![[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.
GPU Console or Systray?
- Thread starter Sunin
- Start date
They are functionally identical. They use the same core, so they do the same work. The only difference is the interface, the fact that the console client can be set as a service, and the viewer that comes with the systray client. Just use whichever you prefer.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2004
- Messages
- 15,022
Nothing is different core-wise. Only the interface is different and IMHO, for a multi-gpu dedicated box, console clients is easier to work with (just copy the folder, configure with a different machine id then fire them up).
If I am running the GPU2 client on a machine I use occasionally for gaming or 3D work, I will use the systray version as I've found it to be much easier, and slightly more reliable, to pause and restart the client. On machines that are dedicated to folding, I prefer the console version.
brokenarrow03
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Messages
- 1,655
I am using 4 of the systray and it seems to be working just fine...
Wow 
, thanks to all you unselfish and knowledgeable people for answering this question for brother Sunin. This is an examle of one of the reasons I read the [H]orde distributed topic thread with regularity.
I've wondered about this question for some time, but I've always used the console clients of the F@H project (LinSMP, GPU2, etc). I believed the F@H console clients had less overhead than the systray clients resulting in better performance
My DCing boxen lately have all been 24/7 crunchers (ATM only three). I don't play any computer games so if the the F@H systray client has a snooze function like the WCG client I probably wouldn't use it anyway. (I'm cool with the CTRL+C key deal )
DCing for the CURE
, thanks to all you unselfish and knowledgeable people for answering this question for brother Sunin. This is an examle of one of the reasons I read the [H]orde distributed topic thread with regularity. I've wondered about this question for some time, but I've always used the console clients of the F@H project (LinSMP, GPU2, etc)
. I believed the F@H console clients had less overhead than the systray clients resulting in better performance My DCing boxen lately have all been 24/7 crunchers (ATM only three
). I don't play any computer games so if the the F@H systray client has a snooze function like the WCG client I probably wouldn't use it anyway. (I'm cool with the CTRL+C key deal ) DCing for the CURE
REason I asked was for the new install I noticed the console version and didn't recall there being a gpu console version so I wanted to make sure if I could tweak any points out of what I have I did and if there is not difference I'll keep the 23 sys tray clients.