Sorry, I leave this projet.
Admin publish information as links. Nice to be informed about . The latest is three years old !!!
The only recent (16july19 by admin) is about "audacious projects". Nice, but is not a part of Boinc.
And this link send us to donation requests !

And about projects who has nothing to do with sciencetific research, as educating people, sexual abuse,...
Of course there are also very important subjects, but
Does we think they not need the computing power of Boinc ?

But what they do to solve the problems of a lot of users ? Abnormal running, app crash,......
Nothing ! Or even good as nothing.Never answer about technical problems. The admin fully ignare the Boinc cruncher.
They just ignore us !

---

The only recent (16july19 by admin) is about "audacious projects". Nice, but is not a part of Boinc.

It is fabulous news, and great for Rosetta.
I think it is entirely possible that Rosetta is now the most important BOINC project there is.

As you may have heard, the Institute for Protein Design was recently selected as part of The Audacious Project. This large-scale philanthropic collaboration, which is the successor to the TED Prize, surfaces and funds projects with the potential to change the world.

As a result, we are expanding our Seattle-based team of scientists and engineers who will work together to advance Rosetta, our software for protein design and structure prediction. The funding will also allow us to invest in the equipment, supplies and lab space needed to design and test millions of synthetic proteins.

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=13199&postid=90915#90915

---

The only recent (16july19 by admin) is about "audacious projects". Nice, but is not a part of Boinc.

It is fabulous news, and great for Rosetta.
I think it is entirely possible that Rosetta is now the most important BOINC project there is.

As you may have heard, the Institute for Protein Design was recently selected as part of The Audacious Project. This large-scale philanthropic collaboration, which is the successor to the TED Prize, surfaces and funds projects with the potential to change the world.

As a result, we are expanding our Seattle-based team of scientists and engineers who will work together to advance Rosetta, our software for protein design and structure prediction. The funding will also allow us to invest in the equipment, supplies and lab space needed to design and test millions of synthetic proteins.

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=13199&postid=90915#90915

Hello Jim,
Roseta is one of Boinc PRJ, not "the" Boinc" PRJ !
Of course more usefull for Mankind that some other projects.
Climate, is also usefull .
Physics of particules, also, ......
All are important and make a "global" knownledge. All in paralel, not seperately.
Why to give full priority to proteins, if we are unable to fully decode genome ?

Only one "enormous" example : we discover some new proteins, nice. Nobel price.
But later, because we do not know fully genome, we discover that this new protein is toxic...
So, Roseta is not the most important ! .

So, Roseta is not the most important ! .

There are other important ones, and I do them too. But your examples are so weak that the comparison shows the importance of Rosetta.
I just added an i7-9700. Have fun elsewhere.

---

Sorry, I leave this projet.
Admin publish information as links. Nice to be informed about . The latest is three years old !!!
The only recent (16july19 by admin) is about "audacious projects". Nice, but is not a part of Boinc.
And this link send us to donation requests !

And about projects who has nothing to do with sciencetific research, as educating people, sexual abuse,...
Of course there are also very important subjects, but
Does we think they not need the computing power of Boinc ?

But what they do to solve the problems of a lot of users ? Abnormal running, app crash,......
Nothing ! Or even good as nothing.Never answer about technical problems. The admin fully ignare the Boinc cruncher.
They just ignore us !

Bye bye.

---

All are important and make a "global" knownledge. All in paralel, not seperately.
Why to give full priority to proteins, if we are unable to fully decode genome ?

The genome is decoded years ago

Only one "enormous" example : we discover some new proteins, nice. Nobel price.
But later, because we do not know fully genome, we discover that this new protein is toxic...

This is why new proteins are tested not only in silico, but also in wet lab, animal testing, etc

---

On and off for a while, but figured I'd boost morale over here after reading this.
i7-7700, Ryzen pro 1700x, fx8350, and i5-3570s all added.

While one leaves, another steps up to take their place.

One question regarding credits, because I forget. Does the number of credits given vary between machines? E.g. my Ryzen should get tons more credits per WU than, say, the 8350 over a 10 hour period, which is what my cpu runtime is set to, since it's IPC is theoretically much quicker?

thanks!

One question regarding credits, because I forget. Does the number of credits given vary between machines? E.g. my Ryzen should get tons more credits per WU than, say, the 8350 over a 10 hour period, which is what my cpu runtime is set to, since it's IPC is theoretically much quicker?

Yes, the IPC is very important.
But, in Rosetta, is important also the speed of ram memory and the speed of hd (i saw an increase of rac - with the same cpu, when i changed my hd with an ssd)

---

I have various degrees of success with different machines, and can't always predict which will work the "best". For me, that means the highest and most consistent output on the 24-hour work units.

