Overclock.net banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 40 of 348 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,493 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>brutis;12832475</strong> <br>
Here's what my two -bigadv sytems would do to a 6901<br><br><a class="bbcode_url" href="http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=17730&start=30#p176708" target="_blank">http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=17730&start=30#p176708</a><br><br>
I'm a LINUX n00b of 6 years now and was told a long time ago not to fold as root...so I haven't <img alt="wink.gif" class="bbcode_smiley" src="http://files.overclock.net/images/smilies/wink.gif"><br><br>
What file extension are you using ext3 or ext4?</div>
</div>
<br>
I fold as root, not really worried about security on my vm with no shared folders either direction, also folding as root so I didn't need to create another user.<br><br><br>
Swyped from my DROID X
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,094 Posts
I'm so doing this tonight. I've forgotten 2 nights in a row and then been reminded of it at work. lol
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,648 Posts
Really need to get this information back in essential threads so we don't lose it.<br><br>
Also, what changes would I need to make to run with this on a 980X (12 threads)?<br><br>
Assume I can just run Linux (dual boot) straight, without going through a VM in Windoze, and fold in that?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,048 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>sstnt;12837384</strong> <br>
Really need to get this information back in essential threads so we don't lose it.<br><br>
Also, what changes would I need to make to run with this on a 980X (12 threads)?<br><br>
Assume I can just run Linux (dual boot) straight, without going through a VM in Windoze, and fold in that?</div>
</div>
<br>
As far as I know, yes you can do that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,094 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>sstnt;12837384</strong> <br>
Really need to get this information back in essential threads so we don't lose it.<br><br>
Also, what changes would I need to make to run with this on a 980X (12 threads)?<br><br>
Assume I can just run Linux (dual boot) straight, without going through a VM in Windoze, and fold in that?</div>
</div>
<br>
You can and it's preferable. You shouldn't need to use that script. That script is for CPUs with fewer than 8 threads available.<br><br>
Just download the native linux SMP client into linux, configure it, and go.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,648 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Boyboyd;12837492</strong> <br>
You can and it's preferable. You shouldn't need to use that script. That script is for CPUs with fewer than 8 threads available.<br><br>
Just download the native linux SMP client into linux, configure it, and go.</div>
</div>
<br>
Great...going to work on it this weekend (with help from my son, a linux expert). I pretty much fold 24x7 on my rig for the Team Comp. Getting over 62k ppd now, but someone on another team with a 970 just went over and dropped his tpf about 10%, and is getting est 75k ppd now. I want!!<br><br>
Oh, would folding in linux impact my OC? Assume that's mostly HW...but there might be an impact on memory, temp, etc. Might I get a better OC in Linux or doesn't it matter?<br><br>
As a side question (not sure if anyone here knows), if I am working a -bigadv wu in linux....then want/need to go to windows..can I move the wu over and fold on it in windows, and then move it back? Wonder if that would cause an issue with bonus points, etc?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,048 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>sstnt;12838030</strong> <br>
As a side question (not sure if anyone here knows), if I am working a -bigadv wu in linux....then want/need to go to windows..can I move the wu over and fold on it in windows, and then move it back? Wonder if that would cause an issue with bonus points, etc?</div>
</div>
<br>
I'm no expert on the matter, but I don't think you would be able to do that. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this would be a similar situation to submitting a WU on a different computer than you folded the WU on. In that situation I don't think you earn any bonus points for your WU's.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,493 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>sstnt;12838030</strong> <br>
Great...going to work on it this weekend (with help from my son, a linux expert). I pretty much fold 24x7 on my rig for the Team Comp. Getting over 62k ppd now, but someone on another team with a 970 just went over and dropped his tpf about 10%, and is getting est 75k ppd now. I want!!<br><br>
Oh, would folding in linux impact my OC? Assume that's mostly HW...but there might be an impact on memory, temp, etc. Might I get a better OC in Linux or doesn't it matter?<br><br>
As a side question (not sure if anyone here knows), if I am working a -bigadv wu in linux....then want/need to go to windows..can I move the wu over and fold on it in windows, and then move it back? Wonder if that would cause an issue with bonus points, etc?</div>
</div>
<br>
