mud, from reading what you quoted, I don't see where John ever claims that Tinkers use any optimizations - merely that they're purely FPU which gives AMDs the edge over Intels - which is exactly the same thing you said.
I might have misread something though, because I'm tired.
Quoted the wrong technobabble, GHoosdum. Here is the proper technobabble I should have quoted:
The P4s emulate SSE like ****. They actually do about 2\3 rate with pure old SSE (which is what the core_65 forces them to do, it uses 3DNow and P4s have to drop to SSE to emulate) versus SSE2. I do not think the Client 4.01.00 or new release core_78 purely is calling for SSE2, but that is what is happening-- the P4s are handling processing mostly using code in SSE2. P4s can do that with work that does not use specific and direct SSE or 3Dnow (which gets handled as SSE) throughout, and can reroute internally to SSE2 functions where more optimum.
From looking at logs and intelligently looking at stats and comments, what happens is this:
-forceasm turns AMD(Barton and up I know, suspect possibly also some of the newer Athlon pre-Bartons but probably not the Durons except for the VERY latest ones) style assembly optimizations on, and -advmethds also does something-- but on a Barton all it does is cause a fetch predisposition to get newer Beta Core_78 and newer beta WUs. Barttons, would say to use all three switches.
On the P4s, the -forceasm does nothing at all and the -advmethods gets faster WUs and tells the P4s (not Willamettes, but Northwoods and up) to tune the SSE internally. P4s later than Willamettes, use the two mentioned above, as the -forceasm does nothing and assembly optimization turns on anyway without the -forceasm on these advanced P4s. P4 is weird beast, if it runs old SSE code, it runs slower code through its deeper pipes and changes cache strategy. If it gets 32 bit compiled code, it tunes it on the fly. That is core of assembly optimnization in a Northwood and up. Prescott will want SSE2 to run right, feed it SSE direct call vector code, it will be real slow. Old games will stink on a P4 of Northwood and up, Barton will emulate better.
Now, the folding assignment servers know what to serve based in part on machine specific data tied to the machine specifc UID hash, and it would appear that the machine type is in this hash now with new client onboard. I did this-- ReConfigured the Barton to the machine ID the P4 had, by machine number. Then, reconfigured the P4 to the Barton's ID. And hacked the machine type and switched those. NEXT WU after that, which was assigned, the Barton got the same WU that the P4 had last, AND vice versa. 48 hours later, the Barton and the P4 were getting WUs back to the older pattern I could see from mining logs for WU specific project info. AND the machine types were changed back. Replicated 3X. Lesson, if you switch around machine IDs, you may get WUs not subtuned for your box, and changing machine type is a definite no-no.
FROM what is happening, the bench timing is used for a rough guess as to how much vector in WUs to push, by project ID and clone. I THINK, in the betas, folding is implementing a 32 bit assembler\compiler. P4s will optimize this natively if given the chance-- with an on-the-fly optimizing based on cache contents. Bartons will if told to. OTOH, with older code, Bartons will try to optimize, and P4s will emulate. I KNOW pure 16 bit code gets emulated in P4s. If you like old classic games, get an AMD. If you like things written for SSE2 or full-fledged SSE, get a P4. I do not think that the Willamettes do as well with SSE-->SSE2 optimizing as Northwoods and up, partly because their anticipation guesses are one heck of a lot worse, and that in part is because they are using smaller chunks of code to use as an anticipation guess base. IF folding were to have implemented full SSE2, which they have NOT yet done, Northwoods and up would massively rock but many boxes that fold now would BOG, especially those who have older boxes and CPUs, partly becasue this is best done with 64 bit compilers which are not fully mature yet. The short machine bench now used does not pick out the full difference between the P4 and Barton and up tuning strategies, but the assignment servers appear to be getting feedback on turnin that lets them tune assingments unless all the "best" servers for a box are busy. The P4 loves project 1000 series, and hates project 900 series. The Barton likes the opposite-- and the -forceasm switch.
John.
This post is just full of pure bs about Tinkers and Gromacs.
About a 10% increase over our current rate would get us gaining on them.
