Posts by Tarx
|
1)
Message boards :
Rosetta@home Science :
CASP 8
(Message 52996)
Posted 12 May 2008 by  Tarx
Post: CASP8? great! I'll be switching some PCs back to help (from F@H) A few things I've noticed while reading up on some posts in this thread: The front page mentions but doesn't really advertise CASP8 is back - (and in general perhaps consider making the front page more engaging/interesting?). Perhaps to refresh the project image, especially with the game bringing in new people to check out the project. As I'm quite familiar with it, I can update some of the comments made about F@H in this thread (and another linked thread). 1) Nvidia GPU is likely to be supported within the next year (they have commented on finally making good progress). 2) Staff and project manager posts are way higher than most other projects, usually with several posts per day in their forums. Plus an ongoing news "blog" from the project leader at http://folding.typepad.com/ Of course the staff at F@H is quite a bit larger and with several different areas to cover especially all their beta clients. But in any case their presence is very appreciated. 3) Because their project mix can permit them, they have both simpler projects that their PS3 and GPU clients can work on as well as more complex project handled by their SMP client (as well as their standard client). As a final comment on F@H, I wonder if there is way for the two project to cooperate more (even if it is just such as to suggest people to people in both projects that have an ATI HD2000 or HD3000 series card to run the GPU2 folding client and have their other core working on R@H?) I am looking forward to CASP8 ... and I do hope there are lots of updates! ;) |
|
2)
Message boards :
Rosetta@home Science :
A possible cure for Cancer
(Message 38000)
Posted 19 Mar 2007 by Tarx
Post: That's too bad. My great Aunt just passed away from bone cancer couple of days ago, so my simpathies go out to any family who has to go through that. If there is a chance, yes a slim one, that this might help for those that are in the last few weeks, why take that away? e.g. My mom passed away earlier this year from cancer - the last couple of months the cancer was in an inoperable state so this perhaps could have helped (and it couldn't have made the pain any worse...). However I can understand if the cancer is still in the treatable stage that it could well be a bad idea to try this. |
|
3)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Oh Canada?
(Message 36069)
Posted 3 Feb 2007 by Tarx
Post: Hello Tarx and fellow Canucks!! I just joined up with Seti recently and finally connected with Rosetta. I think you might find my thread at Seti interesting. LMAO Hi Pawly! As you've no doubt read in this thread, although the team here at Rosetta is doing quite well, it is somewhat limited by not having it's own site. And I don't think we have had any contact with the captain of our team on Rosetta, so it seems that we are in a similar state as the team at SETI. In any case if someone is putting together a website for the Team Canada (and for someone willing to be an active leader) for some (all?) BOINC projects (heck, maybe even adding folding@home), that would be great! |
|
4)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Oh Canada?
(Message 32914)
Posted 19 Dec 2006 by Tarx
Post: Under 1 month before we reach the #5 spot overall! However we have the Czech National Team listed to catch us in about 220 days! (69K RAC vs our 56K RAC) |
|
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
OT: A closer look at Folding@home on the GPU
(Message 31974)
Posted 2 Dec 2006 by Tarx
Post: Folding@Home now has added the X1600/X1650 and the X1800 series graphic cards to the supported (already had X1900/X1950). NVIDIA 8000 series is not yet sure, but most expect it will be supported in the future. Existing NVIDIA 7000 series (and lower) and ATI X850 series and lower, will never be supported. The ATI X850 and lower is due to lack of capability. NVIDIA 7000 series and earlier is due to serious bottlenecks for that type of computation even though the alpha version did run on NVIDIA cards (but was just way too slow) (and no, it didn't have much to do with the number of shaders - it was issues like branching, cache coherency, etc.) |
