Woo Hoo! Climbing through the ranks....

[ghost]

Just a few days ago I was at the bottom of the list, having just joined. Now I'm mid-pack. I know that many members are not folding and that's why I'm climbing so fast, but it's great seeing progress. This P4c is damn quick at folding! :)

I also realize that I won't be able to pass certain guys here that have help with work computers, but nevertheless....it's fun!

[Tawcan]

Is that a P4 c? If so create 2 F@H folders and run 2 instances of folding. Twice the speed! :D

[Humboldt]

Hiya Ghost:)

The chase is part of the fun for sure.

fold on folks

[ghost]

Originally posted by Tawcan
Is that a P4 c? If so create 2 F@H folders and run 2 instances of folding. Twice the speed! :D

I'm not sure I agree with you.

Is it truly faster to separate the logical processors or to just let the "pair" fold the crap out of one WU?

Math analogy:

2 x 10 = 20 vs. 1 x 20 = 20

Each is equal.

:confused:

[ghost]

Originally posted by Humboldt
Hiya Ghost:)

The chase is part of the fun for sure.

fold on folks

Hey Humboldt. I won't catch you, but it'll be fun trying! :)

[Prey521]

WTG Ghost, you're movin right up that chart huh? Humboldt is easy Prey! ;)

[Tawcan]

Sorry I should of explained more.

With P4 C type CPU's they have hyper-thread technology. With hyper-thread turned on the P4 CPU can act as 2 CPU's. Basically you create 2 folders of F@H (named differently), give each client different machine ID's during set up (1 & 2). Finally run them both at the same time.

From what I've heard you get about the same output.
ie
1 CPU running 1 client takes 6 hours.
1 CPU (hyper-thread enabled) running 2 clients (same wu's) takes 6 hours and 15 mins.

Basically you run the CPU as if it's a duallie. :D

[Prey521]

How do you enable the HT option? How would I know if my P4's are HT capable?

[ghost]

Originally posted by Tawcan
Sorry I should of explained more.

With P4 C type CPU's they have hyper-thread technology. With hyper-thread turned on the P4 CPU can act as 2 CPU's. Basically you create 2 folders of F@H (named differently), give each client different machine ID's during set up (1 & 2). Finally run them both at the same time.

From what I've heard you get about the same output.
ie
1 CPU running 1 client takes 6 hours.
1 CPU (hyper-thread enabled) running 2 clients (same wu's) takes 6 hours and 15 mins.

Basically you run the CPU as if it's a duallie. :D

Oh, I know what HT is and how it works, and I also know you can separate the tasks. What's missing from your scenario is:

1 CPU (HT-enabled) running 1 client = ?hrs. ?min.

My guess would be half the time of one P4b CPU running 1 client, i.e., 3 hours (based upon the example you provided), in which case it wouldn't make any difference separating the CPU into two logical processors.

Am I making sense?

[ghost]

Originally posted by Prey521
How do you enable the HT option? How would I know if my P4's are HT capable?

The option will be available in your BIOS, provided you have an updated BIOS that supports HT.

Basically the P4c processors are HT-enabled. They totally kizzle assizzle! :D

And thanks for the encouragement. You're one of those I probably won't be able to catch!

[Tawcan]

Originally posted by ghost
Oh, I know what HT is and how it works, and I also know you can separate the tasks. What's missing from your scenario is:

1 CPU (HT-enabled) running 1 client = ?hrs. ?min.

My guess would be half the time of one CPU running 1 client, i.e., 3 hours (based upon the example you provided), in which case it would matter to separate the CPU into two logical processors.

Am I making sense?

From what I've heard 1 CPU (HT enabled) running 1 client doesn't speed up the wu speed since folding client isn't multi-tasking enabled. (Same as most, if not all of the DC clients)

The scenerio is you proposed would be like..

1 CPU (HT enabled) running 1 client = 6 hrs
1 CPU (HT disabled) running 1 client = 6 hrs
1 CPU (HT enabled) running 2 clients = 6 hrs 15 mins

I don't have a P4 but I think the HT option is in the BIOS.

I'm sure Roger would have more to say on this and can give you more info on this...;)

Look what you did...now I'm late for my electromagnetism tutorial... :p :D :p :D

[ghost]

Originally posted by Tawcan
From what I've heard 1 CPU (HT enabled) running 1 client doesn't speed up the wu speed since folding client isn't multi-tasking enabled. (Same as most, if not all of the DC clients)

The scenerio is you proposed would be like..

1 CPU (HT enabled) running 1 client = 6 hrs
1 CPU (HT disabled) running 1 client = 6 hrs
1 CPU (HT enabled) running 2 clients = 6 hrs 15 mins

I don't have a P4 but I think the HT option is in the BIOS.

I'm sure Roger would have more to say on this and can give you more info on this...;)

Look what you did...now I'm late for my electromagnetism tutorial... :p :D :p :D

If I'm not mistaken, if a program doesn't support HT, then it can't make *full use* of the HT capability but it will still run faster with an HT processor vs. a processor without HT. I understand your trying to help my efficiency, and I really do appreciate it, but I'd like to know more about how this client handles HT before I make any changes.