C'mon gang - we can all find an extra 10% somewhere. Recruit a friend, tweak your box, build that new rig.
Well I'll be installing folding on neighbours 3gh P4 tonite. I know I promised to do this earlier in the thread but time is a real problem at the moment as I'm trying to get a car fit for the road & sold and at present thats my number one priority cos garage space & time is limited till my parents get back from holiday. (I know, folding is priority too but sometimes the pesky real world gets in the way of things. )
Jim
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited January 2004
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 17, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,813 </td><td>372</td><td>20.5</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>398,954</td><td>8,112,854.36</td><td>219,268.38</td><td>29,969.74</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>980</td><td>225</td><td>23.0</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>414,312</td><td>7,372,915.51</td><td>196,289.83</td><td>28,661.79</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>932</td><td>254</td><td>27.3</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>372,915</td><td>7,011,596.34</td><td>186,713.31</td><td>24,677.89</td></tr>
</table>
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
mud, from reading what you quoted, I don't see where John ever claims that Tinkers use any optimizations - merely that they're purely FPU which gives AMDs the edge over Intels - which is exactly the same thing you said.
I might have misread something though, because I'm tired.
Correct, GHoosdum.
Point was, because the Tinkers in fact do not have anything the modern Barton or the P4 can use to optimize to SSE2 or the closest equiv in the AMD CPUs, the P4s actually have to emulate older code to run Tinkers. I included detail to show why, but the base point is, that the P4 actually drops to a complete earlier processor emulation mode as best it can to run Tinkers-- which is gawdawfully. The Barton also drops use of 3Dnow, but it was designed to be more backward compatible so it does this less gawdawfully. In this case, less tuning is better, it allows for older things to run closer to the way they run on the processors they were designed for with AMD. What the toally 64 bit processors will do with Tinkers, is, I suspect worse yet performance compared to what WUs coded for more modern processors would do on the 64 bit CPUs(for instance the new betas compared to the Tinkers, just to keep same comaprison intact). Note, by 64 bit I mean full 64 bit including data out clear to at least bridges in chipset, preferably clear out to PCI-X slots and usage of 64x64 or up RAM. Right now, on some mobos, we have 64 bit internal to core and 32 bit data busses, which give some improvement but not as much as if the whole chipset and data busses out through mobo were 64 bit.
To tune for forward(new features in code plus 64 bit or 32 bit CODE versus 16 bit-- Tinkers are 16 bit FPU code at best), you lose implicitly (and as a corrallary effect) some effectiveness working with older code, except where the base algorithms are handled well in firmware. Essentially, firmware is limited space relative to CPU area and also the body of code out there in the sense of whole body in use is way behind processor dev-- body of code in final usable form can be 2-6 years behind current hardware market easily.
John.
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited January 2004
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 18, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,813</td><td>379</td><td>20.9</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>399,781</td><td>8,144,392.82</td><td>224,510.63</td><td>31,538.46</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>981</td><td>229</td><td>23.3</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>415,115</td><td>7,400,914.92</td><td>201,889.01</td><td>27,999.41</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>932</td><td>254</td><td>27.3</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>373,622</td><td>7,036,564.14</td><td>188,605.85</td><td>24,967.80</td></tr>
</table>
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited January 2004
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 19, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,814</td><td>380</td><td>20.9</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>400,587</td><td>8,174,541.6</td><td>219,490.47</td><td>30,148.85</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>981</td><td>229</td><td>23.3</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>415,814</td><td>7,427,552.36</td><td>197,854.02</td><td>26,637.44</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>933</td><td>251</td><td>26.9</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>374,357</td><td>7,062,197.85</td><td>184,577.44</td><td>25,633.71</td></tr>
</table>
John, a little suggestion: start showing the 2 teams ahead of ARS also as we are damn near at MaxPC's production rate now.:D
mudd
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited January 2004
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 22, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>7</td><td>3,316</td><td>592</td><td>17.9</td><td> Maximum PC Magazine</td><td>265,922</td><td>8,401,757.82</td><td>200,107.40</td><td>23,956.72</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,815 </td><td>372</td><td>20.5</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>403,165</td><td> 8,268,298.62</td><td>217,272.39</td><td>22,374.03</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>984</td><td>229</td><td>23.3</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td> 418,358</td><td>7,516,241.61</td><td>200,257.16</td><td> 26,549.03</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>939</td><td>252</td><td>26.8</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>376,659</td><td>7,138,241.80</td><td>180,135.10</td><td> 21,915.80</td></tr>
</table>
Note, our Daily Points Total was greater than Team 7 and 8's respective total for the time frame I use, for the noon data pickup on the 23rd-- header date is day period BEGINS.
