SMX Folding Production, new Thread.

muddocktormuddocktor
edited November 2003 in Folding@Home
Here is how the SMX Project is faring for the week. Stats taken from Statsman's site this morning.

SM1 - 554.90 points/week, 15,044.80 points total
SM2 - 83.40 points/week, 17,057.70 points total
SM3 - 229.80 points/week, 8,417.86 points total
SM4 - 284.00 points/week, 15,107.20 points total
SM5 - 250.99 points/week, 6,662.43 points total
SM6 - 39.75 points/week, 8,635.55 points total
SM7 - 250.47 points/week, 9,236.08 points total
SM8 - 51.40 points/week, 9,516.23 points total
SM9 - 226.57 points/week, 8,780.60 points total
SM10 - 32.00 points/week, 4,586.91 points total
SM11 - 395.30 points/week, 15,521.50 points total
SM12 - 0.00 points/week, 2,787.86 points total
SM13 - 266.19 points/week, 7,196.62 points total
SM14 - 102.80 points/week, 5,547.71 points total
SM15 - 138.58 points/week, 3,405.08 points total
SM16 - 428.39 points/week, 5,948.25 points total
SM17 - 173.70 points/week, 3,614.47 points total
SM18 - 401.64 points/week, 4,068.55 points total
SM19 - 183.67 points/week, 1,245.91 points total
SM20 - still getting parts sent to it to build.

Man, it seems like several of the SMX rigs have hit a decline in points production this week, with a few notable exceptions. We have SM1 leading production with over 550 points this week, followed by SM 16 and SM18 with over 400 points this week each.:thumbsup: Also up for honorable mention is SM11 at 395 points this week. Also, we have SM3, SM4, SM5, SM7, SM9 and SM13 all in the 200-300 point/week range, WTG guys.:)

Now we get to the more disappointing side of the SMX rigs.:( We have SM14, SM15, SM17 and SM19 weighing in at the 100-200 point/week production rate. Of these, SM15, SM17 and SM19 all have XP processors in them, which should be giving at least 300-400 points/week. What's up with these rigs guys?

Finally, we have SM2, SM6, SM8, and SM10 all with less than 100 points for the week, most a lot less. What is the matter with these rigs? It wouldn't hurt to post a little message up here if you are having problems with the rig or you are going to be down for some reason for a while. Hotrodsun was nice enough to post up his problems with SM8 and now he has it back up and folding; all we want is to be informed of any problems.



We have 1 rig totally out of action; SM12 has 0 points for the week.:mad2: :thumbsdow WTF is the matter, Film. Stanford is showing that SM12 hasn't turned in any work since 10/25/03. If you can't or don't want to keep the rig up and folding, then PM me, mmonnin Leonardo or TBonZ and we will arrange to get another host assigned for it.

Total production for the SMX project for the week was 4,001.03 points.:fold:

The total amount of points the SMX project has accumulated for the team is 152,381.31 points.:fold:
«1

Comments

  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    Forgive SM4. She had a little cold. And by "little cold" I mean I inadvertently unplugged her network cable for a few days.
  • t1rhinot1rhino Toronto
    edited November 2003
    w00t SM1!!! Great job to those SMx machines that are actually running. ;)

    Good thing you noticed SM4 was missing a connection b/c SM1 is right on her tail. :D
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    And SM1 will pass her soon. Trish just can't compete with 600 points/week. But better 450 point/week than none. Crank those WUs, dude! :D
  • redoulentredoulent Michigan
    edited November 2003
    Not sure what was going on with SM2. It was going through WU's normally. Just never attempting to send. When I hit ctrl+c, it suddenly decided to start sending WU's in.
  • profdlpprofdlp The Holy City Of Westlake, Ohio
    edited November 2003
    Why not head over here and here and let your team members know that you appreciate the good job they are doing hosting our S-M team rigs!
    :wave::thumbsup::fold:
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited November 2003
    Every host should have EM3 or some other type of monitoring program running. No excuse.

    Everyone Do it NOW!! I am not ****ing around here. Keep them running here people. EM3 makes it SOOOOO easy its rediculous. It only takes up 2 icon spaces in the system tray.
  • QCHQCH Ancient Guru Chicago Area - USA Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    SM19 is running on an Athlon 1400. Not much I can do.
  • muddocktormuddocktor
    edited November 2003
    QCH, if that is all she'll do then that's cool. It's hard to believe that a 1400 Tbird can't outproduce a 1000 P3 (SM13) though. Are you running -advmethods and -forceasm flags on it? I know it doesn't have SSE but the Tbirds do have 3DNow!, which helps on gromacs work.:)
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited November 2003
    And I think gromacs without optimizations is still better than tinkers and genomes.
  • QCHQCH Ancient Guru Chicago Area - USA Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    -advmethods and -forceasm flags are on. I haven't moved over to the new 4.0 beta. If you guys think that would do better then I'll switch het over to that. Also, I am running XP and many of you have indicated that XP is not as productive as W2K.
  • muddocktormuddocktor
    edited November 2003
    I've been using the beta4 client on 3 of my rigs for several days now and no problems; you can give that a try, QCH. Also, if you turn off all the fancy crap and system restore in XP, it should fold just as efficiently as Win2K, it's just 2K with bloatware added to it basically. Turn off all unneeded services and the fancy bells and whistles in XP and see how she does first, instead of installing 2K, and see if the folding times improve.
  • QCHQCH Ancient Guru Chicago Area - USA Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    I locked down the system fairly well. All unessecary sarvices are diabled and EVERY eyecandy XP feature is diabled. It looks just like W2K. Restore, indexing, and hibernating are also gone. I will wait until the current WU is complete and switch to the beta 4 client.
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    muddocktor had this to say
    I've been using the beta4 client on 3 of my rigs for several days now and no problems;

