1294 points WU.

dragonV8dragonV8 not here much New
edited December 2005 in Folding@Home
Just had a look at psummaryC and found some new WU's.

1294 points was the highest...........................w00t!!!! :)

p2360_Coiled_Coil.

Comments

  • TroganTrogan London, UK
    edited December 2005
    Are you kidding - 1294 points :wow2:


    I can hardly fold a 600 pointer. Luckly, I'm only getting small WU's currently :D
  • botheredbothered Manchester UK
    edited December 2005
    Does it matter how many points a WU is worth? Smaller ones are quicker so is there any points average advantage in large ones?
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited December 2005
    bothered wrote:
    Does it matter how many points a WU is worth? Smaller ones are quicker so is there any points average advantage in large ones?
    Large wu's are nice for dedicated rigs but on a day to day usable rig the smaller wu's won't bog down your gaming and/or pron.
  • zakalwezakalwe Estonia New
    edited December 2005
    I just did some math. (well, I've only had few units so far, but maybe that's why I enthusiastically think about it): it just interested me
    The WU credit and time elapsed are not exactly proportional. And it seems mid-credit units are the best (in terms of points) to fold.
    I'm folding on daily basis only (12hrs a day I'd say) and using my stock Athlon64 2800+ with 512 RAM.
    The results are as follow. (based on 100 frames)
    46 point unit: approx 8 minutes per frame, meaning 800 mins total
    364 point unit: approx 18 minutes per frame, 1800 mins total
    600 point unit: approx 39 minutes per frame, 3900 mins total

    As you can see, the 364-credit unit is actually the best to fold...oh, and it is great to actually SEE some progress:)
    And it also seems, that the larger the WU the more doing something else slows down it's progress, not that folding itself has any effect on games/audio or mixing/whatever. I run it as a low priority process, too.

    PS: If someone is interested and as my folding progresses, I may try to keep record with the average time/point ratio from now on.
  • edcentricedcentric near Milwaukee, Wisconsin Icrontian
    edited December 2005
    part of the effect is also that the wus are baselined on Intel boxes, and some of them faster on AMD machines (can you say Tinker).
    Little things also effect time like special instructions. So even which version of a CPU you run may matter.
  • Sledgehammer70Sledgehammer70 California Icrontian
    edited December 2005
    I have yet to see one of these new WU's but would like to fold 22 of them :)
  • dragonV8dragonV8 not here much New
    edited December 2005
    Found one running on "Lightning". (AMD64 3500). Takes a while. :)
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited December 2005
    Does it matter how many points a WU is worth? Smaller ones are quicker so is there any points average advantage in large ones?
    The experience I've had throughout my participation in Folding, about three years, is that high-point work units generally result in more points production for a given period of time. I've been making big hay with the 9130 600-point units. Theoretically, the smaller units completing faster would approximate the larger units completing more slowly. With my machines, listed below and others no longer under my control, the fat units have always been better.
Sign In or Register to comment.