Folding benchmarking - we need your help!!!!!!!

Ellroy80 · 11th February 2005, 8:51 PM

I have seen a lot of threads lately where people have asked "Is this a good folding score for my machine" or "How would machine x fold?" So I want to compile a list of all the different processors and how well they fold, and I need your help.

If you want to help me out with this, can you please post:

What processor you are folding with. If you are folding with a P4 then please say if you are running two instances or not.
What speed your processor is
Mobo chipset
Amount of RAM
WU Name
The points value of the WU that you want to add to the list
How long per frame the WU is taking to fold
How many frames in the WU
Total time

For example, here's an entry for one of my processors:

Pentium 4, 2 instances
3Ghz
i875
2Gbytes
310
00:28:43
100
47:25:00

Pentium 4, 2 instances
3Ghz
i875
2Gbytes
600
00:51:24
100
84:50:00

If anyone can suggest what else should be added then please do so. Once there are a few entries I will do up an Excel spreadsheet which someone will hopefully be able to host.

I'm not entirely sure on the best way to do the spreadsheet so again if anyone has any ideas please contact me (I do have a few ideas though!)

Cheers!

EDIT: The spreadsheet can be found here.

AzzKikr · 11th February 2005, 8:56 PM

You'd probably have to jot down mobo model, CPU and amount/type of RAM, as these all affect the folding performance.

Ellroy80 · 11th February 2005, 9:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzzKikr

You'd probably have to jot down mobo model, CPU and amount/type of RAM, as these all affect the folding performance.

Cheers, I've noted that down. Hopefully it's not going to get too complicated too quickly!!!! I think I'll put a particular processor on separate pages, then sort by clockspeed.

Bollocks · 11th February 2005, 10:21 PM

You might want to add how many frames each WU is and total time taken.

The points value of the WU that you want to add to the list
How long per frame the WU is taking to fold
How many frames in the WU
Total time

tazwegion · 11th February 2005, 11:02 PM

As Bollocks has already mentioned, WU intensity, core type, and no. of proteins, all effect the time it takes to complete said WU... having said (and agreed) with that, a general rule of thumb (for me

) has been a 400 frame Tinker (approx. 240+ points) takes my...

K62@500Mhz+ 13-14days @ 24/7
CeleronA's@500Mhz 8-9 days @ 24/7

And finally the 2.2Ghz system will do it in less than 36hrs (depending on Internet surfing time

)

-flags will of course assist your times (unless you've pre-SSE etc. equipment like moi'

), as will OC'ing

I dunno' about the 1.2Ghz Athlon... it's kinda' been SETI@home dedicated for a while now

Ellroy80 · 11th February 2005, 11:37 PM

Bollocks, why do we need how many frames in the WU? People use different ways of monitoring F@H, so aren't there going to be a lot of extremely different results? Can we not just have time per frame and then total time?

I do realise that different proteins result in different times, but not hugely (i.e. 600 pointers on my machine take 50-55 mins/frame). So I think this would be a useful exercise so that people can get an idea of what to expect from their machines.

kasi · 12th February 2005, 12:12 AM

The reason we need the number of frames in the WU is that some people use the GUI client and this displays the total number of frames differently (and hence the time taken per frame) to the console client or EM3. For example a 600 point RIBO WU has 100 frames in the console client and EM3 but 250 frames in the GUI client. So unless the number of frames is stated this may lead to confusion.

Processor: Athlon 64 3200+ Clawhammer Socket 754
Speed: 2.17GHz
Chipset / board: nVidia nForce3 250Gb / Epox EP-8KDA3+
Ram: 512MB OCZ PC-3700EL Platinum
WU: p1141_RIBO_FSpeptide_HEL_nospring
Points: 600
Time per frame: 29:14
Frames: 100
Total time: 48:43:20

Processor: Athlon 64 3200+ Clawhammer Socket 754
Speed: 2.17GHz
Chipset / board: nVidia nForce3 250Gb / Epox EP-8KDA3+
Ram: 512MB OCZ PC-3700EL Platinum
WU: p1475_tet1_03_1
Points: 364
Time per frame: 11:03
Frames: 100
Total time: 18:25:00

sean_oz · 13th February 2005, 8:33 PM

I have been thinking of this all week as I have just started folding. I just posted a new thread 'Benchmarking' before I read this one.

I plan to 'BYO' (thanks bollocks) soon, as 'she who must be obeyed' needs her own box.

