Ultimate Guide To Folding@home

Yeah, I believe so. I can see it go up to 65% (when the task manager first opens) but FAH only uses 50% of it.

Either way, even if it is only 50% it is still a lot faster then my old one:)

TD
 
Ok, from what I can tell, I have 2 processors. This is what the everest program tells me anyway.

I would like to set up 2 instances of the console version of FAH but cannot figure it out. This is what FAH says:


**Yes, you can. Additional processors must run the console version
(with the "-local" command-line argument if run on Windows).
First, make additional directories for each processor and copy
the FAH Console executable file into each. Then configure them
with the -config switch, filling in settings for each.
It is very important to make sure that under the "Advanced Settings"
option each copy is given a unique machine ID (from 1 to 8).
The first copy will default to a machine ID of 1, so additional
copies should be given IDs of 2, 3, 4, etc. Each may then be run
out of their installed directory, using the -local switch on windows.**



Anyone one else do this? I cannot figure out how to name each version. Where is the config switch? Where is the advanced settings in the console version? If you know how to make this possible for an idiot like me I would greatly appreciate it.

Also, does it matter where I make the separate directories? Or can I make them both in the folding@home folder?

Thanks

TD
 
Since your processor only has one Floating Point Unit, and most of the work is done by the FPU, you will see very little advantage. Pandegroup actually prefer that you don't run a HT processor in this way.

If you really want to run 2 copies you can do so:

You have to make a completely separate folder for each copy.

Create a new folder (call it something like Folding2) and copy just the console executable into it. If you copy anything else it may not work.

Now start a command prompt, change to the new folder, and run the console program. There will be no config file so it will think this is the first run, consequently it will automatically run the config. I've never found the need to use the -local setting.

It will ask you if you want to change the advanced settings as part of the config. The only thing you need to make sure is different is the machine ID - set it to 2. It will also ask you if you want to install it as a service - it's a good idea to do this.

If you decide to install it as a service, you should stop the program immediately after completing the config (press ctrl-c a couple of times), then go to control panel/admin tools/services and start the service.
 
Thanks lynx.

If I do this, then the only difference is that I will have 2 separate wu's going? It will not use more of my processors capabilities? Sorry, this new computer setup is new to me and I want to be sure I am using it to it's full potential.

I am kinda confused about the HT technology. Do I really have 2 separate processors or does everest just report it that way?

I can see 2 separate cpu's listed and how much power is being used by each, however according to HP I only have 1 processor.

Anyway, thanks for you help. Hopefully I can use this computer for good as well as evil;)

TD
 
You've only got one processor, but some parts of it are duplicated. These are the simpler components which don't produce much heat, such as the main instruction path, the arithmetic unit etc.

It has to report that it has 2 processors so that windows can schedule it to execute 2 tasks simultaneously. That effectively means that with two tasks which for the most part only use the duplicated parts you can get more performance out of the chip.

Unfortunately F@H mainly uses parts which aren't duplicated - the MME stuff and the FPU. These are complex units and produce large amounts of heat, which is why they aren't duplicated. So although you could have 2 copies of the program scheduled to run, in practice they would be waiting for the shared resources to be free.

There's even a down side to HT when you want to run another program, even with only one copy running. Windows sees that it has a spare "processor" which can run your prog, it doesn't know about the shared resources. So windows schedules your prog and doesn't bother interrupting the other FPU/MME intensive prog. If your prog uses the duplicated parts there's no problem, but if it uses the shared parts then it runs like a dog.

Nice one Intel - how to slow down our systems by not thinking out the problem. Nothing new there then. :dry:
 
LOL, thanks again. I guess I will leave well enough alone.

I believe I will have my other comp up and running again within the hour so I will just run it as well.

Thanks.

TD
 
Now folding!
Just started on my computer:

Athlon XP 3200+ w/ 512mb RAM 24/7

Will start with my gf computer tommorrow:

Athlon XP 1900+ w/ 512mb RAM 24/7

And in a few days when I finished building it:

Athlon 64 3500+ w/ 1.5GB RAM (will be 24/7)

I just had a question on the 64 bit processors. I'm using the newest version (5.03??) and I was wondering, 64 bit processors obviously pass data faster, but would are they eligible for the Gromac tweak i was reading about?

I read about 30 pages of this thread, but I can't be assed to read another 14, it was just far to much...

Also I read on page 28 about making F@H a process, would this work to spike public computers to run this application automatically on windows start? I've got access to at least 10 computers that run non stop, with little to no process power used for 90% of the time. I doubt the owners would submit to this willingly, so I'd just spike them to run as a process that runs in the backroung without making itself known... What better way to put all that processing power to work than to use it for such a great cause!
 
Damnatory said:
...
Also I read on page 28 about making F@H a process, would this work to spike public computers to run this application automatically on windows start? I've got access to at least 10 computers that run non stop, with little to no process power used for 90% of the time. I doubt the owners would submit to this willingly, so I'd just spike them to run as a process that runs in the backroung without making itself known... What better way to put all that processing power to work than to use it for such a great cause!
Click to expand...
Don't do it. It's never a good enough cause to steal someone elses CPU power. It's a good enough cause to keep this honest.
 
I suppose you are right, it just seems like so much of a waste to not do so... Oh well, I'll just stick to the three I own, and maybe try and convince my father to do it as well.
 
Back
Top