|
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Temperature/energy management
(Message 30544)
Posted 3 Nov 2006 by Tarx
Post: I use Notebook Hardware Control (NHC - use to be called CHC). http://www.pbus-167.com/ Worked great on my Pentium M! Voltages were dropped by quite a bit. Basically I found the lowest voltage that worked at max CPU speed that was stable tested at max CPU use, then added a bit extra voltage "just in case". Now at max CPU use, it is quieter and cooler then when it was only working at 40% cpu use. (by the way, don't have it set the new voltage on windows startup until you are really sure it is stable!) |
|
7)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
OT: A closer look at Folding@home on the GPU
(Message 30543)
Posted 3 Nov 2006 by Tarx
Post: By the way, I just noticed that folding@home now supports multiple ATI graphic cards crunching away on the same system. |
|
8)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
OT: A closer look at Folding@home on the GPU
(Message 29875)
Posted 23 Oct 2006 by Tarx
Post: Though I don't have an ATI card, but an NVIDIA one, maybe they'll help translate to thiers. Though Microsoft has an 'Accelerator' technology in the research labs which I think is suppose to make this cross 'graphics' platform. [I think] The current gen of NVIDIA cards (6xxx and 7xxx series) was originally using for the GPU folding client but were found to be much slower (X1600Pro possibly faster than the 7900GTX) than the ATI X1xxx series cards due to several technical reasons (e.g. cache coherence). As they didn't want to support/develop on two code paths (one for ATI and one for NVIDIA) when the ATI cards were so much faster, they are not planning to support/release the NVIDIA GPU client for the 6xxx/7xxx series (8xxx series however might be supported once it is properly examined). Now the current NVIDIA cards are still very fast, so depending on the requirements needed, they could well be a good fit for other code. |
|
9)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Sony PS3 and Folding@Home
(Message 25135)
Posted 27 Aug 2006 by Tarx
Post: With the overheating problems the initial Xbox360s were reported to having, I'm not surprised MS said no. Hopefully with the latest revision this problem is history so they would be open to running BOINC on it. (The original xboxs where x86 based and had a hack to put linux on it so they did run folding@home among other things - but as they were using a fairly weak CPU (IIRC Celeron/PIII 733MHz hybrid) it wasn't fast). What is interesting with Sony is that there was also reports that it also overheated and that the clock speed was dropped to correct that. I guess they dropped it enough that it gave them enough margin that they are no longer concerned about overheating. |
|
10)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Sony PS3 and Folding@Home
(Message 24923)
Posted 26 Aug 2006 by Tarx
Post: Great find FluffyChicken! Hopefully it will become a reality. And I wonder about the use of graphics cards to help the calculations (folding@home is putting this in open beta testing next month but only for high end ATI cards) - apparently a X1900XT will give a significant boost in performance (details on just how much is not yet posted, but likely to be over 3x improvement). |
|
11)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Sony PS3 and Folding@Home
(Message 24435)
Posted 23 Aug 2006 by Tarx
Post: A new Folding@Home client was announced for the PS3. This client integrates and uses the various cell processor cores and the ATI RSX GPU for what appears to be a very high performance client. http://folding.stanford.edu/FAQ-PS3.html This is quite spectacular if it works as described (and doesn't dramatically shorten the PS3's life). I wonder how good a fit a Rosetta based client would be on the PS3. First would need BOINC to run on the PS3. Then I wonder if the performance would be worth it as I think Rosetta likes FPU performance primarily? |
|
12)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
"Is Distributed Computing being Distributed Badly?"
