• 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.

SMP Client on a Quad - Is this about normal?

T

Tobit

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - March 2010/May 2011
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
5,145
So, I am running the SMP client on my first quad. I currently have my Q6600 OC'd at 3.24GHz (360x9).

My first project: Project: 2653 (Run 8, Clone 51, Gen 55)

It is averaging 18m 26s per frame. It will meet the preferred deadline by more than a day. Is this about normal? It seems a bit slow to me but maybe it isn't.
 
Running on only two core or all four ?

Speed on 2 cores is around 330 PpDpGhz = 330PpDpG x 3.24 Ghz x 2 Cores = ~2,140 PpD. Adding the second client gives you ~4,280 PpD
Speed on 4 cpres is around 250 PpDpGhz = 250 PpDpG x 3.24 Ghz x 4 Cores = ~3,240 PpD.

Luck .......... :D
 
Tobit said:
Running on all four cores I believe. Task manager is showing 100% utilization on all four cores.
Click to expand...

Something is using big part of your CPU - find what proces (except F@H) is using CPU and kill it :)

 
Rebel44 said:
Something is using big part of your CPU - find what proces (except F@H) is using CPU and kill it :)
Click to expand...
Nothing. 4 instances of the F@H project core each running at 25%. Everything else is 0.
 
Did you reboot after you installed the client.

Sometimes one of the services the SMP client needs will hog one core when first set up.
Rebooting will fix this.

Luck ........... :D
 
In task manager, I am showing four instances of FahCore_a1.exe - each one at 25%. Is this not correct?
 
Each SMP uses 4 fahcore.exe's so you should see 8 if you have 2 Smps running

 
Sunin said:
Each SMP uses 4 fahcore.exe's so you should see 8 if you have 2 Smps running
Click to expand...
But I only want one SMP running right now. :)

The point of this thread is to determine if I am seeing the performance I should be from ONE SMP client, not two.
 
Thats correct.
But you're running slow.
A single client on a 3.24 Ghz Quad core should be doing a frame in the 9-11 mins range.
My dual clients on a 3.10 Ghz Quad are doing a frame in the 14-17 mins range.

Did you try a reboot to see if that would help ?
Back the client up before you shut it down.
that way if it fails to restart correctly, you can try and restore your lost data.

Luck ............ :D
 
Tigerbiten said:
Did you try a reboot to see if that would help ?
Click to expand...
Yeah, i did. No noticeable improvement. The last frame was completed in 15m, still averaging about 18m per FahSpy.
 
Tigerbiten said:
Thats correct.
But you're running slow.
A single client on a 3.24 Ghz Quad core should be doing a frame in the 9-11 mins range.
My dual clients on a 3.10 Ghz Quad are doing a frame in the 14-17 mins range.


Click to expand...

x2..... on 2653's I get 15 minutes per frame on dual SMP's and about 9 minutes on single. thats @ 3.2, I am currently getting about 13 @ 3.6.
 
What OS are you running Tobit? I found Vista 64 to be very slow with Windows SMP.

Also, some 2653s run slower than others. I got a slow one last night. It's taking several minutes more per frame than usual.



 
That is still way slow. At that rate, it'll take 30 hours to complete one WU. My laptop (T7500 @ 2.2) can do better than that with only 2 cores. I gotta believe there is still something taking CPU cycles. Open up Task Manager and sort by CPU Time (add it to the view if necessary). All 4 instances (I assume you're still running one SMP client) of fahcorexxx.exe should be at the top with most of the CPU time. If they are NOT at the top, then that item in the top 4 is your suspect. If all 4 are at the top, then take a look at the next few items. None should have much time if anything. If they do, then they are the culprits.

 
capreppy - the are indeed at the top, all four running at 25% with everything else 0

aldamon - This is indeed Vista 64.
 
Were you able to see if any other process is using CPU Time? CPU Time by default is not part of the Task Manager View and may need to be added. Other than the 4 cores, what else is taking up CPU Time?

Even at default 2.4 speed for a Q6600, you would be getting ~12 minute frames.

