Folding@Home - Join The Fight! - Page 7

darknight909 · 05-09-2007, 18:31 | posts: 4,845 | Location: San Diego, CA

yay, im catching up to you guys with only my PS3

anyays im still confused on the scoring

1 Finchwizard 12978 17
2 double_cut 6514 26

how does double cut have 9 more working units completed but 6~K points less then finch?

kwak · 05-09-2007, 18:47 | posts: 6,569 | Location: Galactic Sector QQ7 Active J Gamma

exactly. some work units give less points than others, especially the big units give lots of points.

Finchwizard

He must be cheating, I don't have access to that many machines to catch up.

It was good while it lasted.

double_cut · 05-09-2007, 23:26 | posts: 2,150

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finchwizard

He must be cheating, I don't have access to that many machines to catch up.

It was good while it lasted.

You're still well ahead my man, dont give up!

scoutingwraith · 05-09-2007, 23:41 | posts: 9,222 | Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Running it on my new Core 2 Duo CPU in my laptop and the CPU does the job noticeably faster than my old one. I am surprised by it.

Anarion · 05-10-2007, 16:41 | posts: 9,146 | Location: Finland

Guru3D team is now ranked 3967 of 65137! That's really nice.

darknight909 · 05-10-2007, 19:35 | posts: 4,845 | Location: San Diego, CA

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anarion

Guru3D team is now ranked 3967 of 65137! That's really nice.

Wow, not even a week ago we were ranked 9000

Tat3 · **Memory**: 3*2Gb 8-8-8-20 @ 1680MHz

Yesterday completed my first WU

38. Tat3

Finchwizard

Yep, we are doing very well, shooting up the ranks.

double_cut · 05-12-2007, 12:35 | posts: 2,150

Iv had to stop my home machines folding unfortunately, including my PS3. It gets too damn hot in my stuffy little computer room, so I expect to be slipping down the ranks somewhat. Sorry guys, keep up the good work the rest of you!

PS. This is ideal in winter (and save me some actual heating costs), but with summer coming and having such an old house, staying cool is top of the pops atm.

xg-ei8ht · 05-13-2007, 02:08 | posts: 1,730 | Location: London Baby

hey guys, i used to do seti

But i've been doing this for a short time and i've now joined the team.

Cpu.

The more the merrier!!!

Prof. Dr. Silver · 05-13-2007, 07:57 | posts: 14 | Location: Toronto, Canada

Okay guys, eventhough I'm Dutch...I'm not completely stupid, BUT I need to figure out wether I can run CPU/GPU together....AND HOW!!

Hilbert Hagedoorn · 05-13-2007, 08:11 | posts: 16,932 | Location: Guru3D testlab

Shouldn't be a proplem I think. Have you already tried running both clients simultanious ?

Prof. Dr. Silver · 05-13-2007, 08:25 | posts: 14 | Location: Toronto, Canada

Yeah...that just doesn't work....it will tell me I already have another client running! You're up early btw....

KFleshman · 05-13-2007, 18:39 | posts: 445 | Location: 4F 52 2C 55 53

From what I've been reading, to use CPU and GPU together, you'll have to use the console version. Also, you'll want to have one core dedicated to the GPU client. Eg: On a single processor/core machine, you would want to use just the GPU client. On a dual processor (or dual core) machine, you could run one GPU client, and one CPU client. You might have to set the machine ID's to be different on the CPU and GPU client as well (under the advanced options while configuring). Also, the GPU client does not run in the background nicely like the CPU client does, so the computer will apparently be pretty much unusable for a lot of things while the GPU client is running.

Prof. Dr. Silver · **Score!!! -** 05-14-2007, 09:52 | posts: 14 | Location: Toronto, Canada

Okay....DRUMROLL!!!

Date of last work unit 2007-05-14 01:14:00
Active CPUs within 50 days 163
Team Id 69411
Grand Score 132854 (certificate)
Work Unit Count 558 (certificate)
Team Ranking (incl. aggregate) 2720 of 65684
Home Page http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?page=folding

For me personally after 6 fays of folding:
Donator Prof._Dr._Silver
Team guru3d (69411)
Score 1236 (certificate)
Donator Rank 296886 of 718385
WU 6 (certificate)
Date of last work unit 2007-05-13 07:09:56
Active processors (within 50 days) 1
Active processors (within 7 days) 1

Keep up the good work guys!

conroesli · 05-14-2007, 18:34 | posts: 3

which is the best for processing Folding@Home : kenstfield QX6800 or PS3 cell

aircool · 05-14-2007, 19:06 | posts: 13,426 | Location: Devon, In A Little Town.