Pentium 4, 1 instance
2,2GHz (533)
i845G
512Mb Ram
?
?
e.g. p1801_Collagen_PPG10_AMBER_Core, 4m:07s minimum (4:42 while typing this)

88 points per day with mixed use (office apps, surfing email etc )

sean_oz

sean_oz · 13th February 2005, 8:40 PM

More thoughts, would any of the three apps be more efficient than the others, eg would the 'grapic' use more resources than the 'console' version.

Is their any speed advantage in the OS being used.

Does the amount of RAM have any effect.

Does a similar cost intel CPU have any advantage over an AMD equivalent.

sean_oz

Ellroy80 · 13th February 2005, 9:55 PM

Sean,

I think that the console version is the fastest, and I'm not sure about the OS thing. The rest of it I think will be answered by doing this "database". The first version should be up soon.

Can you please post your folding details as kasi did?

Cheers.

Ellroy80 · 13th February 2005, 11:15 PM

Ok, I've had a shot at this. You can download the excel spreadsheet here. Please don't d/l it too much, I'm on a standard IInet acct, so it might have to come down after a day or two (hopefully some can host it!). Feedback is welcome, whether good or bad.

I can't calculate PPW and PPW/Mhz. If anyone has any suggestions on how this can be done then I am all ears.

sean_oz · 13th February 2005, 11:27 PM

Sure, no problem

Processor: Intel P4 [478]
Speed: 2.27GHz [533]
Chipset / board: I845G / ASUS P4B533
Ram: 512MB [?DDR 333?]
WU: p1801_Collagen_PPG10_AMBER_Core
Points: 66
Time per frame: 3m:07s minimum
Frames: 250
Total time: 16 hours min

kasi · 14th February 2005, 1:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ellroy80

I can't calculate PPW and PPW/Mhz. If anyone has any suggestions on how this can be done then I am all ears.

For an easy way to calculate PPW, perhaps you could use EM Protein Calculator. Right click some text inside the EM3 display window and click "Calculate Points". In the window that pops up enter the values for "Number of Frames", "Time Unit per Frame" and "Work Unit Point Value" and then click the "Calculate" button.
Your spreadsheet is good, well done. If I may suggest you could perhaps make it not as wide by abbreviating the protein name to just p724, p1141, p1801, etc. I am not familiar with using spreadsheets but would it be possible to also make some of the columns narrower by using more than one line for the column title. This is just to reduce the need for scrolling; if you could get it narrow enough it wouldn't be necessary to scroll at all, which makes for easier viewing for all.

Ellroy80 · 14th February 2005, 10:48 PM

I have uploaded an updated version of the spreadsheet, which can be found here. I will add this link to my first post. It seems to me now that everything is working as it should be. A huge props must go to sean_oz for this, as he implemented all of the new stuff. Well done mate!!!!!!

Please take the time to have a look and post your results in this thread so that I can add them to the spreadsheet. I think there are a few interesting things to be taken from it, even at this early stage!!!!

kasi · 15th February 2005, 1:44 AM

The original was good but the new one is better because it is much easier to view, well done to sean_oz and to you for organising it.
You probably shouldn't take too much notice of my result for the bonus points p1475 WU for comparison purposes. Even though they give wonderful PPW on my machine, very few of them are given out. I really should not have included it because it is not representative of normal performance, but it is the only WU other than 600 point RIBOs that I have done for the last 8 weeks. Even though the p1475 are rare, I'm still hoping to get a few of those beauties when the time trial starts.

The performance can differ between different types of CPU when folding different kinds of work units. It is a bit early to make any conclusions regarding relative performance based only on the these results of a few machines and a few work units. I know that due to hyperthreading P4 machines were getting much higher PPW relative to my A64 in the past before the current batch of bonus point WUs became available. This may happen again if the current supply of bonus point WUs ceases.