Since it would be using different cores it would most likely crash.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Regarding the OC, and bearing in mind that I'm still an OC n00b, my understanding is that that would only be for the hardware - as that's what would cause a BSOD (I presume that a Linux box would BSOD if there was a HW fault) or instability...but I might be slightly off..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,493 Posts
Discussion Starter #30
You would def get a kernel panic if you had an unstable OC.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,094 Posts
ok i just tried this. It absolutely crippled my machine. Even the task managed graph stopped updating but the unit was still folding.<br><br>
Might just upgrade to a 2600k and sell this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Boyboyd;12876782</strong> <br>
ok i just tried this. It absolutely crippled my machine. Even the task managed graph stopped updating but the unit was still folding.<br><br>
Might just upgrade to a 2600k and sell this.</div>
</div>
<br><br>
If it were me that is what I would do. I have a feeling that when v7 comes out it will kill the walk around and the 2500's will no longer be able to fold bigadv WU's. Stanford has always said they do not want Quads doing bigadv. I do not know why though there have been sugestions before that the results they return are somehow corrupted. But I do not know if that is true or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Grandpa_01;12877714</strong> <br>
If it were me that is what I would do. I have a feeling that when v7 comes out it will kill the walk around and the 2500's will no longer be able to fold bigadv WU's. Stanford has always said they do not want Quads doing bigadv. I do not know why though there have been sugestions before that the results they return are somehow corrupted. But I do not know if that is true or not.</div>
</div>
I've seen some on the FF say that but I've not read anything from Dr. Kasson or anyone from PG to suggest that that is the case. And if that were the case then wouldn't using -smp 7 do the same thing since that veers from the original 8 core/thread requirement?<br><br>
We should be finding out shortly if v7 does kill x4 & x6 doing -bigadv but then <b>tear</b> will probably find another work around for that one too <img alt="cheers.gif" class="bbcode_smiley" src="http://files.overclock.net/images/smilies/cheers.gif">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>brutis;12878034</strong> <br>
I've seen some on the FF say that but I've not read anything from Dr. Kasson or anyone from PG to suggest that that is the case. And if that were the case then wouldn't using -smp 7 do the same thing since that veers from the original 8 core/thread requirement?<br><br>
We should be finding out shortly if v7 does kill x4 & x6 doing -bigadv but then <b>tear</b> will probably find another work around for that one too <img alt="cheers.gif" class="bbcode_smiley" src="http://files.overclock.net/images/smilies/cheers.gif"></div>
</div>
<br>
Yes we should find out soon. As far as the -smp 7 goes there are already some smp WU's that will not work with it. It is probably just a matter of time before there will be bigadv WU's that will not work with it. That is a core issue not a Stanford requirement.<br><br>
If v7 does stop the X4 & X6 from folding bigadv then it would be v7 client or software doing it. I doubt that a work around could be made without changing the v7 client and or software which would be a EULA violation.<br><br>
I do not know that this is going to happen like you said I have not heard anything official.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Grandpa_01;12879089</strong> <br>
Yes we should find out soon. As far as the -smp 7 goes there are already some smp WU's that will not work with it. It is probably just a matter of time before there will be bigadv WU's that will not work with it. That is a core issue not a Stanford requirement.<br><br>
If v7 does stop the X4 & X6 from folding bigadv then it would be v7 client or software doing it. I doubt that a work around could be made without changing the v7 client and or software which would be a EULA violation.<br><br>
I do not know that this is going to happen like you said I have not heard anything official.</div>
</div>
Yes the prime number effect.<br><br>
Even now without the work around the client will stop none 8+ thread systems from folding -bigadv so it's already doing that. One thing that it might do, besides looking at how many cores the OS reports to it, is to also see what the CPU identification string is saying...just speculating.<br><br>
If there is a work around for v7 someone will find it without having to hack the client and break the EULA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>brutis</strong>
<a href="showthread.php?s=a8165a00c4e6ba8c8b9883ce4f3dc622&p=12879986#post12879986" rel="nofollow"><img class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" border="0" alt="View Post" /></a>
</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">Yes the prime number effect.<br />
<br />
Even now without the work around the client will stop none 8+ thread systems from folding -bigadv so it's already doing that. One thing that it might do, besides looking at how many cores the OS reports to it, is to also see what the CPU identification string is saying...just speculating.<br />
<br />