But for the past few months, my Ryzen 2600 (Ubuntu 18.04) has been doing very well; the best I have ever seen.
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/results.php?hostid=3718408

My i7-3770 does very well too, but for some reason my i7-4770 and 4790 are falling down on the job. It may just be a scoring abnormality by Rosetta. And my i7-8700 started out well, but then fell down. Most surprisingly, my i7-9700 (8 full cores), which should do the best per core, is doing consistently badly, at about 200 points per day instead of around 1500 as it should. So I will just go with the Ryzen.

---

I have various degrees of success with different machines, and can't always predict which will work the "best". For me, that means the highest and most consistent output on the 24-hour work units.

But for the past few months, my Ryzen 2600 (Ubuntu 18.04) has been doing very well; the best I have ever seen.
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/results.php?hostid=3718408

My i7-3770 does very well too, but for some reason my i7-4770 and 4790 are falling down on the job. It may just be a scoring abnormality by Rosetta. And my i7-8700 started out well, but then fell down. Most surprisingly, my i7-9700 (8 full cores), which should do the best per core, is doing consistently badly, at about 200 points per day instead of around 1500 as it should. So I will just go with the Ryzen.

Now that's very odd and unfortunate. You'd think Intel's newest would be walking all over the place.
Assuming all of these machines have enough ram to get the job done? I have a ryzen 1800x here but only has 16 gb of ram so I think I'll be reserving 10 or so jobs at once instead of 16.

Now that's very odd and unfortunate. You'd think Intel's newest would be walking all over the place.
Assuming all of these machines have enough ram to get the job done? I have a ryzen 1800x here but only has 16 gb of ram so I think I'll be reserving 10 or so jobs at once instead of 16.

They all have at least 16 GB, and the i7-9700 has 32 GB. It was sized for the new CPDN work units, but I thought I would try it on Rosetta until they become available. But no luck; it is now on LHC. It may be an oddity of the Rosetta scoring system.

---

I'll be getting 32 GB for a Ryzen 1800x. I've been running WCG so long that I'm not used to tasks making my virtual memory skyrocket to 32 GB.

I don't think you need to worry about the virtual memory. That is just the disk space it might require, and I don't know if it actually uses it anyway. As for working memory, 1 GB per work unit is enough. Occasionally you will see a work unit (probably in development) that uses more, but never all of them at once that I have seen. I think even if it did occur, the worst that would happen is that some work units would not run until more memory became available.

However, I like lots of memory too, and it is cheap, so why not? It might be useful later.

---

When I was starting contributing to this project, I noticed that with the default boinc settings, r@h was cycling on and off. I turned off "Suspend when computer is in use" and the cycling stopped and my computers became more productive. Here are my computing settings:

I don't think you need to worry about the virtual memory. That is just the disk space it might require, and I don't know if it actually uses it anyway. As for working memory, 1 GB per work unit is enough. Occasionally you will see a work unit (probably in development) that uses more, but never all of them at once that I have seen. I think even if it did occur, the worst that would happen is that some work units would not run until more memory became available.

However, I like lots of memory too, and it is cheap, so why not? It might be useful later.

Sorry for the bit of a late response.
An interesting thing I found working with different projects, and I'm not sure if this is due to excessive disk swapping, but throwing a project like Asteroids at this Ryzen 1800x spikes temps up past 65 c and the package power is right around 120 W. Throwing Rosetta at it, temperatures plummet down to around 55 steady and the package power slides down to about 90 w. The fans are at a lower RPM too. Does this mean I'm losing efficiency somewhere along the line? I have tried setting Rosetta to only use 12 threads, but that didn't seem to bring out much of a change in power or temperatures. I'm not sure if I should be looking at the number of decoys found in each workunit or credit granted or something else.

I always thought that I'd never need more ram than 16 GB - certainly for my own use I don't, but maybe 16 is the new 8 now.

An interesting thing I found working with different projects, and I'm not sure if this is due to excessive disk swapping, but throwing a project like Asteroids at this Ryzen 1800x spikes temps up past 65 c and the package power is right around 120 W. Throwing Rosetta at it, temperatures plummet down to around 55 steady and the package power slides down to about 90 w. The fans are at a lower RPM too. Does this mean I'm losing efficiency somewhere along the line? I have tried setting Rosetta to only use 12 threads, but that didn't seem to bring out much of a change in power or temperatures. I'm not sure if I should be looking at the number of decoys found in each workunit or credit granted or something else.

