Change in BA requirements

Discussion in 'Distributed Computing' started by ChristianVirtual, Dec 17, 2013.

  1. ChristianVirtual

    ChristianVirtual [H]ard DCOTM x3

    Messages:
    2,522
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2013
    Some changes in BA requirements in 2014 coming ...

    https://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?nomobile=1&f=24&t=25410

    Some of you guys will not be disturbed; but the low-end BA folder might get hit ...
     
  2. Louis_Wu

    Louis_Wu n00b

    Messages:
    31
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    guess that really knocks the stuffing out of the Socket F market :(

    Louis
     
  3. ChristianVirtual

    ChristianVirtual [H]ard DCOTM x3

    Messages:
    2,522
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2013
    My plan of a 2P 2680v2 seems still valid (or need to try harder to get those 4650; difficult where I am).

    Really hope PG get QRB done for regular CPU folding and keep it interesting to run 16 and 24 core systems.
     
  4. tear

    tear [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2011

    Messages:
    1,568
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    The only practical performance requirement is preferred deadline time, not core count :)

    Core count should only be assignment *hint*.

    If deadlines aren't changed, I will be sure to accommodate all BA-capable machines that do
    meet preferred deadlines regardless of core count.
     
  5. Nathan_P

    Nathan_P [H]ard DCOTM x2

    Messages:
    3,377
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    That's what I like to hear!!!
     
  6. Louis_Wu

    Louis_Wu n00b

    Messages:
    31
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    +1 for sure!

    they didn't say anything about tightening up the deadline times (not to say that this isn't part of their master plan), so I do wonder what is driving the increased core-count criterion...
     
  7. runs2far

    runs2far Gawd

    Messages:
    899
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    ...maybe bigger bigadv... time will tell.

    EDIT:

    Define low-end BA folder.
     
  8. Liger88

    Liger88 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,657
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    It seems kind of counter-productive since the BigAdv community is small compared to the rest of the F@H community. We're going to nix the niche community further, which is doing projects that others can't do so we bring in new people? Wat? I mean those of us with HD7000/GTX 600 Series cards on up on the GPU side of things are doing twice the work of anyone with a GPU prior. Except there's only one project a year later with Core_17. Or is that just a reference toward CPU folding?

    Want more people? Up the point count because technologically speaking it makes very little since to run CPU folding these days with powerful SMP rigs and GPU's for the point payout.

    I'm angry for you BigAdv guys who are well invested just like how the last update from 16 screwed a lot of people with Intel rigs.
     
  9. tear

    tear [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2011

    Messages:
    1,568
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Few more observations:

    There aren't many 16-thread (as that's what their requirement really is) BA-capable machines right now.

    P8101 deadline is tighter than most 16t machines (think dual intel quads w/HT) so this change (without
    pulling anything from the sleeve) will only affect high end AMD 4P quads.

    But then, OTOH, low-end AMD 4P hexen perform about the same.

    So either:
    a) they keep preferred deadlines and AMD 4P quads are made to work *wink* *wink*
    b) they shorten preferred deadlines and cut all AMD 4P quads, low-end (and possibly mid-range)
      AMD 4P hexen and most (if not all) 2P 1366 setups

    While (b) may not happen in Feb, I will be surprised if it doesn't happen in Apr (24->32).

    So, what kasson should be asked to provide is: preferred deadlines effective Feb 17 and April 17
    Core count information is useless to BA folders.
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2013
  10. Patriot

    Patriot [H]ard|DCer of the Month - March 2011/June 2013/De

    Messages:
    2,496
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    The project just seems incapable of learning from its past.
    They need more people folding SMP. So they are making it harder to get into Bigadv rather than incentivizing non-bigadv smp. They did it not to long ago with the push to 16 cores. They also reduced deadlines. Although they were targeting those who were folding bigadv wu's on 4c chips cranked to the wall. I think they will find there are not many slow machines folding bigadv anymore. This push seems rather pointless.
     
  11. Pocatello

    Pocatello DC Moderator and [H]ard DCOTM x4 Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,194
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    What will happen to the SR-2 folders?
     
  12. tear

    tear [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2011

    Messages:
    1,568
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Exactly. We can't extrapolate anything from that announcement.

    I've sent a PM to Peter Kasson in the FF. Content follows:
     
  13. runs2far

    runs2far Gawd

    Messages:
    899
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    thanks tear, looking forward to seeing an answer from him.
     
  14. Spazturtle

    Spazturtle [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,526
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2013
    Remember that a 7970 running Core 17 gets more science done then most current big adv rigs according to Proteener.
     
  15. tear

    tear [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2011

    Messages:
    1,568
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    "More science" is a relative term. Performance is a factor, sure. But so is importance/priority and that has
    nothing to do with performance.
     
  16. tear

    tear [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2011

    Messages:
    1,568
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    It would be nice if other teams would hit FF/kasson/VJ on that as well.
     
  17. Nathan_P

    Nathan_P [H]ard DCOTM x2

    Messages:
    3,377
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Evga just did, sort of. I added a more direct question
     
  18. bobc36

    bobc36 n00b

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Thanks for that Nathan, I wanted to make sure my topic got through the filters (was my first post at FF).
     
  19. Grandpa_01

    Grandpa_01 [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2013

    Messages:
    1,175
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2011
    From reading Kassons statement and reading between the lines, there are more people running bigadv than needed at this time, they know exactly how much they will lose by implementing the limits, they are not stupid. He pretty much said they need more SMP and less bigadv so I would guess one way or the other they will achieve their goal.

