Vaulter98c
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - October 2009
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 5,817
38 min TPF on Skynet @ 3.33ghz, thats only 25k, that's very depressing
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It has to be better than that. How many frames has it done and are all cores engaged?38 min TPF on Skynet @ 3.33ghz, thats only 25k, that's very depressing
It has to be better than that. How many frames has it done and are all cores engaged?
I agree! You should be in the upper 20 second range!
hmmm...
-smp 16 -bigadv -verbosity 9
only one frame done right now but I show 38 TPF
2x E5530s @ 3.33Ghz (185x18)
EDIT
OK, so I just finished my 2%, now I'm showing 35min TPFs or 29k ppd, thats a little better, once 7 rolls around I'll be getting my i7 back on this
EDIT x2
OK, so looking at the log file I'm pulling an exact 30:01 TPF between the last two frames, why does HFM report it otherwise?
Depends on what your preferences are set for, but I think LastThreeFrames is the default. You can set it to "LastFrame", "AllFrames", or "EffectiveRate" as other choices.HFM.net does not give a true TPF till 3 frames have passed.
52-54:ish range. My work computer is at 3.3GHz, but I forgot the number.
Just grabbed one on skynet
Altho I will say this, is there utilization issues with this?? with A3 SMP's I had a steady power draw, maybe a 2 watt vary in each direction. Now, my draw is jumping around between 380 and 417 (417 where I was with A3's) but task manager shows me at constant 100% CPU use. ideas??
Depends on what your preferences are set for, but I think LastThreeFrames is the default. You can set it to "LastFrame", "AllFrames", or "EffectiveRate" as other choices.
Ok, my Gulftown is currently clocked at 4.33 (PSU can't handle all the OC) and I'm getting 30:26 per frame for 36.6 PPD.
29:00
anyone found stability issues yet? It seems the system is more responsive when using the rest of it while bigadv'ing than it dis under a Linux VM
anyone seeing issues yet?
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
Agreed, and that essentially has been the controversy surrounding the P2684 from the get go, hence the giant thread devoted to it and all the issues people have been experiencing. There has occasionally been large point discrepancies between newly released, bigger WUs over older series on the same clients. I don't know why this is the case. I've seen it enough times to realize there must be something odd about the way Stanford assigns credit to WUs, something that is not mentioned by them in all the threads where this topic comes up.So, how come there are A3s units that out score a bigadv? They need to fix the scoring on these, why waste 3 days on a unit you may not even finish to get less points than a few hour unit that doesn't crash?
You guys are braver than I am, but I would suggest that one or two crashes at reasonable clocks and I would not run them until Stanford gets the issues resolved. Hopefully, the P2684s are more stable in Windows since A3 seems to be tailored for it.This needs fixed now, I could understand a bit when they nixxed bigadv but if they nix it to the point where it's not worth more than a normal unit IF it finishes
Yeah, that looks to be about right.So a 12 core rig at 4.3 gets the same or slighlty less than a 16 core at 3.3
Quite likely especially if you're running the GPU client.PPD is fluctuating. Between 33.5K and 35K. I think it is the 480s causing it.
Just an FYI for those that are running a VM and aren't getting any bigadv WU's...apparently they've been turned off.
Supposedly just run the bigadv flag and you're good to go on Windows.
http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=14792&start=15
OK, anyone who is dissatisfied with the performance and has tons of cores and RAM available, maybe try multiple clients to see if there's an overall improvement? I know Stanford frowns on this but it's just for testing purposes and I only suggest it for those who have the big iron to try it out.
I agree that's what the situation is on paper. We don't know how efficient the client or WU is in actual practice. I realize these new units run much slower than the A2 predecessors. It's something only those who have the horsepower to attempt without risk losing the bonus credit. It was only a suggestion.Also they way the bonus is set up, running multi clients like we did back in the day with A1 cores just wont get ya the most ppd anymore. You need as much power as you can get in one client with one bonus structure.
So a 12 core rig at 4.3 gets the same or slighlty less than a 16 core at 3.3
atleast it was a good investment
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
Makes sense...
12 * 4.3 = 51.6
16 * 3.3 = 52.8
Gotta push them quads higher!
When someone completes one of these, can you post the amount of data that was uploaded to Stanford? I can crank out a bunch of these, but I am limited on how much total data I can upload, and my upload speed is "unimpressive".