(Message 19732)
Posted 3 Jul 2006 by Tarx
Post: Interesting comments & discussion here! Regarding that comment from ./ (the one that mentioned "I can also tell you that the project is complete and utter crap, from a scientific perspective."), the F@H project leader actually responded (in the F@H forums) about it: "There is a wide variation in the success of distributed computing projects (and the claims of what could be done made by those projects). Out of scientific courtesy, it's not appropriate for me to critique other projects in this forum, as such discussions are best left for the literature and other science forums. One can guess which project he/she's talking about above, but from my point of view, it's bad form to anonymously make such claims. If the person making those claims feels so strongly about it, he/she should make the claims in public so the project he/she is criticizing can rebut and so this isn't used as a general smear over the important science that is being done by distrbuted computing in general -- just because one project may not have been successful (or even well designed from the begining) doesn't mean that d.c. has not been successful! I can happily talk about what we've been able to do. Our list of peer reviewed papers from FAH http://folding.stanford.edu/papers.html is some sense of the scientific significance. There are major journals there (Science, Nature, etc) and results which would not be possible without distributed computing. We have done what we set out to do (fold small proteins and peptides) and have set new goals, with even greater biomedical impact expected. Also, FAH distributed computing has lead to major awards from science societies. Most recently, from the Protein Society: http://www.proteinsociety.org/pages/page03a.htm but there are several others, see http://folding.stanford.edu/awards.html From the Protein Society's award web page: Quote: The 2006 awardee is Dr. Vijay Pande (Stanford University) for his unique approach to employing advances in algorithms that make optimal use of distributed computing, which places his efforts at the cutting edge of simulations. The results have stimulated a re-examination of the meaning of both ensemble and single-molecule measurements, making Dr. Pande’s efforts pioneering contributions to simulation methodology." http://forum.folding-community.org/viewtopic.php?p=137093&sid=4473baf036e5e125ffac9695057a2819#137093 |
|
13)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Old Geezers Club
(Message 19695)
Posted 2 Jul 2006 by Tarx
Post: Started with the original TSR model and PDP-11 (ticket tape with text terminal). Then bought a Vic 20, then Apple ][+ clone for most of the 80s, before finally making to a 386-40 (AMD) many years later. |
|
14)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Team or not to Team...
(Message 19524)
Posted 30 Jun 2006 by Tarx
Post: A more interesting stat is what % of the total points is not under a team. |
|
15)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
"Is Distributed Computing being Distributed Badly?"
(Message 19523)
Posted 30 Jun 2006 by Tarx
Post: There is a follow-up ./ (backslash) http://backslash.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/29/1617259 |
|
16)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
"Is Distributed Computing being Distributed Badly?"
(Message 19467)
Posted 29 Jun 2006 by Tarx
Post: There was someone in the comment on ./ article that anonymously claimed that he worked in one of the following projects: "http://folding.stanford.edu/about.html [stanford.edu] http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_about.php [bakerlab.org] http://boinc.bio.wzw.tum.de/boincsimap/project.php [wzw.tum.de] http://predictor.scripps.edu/about_team.php [scripps.edu] http://www.grid.org/projects/cancer/index.htm [grid.org]" "I'm a guy who was once associated with one of labs/projects mentioned above. I was working on the problem for years, and have a great deal of expertise in the area. I can also tell you that the project is complete and utter crap, from a scientific perspective. The PI routinely misrepresents the project goals, claiming "possible" results that could never, ever come from the type of research performed. In general, the "science" is poorly-conceived and improperly controlled, and most of the "experiments" are methodologically flawed. I can't post my name here...it would be career suicide. As one of the authorities to whom you seem so desperate to appeal, let me assure you: if you are devoting your resources to this project, the world would be a better place if you simply turned your computer off." Making the assumption (yes, it is a big assumption) that he is right, now I wonder which one he was talking about... I'm lousy at detective work (hopefully someone is better at it than me), but I can pick up a few things... Years seem to indicate that the project has run for at least 3 or 4 years. Using the phrase "PI" instead of many alternative terms could be a clue. Of the above links, I noticed that just Folding@Home used it. However Folding@Home also has produced the most results, and seems to be well received as oppose to some of the other projects mentioned that has produced almost nothing. Of course the results could well have little to do with the main stated project goals (and much more with its secondary basic research goals), although some of the papers do seem promising (e.g. the lastest one is