Parts for a folding computer
Tim
Southwest PA Icrontian
If you could build a system purely for folding, what parts would you use? List your ultimate system for folding.
And I've got some questions for a twin processor folding system. I was thinking of getting an older system (500+ Mhz) for another folder, but the more I think about it, If I'm going to do that, let's make it interesting and go twin CPU with it. And overclock it! Money is an issue, got to keep it cheap, otherwise I'd pick up some P4 HT twin cpu systems and get into the top 10.
I've read in the forums here that P3's are good folders.
Would having a lot of memory be needed for a folder, or can they do well with a single 128 MB stick? Would twin CPU MB's need 2 sticks?
I have a copy of Windows 98 to use. I think 98 would get the job done without getting in the way like XP would. It'd have enough antivirus software on it to keep it clean.
What twin CPU MB's can be overclocked and run well with P3's? I've looked around on eBay and seen some different ones.
Preferably 900+ Mhz P3's for better speed.
And I've got some questions for a twin processor folding system. I was thinking of getting an older system (500+ Mhz) for another folder, but the more I think about it, If I'm going to do that, let's make it interesting and go twin CPU with it. And overclock it! Money is an issue, got to keep it cheap, otherwise I'd pick up some P4 HT twin cpu systems and get into the top 10.
I've read in the forums here that P3's are good folders.
Would having a lot of memory be needed for a folder, or can they do well with a single 128 MB stick? Would twin CPU MB's need 2 sticks?
I have a copy of Windows 98 to use. I think 98 would get the job done without getting in the way like XP would. It'd have enough antivirus software on it to keep it clean.
What twin CPU MB's can be overclocked and run well with P3's? I've looked around on eBay and seen some different ones.
Preferably 900+ Mhz P3's for better speed.
0
Comments
128 will be fine for folding. 2 CPUs can use the same stick of RAM.
I would go for XP, even on 128mb of RAM.
Dual motherboards cant really be OCed very much at all.
If you get P3s, get ones that SSE, otherwise they wont fold very well at all. There is no reason not to get anything slower than an Athlon Xp unless you already have the parts. The points are not worth spending money on. You can get a complete folding system for prolly less than $200 nowadays.
And there are no Dual P4 machines, they do not exist and it is impossible to run 2 P4s in one machine.
Any specific motherboards that will let me get some good work out of P3's?
I've heard of people overclocking twin processor boards on this site. I don't know what is different, but I'll find out.
How about motherboards that take Slot 1 processors? Are they also limited if you put Socket 370 adapters in them?
SSE is a special way of quickly handling mathematical computations. They're special registers on the CPU that are like specialists in the world of doctors; they're not good at much else, but when they see something they know, they shoot it through the CPU completed faster than any other part of the processors.
Sorry I can't answer your question on P3 SMP computing, however what I can shed light on is what boards people are overclocking: namely Athlon MP/XP motherboards that have CPUs in them with hardware-level modifications (Pin-modding) that forces the CPU to run at a higher speed independent of the BIOS. It's tricky, but it's what works.
Presumably your support for Socket 370 processors will be limited to the capability of the adapter, the motherboard, and its BIOS. The only way to know is to start comparing various boards and adapters. Time to hit Google! Look for dual socket 370 boards, or find reviews of Pentium 3 SMP board. Start here as your guide for searching. What kind of Pentium 3s do you have? That would help us narrow down what's best.. But it's pretty silly to me, as you can buy a dual Athlon system which would cream the P3 system for probably the same price.
For the operating system, you'd have to use Windows XP Pro or Windows 2000 Pro as Windows 98 cannot employ both processors in an SMP computer.
BUT, about RAM. IF you run Windows 98 you will want 128-256 MB if you want to run big WUs AND run a graphics client. IF you run XP and probably also this might apply to 2000, you will want 256 MB per box or 128 MB per processor minimum.
IF, OTOH, you run a console client for Windows, and the box ONLY folds, 128 MB is plenty for all but XP (not enough for XP with Ambers and some of the newer Gros and Double Gros and AmberGros). I have gotten and folded a few Gros with the AmberGS name in thier project IDs recently, which are real complex and call for the standard Gro Core and not the Amber Core whihc was being worked on.
That's a huge question and one that you'd surely get twenty different answers if you'd ask twenty different people. I can offer my opinion as I was in that same predicament before. If you had enough time you could plot processor power and cost on a chart and determine where the two lines meet. That would be your most bang for the buck. AMD has traditionally been the best buy in the processor arena before they introduced their athlon64.
About six months ago I was making the same choices when putting together a folding farm. I wanted the most folding for my dollars and I knew I would want about 5-10 nodes. I chose the amd 2400+ along with 256 megs of ram and a biostar micro-atx board with integrated video and lan. I picked up some cheap hard drives in the 3gb range off ebay and threw win xp on them. I didn't get a monitor or case for any of them to save money. I bought some el cheapo power supplies off newegg. The cost breakdown was as follows:
PSU: $20
CPU: $70
Mobo: $50
Ram: $50
Hard Drive: $10
The entire operation is managed via pcanywhere so a monitor isn't needed. If you wanted, you could purchase a kvm switch for convenience although I didn't choose that route because I would rather my dollars go for parts and affected folding directly. The rack is rather unsightly and is tucked underneath a machine where it is not in direct view. It is cheap but quite effective.
Each node was about $200, give or take. That was six months ago. If given the decision today I would probably go with an amd barton core proc in the 2500-3000 range. I would probably use win 2000 instead of xp because it is leaner for ram usage. I would probably go with 256 mb of ram and enable large work units.
At about the same time, Jon/Sally (JonsHandbrake) was putting together a folding farm. They are using (I think) 3.2 GHz P4's with HT and running two consoles per processor. They do quite well also. There are many approaches. If you plan on running a multi-node farm I wouldn't bother with overclocking unless you have oodles of time that you can use for troubleshooting should some overclocks go south on you. Don't forget to figure in electricity usage (about $6 per month per computer running 24/7), the networking equipment needed to tie the computers together, and the internet connection.
Once again, this is only one approach of the many you could take. Ask anyone else and they will definitely give you a different opinion on how they would attack it. Good luck, and glad to see you have an interest on this level. It sure is fun!
KingFish
I pretty much agree with KingFish on this - I went with the Barton 2500 cpu and I run Win 2K on almost my entire farm. No cases for the most part - a few mobile monitors that I can still lift