    It really does not matter what I or anyone else thinks about it or whether we like it or not, in the end it will be what it will be. And we will adjust over time. :rolleyes:
     
  20. Patriot

    Patriot [H]ard|DCer of the Month - March 2011/June 2013/De

    Messages:
    2,496
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    In the end... they will find out that no one wins with this approach...

    They won't get more SMP users this way... just less BigADV... :rolleyes:
     
  21. Louis_Wu

    Louis_Wu n00b

    Messages:
    31
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    I agree -- the power bill vs PPD makes plain SMP not at all worthwhile :(
     
  22. Zagen30

    Zagen30 [H]Lite

    Messages:
    85
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    This is very true. On the couple of occasions that my Intel 4P has picked up a regular SMP WU, it's done around 200k PPD. You can now do better than that with a 780 Ti or 290X, and those are far cheaper than an Intel 4P.
     
  23. tear

    tear [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2011

    Messages:
    1,568
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Aye. That's how you kill non-BA CPU folding, didn't we project it some time in the past? :)
     
  24. Louis_Wu

    Louis_Wu n00b

    Messages:
    31
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    uh, I forget -- why did they do that anyway?
     
  25. Grandpa_01

    Grandpa_01 [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2013

    Messages:
    1,175
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2011
    That is true, what the move will do is make them reevaluate the smp points scheme or convert the smp over to GPU, which I have a feeling they are having some problems with since they have not done that already and they are still releasing smp projects on a regular basis and not releasing many or any GPU work.
     
  26. Nicolas_orleans

    Nicolas_orleans [H]ard DCOTM May 2016

    Messages:
    352
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Right.
    Maybe next year will be time to start crunching some BOINC projects instead of wasting power on SMP folding ?
     
  27. tear

    tear [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2011

    Messages:
    1,568
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    I was referring to some past discussions we had about PG making (intentionally or not)
    BA less appealing (lowering rewards/increasing requirements etc.) and, at the same time
    intensifying the use and promotion of GPUs.

    At the time, general consensus was that it would make people shift away from SMP folding
    either to GPUs or completely different DC projects.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying BA shouldn't accelerate. Nor I'm saying that GPUs
    are given too much attention. None of that.

    The point is that the upcoming changes are unlikely to have the effect PG expects :)
     
  28. Bill1024

    Bill1024 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,118
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Maybe if everyone turned off all FAH for 48-72 hours call it being on strike.
    They will get the hint.
    My hexcore AMD-1045T was o/c to 3.6ghz and used to get 18k or so on regular smp.
    Now I am lucky to get 10k ppd.
    I would not mind doing smp, but why the big reduction if they need more to fold them?
     
  29. Louis_Wu

    Louis_Wu n00b

    Messages:
    31
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    Thanks for the history lesson tear. the GPU shift sure did occur.

    and for what PG is expecting to happen, I certainly agree…

    ...if there's one thing I've learned from the forum here; it's that [H] team members are incredibly effective (and fast) at switching around their resources :D

    regards,

    Louis
     
  30. Patriot

    Patriot [H]ard|DCer of the Month - March 2011/June 2013/De

    Messages:
    2,496
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Our team has over 500 members. Our top 100-150 is fairly active but I don't think we are quite agile enough to pull something like that off without weeks of communication ahead of time.

    We should let PG make his reply on deadlines changes if any.

    Don't be Hasty ...
     
  31. Louis_Wu

    Louis_Wu n00b

    Messages:
    31
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    true enough…

    we'll [H]old our fire...
     
  32. terrabyte89

    terrabyte89 [H]Lite

    Messages:
    120
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    I switched off all my standard smp clients because they just weren't worth the power they used. Basic i5 desktops were getting like 15k ppd for me. Using over 100w of power. My dual xeon machine might use ~300watts but folds 500k ppd (3 times the power for 33 times the points) If they want more smp, make it worth the electricity I'm using. Don't just reduce the number of bigadv capable machines.

    If they all of a sudden made my dual xeon worth 100k ppd. Guess what, I'd stop folding on it!
     
  33. orion

    orion [H]Lite

    Messages:
    113
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2011
    I PM'd Dr. Kasson too.

    We'll see what happens.
     
  34. Linden

    Linden [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,181
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    I only fold with my dedicated AMD 4P systems. Although my multipurpose box has a nice i7, SMP-capable processor, it's just not worth the power bill to keep that machine running 24/7. I may be fortunate to have a small garden 48-core crunchers, but I do have a limit over ratio of power consumption versus production. It may sound elitist, but everyone must draw the line somewhere.
     
  35. rhavern

    rhavern [H]ard|DCer of the Month - Apr. 2013/Oct. 2014

    Messages:
    508
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Interesting times...
     
  36. orion

    orion [H]Lite

    Messages:
    113
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2011
    You guys should have your DAP representative bring this up in the DAB forum.
     
  37. musky

    musky [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2012

    Messages:
    3,154
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    DAB is dead as far as I know, and it didn't seem to accomplish anything when it was alive.
     
  38. rhavern

    rhavern [H]ard|DCer of the Month - Apr. 2013/Oct. 2014

    Messages:
    508
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Wasn't Kendrak [H]'s rep? If so, when was the last meet?
     
  39. musky

    musky [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2012

    Messages:
    3,154
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Better question - when was the last time you saw Kendrak post in the DC section?
     
  40. tear

    tear [H]ard|DCer of the Year 2011

    Messages:
    1,568
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Kendrak is AWOL and..
    DAB has been useless since its inception, thanks to bruce & company.

    I'll be hitting people responsible directly (in a day or two).