Posts by B-Roy

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Naive Quad Core to be released in August. (Message 43297) Posted 6 Jul 2007 by B-Roy Post: I don't see the point to be honest of throwing old or speculative articles at each other. as long as nothing is released and testable by the public, I won't believe any of the articles, may they be from AMD or Intel. Journalists are bias too, and as long as we don't see a competition of those new chips here on BOINC, we won't know what they can and cannot achieve. Let's wait for the first Barcelona chips appearing here, cause until then it's all marketing: AMD wants people to wait for their new product and Intel wants to sell as much as possible before.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : When is "one more project" one too many? (Message 42725) Posted 27 Jun 2007 by B-Roy Post: ... or you do it like me: one slow cruncher and many projects. BOINC sorts it out anyway and until next year, I'll have to stick to my laptop.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : June 9th WU (Message 42305) Posted 19 Jun 2007 by B-Roy Post: According to the results table, 5 of them were sent over to me. I never received these units. I thought I'd point that out. might be so called "ghost work units". you actually don't have to do anything. As soon as their deadline passes, they will eventually get distributed to someone else.
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with Rosetta version 5.67 (Message 41859) Posted 5 Jun 2007 by B-Roy Post: My workunits all work fine and do also validate, but I have a problem with the checkpointing. While the %complete bar is moving up, shutting down my pc has a negative impact. Before the shut-down I was at 50%, while after booting the pc up again the wu starts at only 40%. Does this mean that the wu saves its results less frequently than the progress bar would indicate, and if so why? Is the 5.68 version improving the situation?
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Lowest energy in the graph (Message 41792) Posted 3 Jun 2007 by B-Roy Post: It's the model you are current working on. The prior models you have crunched on that task will show in the lower right as red boxes, but only once the scale on your charts gets in to the range of the prior model results. Then later, once everyone sends back their results, you can click the results like on the Rosetta homepage and see of chart of how all of your models compare to those returned by others. thanks.
6) Message boards : Number crunching : does rosetta use my gpu (Message 41791) Posted 3 Jun 2007 by B-Roy Post: hiya, does rosetta utilize my gpu ? i have an atx x1900 something or other with 512 mb vram. does that have an influence on the speed of processing my wu ? just curious, ken not really. rosetta does not compute on your gpu, but uses it to display the screensaver. so a good graphics card reduces the load on the cpu to display the graphics (thus frees space to actually crunch the data), but otherwhise your card does not have an impact.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Lowest energy in the graph (Message 41774) Posted 2 Jun 2007 by B-Roy Post: Is the lowest energy structure shown in the screensaver the best structure from all models simulated in that work unit, or is it the one with the lowest energy in the one model just being calculated?
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Help! Rosetta is using all my RAM (Message 41510) Posted 26 May 2007 by B-Roy Post: from Rhiju in another thread: "Hi Everybody: Sorry for checking in a little late on this thread. I'm a bit puzzled that the FOLD_AND_DOCK_SUBSYSTEM workunits are taking up so much memory, but I've canceled all those jobs, and won't send any more out until we reduce the memory requirement! Apologies! Thanks for posting so quickly about the problem. It wasn't apparent on ralph. Also: if you have one of these workunit in your queue, please feel free to cancel it rather than risk a system slowdown due to virtual memory problems."
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta and RAM Consumtion (Message 41509) Posted 26 May 2007 by B-Roy Post: from Rhiju in another thread: "Hi Everybody: Sorry for checking in a little late on this thread. I'm a bit puzzled that the FOLD_AND_DOCK_SUBSYSTEM workunits are taking up so much memory, but I've canceled all those jobs, and won't send any more out until we reduce the memory requirement! Apologies! Thanks for posting so quickly about the problem. It wasn't apparent on ralph. Also: if you have one of these workunit in your queue, please feel free to cancel it rather than risk a system slowdown due to virtual memory problems."
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with Rosetta version 5.67 (Message 41508) Posted 26 May 2007 by B-Roy Post: first time I've seen such a huge impact of boinc on my system performance, it just all collapsed. Good to see that counteraction was taken. <core_client_version>5.8.16</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <message> - exit code -529697949 (0xe06d7363) </message> <stderr_txt> # cpu_run_time_pref: 10800 Unhandled Exception Detected... - Unhandled Exception Record - Reason: Out Of Memory (C++ Exception) (0xe06d7363) at address 0x7C812A5B Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Optimum CPU Run Time (Message 40278) Posted 3 May 2007 by B-Roy Post: It's the same recommendation for any WU type. It is the hours per day that helps the project, regardless of the runtime preference that you prefer. More crunching hours per day, regardless of how many hours per task. I generally recommend that people select a runtime that completes a task per day. So if your machine is on 10hrs a day, you might select a runtime preferences in the 8 - 12 hours range. But for anyone on dial up modem, I'd go right to 24hr runtime preference because of the time savings downloading less tasks. Assuming you can still complete 24hrs of crunching within the 10 day deadline. does it make any difference for the project whether I crunch (let's say) 3 wus with 4 hour runtime, or just one wu with 12 hours runtime per day?
