• 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.

make sense?

C

corran_horn314

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 4, 2004
Messages
445
i was playing around with my oc thinking that it would be nice to squeeze a little more out of it. i increased cpu speed 4% and found that my ram couldn't handle it so i changed the ratio and now its running 6% slower than before. After letting F@H run for a bit and checking the log file the time between steps for the same work unit is about 10% longer. The sample size is small but it looks like its slowed down a fair bit. Does that seem right? I'm running an A64, I thought they weren't as memory dependent as P4s. Does folding really require that much bandwidth? Or is it likely something else/just a fluke?
 
Overclocking while folding -- there is like a 50/50 chance that it will fold faster.

I had the same thing happen with my new AMD moble 2400 , clock speeds went up, everything was stable, folding speeds went down.

On the other hand, my 1.3Ghz celeron , I oced to 1.68 Ghz or something crazy, it folds way quicker then stock.

Sometimes when you OC the Folding core becomes unstable/

 
do you ever leave this forum DR_K13? :)

i ran prime95 for a while and no errors, and the increase wasn't that much so i assumed it would be stable, guess not. :confused:

folding is the biggest reason i wanted to increase it more, so i guess i should back it off a bit.
 
corran_horn314 said:
do you ever leave this forum DR_K13? :)

i ran prime95 for a while and no errors, and the increase wasn't that much so i assumed it would be stable, guess not. :confused:

folding is the biggest reason i wanted to increase it more, so i guess i should back it off a bit.
Click to expand...


Mon-Fri 7am-4pm PST. I am always watching you. ;) i pop in from time to time on weekends, my girlfriend take most of my time those days.

Ya I ran prime95 on my AMD, it was stable, but you never can tell with folding, go back to stock, I bet it will fold faster.
:D

 
When you change the memory ratios on Athlons they don't care for it much. The latency penalty is bad if you don't have FSB matched with the RAM speed. That could be what is causing the problem.

You may want to try loosening your RAM timings a bit or upping the voltage some and keeping the RAM and FSB sync'd. If that's stable, it will probably work better. You'd have to test it out since I don't have an Athlon64 to play with yet.

 
I think i managed to reach a balance now. And i just passed 1000points, so woohoo :)




edit: hmm, icon shows much lower but link to extremeoverclocking shows it correctly. 723 points are from today, so it should update in time
 
yeah the page the icons pull from only updates once or twice a day (i guess... ask xENo. he set up the icons/page) so that's why that happened.

are you running the -forceasm flag?
 
I have yet to look at all the flags and such, right now i just have it running as a service using mostly default settings. any flags i should really be looking at? I thought it was supposed to automatically use assembly and sse anyway... but i'm just starting so please enlighten
 
if you don't use the "-forceasm" flag, then whenever the computer is rebooted folding will no longer use SSE until the next unit starts. that has to do with folding disabling optimizations if it isn't cleanly exited, and as a service it can't exit "properly" even if you were just shutting the machine down regularly.

to turn it on, go to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\FAH@C:+fah+FAH502-Console.exe
in regedit. edit the "ImagePath" key to say -forceasm as well. then restart the service and it should be working right.
 
My machines are certainly faster overclocked.

Frame time comparisons are only valid for the same Work Unit.

Other than that, don't know what to tell you. I've never seen a proper overclock fold slower. It just doesn't make sense.
 
overclocking is like cancer for your PC. it starts to mis-calculate and crap when it overheats, so now youre taking a scientific project that counts on mathematical calculations and giving it errored data.

Is it possible that FAH does error-checking and rejectst he poor results? maybe that would cause the perceived slow-down -- it's actually re doing chunks of work that were incorrect
 
Fujiwara Takumi said:
overclocking is like cancer for your PC. it starts to mis-calculate and crap when it overheats, so now youre taking a scientific project that counts on mathematical calculations and giving it errored data.

Is it possible that FAH does error-checking and rejectst he poor results? maybe that would cause the perceived slow-down -- it's actually re doing chunks of work that were incorrect
Click to expand...

I believe they run more than one instance of each WU and check the results. There is also error checking during the execution of the WU on your CPU.
Also, only improper overclocking is wrong. If you overclock properly there should be no errors introduced.


 
Fujiwara Takumi said:
overclocking is like cancer for your PC. it starts to mis-calculate and crap when it overheats, so now youre taking a scientific project that counts on mathematical calculations and giving it errored data.

Is it possible that FAH does error-checking and rejectst he poor results? maybe that would cause the perceived slow-down -- it's actually re doing chunks of work that were incorrect
Click to expand...

If you know what you are doing when you overclock, there are no errors. There is no point in overclocking if it is not stable, especially if you are a folder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top