| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: MegaCruncher - Build Log (started, photos' added) Completed & Running! |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 68
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Mamajuanauk
Master Cruncher United Kingdom Joined: Dec 15, 2012 Post Count: 1900 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Do you offer the possibility to rent your megacruncher for my WCG account ? It will be for research like yours, but I'm seeking this material for the points of my team. Hi Floxit, apologies for the late response. Yes that would be possible, please contact me at my yahoo.co.uk email addressCan I contact you about this ? It will be only for one month (ideally this month until the end)
Mamajuanauk is the Name! Crunching is the Game!
  |
||
|
|
Mamajuanauk
Master Cruncher United Kingdom Joined: Dec 15, 2012 Post Count: 1900 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Output update after error correction
----------------------------------------
Totals Days - 404 Points - 1,207,436 Results - 2090 Averages Days - 57 Points - 172,364 Results - 298 This gives a return of 12.17 PPW - not bad really! Comments?
Mamajuanauk is the Name! Crunching is the Game!
|
||
|
|
OldChap
Veteran Cruncher UK Joined: Jun 5, 2009 Post Count: 978 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
The following is to give a comparison with Intel:
----------------------------------------Running on the Aids project and adjusted to run mostly FAHV, my pair of xeons (8c/16t@2.4) use 243watts in running (measured when I first set this one up). I get about 31.9 days per day using Linux Average over 2 weeks: 132447ppd and 242 results per day This equates to: 24.09 watts per result 41.51 results per Kw 22.71 points per watt More efficient? yes, but the build cost is not taken into account. I was only able to proceed due to getting ES processors.  |
||
|
|
Mamajuanauk
Master Cruncher United Kingdom Joined: Dec 15, 2012 Post Count: 1900 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
OC will you double check my sums please?
----------------------------------------Watts per hour - 590 Results as above, I ignored the 19th as this was the first day. The reason I ask is that I've just worked out results per Kw as a comparrison 14.16 Kwatts/day 298 results/day 47.47 results/Kw? If I've done that correct, I'm getting more results than your machine so should return higher points too? Or have I missed something?
Mamajuanauk is the Name! Crunching is the Game!
|
||
|
|
OldChap
Veteran Cruncher UK Joined: Jun 5, 2009 Post Count: 978 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I believe it looks like this:
----------------------------------------Remember this is just the first week of running so things have not settled yet You are using 590 watts = 14160watts/day Average over First week: 172363ppd and 298 results per day and 56.7 days/day This equates to: 47.47 watts per result 21.07 results per Kw 12.17 points per watt To make this an apples to apples comparison we would both need to run the same project because FAHV on Linux is more productive than anything else currently available I am a firm believer in running a single project on each machine in order to be able to optimise that machine for best performance [Edit 1 times, last edit by OldChap at Feb 9, 2014 2:39:44 PM] |
||
|
|
Mamajuanauk
Master Cruncher United Kingdom Joined: Dec 15, 2012 Post Count: 1900 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I believe it looks like this: Thanks OC, so my calculations were about right.Remember this is just the first week of running so things have not settled yet You are using 590 watts = 14160watts/day Average over First week: 172363ppd and 298 results per day and 56.7 days/day This equates to: 47.47 watts per result 21.07 results per Kw 12.17 points per watt To make this an apples to apples comparison we would both need to run the same project because FAHV on Linux is more productive than anything else currently available I am a firm believer in running a single project on each machine in order to be able to optimise that machine for best performance This first week I only ran FA@H, but both flavours, how can I limit it to FAHV only? Would that explain the difference in output, or at least some of it as vina is known for being good on Linux based machines and autodock is not as efficient?
Mamajuanauk is the Name! Crunching is the Game!
|
||
|
|
OldChap
Veteran Cruncher UK Joined: Jun 5, 2009 Post Count: 978 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Much as the people that run the project insist that the two are not separated, I think it is up to me what I run. For me the best way has been to use an app_config that limits FAAH to one at a time then, if there are more autodock than Vina projects on the machine, after a while I abort them. If the FAHV project allowed me to set Boinc preferences in the config file this might not be necessary.
----------------------------------------Your results with this may vary due to running AMD. If your priority is to maximise days run then try each project in turn to see what is best for you. Here it is probably MCM1 |
||
|
|
Mamajuanauk
Master Cruncher United Kingdom Joined: Dec 15, 2012 Post Count: 1900 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks OC, good tips, when I have some time, I'll see which run best...
----------------------------------------
Mamajuanauk is the Name! Crunching is the Game!
|
||
|
|
|