11th February 2005, 8:51 PM	#1
Ellroy80 Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Perth, WA, 6022 Posts: 2,061	Folding benchmarking - we need your help!!!!!!! I have seen a lot of threads lately where people have asked "Is this a good folding score for my machine" or "How would machine x fold?" So I want to compile a list of all the different processors and how well they fold, and I need your help. If you want to help me out with this, can you please post: What processor you are folding with. If you are folding with a P4 then please say if you are running two instances or not. What speed your processor is Mobo chipset Amount of RAM WU Name The points value of the WU that you want to add to the list How long per frame the WU is taking to fold How many frames in the WU Total time For example, here's an entry for one of my processors: Pentium 4, 2 instances 3Ghz i875 2Gbytes 310 00:28:43 100 47:25:00 Pentium 4, 2 instances 3Ghz i875 2Gbytes 600 00:51:24 100 84:50:00 If anyone can suggest what else should be added then please do so. Once there are a few entries I will do up an Excel spreadsheet which someone will hopefully be able to host. I'm not entirely sure on the best way to do the spreadsheet so again if anyone has any ideas please contact me (I do have a few ideas though!) Cheers! EDIT: The spreadsheet can be found here. __________________ Fold for OCAU (Team 24) to help fight disease and the Yanks!! \| Want to take on F@H's big producers? Join TeamXFAU!! OCAU Aquarium Club Member #058 Over 80 successful trades!!!! Last edited by Ellroy80; 19th February 2005 at 2:45 AM.

11th February 2005, 10:21 PM	#4
Bollocks Master of Folding Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Mandurah W.A. Posts: 7,719	You might want to add how many frames each WU is and total time taken. The points value of the WU that you want to add to the list How long per frame the WU is taking to fold How many frames in the WU Total time __________________ "We shall Fold on the beaches. We shall Fold on the landing grounds. We shall Fold in the fields, and in the streets, we shall Fold in the hills. We shall never surrender!" The Official OCAU Folding Page Folding@Home 350,000 Club Folding@Home 21,000,000 Points Milestone Last edited by Bollocks; 11th February 2005 at 10:22 PM.

11th February 2005, 11:02 PM	#5
tazwegion Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Central Victoria Posts: 339	As Bollocks has already mentioned, WU intensity, core type, and no. of proteins, all effect the time it takes to complete said WU... having said (and agreed) with that, a general rule of thumb (for me ) has been a 400 frame Tinker (approx. 240+ points) takes my... K62@500Mhz+ 13-14days @ 24/7 CeleronA's@500Mhz 8-9 days @ 24/7 And finally the 2.2Ghz system will do it in less than 36hrs (depending on Internet surfing time ) -flags will of course assist your times (unless you've pre-SSE etc. equipment like moi' ), as will OC'ing I dunno' about the 1.2Ghz Athlon... it's kinda' been SETI@home dedicated for a while now __________________ Caution: Retro-ism is a way of life... Last edited by tazwegion; 11th February 2005 at 11:04 PM.

11th February 2005, 11:37 PM	#6
Ellroy80 Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Perth, WA, 6022 Posts: 2,061	Bollocks, why do we need how many frames in the WU? People use different ways of monitoring F@H, so aren't there going to be a lot of extremely different results? Can we not just have time per frame and then total time? I do realise that different proteins result in different times, but not hugely (i.e. 600 pointers on my machine take 50-55 mins/frame). So I think this would be a useful exercise so that people can get an idea of what to expect from their machines. __________________ Fold for OCAU (Team 24) to help fight disease and the Yanks!! \| Want to take on F@H's big producers? Join TeamXFAU!! OCAU Aquarium Club Member #058 Over 80 successful trades!!!! Last edited by Ellroy80; 11th February 2005 at 11:42 PM.

12th February 2005, 12:12 AM	#7
kasi Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Central Coast NSW Posts: 1,201	The reason we need the number of frames in the WU is that some people use the GUI client and this displays the total number of frames differently (and hence the time taken per frame) to the console client or EM3. For example a 600 point RIBO WU has 100 frames in the console client and EM3 but 250 frames in the GUI client. So unless the number of frames is stated this may lead to confusion. Processor: Athlon 64 3200+ Clawhammer Socket 754 Speed: 2.17GHz Chipset / board: nVidia nForce3 250Gb / Epox EP-8KDA3+ Ram: 512MB OCZ PC-3700EL Platinum WU: p1141_RIBO_FSpeptide_HEL_nospring Points: 600 Time per frame: 29:14 Frames: 100 Total time: 48:43:20 Processor: Athlon 64 3200+ Clawhammer Socket 754 Speed: 2.17GHz Chipset / board: nVidia nForce3 250Gb / Epox EP-8KDA3+ Ram: 512MB OCZ PC-3700EL Platinum WU: p1475_tet1_03_1 Points: 364 Time per frame: 11:03 Frames: 100 Total time: 18:25:00 Last edited by kasi; 12th February 2005 at 12:55 AM.