Quote:

Originally Posted by conroesli

which is the best for processing Folding@Home : kenstfield QX6800 or PS3 cell

both.

conroesli · 05-14-2007, 19:16 | posts: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by aircool

both.

which is better for processing Folding@Home:kenstfield QX6800 or PS3 cell?
----------------------
kenstfield having over than 590 million transistors with 4 really core and 8 MB L2 , but ps3's CELL having 235 million transistors!
_________________________
http://www.geekpatrol.ca/2006/11/pla...3-performance/
I'll just basically repeat what I wrote in the last thread.
1.6 G5 vs. PS3 and I added some Xeon benchmarks they also had. bZip and JPEG seemed like the most common and useful of the benchmarks so here they are. Check out their site for the rest.
bzip2 Compress (multi-threaded scalar)
PlayStation 3 - 124.1
Power Mac G5 - 168.4
Xeon 5160 - 1194.4

bzip2 Decompress (multi-threaded scalar)
PlayStation 3 - 99.5
Power Mac G5 - 133.1
Xeon 5160 - 1353.3

JPEG Compress (multi-threaded scalar)
PlayStation 3 - 94.8
Power Mac G5 - 103.0
Xeon 5160 - 877.6

JPEG Decompress (multi-threaded scalar)
PlayStation 3 - 72.9
Power Mac G5 - 119.2
Xeon 5160 - 788.9

So basically in performance the PS3 processor usually isn't going to be as good as a three and a half year old budget G5 processor. The PS3 is probably about equal to a G4 processor at most general tasks. Kind of pathetic after all the hype Sony made about it before it came out.
It would get totally crushed by a Quad core processor.
__________________________________________
Science on a G5/PS3/MacPro - Benchmarks
As promised last week, I have here some benchmarks that compare the performance of double-precision floating point operations between a PowerMac (2.5 GHz G5), a PlayStation 3 (3.2 GHz Cell) and a Mac Pro (2.66 GHz Xeon). The PowerMac and Mac Pro are running Mac OS X Tiger. The PS3 is running Yellow Dog Linux 5.0. The codes I used are simple, serial and single-threaded. Thus, the numbers below are for a single core only on all the systems. I used a variety of compilers/flags on these different platforms, including some commercial ones. GCC is available for all these systems, IBM XLC (an alpha version) is available for the Cell and Intel's ICC is available for the Mac Pro. Note that for now, I am only using the PPU on the PS3 for these tests, so I'm really using a fraction of the PS3's available hardware.

The "Astrophysics Simulation" is based on one of my own research codes. Its essentially a linear, hyperbolic PDE solver with a complicated source-term. Sorry, the source code is not publicly available. The other two codes compute "Pi" using different approaches. Those codes can be found easily on the internet. Now, on with the number

http://www.macresearch.org/book/print/1382
_________________________________________

What do you all think about it?

Tat3 · **Memory**: 3*2Gb 8-8-8-20 @ 1680MHz

^^

I Would say PS3. With the money you need to make QX6800 PC you can buy atleast 2 PS3's.

Finchwizard

Cell processors perform a lot better at this type of computation.

So the PS3 is better.

The PS3 could be doing them even faster, but they limited how fast they folded.

KFleshman · 05-14-2007, 23:48 | posts: 445 | Location: 4F 52 2C 55 53

In terms of speed for folding:
Video card > PS3 > x86

In terms of flexibility in types of folding problems they can run:
x86 > PS3 > Video card

Finchwizard

How quick does a Videocard render the WU's?

I knew Cell chips were a lot faster than x86 hardware, wasn't sure on Videocards.

conroesli · 05-15-2007, 02:31 | posts: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finchwizard

I knew Cell chips were a lot faster than x86 hardware

why?
---------------------
which is better for processing Folding@Home:my pc or PS3 ?

Finchwizard

You're right, the GPU is faster than a Cell processor, but it's limited in what it can calculate, the Cell Processor is said to be the best because it is much faster than normal x86 hardware and can run more types of calculations that a GPU can't.

The Cell CPU's handle the specific calculations they need very well and very fast compared to the PC's.

You can not compare the G5 chips, even though they are both IBM PPC chips, the new Cell chips are significantly faster, and the new Intel chips used in Mac Pros etc now are x86, not PPC architecture.

So, if you can run the GPU client, then do it, but you may not get as much work as the PS3 because the GPU's will only get a certain set to work on, whereas the PS3 should have a lot of work available to it, and can work much faster than the PC's.

If you can't run the GPU client or the PS3 client, then it's obviously the CPU one.

I'd be running the PS3 though if you can.