If there is a work around for v7 someone will find it without having to hack the client and break the EULA.</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>That is the assignment server that is checking for 8 cores not the client. The work around is fooling the AS therefore it is not breaking the EULA. If v7 has the ability to read CPU’s it is different and any hack to the client or software would be breaking the EULA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>Grandpa_01</strong>
<a href="showthread.php?s=a8165a00c4e6ba8c8b9883ce4f3dc622&p=12880298#post12880298" rel="nofollow"><img class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" border="0" alt="View Post" /></a>
</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">That is the assignment server that is checking for 8 cores not the client. The work around is fooling the AS therefore it is not breaking the EULA. If v7 has the ability to read CPU’s it is different and any hack to the client or software would be breaking the EULA.</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>Learn something new every day. <br />
<br />
I always thought that when you started the client one of the first things it showed was "reporting 8 cores" or something to that effect and that it was the client that was reporting to the AS that it had 8 cores to use, then the AS would pass that off to the proper WU server.<br />
<br />
I'm sure it's the client that reports the number of cores to the AS. Bruce and I talked about that before.<br />
<a href="http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=15107&p=150142&hilit=Frau+Farbissina#p150119" target="_blank">link</a><br />
<br />
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>bruce</strong>

</div>
<div style="font-style:italic"><u>The Assignment Server bases it's decisions on the information supplied by the client</u>. Your discussions are centered about about a concept called performance. Performance is only indirectly related to getting the AS to assign or not assign bigadv is The client DOES NOT KNOW the performance of your system.</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>So the work around is fooling the client that then fools the AS which doesn't break the EULA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>brutis</strong>
<a href="showthread.php?s=5bd08cb0a2becf66ff9a516b8d226d15&p=12880951#post12880951" rel="nofollow"><img class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" border="0" alt="View Post" /></a>
</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">Learn something new every day. <br />
<br />
I always thought that when you started the client one of the first things it showed was "reporting 8 cores" or something to that effect and that it was the client that was reporting to the AS that it had 8 cores to use, then the AS would pass that off to the proper WU server.<br />
<br />
I'm sure it's the client that reports the number of cores to the AS. Bruce and I talked about that before.<br />
<a href="http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=15107&p=150142&hilit=Frau+Farbissina#p150119" target="_blank">link</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
So the work around is fooling the client that then fools the AS which doesn't break the EULA.</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>Yes the AS reads what the client detects from the OS then makes the assignment. But what if the new client or software has the ability to register how many cores are actually dedicated to running the WU and thus refuses to run with less than 8. That is where the EULA comes into play. You would have to alter the client or software.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>Grandpa_01</strong>
<a href="showthread.php?s=5bd08cb0a2becf66ff9a516b8d226d15&p=12881855#post12881855" rel="nofollow"><img class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" border="0" alt="View Post" /></a>
</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">Yes the AS reads what the client detects from the OS then makes the assignment. But what if the new client or software has the ability to register how many cores are actually dedicated to running the WU and thus refuses to run with less than 8. That is where the EULA comes into play. You would have to alter the client or software.</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>I agree with you if the only way is to hack the client, then yes that is breaking the EULA and should not be done. I wouldn't do it and wouldn't use any app that would. I would also warn people not to as you would too.<br />
<br />
But...if the client still queries the OS, BIOS, CPU for that answer and a work around can be done then yes it's not breaking the EULA and I wouldn't have a problem with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
I personally do not see any problem with Quads and 6 core machines running bigadv as long as they do not slow the project down and return usable results. Hell I ran a couple of bigadv WU's on a Q9650 in 2.5 days sneakerneting over a year ago when they said it could not be done. But it did not take Stanford long to block sneakerneting after I did it. <img src="/images/smilies/biggrin.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" class="inlineimg" /><br />
<br />
I do believe that if Stanford does not want Quads and 6 core machines to run bigadv they could, would or will stop it. If they do not care then it will continue. When I did it they stooped me with no problem. <img src="/images/smilies/wink.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Wink" class="inlineimg" />
 
21 - 40 of 348 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top