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
John, a little suggestion: start showing the 2 teams ahead of ARS also as we are damn near at MaxPC's production rate now.:D
mudd
Ok, will build tables for positions 3 higher than us(through Team position 6) starting today. That is not hard, essentially Cut-n-Paste another row in and then take a bit longer to maintain each time. I will also not go much more than one lower ever, so what shows might gradually morph as to teams actually shown. Also, below is a kinda neat link for anyone who wants to see a fun graph.... Not mine, is on Statsman.
Look at the "Production History" graph (top one) and you will see what I use to decide what to display and why I stuck in an extra team yesterday when I PULLED data for the graph.
i apologize for my extreme folding loss, one comp went to a dumbass cousin who doesnt know too much about a computer, she referred to the network card as a spatula with a stick... and my ex had a 2600+ which I built for her free of charge, and she took folding off of that, so i lost a 2600+ and a 3200+ within a month.... so *sigh*, and my new gf has a 5 yr old comp with windows se on it so.... there is no point on making that hunk of garbage fold...and if i want my lappy to fold i need top buy a cooling system for it
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited January 2004
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 23, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>6</td><td>2,522</td><td>434</td><td>17.2</td><td> Team Rage3D</td><td>606,832</td><td>10,020,259.33</td><td>232,638.34</td><td>29,154.83</td></tr>
<tr><td>7</td><td>3,318</td><td>593</td><td>17.9</td><td> Maximum PC Magazine</td><td>266,560</td><td>8,429,125.97</td><td>199,219.30</td><td> 27,368.15</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,816 </td><td>373</td><td>20.5</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>403,721</td><td>8,292,493.74</td><td>209,609.12</td><td>24,195.12</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>984</td><td>231</td><td>23.5</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td> 419,024</td><td>7,542,346.23</td><td>198,092.51</td><td>26,104.62</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>940</td><td>247</td><td>26.3</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>377,371</td><td>7,163,190.84</td><td>176,272.39</td><td>24,949.04</td></tr>
</table>
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited January 2004
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 24, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>6</td><td>2,527</td><td>435</td><td>17.2</td><td> Team Rage3D</td><td>607,587</td><td>10,050,894.71</td><td>228,748.77</td><td>30,635.38</td></tr>
<tr><td>7</td><td>3,320</td><td>592</td><td>17.8</td><td> Maximum PC Magazine</td><td> 267,229</td><td>8,458,608.21</td><td>200,794.35</td><td>29,482.24</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,818</td><td>373</td><td>20.5</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>404,328</td><td>8,319,334.25</td><td>206,479.89</td><td>26,840.51</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>984</td><td>231</td><td>23.5</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>419,714</td><td>7,568,422.82</td><td>195,507.31</td><td> 26,076.59</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>941</td><td>247</td><td>26.2</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>378,089</td><td>7,186,729.58</td><td>175,133.24</td><td>23,538.74</td></tr>
</table>
On another note, have you all noticed that OCAU's other big folder, plext, has scaled way back lately? I wonder what's going on there.