13th February 2005, 8:33 PM	#8
sean_oz Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: 2350 Posts: 793	I have been thinking of this all week as I have just started folding. I just posted a new thread 'Benchmarking' before I read this one. I plan to 'BYO' (thanks bollocks) soon, as 'she who must be obeyed' needs her own box. Pentium 4, 1 instance 2,2GHz (533) i845G 512Mb Ram ? ? e.g. p1801_Collagen_PPG10_AMBER_Core, 4m:07s minimum (4:42 while typing this) 88 points per day with mixed use (office apps, surfing email etc ) sean_oz

13th February 2005, 8:40 PM	#9
sean_oz Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: 2350 Posts: 793	More thoughts, would any of the three apps be more efficient than the others, eg would the 'grapic' use more resources than the 'console' version. Is their any speed advantage in the OS being used. Does the amount of RAM have any effect. Does a similar cost intel CPU have any advantage over an AMD equivalent. sean_oz

13th February 2005, 9:55 PM	#10
Ellroy80 Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Perth, WA, 6022 Posts: 2,061	Sean, I think that the console version is the fastest, and I'm not sure about the OS thing. The rest of it I think will be answered by doing this "database". The first version should be up soon. Can you please post your folding details as kasi did? Cheers. __________________ Fold for OCAU (Team 24) to help fight disease and the Yanks!! \| Want to take on F@H's big producers? Join TeamXFAU!! OCAU Aquarium Club Member #058 Over 80 successful trades!!!!

13th February 2005, 11:15 PM	#11
Ellroy80 Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Perth, WA, 6022 Posts: 2,061	Ok, I've had a shot at this. You can download the excel spreadsheet here. Please don't d/l it too much, I'm on a standard IInet acct, so it might have to come down after a day or two (hopefully some can host it!). Feedback is welcome, whether good or bad. I can't calculate PPW and PPW/Mhz. If anyone has any suggestions on how this can be done then I am all ears. __________________ Fold for OCAU (Team 24) to help fight disease and the Yanks!! \| Want to take on F@H's big producers? Join TeamXFAU!! OCAU Aquarium Club Member #058 Over 80 successful trades!!!! Last edited by Ellroy80; 13th February 2005 at 11:17 PM.

13th February 2005, 11:27 PM	#12
sean_oz Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: 2350 Posts: 793	Sure, no problem Processor: Intel P4 [478] Speed: 2.27GHz [533] Chipset / board: I845G / ASUS P4B533 Ram: 512MB [?DDR 333?] WU: p1801_Collagen_PPG10_AMBER_Core Points: 66 Time per frame: 3m:07s minimum Frames: 250 Total time: 16 hours min

14th February 2005, 10:48 PM	#14
Ellroy80 Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Perth, WA, 6022 Posts: 2,061	I have uploaded an updated version of the spreadsheet, which can be found here. I will add this link to my first post. It seems to me now that everything is working as it should be. A huge props must go to sean_oz for this, as he implemented all of the new stuff. Well done mate!!!!!! Please take the time to have a look and post your results in this thread so that I can add them to the spreadsheet. I think there are a few interesting things to be taken from it, even at this early stage!!!! __________________ Fold for OCAU (Team 24) to help fight disease and the Yanks!! \| Want to take on F@H's big producers? Join TeamXFAU!! OCAU Aquarium Club Member #058 Over 80 successful trades!!!!

15th February 2005, 1:44 AM	#15
kasi Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Central Coast NSW Posts: 1,201	The original was good but the new one is better because it is much easier to view, well done to sean_oz and to you for organising it. You probably shouldn't take too much notice of my result for the bonus points p1475 WU for comparison purposes. Even though they give wonderful PPW on my machine, very few of them are given out. I really should not have included it because it is not representative of normal performance, but it is the only WU other than 600 point RIBOs that I have done for the last 8 weeks. Even though the p1475 are rare, I'm still hoping to get a few of those beauties when the time trial starts. The performance can differ between different types of CPU when folding different kinds of work units. It is a bit early to make any conclusions regarding relative performance based only on the these results of a few machines and a few work units. I know that due to hyperthreading P4 machines were getting much higher PPW relative to my A64 in the past before the current batch of bonus point WUs became available. This may happen again if the current supply of bonus point WUs ceases.