• 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.

point values?

M

Mayhem33

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
1,204
Has anyone had their production levels cut down since upgrading to 5.02 graphical clients? I seem to be running 1500 to 2000 points below my normal monthly point values.

:confused:
 
Mayhem33 said:
Has anyone had their production levels cut down since upgrading to 5.02 graphical clients? I seem to be running 1500 to 2000 points below my normal monthly point values.

:confused:
Click to expand...

I think the problem is Stanford has changed the point value system again. I just got a 155 pointer that’s not due until December. That is one slow folder.

I had a few machines with version 4.0 installed and I actually think 5.02 is just slightly faster, but with this new value system it seems to matter not.

In my opinion it would benefit Stanford to break these units into smaller parts. Aside from teams like us how many people actually leave their computers on and folding the way we do? They (Stanford) have to be losing many many work units that have to be re-done. This just plain seems totally inefficient to my way of thinking.

This isn’t about the points, it’s about assigning work that is scheduled to take two or three months to complete with full knowledge that they will run the same unit several times to be sure of the results. How much science is accomplished with this method? If I were one of the researchers I would sure want my results back as fast as possible.

V Jay and group need to realize that our resources are not unlimited; we are not a government-funded project.

Perhaps the total methodology here is beyond me. If in fact that is the case I wish they would at least attend our forum and explain things.

Just my usual late night rant
 
I have been looking around Stanford’s folding forum and some people are having problems with points not being given out for completed work units. This seems to be with the dually rigs as far as I can tell. But the people that are noticing this are just starting out. If you have been folding for a while, you wouldn’t necessarily notice this. I am running 2 boxes with single CPU’s so I would guess this is not my problem. Perhaps this due to the new Amber cores running more like a Gromac core but without the support of SSE. I mainly was just curious if any others out there had noticed this as well. This could also explain my production loss due to the fact that one of these boxes is an old athlon that doesn’t do SSE anyway.

:)
 
I've noticed that there is a bigger range in Points per Hour per Ghz now that when Stanford first changed its points values.
Then I reconed on 2 PpHpG for Gromacs and 3.5 PpHpG for Tinkers.
Now Tinkers are worth around 3.5 PpHpG if you get them.
Gromac are worth between 1.7 and 4 PpHpG.
Ambers are worth between 1.7 and 2.3 PpHpG.
So depending on which protiens you get you could see a +/- 15% difference in your points gain.
All speeds are4 from AMD's CPU's.
I would have put the Gromac's at the same speed as the Ambers but my Opterons are crunching the 13** protiens fast.
At 2.4 Ghz they only take19:30 per frame. 320 points in 32 hours.

Luck.......... :D
u=Tigerbiten.gif
 
It seems that I have turned in a couple of workunits that I didn't get credit for and they completed just fine. I went back and checked the logs. This was about two weeks ago. It was really annoying considering my PIII 700 sat on one work unit for a week and then I didn't get any credit for it. I thought that there was a slim chance that the problem was a config error on my side but it had turned in units just fine before and check the box when I got back to work and it was configured correctly. I just didn't get any credit for it it seems. I haven't had that problem for a over a week now so if there was a problem on Stanford's end, they fixed it.

Also, for me, it seems the new Amber core proteins fold at about the same speed as Tinkers. At least, that's what it seems on my PIII 700. I'm not sure if my main box at my friend's has gotten any Ambers yet. Haven't really been over there in the last week and haven't had a chance to check it out.
 
I noticed a few missing points also... Mainly from my P4 2.4C... (two instances)... just the occasional, but still...


Keep on Folding!!

 
What I found over at the folding forum was they were having network trouble. I still looking for the thread and will post a link. They say that the network problem is now fixed. As for your credit you can try posting over there for help on reclaiming your earned credit.

:rolleyes:
 
I dont' care so much for the points, as long as they got the WUs... Do you know if they
actually received these WUs?


Keep on Folding!!


 
The wu’s are being received and eventually updated along with points. I haven’t noticed any current network troubles like before.
 
Tigerbiten said:
I've noticed that there is a bigger range in Points per Hour per Ghz now that when Stanford first changed its points values.
Then I reconed on 2 PpHpG for Gromacs and 3.5 PpHpG for Tinkers.
Now Tinkers are worth around 3.5 PpHpG if you get them.
Gromac are worth between 1.7 and 4 PpHpG.
Ambers are worth between 1.7 and 2.3 PpHpG.
So depending on which protiens you get you could see a +/- 15% difference in your points gain.
All speeds are4 from AMD's CPU's.
I would have put the Gromac's at the same speed as the Ambers but my Opterons are crunching the 13** protiens fast.
At 2.4 Ghz they only take19:30 per frame. 320 points in 32 hours.

Luck.......... :D
u=Tigerbiten.gif
Click to expand...

Yup, if you go to the project section of Stanford’s web site and do a bit of math they seem to have gotten off track a bit.

The worst part is there seems to be tons of the really slow ones available.

Like I said before, it’s not the points, it’s slowing down the science part with these overly chewy units that could be broken into small parts…or so it would seem.
 
It seems that the amber cores tend to be the large slow ones. I read about the amber cores being done in double precision, this is why there is no SSE support. SSE support is come in a little while though. It is reported to only give about a 10% gain in speed. :eek:
True it’s not about the points, but that is part of the enjoyment of it.
 
yup.. the points are fun :D but as long as we're making progress.... Sometimes I wish the proteins were smaller and worth less points... I guess turning in 8, 9, 10 WUs a day feels better than turning in 2 or 3... But then again 2 x 5 = 4+6 = 2+8 = 10..... so I guess in the end it's all the same...


Keep on Folding!!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top