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited January 2004
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 26, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>6</td><td>2,543</td><td>442</td><td>17.4</td><td> Team Rage3D</td><td>609,224</td><td>10,120,595.06</td><td>231,845.86</td><td>39,084.19</td></tr>
<tr><td>7</td><td>3,323</td><td>578</td><td>17.4</td><td> Maximum PC Magazine</td><td>268,623</td><td>8,520,009.84</td><td>205,089.96</td><td>33,335.75</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,820</td><td>379</td><td>20.8</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td> 405,945</td><td>8,398,148.01</td><td>223,606.34</td><td>50,201.03!!!</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>986</td><td>226</td><td>22.9</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>421,041</td><td>7,621,675.06</td><td>194,122.70</td><td>27,681.06</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>943</td><td>248</td><td>26.3</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>379,584</td><td>7,239,173.66</td><td>176,975.81</td><td>28,397.39</td></tr>
</table>
The AMDmb team is falling behind right now.... More catchup to do to keep up with us once GnomeWizardd's boxes come online.... They are now off the top 9 producing teams based on weeklies.... And, AFAIK, the big boxes are getting a bunch of the biggest Gromacs all the sudden, so look at tomorrow's results before thinking this is pattern-- with lots of big Gromacs, my boxes peak with points every three days. BUT, look at what Team Eggroll managed yesterday.... I hope that is not a pattern from them....
plext got a crapload of tinkers and I guess stanford ran out of diskspace. He will be credited for that. I guess they lost or couldnt handle 4k WUs from everybody. plext should have a huge jump when stanford gives credit.
plext got a crapload of tinkers and I guess stanford ran out of diskspace. He will be credited for that. I guess they lost or couldnt handle 4k WUs from everybody. plext should have a huge jump when stanford gives credit.
Yeah I keep getting tinkers, whats the deal? It takes me ~48 hrs to complete two running at the same time, its almost not even worth it for me to do them (but I am anyways).
Yeah I keep getting tinkers, whats the deal? It takes me ~48 hrs to complete two running at the same time, its almost not even worth it for me to do them (but I am anyways).
maybe (ehem) ...just maybe if you contact one of the admins at the stanford forums you can request to become a beta tester for wu's. I don't think that the beta testers are getting many stinkers. however ...this doesn't guarantee that you'll not get tinkers but it may reassign the assignment server. just a thought.
I had not really gotten any tinkers up untill yesterday. Occasionally one would pop up, but I would delete it and then I would be assigned a gromac. But now I get a tinker on each console, even if I delete them, they come back
Maybe that's because they are currently looking at the results that tinkers provide? Maybe it's just me but I don't really see what deleting the protiens they want you to do furthers the project.
Even though I'm not particularly fond of (s)Tinkers, I still let them fold on through. They are still a necessary part of the project as Stanford still has some simulations that they can't presently run on Gromacs.
Comments
I might have misread something though, because I'm tired.
This post is just full of pure bs about Tinkers and Gromacs.
Well I'll be installing folding on neighbours 3gh P4 tonite. I know I promised to do this earlier in the thread but time is a real problem at the moment as I'm trying to get a car fit for the road & sold and at present thats my number one priority cos garage space & time is limited till my parents get back from holiday. (I know, folding is priority too but sometimes the pesky real world gets in the way of things.
Jim
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 17, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,813 </td><td>372</td><td>20.5</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>398,954</td><td>8,112,854.36</td><td>219,268.38</td><td>29,969.74</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>980</td><td>225</td><td>23.0</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>414,312</td><td>7,372,915.51</td><td>196,289.83</td><td>28,661.79</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>932</td><td>254</td><td>27.3</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>372,915</td><td>7,011,596.34</td><td>186,713.31</td><td>24,677.89</td></tr>
</table>
Correct, GHoosdum.
Point was, because the Tinkers in fact do not have anything the modern Barton or the P4 can use to optimize to SSE2 or the closest equiv in the AMD CPUs, the P4s actually have to emulate older code to run Tinkers. I included detail to show why, but the base point is, that the P4 actually drops to a complete earlier processor emulation mode as best it can to run Tinkers-- which is gawdawfully. The Barton also drops use of 3Dnow, but it was designed to be more backward compatible so it does this less gawdawfully. In this case, less tuning is better, it allows for older things to run closer to the way they run on the processors they were designed for with AMD. What the toally 64 bit processors will do with Tinkers, is, I suspect worse yet performance compared to what WUs coded for more modern processors would do on the 64 bit CPUs(for instance the new betas compared to the Tinkers, just to keep same comaprison intact). Note, by 64 bit I mean full 64 bit including data out clear to at least bridges in chipset, preferably clear out to PCI-X slots and usage of 64x64 or up RAM. Right now, on some mobos, we have 64 bit internal to core and 32 bit data busses, which give some improvement but not as much as if the whole chipset and data busses out through mobo were 64 bit.