[rickoic]

I'm not sure either, but why not try this and see if it works.

Make two folders called FAH1 and FAH2.

Place the FAH3Console.exe program in each one.

Right click on the FAH3Console.exe and choose to make a shortcut.

Richt click on the shortcut created and rename it to FAH1 and FAH2.

Richt click on the shortcut created and on the command line make it look like this:

C:\FAH1\FAH3Console.exe -advmethods -forceasm -local -verbosity 9

Accept the changes and then when you run from the shortcut just accept the defaults. When you run it from FAH2 accept all defaults until you get to the option that asks if you want to change the advance settings, answer y to that and then when you get to the option of CPU 1-4 input a 2 here.

Now if you want the programs to automatically start each time you restart the computer right click on the shortcuts and choose the Send To option and send it to Startup.

You shouldn't be any worse off and if it makes them both fold almost as fast as if you were folding only 1 then you will have almost doubled your output.

Tks
Rick

[ghost]

Hmmm....okay. Let me work on that and see what happens.

Thanks for the help. ;)

[Prey521]

Originally posted by ghost
And thanks for the encouragement. You're one of those I probably won't be able to catch!

Probably? My my aren't we a tad cocky!! :D

[ghost]

Originally posted by Prey521
Probably? My my aren't we a tad cocky!! :D

Hey, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt! :D I said probably, since I don't limit my abilities with the word never.

Besides, who knows, maybe your wife will catch you cheating on her with some fat chick and she'll give you an ice pick in the temple. THEN I'd be able to catch up. :D

[ScottE]

Folding@Home is not a multithreaded application so it doesn't take advantage of having 2 CPU's be they physical or logical. So in order to take full advantage of each CPU (again either physical or logical) you need to run a seperate instance of Folding for each Processor.

[Tawcan]

Here you go....

http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=122097561&m=2810958614&r=1900969614#1900969614

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4952&highlight=Hyperthreading

I installed a 3.06ghz P4 in my gaming pc a few days ago. I hadn't been using it for folding since then. This evening I decided to do some testing to see if hyperthreading could improve folding performance.

Executive summary:
Hyperthreading can improve folding performance by 36%.

Details:
I first ran a single folding process (p611) with hyperthreading enabled and disabled. The time per frame was 73 seconds for either. Thus hyperthreading doesn't degrade folding performance. Extrapolating the 73 seconds to 400 frames gives an estimate of 8.11hrs/p611, or 2.96 p611's/day. Starting a second folding process with hyperthreading disabled gave 147 seconds/frame for each process. This would extrapolate to 2.94 p611's/day, or identical to the single process case to within the accuracy of the measurements.

I then re-enabled hyperthreading and started two folding processes (p611 also). The time per frame for each of the two folding processes was 107 seconds. Extrapolating from this gives an estimate of 11.89hrs/p611, or 2.02 p611's/day per process, for a total of 4.04 p611's/day total. 4.04/2.98=1.36, or a 36% improvement.

[Tawcan]

Originally posted by ghost
If I'm not mistaken, if a program doesn't support HT, then it can't make *full use* of the HT capability but it will still run faster with an HT processor vs. a processor without HT. I understand your trying to help my efficiency, and I really do appreciate it, but I'd like to know more about how this client handles HT before I make any changes.

You can try running 1 instance of F@H under the name Spankin_Barbaric_Beavers and I'll tell you if it's efficient or not. :p :D :p :D

[ghost]

Okay, I did as instructed and now have the following:

Two separate instances of F@H working:

http://www.doersch.info/sg/folding.jpg

And Task Manager shows two running processes:

http://www.doersch.info/sg/taskmanager.jpg

However, one seems to be running faster than the other. Any insight?

[Tawcan]

http://folding.stanford.edu/psummary.html

380 is 53 wu points
387 is 15.30 wu points

;) :p :D

[Tawcan]

Man this makes me wanna get an Intel. :eek: :eek: :eek:

[ghost]

Originally posted by Tawcan
http://folding.stanford.edu/psummary.html

380 is 53 wu points
387 is 15.30 wu points

;) :p :D

Ah, okay, I understand better now, thanks. :)

And yes, get an Intel with Hyperthreading...it's the shiznit! :D

[ScottE]

Ghost make sure during the config of the clients you go under advanced options and give the first client Machine ID 1 and the second Machine ID 2.

[ghost]

Originally posted by ScottE
Ghost make sure during the config of the clients you go under advanced options and give the first client Machine ID 1 and the second Machine ID 2.

Yep, that's what I did already, but thanks for the suggestion. ;)

You guys have been a great help, thanks again so much!

[Tawcan]

Originally posted by ghost
Yep, that's what I did already, but thanks for the suggestion. ;)

You guys have been a great help, thanks again so much!

Np. I was in your position a long time ago too! :D So was everyone else. :)