12) Message boards : Number crunching : 80 cores, not science fiction ... it is real! 1.2 TERA! (Message 39737) Posted 22 Apr 2007 by B-Roy Post: What happened to Who? He's so quiet and he isn't crunching almost nothing compared to some weeks ago. Is everything ok Who? afaik he has been in china on the intel forum, and when he comes back has some holidays and will try to enhance the seti code. quite funny how much one can learn about somebody else's private life over the net.
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Intel CoreDuo processor (Message 39534) Posted 17 Apr 2007 by B-Roy Post: Hi all, I have recently joined Rosetta@home. I have installed the latest version of Boinc (Boinc Manager 5.8.17). Boinc only uses 100% CPU time, allthough my Macbook Pro has a CoreDuo processor and therefor has 200% CPU time available.... Cheers Well not really. You can only use 100% of a CPU, but as you have two of them you should see two work units being crunched at the same time. Thus two processes in your task manager. The only thing you might want to check is that in your preferences you allowed rosetta to use both CPUs and not just one. MHO: Welcome to one of the best projects when it comes to support and communication.
14) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Join the London School of Economics Team (Message 38770) Posted 31 Mar 2007 by B-Roy Post: Whether you are a student, alumni, member of staff or just interested in joining a multinational university team: Join BOINC@LSE!
15) Message boards : Number crunching : When is a wu stuck? (Message 38526) Posted 28 Mar 2007 by B-Roy Post: thanks for the quick reply. Is there actually a fixed amount of steps for each model? I am at 446000 and counting, so I wonder whether I could preview a potential end, before having to shut-down the computer for the night again.
16) Message boards : Number crunching : When is a wu stuck? (Message 38520) Posted 28 Mar 2007 by B-Roy Post: i just have one at 4:11 with Model: 1 and Step: 326500 (still showing 1%). I think that for slow crunchers like me, this is a potential problem considering that the wu does not checkpoint; due to this I lost 2h of crunching yesterday, when I turned of my PC with the same wu.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Ps3 - linux app? (Message 38198) Posted 24 Mar 2007 by B-Roy Post: In very simple terms: the problem with the ps3 is that linux can only access one cpu, that runs at the speed of a slow pentium apparently. The speed of the ps3 lies in the combination of its 8 cores, to which linux doesn't have any access. So there seem to be 2 problems: a) Getting access to all cores b) write an application that works on parallel on all 8 cores. What can be done has been proven by folding@home, who increased their crunching power tremendously. Have a look at the other PS3 thread by Paydirt entitled: "PS3 preliminary crunching numbers". Given that the PS3 already runs Linux (see http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=70611 for example), what chance of compiling the boinc & rosetta code for that platform? Why wait for Sony to offer? What am I missing, it seems such an obvious idea there must be some reason its not already been done? River~~
18) Message boards : Number crunching : PS3 preliminary crunching numbers (Message 38146) Posted 22 Mar 2007 by B-Roy Post: interesting. may I ask where you got those numbers from? edit: I just saw your message on seti too. Here is the link: http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=osstats Currently: OS Type Current TFLOPS* Active CPUs Total CPUs PLAYSTATION®3 102 3409 4338
19) Message boards : Number crunching : Sony plugs PS3 into folding@home (Message 37955) Posted 18 Mar 2007 by B-Roy Post: but your ps3 is only going to crunch when you do not play, which means that it will not be noisier while you play. it might even be quite silent during your gaming breaks. quietly crunching... keep us tuned of your results please.
20) Message boards : Number crunching : To completion goes up (Message 37806) Posted 14 Mar 2007 by B-Roy Post: the wu finished shortly after my posting, so I guess it reached something like 1.5 mio steps. I also switched my settings to show my computers if you'd like to have a look. Concerning the credits, I am wondering whether the fixed credit has been changed, as it seems it has been going down. May last wus are (time, claimed, received): 12,440.99 24.61 14.77 (new version) 10,141.14 20.10 16.64 10,549.60 20.91 13.89 10,199.85 20.21 20.86 11,249.42 22.02 18.15

Next 20