To tune for forward(new features in code plus 64 bit or 32 bit CODE versus 16 bit-- Tinkers are 16 bit FPU code at best), you lose implicitly (and as a corrallary effect) some effectiveness working with older code, except where the base algorithms are handled well in firmware. Essentially, firmware is limited space relative to CPU area and also the body of code out there in the sense of whole body in use is way behind processor dev-- body of code in final usable form can be 2-6 years behind current hardware market easily.
John.
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 18, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,813</td><td>379</td><td>20.9</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>399,781</td><td>8,144,392.82</td><td>224,510.63</td><td>31,538.46</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>981</td><td>229</td><td>23.3</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>415,115</td><td>7,400,914.92</td><td>201,889.01</td><td>27,999.41</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>932</td><td>254</td><td>27.3</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>373,622</td><td>7,036,564.14</td><td>188,605.85</td><td>24,967.80</td></tr>
</table>
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 19, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,814</td><td>380</td><td>20.9</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>400,587</td><td>8,174,541.6</td><td>219,490.47</td><td>30,148.85</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>981</td><td>229</td><td>23.3</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>415,814</td><td>7,427,552.36</td><td>197,854.02</td><td>26,637.44</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>933</td><td>251</td><td>26.9</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>374,357</td><td>7,062,197.85</td><td>184,577.44</td><td>25,633.71</td></tr>
</table>
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 20, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,814 </td><td>379</td><td>20.9</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>401,589</td><td>8,210,589.24</td><td> 222,988.04</td><td>36,047.57</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>982</td><td>228</td><td>23.2</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>416,714</td><td>7,458,679.74</td><td>200,291.40</td><td>31,127.38</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>936</td><td>252</td><td>26.9</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>375,180</td><td>7,088,938.10</td><td>184,593.15</td><td>26,740.25</td></tr>
</table>
John-- who has had extensive eye work being done last three days....
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 21, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,815 </td><td>374</td><td>20.6</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>402,603</td><td>8,245,924.59</td><td>227,572.56</td><td>35,335.35</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>982</td><td>230</td><td>23.4</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>417,664</td><td>7,489,692.58</td><td>203,296.09</td><td>31,012.84</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>938</td><td>255</td><td>27.2</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>376,033</td><td>7,116,326.00</td><td>185,487.54</td><td>27,387.90</td></tr>
</table>
mudd
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 22, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>7</td><td>3,316</td><td>592</td><td>17.9</td><td> Maximum PC Magazine</td><td>265,922</td><td>8,401,757.82</td><td>200,107.40</td><td>23,956.72</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,815 </td><td>372</td><td>20.5</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>403,165</td><td> 8,268,298.62</td><td>217,272.39</td><td>22,374.03</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>984</td><td>229</td><td>23.3</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td> 418,358</td><td>7,516,241.61</td><td>200,257.16</td><td> 26,549.03</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>939</td><td>252</td><td>26.8</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>376,659</td><td>7,138,241.80</td><td>180,135.10</td><td> 21,915.80</td></tr>
</table>
Note, our Daily Points Total was greater than Team 7 and 8's respective total for the time frame I use, for the noon data pickup on the 23rd-- header date is day period BEGINS.
Ok, will build tables for positions 3 higher than us(through Team position 6) starting today. That is not hard, essentially Cut-n-Paste another row in and then take a bit longer to maintain each time. I will also not go much more than one lower ever, so what shows might gradually morph as to teams actually shown. Also, below is a kinda neat link for anyone who wants to see a fun graph.... Not mine, is on Statsman.
http://statsman.ww-testsites.co.uk/folding2stats/html/index.html
Look at the "Production History" graph (top one) and you will see what I use to decide what to display and why I stuck in an extra team yesterday when I PULLED data for the graph.
