PTrpCage protien

[downhill]

Man this thing is HUGE........I'm taking around 24 minutes a step. :eek:

I wonder if those with slower computers are even going to be able to finish this one in time. I'm too lazy to see what's going on with it or how long you have to finish it....but man....

Did I mention this thing is HUGE.

[rickoic]

Actually I've had about 3 of them so far and they finish faster than the P180/2's and are worth 6.20 points. Give me more of them.:D

[downhill]

Interesting...mine are in no way shape or form, finishing faster. LOL

Looks to be more than double the time it took for a p180..If that's the case....those of you into the race are screwed if you get one.

[downhill]

LOL...a day and 3/4's later, it's still running on my XP 1800, which is overclocked....

I get 6.2 points for it? LOL

[downhill]

Well after doing some reading, I figured that if your using an AMD processor, your going to be penalized for running this protien.

As much as 50 percent over those running p4's with SSE..

I feel so dirty.

[downhill]

Now I do feel dirty.....

I only get 6.19 points for it. LOL They cheated me a tenth. :eek:

[rickoic]

I know, just like the p180/2's when I only get 5.59 points. Real Bummer.....

[downhill]

Originally posted by rickoic
I know, just like the p180/2's when I only get 5.59 points. Real Bummer.....

I'm being sarcastic. I fold because of the benefit it might someday prove to be. The points don't mean much to me. :)

In saying that, however, a lot of folk love the competition between teams. Those that get this protein and don't have a large processor or those using AMD's are at a disadvantage...as the point's given for this vs what you can do with the other proteins will discourage quite a few good folders, I'm afraid.

For instance, I hit anywhere from 58 to 72 a week, depending on what protiens I get....if all I folded, was this new protien...I'd never get over 23 or so. Big difference.

[rickoic]

Don't get me wrong. I fold for the possible bennefit of what may be accomplished. And hope that it will be in my lifetime. I switched from SETI to Folding for that reason. However saying that, I also enjoy a bit of compitition even though I know that I will never catch or pass many of the persons folding. I just wish that there were a little more feedback and possibly a way that if we wanted to we could pick which project to fold on. My P3 usually takes 46 hours to fold a p180/2 unit, but when it got one of these units, it finished it in about 25 hours. There might be a difference in each unit however. I've also noticed that some of the other units don't post as advertised also.

[Encnuk]

Look at it the other way around. The AMD people have been having the advantage for quite some time now, and the P4 people have been ripped off for months. It is about time that they code their cores in a way that they use the power of the P4 and give us the credit we deserve.

[downhill]

Originally posted by Unkink
Look at it the other way around. The AMID people have been having the advantage for quite some time now, and the P4 people have been ripped off for months. It is about time that they code their cores in a way that they use the power of the P4 and give us the credit we deserve.


Eh?

I'm not disagreeing with Stanford using SSE...In fact it's a great idea.

And I fail to see what advantage AMD had over Intel in folding. Maybe someone could enlighten me?

I'm saying that in doing so, a large part of Folding is going to be somewhat disillusioned as they are also contributing. Maybe the selection process for distributing protiens needs to change. That way you also keep those with slower machines.

[Encnuk]

The advantage that AMD has over Intel is that unless you use SSE, the AMD CPU's are faster at raw number crunching. For Intel owners, it is not overly thrilling to know you can outperform the cheap AMD CPU's if the right commands were used for the job, yet the job is done in such a way that a slower CPU appears faster.

But you are perfectly right. "the selection process for distributing protiens needs to change. That way you also keep those with slower machines." If they used the information they are apparently collecting when the core starts up and displays the words "Benchmarking", they would assign small proteins to slow machines, new cores that make use of SSE to Intel machines and old cores to AMD machines. That would make the most efficient use of the resources available to them.

My box runs the 6.2 WU proteins in 15 hours, the 5.9 WU proteins in 22 hours. I know which ones I prefer to see.

[rickoic]

Does anyone know if Stanford is working on SSE programming? I'd like to see my P4's crank it up a bit.:D

AMD finishes a 180/2 in 13 Hrs 12 Min
P4 finishes the same unit 28 hrs 49 min.