related to cancer). http://folding.stanford.edu/papers.html R@H is likely too new for the "several years" comment. The other 3 projects I know little about. I haven't seem much from them, so perhaps one of them might be the right one? Of course as anonymous can't tell who wrote what, so perhaps this other comment is from the same person, or maybe not... (in response to the question Is "Human Proteome Folding" the same as Folding@Home, the one run by Stanford?) "They are competitors. Or rather... "Human Proteome Folding" would like to compete, but haven't been able to. Just look at the amount of _hard_ results coming out of Folding@Home in the form of scientific papers and your choice is easy. The "Human Proteome Folding" project claims they are heading into "phase2", yet haven't published any real results public journals. Yes, I'm in the field, but no, I'm not related to the Pande group, but I find their recent work _very_ impressive scientifically." |
|
17)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Personal Milestones
(Message 18973)
Posted 20 Jun 2006 by Tarx
Post: Woohoo! 10K and climbing :) |
|
18)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Illegal Borging and the Impact on Distributed Computing
(Message 18899)
Posted 18 Jun 2006 by Tarx
Post: Just saw this on the Folding@Home forum: "Shmaa and UCMajewski, collectively known as LocalBusinessMen (LBM), from xtremesystems' Rosetta team illegally installed Rosetta@Home onto computers that were already legally running Folding@Home. The resulting instability from running two DC projects on systems simultaneously resulted in Folding@Home being removed because it was assumed that it was responsible for the issues that had suddenly arisen (because those in charge did not know until later that the systems had been illegally borged with Rosetta). Now, it is important to understand that How???, being senior systems administrator, was in the appropriate position to install Folding@Home on computers under his responsibility. He made sure that people both up and down the chain (including network operations and the head of IT security) knew that Folding was installed and how it was being used (burning in / stability). But with these events taking place, it is doubtful that any distributed computing project will be reintroduced. While LBM's project points are zeroed out and both are banned from xtremesystem, the real cost is to Distributed Computing and its reputation. The loss of 2THz computing power pales in comparison to the possible longtem impacts. This is why people must have the proper authority before installing ANY program on a system that is not their own." http://forum.folding-community.org/viewtopic.php?t=15412&highlight= That was the top member at F@H with thousands of computers that had the F@H DC legally installed (and the installation was carefully optimized to minimize impact), and because of the illegal borg - all gone. Ouch! Anyway, the point of this post (outside of general interest), is that besides yourself (I would think that just about everyone on this forum doesn't need the reminder), it is important to keep reminding your own team members not to illegally borg (yes, people get caught up in the competitive elements and go overboard). I've had to remind people numerous times on the various teams (on other DCs) that I've worked with. And I've seen people actually getting fired for borging at work (fortunately they were not arrested or sued like some people). And then others losing friends for sneaking it on their system, and just causing a bad feeling for DC projects. i.e. Must ask, and if with a company or someone that doesn't remember things too well - get the ok written (or emailed). And don't mess up their systems (e.g. overheat, memory starved, etc.)! |
|
19)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Teraflops seem to be sliding ....
(Message 18888)
Posted 18 Jun 2006 by Tarx
Post: in spite of the increase of users? Although I personally LOVE BOINC and all the options it offers ... I wonder if a number of people find it too confusing and abandon quickly after they join .... I suspect that many are scaling back due to the summer heat. I've seen that in other projects where many teams have a drop for summer production and then return back to full power in the fall. At Boinc they posted "There may also be an environmental cost. If your electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels, the extra electricity usage produces greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. If this is the case, we recommend that you not leave your computer on just to run BOINC, or that you reduce your overall energy use to compensate." http://boinc.berkeley.edu/energy.php The one thing they should have mentioned is that in the summer time, the cost goes more than double if the computer is in an airconditioned area! And it also might make a room too warm if on all the time. On the other hand, if need to heat a room (e.g. in the winter, or in a cold basement), then the power cost is just a fraction of the electricity used as the heat is desired (and most of the power a PC uses, excluding the monitor, turns to heat). |
|
20)
Message boards :
Cafe Rosetta :
Oh Canada?
(Message 18700)
Posted 15 Jun 2006 by Tarx
Post: Bye-bye Ars Technica! Yes, we've moved up to 7th overall! After passing Phoenix Rising, now we are 6th overall! |
Next 20
©2024 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org