John
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 23, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>6</td><td>2,522</td><td>434</td><td>17.2</td><td> Team Rage3D</td><td>606,832</td><td>10,020,259.33</td><td>232,638.34</td><td>29,154.83</td></tr>
<tr><td>7</td><td>3,318</td><td>593</td><td>17.9</td><td> Maximum PC Magazine</td><td>266,560</td><td>8,429,125.97</td><td>199,219.30</td><td> 27,368.15</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,816 </td><td>373</td><td>20.5</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>403,721</td><td>8,292,493.74</td><td>209,609.12</td><td>24,195.12</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>984</td><td>231</td><td>23.5</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td> 419,024</td><td>7,542,346.23</td><td>198,092.51</td><td>26,104.62</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>940</td><td>247</td><td>26.3</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>377,371</td><td>7,163,190.84</td><td>176,272.39</td><td>24,949.04</td></tr>
</table>
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 24, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>6</td><td>2,527</td><td>435</td><td>17.2</td><td> Team Rage3D</td><td>607,587</td><td>10,050,894.71</td><td>228,748.77</td><td>30,635.38</td></tr>
<tr><td>7</td><td>3,320</td><td>592</td><td>17.8</td><td> Maximum PC Magazine</td><td> 267,229</td><td>8,458,608.21</td><td>200,794.35</td><td>29,482.24</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,818</td><td>373</td><td>20.5</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td>404,328</td><td>8,319,334.25</td><td>206,479.89</td><td>26,840.51</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>984</td><td>231</td><td>23.5</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>419,714</td><td>7,568,422.82</td><td>195,507.31</td><td> 26,076.59</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>941</td><td>247</td><td>26.2</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>378,089</td><td>7,186,729.58</td><td>175,133.24</td><td>23,538.74</td></tr>
</table>
On another note, have you all noticed that OCAU's other big folder, plext, has scaled way back lately? I wonder what's going on there.
<table bgcolor="CCFCFC" border="1">
<tr><th colspan="9">Stats for January 26, 2004</th></tr>
<tr><td>Team#</td><td>Total Members</td><td>Active Members</td><td>%Active</td><td>Team Name</td><td>Total WU</td><td>Total Score</td><td>Total Points\Week</td><td>Total Points\Day</td></tr>
<tr><td>6</td><td>2,543</td><td>442</td><td>17.4</td><td> Team Rage3D</td><td>609,224</td><td>10,120,595.06</td><td>231,845.86</td><td>39,084.19</td></tr>
<tr><td>7</td><td>3,323</td><td>578</td><td>17.4</td><td> Maximum PC Magazine</td><td>268,623</td><td>8,520,009.84</td><td>205,089.96</td><td>33,335.75</td></tr>
<tr><td>8</td><td>1,820</td><td>379</td><td>20.8</td><td>Ars Technica Team Egg Roll</td><td> 405,945</td><td>8,398,148.01</td><td>223,606.34</td><td>50,201.03!!!</td></tr>
<tr><td>9</td><td>986</td><td>226</td><td>22.9</td><td>Team Short-Media</td><td>421,041</td><td>7,621,675.06</td><td>194,122.70</td><td>27,681.06</td></tr>
<tr><td>10</td><td>943</td><td>248</td><td>26.3</td><td>Amdmb.com Folding
Team</td><td>379,584</td><td>7,239,173.66</td><td>176,975.81</td><td>28,397.39</td></tr>
</table>
The AMDmb team is falling behind right now.... More catchup to do to keep up with us once GnomeWizardd's boxes come online.... They are now off the top 9 producing teams based on weeklies.... And, AFAIK, the big boxes are getting a bunch of the biggest Gromacs all the sudden, so look at tomorrow's results before thinking this is pattern-- with lots of big Gromacs, my boxes peak with points every three days. BUT, look at what Team Eggroll managed yesterday....
Yeah I keep getting tinkers, whats the deal? It takes me ~48 hrs to complete two running at the same time, its almost not even worth it for me to do them (but I am anyways).
I had not really gotten any tinkers up untill yesterday. Occasionally one would pop up, but I would delete it and then I would be assigned a gromac. But now I get a tinker on each console, even if I delete them, they come back
-Aranyic