    Any improvement in speed? Also, for an AXP, what flags should be used?
  • muddocktormuddocktor
    edited November 2003
    Nothing conclusive on a speed increase so far, TD, but it definitely isn't slower than 3.25. I've only been able to match up 2 proteins that have been done with both 3.25 and 4.0 and on 1 of them, it looks like 4.0beta was just a tick faster.

    The biggest change in flags that I've seen with 4.0 is that you need to use a new flag, -forceSSE, to enable SSE usage on your XP procs. The -forceasm flag only gets 3DNow! assembly loops with the 4.0 client now. Your other flags such as -verbosity 9 and -advmethods still work the same way as on 3.25 clients.
  • t1rhinot1rhino Toronto
    edited November 2003
    SM1 is running XP with beta4. ;)
    Not one problem yet. :)
  • profdlpprofdlp The Holy City Of Westlake, Ohio
    edited November 2003
    muddocktor had this to say
    ...Your other flags such as -verbosity 9 and -advmethods still work the same way as on 3.25 clients.
    -verbosity 9? What does that do? :confused:
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    muddocktor had this to say
    ... -forceSSE ... -forceasm

    So in a nutshell, with 4.0, I want -forceSSE -forceasm -advmethods?
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited November 2003
    Hmm I havent ried both forceasm and forceSSE. I dont know if it can do both type of loops or not. I thought it was one or the other. Not sure tho.

    -verbosity X where x is a number 1-9 (integer values) determines the level of information written to the log file. The higher the number the more written. I always use 9. Default is like 6 or something.
  • muddocktormuddocktor
    edited November 2003
    Mr. Kwitko had this to say


    So in a nutshell, with 4.0, I want -forceSSE -forceasm -advmethods?

    All you need is the -forceSSE flag; you no longer need the -forceasm flag with the 4.0 beta and an XP proc. Also, unless they've changed the beta a little more, you need to enter it with the "SSE" capitalized as in -forceSSE, not -forcesse like mmonnin just posted. It seems to be case-sensitive.
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    Cool, thanks!
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited November 2003
    I edited so no one else would see it. I was in a hurry.
  • edcentricedcentric near Milwaukee, Wisconsin Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    QCH, It does sound like something might be wrong. I was running two tbird machines and getting about 70/day. A single 1.4 should manage 225-275/week.
  • QCHQCH Ancient Guru Chicago Area - USA Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    I'll look into it tonight...
  • qparadoxqparadox Vancouver, BC
    edited November 2003
    SM-17 is running 3.25 beta on Linux -forceasm -advmethods. Its now had over 2 weeks up uptime and it still folds at basically 200 pts a week. I'm going to switch one of my servers from windows 2000 to FreeBSD during my semester break, so I'll have a windows license for SM17 to use then and see if it changes anything.

    The proc refuses to overclock stably on that board and and I also get a lot more tinkers (see reason here here because of a bug with the folding core and SM17's last 3 units have been tinkers (this is why its droped from ~240-250 a week to 170, it might drop even further). Its currently on frame 230 of a 400 frame tinker WU. I will NOT delete tinker wu's to get gromacs as I believe the intention of the F@H project was to get

    Like I said above, I'll switch it to windows first thing on December 8th after my last exam and see what happens. But until then with no overclocking and a rain of SSE-less tinkers its going to be pretty hard to bump SM17 up at all, I've heard some grumbling about 4.00 and I'd rather not have a hung machine daily so I'll stick with what's stable for now.
  • EnverexEnverex Worcester, UK Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    Wouldn't it be better to run Win2k on the SM rigs rather than XP? As XP seems an unneeded waste of Space and RAM in comparison....

    NS
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited November 2003
    Yes XP would be better esp with some machines only haveing 128MB of RAM.
  • EnverexEnverex Worcester, UK Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    mmonnin had this to say
    Yes XP would be better esp with some machines only haveing 128MB of RAM.

    :rolleyes2

    NS
  • muddocktormuddocktor
    edited November 2003
    NS, I think mm meant 2k, not XP. Sometimes his hands don't interpret what his brain is thinking correctly.:eek2::p

    I prefer 2k myself for folding only rigs as it uses less resources, but you can strip all the bloatware and excess crap off from running on XP and get pretty close.
  • redoulentredoulent Michigan
    edited November 2003
    Icrontic2 appears to be back on his pure protein diet. SM2 is running the 4.0 client prerelease 1.
  • edcentricedcentric near Milwaukee, Wisconsin Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    qp, one of my machines is seeing a lot of tinkers also.
    Just one question, what is a Windows license? jk
Sign In or Register to comment.