| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: FightAIDS@Home
Thread: 64 bit version of FAAH application - up to 25% faster... |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 32
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Somervillejudson@netscape.net
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: May 16, 2008 Post Count: 1065 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Personally as 2/3 rds of my computers are 64 bit machines I would rather be playing catch up. That is making full us of my faster machines and working on changing out the 32 bit ones vs my 32 bit are maxed out and my 64 are under performing!
|
||
|
|
Movieman
Veteran Cruncher Joined: Sep 9, 2006 Post Count: 1042 Status: Offline |
Guys:
----------------------------------------If you do come up with a 64 bit app I'll be glad to test it for you in a controlled setting across 4 machines: Socket 775 Yorkfield X3380 @4171mhz Nehalem W3580 @4200mhz Dual socket 12 core Westmere @2660mhz AMD 940 @ 3600mhz Between those 4 machines you'd get a fair sampling from the high end to the mid range all running on XP Pro 64 bit.  |
||
|
|
KLiK
Master Cruncher Croatia Joined: Nov 13, 2006 Post Count: 3108 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I'm running a 64bit BOINC ver 6.10.18, on a Windows 7...
----------------------------------------the device is a IBM/Lenovo T60 laptop, version 2007-FUG...only modification is 4GB of RAM! device name in the devices is T60...and is in a group that has the Beta crunching enabled... so test! see what is similar with the same T60... |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Good news!
I have managed to complie 64 bits version of Autodock 4.2.2 on Windows machine. It works fine, I run some simple docking tests which went fine! But I want to make more tests and I do ask some autodock guru to help me out: 1. Compare docking results of old 32 bits Autodock with new 64 bit one, to be sure that the process is correct. 2. Compare speed of docking process. Now if there would be significant speed increase, the reason would be given to attempt upgrade of Fight Aids at Home project. I would be happy to provide the compiled 64 bit autodock and the compilation procedure to all people interested in helping out. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Good news! I have managed to complie 64 bits version of Autodock 4.2.2 on Windows machine. It works fine, I run some simple docking tests which went fine! But I want to make more tests and I do ask some autodock guru to help me out: 1. Compare docking results of old 32 bits Autodock with new 64 bit one, to be sure that the process is correct. 2. Compare speed of docking process. Now if there would be significant speed increase, the reason would be given to attempt upgrade of Fight Aids at Home project. I would be happy to provide the compiled 64 bit autodock and the compilation procedure to all people interested in helping out. Not sure if the FAAH scientists will be interested in this. But then again, the institute they are working at (Scripps) is the very institute that develops Autodock, so they may have already been testing a 64-bit version internally. You never know  ...[Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Jan 14, 2010 5:14:15 AM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Moonian,
I would be happy to get in touch with somebody who is using Autodock 4.2.2 and would like to use also 64 bit version to compare results of the 32 bit and 64 bit. There is speedup and if the correctness is ok, then moving up to 64 bit means speed improvement with no development costs - they can just do those few small changes that I performed. |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Would you be able to set up a simulation that runs 6-7 hours with a 32 bit v 64 bit compile to measure the improvement on your 64 bit OS... to include 2 and 4 concurrent for duo and quad environment?
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Sekerob: I will be happy to do this.
I am still an beginner in generating good test cases, if you could help me out by sending the test data I will perform the setup and tests. Thank you for helping out |
||
|
|
Hypernova
Master Cruncher Audaces Fortuna Juvat ! Vaud - Switzerland Joined: Dec 16, 2008 Post Count: 1908 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Not to say but I am very interested to have the results of such a test.
---------------------------------------- With only 64 bit platforms I am eager to get any crunching performance improvement. Thank's very much wojciech_czyz for your efforts.   |
|||
|
||||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
wojciech_czyz,
----------------------------------------Was actually thinking of you doing it with your own data file/parms/torsions settings etc. I'm entirely unsure how a parm set of whatever version FAAH is running of Autodock fits into your version of AutoDock. Possibly if you download a FAAH task you may be able to decipher from that what they are. And, I don't want falsely get your hopes up in any form or fashion. Actually implementing a 64 bit version, if determined worthwhile, ascertaining the results are 100% valid and matching to the 32 bit results, timing extremely important, setting the manufacturing stream up, testing if all platforms produce same and to what level homogeneous groups have to be set, synching with the scientists is major labor, the techs/programmers at WCG extremely busy with known (3) and unknown projects. As for volunteers to help test, I'll be following your thread http://mgl.scripps.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=726 with interest.
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
|