Aldamon's similar experience with Vista x64 may be the culprit. I never experienced this, but that's not to say it didn't happen. Let it run for a while and see if the frame times improve.

 
capreppy said:
Were you able to see if any other process is using CPU Time? CPU Time by default is not part of the Task Manager View and may need to be added. Other than the 4 cores, what else is taking up CPU Time?
Click to expand...
System Idle = 4:34:40
FahCore = 0:17:25
FahCore = 0:17:25
FahCore = 0:17:25
FahCore = 0:17:25
firefox = 0:02:20
System = 0:00:10

All the rest are 5s or less.
 
Tobit: make sure there is no Monkey porn running: that takes a lot of system resources. Uhh or so i have heard...

:)
 
Tobit said:
System Idle = 4:34:40
FahCore = 0:17:25
FahCore = 0:17:25
FahCore = 0:17:25
FahCore = 0:17:25
firefox = 0:02:20
System = 0:00:10

All the rest are 5s or less.
Click to expand...

Then it must be Vista having problems. I'm not entirely sure why it happens to some and not to others. Let it run for a while and see if the frame times get better. Don't know what else to do.

 
aldamon said:
Dual VMs fixes the Vista 64 problem real fast. :D



Click to expand...

Totally agreed. I didn't run into the problems that you two ran into, but I wanted to decrease my frame times. I moved to Dual VMs and my frame times are just over 11 minutes on a 3.42 Q6600. This is from just over 12 min per frame. Not a huge gain, but a gain none the less.

 
I'm running vista64 with just 1 smp client and im getting around 9.5min/frame on 2653s. I have it heavily tweaked, killed uac, system restore, indexing, aero, etc...

Q6600@3.2ghz
 
skindogg said:
I'm running vista64 with just 1 smp client and im getting around 9.5min/frame on 2653s. I have it heavily tweaked, killed uac, system restore, indexing, aero, etc...
Click to expand...
Yeah, my Vista 64 is actually Windows 2008 Server Standard edition and a lot of that is killed by default. I've been tweaking it some more and still can't get much better than 14m per frame.
 
Hmm that's strange, well i'm at 400x8 if that helps, 8GB ram, 50Mb pagefile. I wish I knew what else I've done that would help you.
 
I disgress about the part of Vista 64 SP1 + SMP not playing nice. I had no problem with this, the issue here on hand moreover seems to be the fact that we do not know what kind of project he's running. For some project, it takes longer to finish.

OP: What project are you running now?

EDIT: I noticed that he's now running 2653s, they are the slower WU, but the time does seem to be quite off on that... Please take a snapshot of the entire process which you are currently running and post it. We'll get to the bottom of this.
 
I run two systems with Vista 64 with SP1 and dual SMP instances (in windows not VMs)

I agree that your frame times should be faster.
I don't understand the problems others have had with Vista 64, my only bad experience was with the pre-release SP1 which slowed down f@h.

The current SP1 works fine and my Vista systems run f@h very well with or without UAC.
 
relic said:
I run two systems with Vista 64 with SP1 and dual SMP instances (in windows not VMs)

I agree that your frame times should be faster.
I don't understand the problems others have had with Vista 64, my only bad experience was with the pre-release SP1 which slowed down f@h.

The current SP1 works fine and my Vista systems run f@h very well with or without UAC.
Click to expand...

I'm glad to hear that the SP1 does not effect F@H, I guess I stopped reading about it when there was only RC-1.
 
I heard SP1 slows up dual SMP's w/ AC, so I left it off the quad.

I have SP1 on my e8400 and am hitting 9-11 minutes per frame on a 2653(depending on what else I am doing).
 
delvryboy said:
I heard SP1 slows up dual SMP's w/ AC, so I left it off the quad.

I have SP1 on my e8400 and am hitting 9-11 minutes per frame on a 2653(depending on what else I am doing).
Click to expand...

Yes, I reported a slow down with the pre-release SP1.
After loaded the real release the problem went away.

You should be ok now using a Quad, Vista 64, 2xSMP, AC, and SP1.
Both my systems are running well with this setup.
 
Think I'll just go back to XP or, better yet, Linux. Will wait til this WU finishes though, ugh.
 
After folding with * XP, Vista 32 & 64 and just recently Linux...I think I like the linux setup best...even if I am a linux noob.

Not the best for my primary work box since I need windows programs, but great for all my other stuff.

*Yeah, I know I forgot to mention Win98 and 2k, but that was a while ago when we were OCing slot 1 celery 333s. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top