
- These thing really kill my dual E5530 machine - 15.5K ppd on these versus close to 25K ppd on other A3s
- Memory speed helps - same clock speed I7's, memory at 1520 is 1500 ppd better tham memory at 1440, still down 4 - 5K ppd from other A3s
- 1K or so ppd drop on a stock speed I7
- On the up side, they seem rock stable on my machines
On every SMP box I currently have running, I have a 6701 running. My overall PpD is in the dumps. On a lighter note, I dropped one Windows 2684 without one hickup. The next one will drop tomorrow night around 9 or 10pm.
They are stable, but the PpD sucks on every machine from an C2D to a C2Q / AMD PII X4.
They are stable, but the PpD sucks on every machine from an C2D to a C2Q / AMD PII X4.