Quite a difference and they are both pretty close to the same MHz.

[Encnuk]

The Gromacs core uses SSE.

The hard decision for Stanford was the assignment of how many points those WU's are worth. It appears they have taken a compromise, so that Gromacs WU's give less points per day to AMD CPU's and more points per day for Intel CPU's when compared to the Tinker WU's.

They could have kept it linear for AMD CPU's, so that the points per day would have stayed constant, but then the points Intel CPU's would have gotten would have been astronomical, or they could have kept it linear for Intel CPU's, so that the AMD people would have felt they are getting very little credit for their work.

By giving out the points as they have, Intel CPU's get a few more points per day then they used to and AMD CPU's get a few less. Overall a pretty good compromise really, compared with the uproar that would have happened if they had kept Intel performance linear and reduce AMD credits.

They used to assign 1 point to the amount of work a P2 400 could do in a day. I am not sure if that holds true for the Gromacs core.

[rickoic]

Well, looks like I got some short early wu's of this variety. Just got assigned a couple of more and this time they downloaded an updated core and the times now are longer than 180/2's.

[downhill]

I still think there is something fishy about this protien....My AMD XP1800 runs SSE... I'm overclocked to 141 fsb....So I'm at 1.62 Ghz on the proc.

But I don't see any kind of results like some have posted on the Folding forum.

I'm getting around 24, 25 minutes a frame. How is everyone else doing with these? I've seen some post on the Folding forum that they are using PIII's and hitting anywhere from 12 minutes to 18 minutes.

Input please..those that are running this protien, could you list your proc, and your frame speed for this protien?

[rickoic]

Running 2 of them right now so using the new updated core.
My times are:
AMD XP2000+ 1.67MHz 9 min 34 sec per frame. (not overclocked)
P4 1.8MHz 13 min 12 sec per frame.
Your times really sound huge.

[poptom]

I got two of these last night. Looks like this:

Tbird 1.33(1400).....31 min

XP1800(1533).........12 min

????????????????????????

[emobley3]

I'm running one right now on a xp@1604 mh with times of 9:42 per frame. Downhill, are you sure that you have the SSE instructioins activated on your Athlon? You can check for this and enable the SSE instructions on your proc by using WCPUID.

[poptom]

That must be why there's such a big difference in mine. The Tbird apparently doesn't support SSE.

[downhill]

poptom...12 minutes for the 1800? Wow..that's about double what I'm getting for the same proc....Maybe I should wipe the whole folder and start over.

[downhill]

Originally posted by emobley3
I'm running one right now on a xp@1604 mh with times of 9:42 per frame. Downhill, are you sure that you have the SSE instructioins activated on your Athlon? You can check for this and enable the SSE instructions on your proc by using WCPUID.

Yep I tried running WCPUID......

http://m3.easyspace.com/downhillin/gifs/CUPID.jpg

[poptom]

Originally posted by downhill
Maybe I should wipe the whole folder and start over.
Probably won't change anything. Have you checked WCPUID to see if SSE is supported?

[edit] Sorry. I didn't see your last post.

[emobley3]

Well, I guess I'm out of ideas. Your times just don't sound right Downhill. Is it possible that some other prog is using your cpu?

[iaus10]

Are you running FAH as a service? Firedaemon?
If so, you may need to identify the new core as well. Sounds like you may somehow have 2 processes of FAH running.

-Ivan

[downhill]

I'm not running it as a service and the times are close to the same at night when nothing is going on to when I'm just surfin....

As to something else using the cpu.....It runs 100 percent with folding running....and runs almost zilch when I stop it....

My other protiens seem to be right inline with what others get for my cpu...(RYO has the same processor and we are exactly the same for other protiens....)

My guess is that I had an early version..dunno...I wiped my whole folder and started over...we'll see, I havn't gotten one yet.


Is there something that can stop your processor from running SSE instructions? I can't find any info that points me as to the whys and why nots of that question. LOL