I am running a Ryzen 1700 (all 16 cores) on Rosetta (Ubuntu 18.04), and Psensor/CPUTIN shows 48C, so I guess it is normal enough. As for "efficiency", that is a slippery concept. All I know is that BoincTasks shows the CPU% at 99.5% on all the cores, so that looks good to me. Some programs just exercise the chip more than others. For example, those that use AVX2 usually run hot. I don't think there is anything you can do about it. That is for the program developers. Just let it do its thing.

---

An interesting thing I found working with different projects, and I'm not sure if this is due to excessive disk swapping, but throwing a project like Asteroids at this Ryzen 1800x spikes temps up past 65 c and the package power is right around 120 W. Throwing Rosetta at it, temperatures plummet down to around 55 steady and the package power slides down to about 90 w. The fans are at a lower RPM too. Does this mean I'm losing efficiency somewhere along the line? I have tried setting Rosetta to only use 12 threads, but that didn't seem to bring out much of a change in power or temperatures. I'm not sure if I should be looking at the number of decoys found in each workunit or credit granted or something else.

I am running a Ryzen 1700 (all 16 cores) on Rosetta (Ubuntu 18.04), and Psensor/CPUTIN shows 48C, so I guess it is normal enough. As for "efficiency", that is a slippery concept. All I know is that BoincTasks shows the CPU% at 99.5% on all the cores, so that looks good to me. Some programs just exercise the chip more than others. For example, those that use AVX2 usually run hot. I don't think there is anything you can do about it. That is for the program developers. Just let it do its thing.

There is a recent article on anandtech that deals with this topic: https://www.anandtech.com/show/14873/reaching-for-turbo-aligning-perception-with-amds-frequency-metrics-/2

Here's a quote:

Now please note that a workload, even a single thread workload, can be ‘light’ or it can be ‘heavy’. If I created a piece of software that was a never ending while(true) loop with no operations, then the workload would be ‘light’ on the core and not stressing all the parts of the core. A heavy workload might involve trigonometric functions, or some level of instruction-level parallelism that causes more of the core to run at the same time. A ‘heavy’ workload therefore draws more power, even though it is still contained with a single thread.

This definitely makes sense to me. Will just let it crunch away.. Right now I have Rosetta set as a backup, but may change that depending.
Jim, I see you got a Ryzen 3700x. I'm very curious to see how that pans out for you.

Jim, I see you got a Ryzen 3700x. I'm very curious to see how that pans out for you.

I had high hopes for it. It started out very well, around 1200 points for the 24-hour work units. Then after a few days it dropped down to around 200 points, so I stopped.

I have seen this behavior before. In fact, it is the rule rather than the exception, as I have posted on multiple times elsewhere. My best (most consistent) results are with an i7-3700 or Ryzen 2600 running Ubuntu. I am presently trying a Ryzen 2700 (my Ryzen 1700 produces segmentation errors, even though it is one of the "fixed" ones).

It is possible that the shorter work units (maybe 12 or 18 hours) would be more consistent. I think it has something to do with their scoring function, but it is not possible for me to troubleshoot it.
Give it a try; it might work for you. The Ryzen 3700x is a very nice chip; it is doing very well on WCG now.

NOTE: My i7-9700 was equally bad if not worse; it was always 200 points. So it is not Intel versus AMD.

---

Jim, I see you got a Ryzen 3700x. I'm very curious to see how that pans out for you.

I had high hopes for it. It started out very well, around 1200 points for the 24-hour work units. Then after a few days it dropped down to around 200 points, so I stopped.

I have seen this behavior before. In fact, it is the rule rather than the exception, as I have posted on multiple times elsewhere. My best (most consistent) results are with an i7-3700 or Ryzen 2600 running Ubuntu. I am presently trying a Ryzen 2700 (my Ryzen 1700 produces segmentation errors, even though it is one of the "fixed" ones).

It is possible that the shorter work units (maybe 12 or 18 hours) would be more consistent. I think it has something to do with their scoring function, but it is not possible for me to troubleshoot it.
Give it a try; it might work for you. The Ryzen 3700x is a very nice chip; it is doing very well on WCG now.

NOTE: My i7-9700 was equally bad if not worse; it was always 200 points. So it is not Intel versus AMD.

That's a pretty poor credit score for 24 hours of work on 16 threads. I'll give it a try on 8 hours and see what it comes up with.
Asteroids is out of work right now so it's crunching away at some 24 hour WUs.
It's very unfortunate that work completed doesn't seem to correlate to real world credit score. E.g. an i5-2400 vs. i5-8400 should be far different, but don't seem to be.