Interesting. I don't see Team Anandtech in that list - shouldn't be be in / near the top 20?
Interesting. I don't see Team Anandtech in that list - shouldn't be be in / near the top 20?They have corporate donors of computer time now, although certainly not at a scale like F@h.
Dutch Power Cows (their top user is an organization with a datacenter), Rackspace, HPE, CERN stick out.
With over 5,000 tasks to upload, just that part alone may take a while. I have 50.50 mbit internet, but 11 boxes and 0ver 5,000 tasks ??? I will reply with status.Remember folks,
if you have built bunkers, verify that stats tables appear and the sentence "Credits that are granted now will not be counted" disappeared here...
...before you release the results.
While it is probable that the stats will be initialized on time, they might not if the project servers are very busy.
On the other hand, don't be shocked if the Rosetta server is very busy and maybe even unresponsive during the first hour or so after the start.
Remember, its an ES, and only 7 memory channels are working, so its really only 110 ggi for 125 tasks. Not enough for 4.2. I did check that.Make sure the BOINC client under //Options: disk/memory usage// does NOT have 'leave non GPU tasks in memory' selected.
On May 2, a change to the project scheduler was being put to test at Ralph@home: The scheduler now recognizes the target CPU time preference and sends an according number of tasks in response to work requests.Marathon at Rosetta@home — about task duration:
[...] when the watchdog was implemented in Rosetta, the developers and admins decided to expose the target CPU time to contributors as a configuration option, allowing them to deviate from the default if they use their computers in a different manner than the project developers anticipated.
The setting is located at the user page at the Rosetta@home web site, in "Rosetta@home preferences". You can choose non-default target CPU times anywhere between 2 hours or 36 hours.
[...] While the tasks themselves are affected as described above, the runtime estimation of boinc-client is not influenced by a change of this setting. Boinc-client merely recalls how long Rosetta tasks used to take in the past, and assumes that new tasks will take just as long. The client will require a very long period of observing further tasks in order to gradually adapt its runtime estimation.
Consequently, not only does boincmgr show estimations which may be way off, but boinc-client is also highly confused when it is meant to fetch work for a buffer of n days duration. It will fetch far too few tasks, or far too many tasks, depending on whether you decreased or increased the target CPU time, and by how much you changed it.
I'm givin er all she's got CaptainNow our lead is 50k....
And I have done 1,400,739 of our almost 4 mil
So far it looks like none of the other teams built as large Rosetta bunkers up front as we did. Of course, sustained output will be what decides this 14 days long Marathon.1st to 3rd in the last 3 hours... dang
The best start had TeAm AnandTech (TAAT), but apparently they are running out of steam now. Newcomer Dutch Power Cows (DPC) has taken the lead, followed by Planet 3DNow! (P3D). A small gap has formed behind it.
(This was based on 12:00 UTC stats = 3 hours ago.)Do the teams show their utmost on the first day or do they first look at the competition? This consideration is not so easy, because it will take some time before all dates for the Javelin Throw are clear. [...]
What a view! SG on #1! The blue and yellow ones had to wait a long time for it. But nothing is decided yet. CNT (#2) stays with SG and wants to have a say in the victory. TAAT on #3 is no longer such a big surprise, last year's performances have certainly announced it.
Well, I got almost everything in, over 600 threads, and all my EPYC boxes Based on my bunkers, about 400k ppd.Our bunker uploads in Rosetta@home are now more than 12 hours ago.
Ranked by last 12h output, we are 8ᵗʰ in the Rosetta Marathon.
I'm running Folding at home on my GPUs and Rosetta at Home (BOINC) on my CPUs. They work fine together, and if you look at how F@H awards points, GPUs get 10x the points that CPUs get within a similar generation (1080ti vs Ryzen 2700x). They are, essentially, telling you that your CPUs are best used to drive GPUs for F@H.Is Boinc better then Folding@Home for that thing that shall not be named when it comes to running on the cpu? I heard it got updated for it and i am genuinely curious on this.
I i tried to bring over to the Folding@Home team a close friend of mine who is pretty set on using BOINC and perhaps i have been a bit bias just running folding@home. I got a 3900x arriving today and wanna make sure when i go to bed and fully work the cpu i am picking the most prime optimized program that will take full advantage of it as well. Well as full as i could get with a gpu also rendering and using a thread in Folding@Home.
Due keep in mind my build KRONOS will be getting dual 3080ti before the end of the year and i need a client that plays nicely with this but given i wanna do possibly cpu this may not even matter? I know Folding@Home requires a single thread per fah_21/22 exe which works fine. I am currently sitting on a single 1080ti so idk how this client will interact with the Folding@Home one which will be using a single thread to execute.
@mopardude87, if you already used a F@h CPU slot alongside the F@h GPU slot, and figured out how many threads you can put towards the CPU slot without affecting the GPU slot's performance — then you could replace that CPU slot by a BOINC client and set it to the same number of logical CPUs.
There is only one extra consideration when you run Rosetta@home specifically: You need about 0.8...0.9 GB of spare RAM for each CPU thread that you enable in BOINC – on average. Peak usage of these threads can be 1.4 GB.
On older hardware, like my old AMD APUs, I only have 4 threads. If I tell BOINC to use only 75% of CPUs (1 CPU), my PPD drops by 50k-100k on my A10-5800k. If I only use 50% of CPUs (2CPUs) I pickup that 50-100k PPD, but I gain no extra PPD by having all 4 CPUs dedicated to folding. I settled on 75% of CPUs - I'll take the slightly longer turn around times when I do get Folding WUs, so that I have 3 threads running Rosetta when I fail to get F@H WUs.@mopardude87 , I had to upgrade my ram to 32 gig on all my 3900x's.
As for folding and Rosetta, yes, GPUs on folding, and whats left for CPU's on Rosetta is the way to go, they work fine together, all my rigs are configured that way.. I tell BOINC to use all the cpu time, but 90 or 95% of theCPUs. That leaves abou 2 threads for the video card, which is fine.. So you end of with 22 on the CPUs doing Rosetta, and 2 working the video cards.