TR Forums

Who knows... I downloaded it first and then registered. Could that be the problem? FF fixed the problem for me though. Thanks FF.

Very impressive. Folds at about the same rate as the Windows SMP client does or even a little quicker. Best part is that it's using less CPU than the Win SMP client!

Just so you know Beta2 is out and Beta1 is no longer valid as of 02/02/08.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegrou ... -Linux.tgz

Thanks! (and now updated to beta2).

Luckily I never shut down the client, so I don't have to bother for a while

Okay got this working now. However, I noticed that there's 4 fahcore_a1.exe processes. I thought there's only 2 virtual CPUs per machine?

ChronoReverse wrote:

Okay got this working now. However, I noticed that there's 4 fahcore_a1.exe processes. I thought there's only 2 virtual CPUs per machine?

It's supposed to be that way.

No similar virtualization trick available to us users of Vista x64 eh?

pikaporeon wrote:

No similar virtualization trick available to us users of Vista x64 eh?

VMware Player (remember to get the 2.0 version) + EasyVMX = win

F@H is unbelievably biased towards SMP. When running two instances of console, I get 300PPD but running the Linux x64 SMP client gives me 1900PPD

Just decided to install the linux vm on my work computer at work so hopefully the results will start to come through soon. Also by trawling through the interweb I managed to find a way to jack up the speed of my Q6600 at home. Its running Xubuntu native and even with the SMP client running it was only running at 1.6GHz, Found out that I had to get the speed governor to also use nice processes in its calculation for deciding what speed to run the cores at. It might be something to add to the guide at the start of the topic for those that run native and want the cpu to run at max speed all the time.

edit the config file for the powernowd daemon

add -n to the list of options (don't forget to leave a space between the options )
and restart the daemon


Just to give you an idea of the performance increase that I've noticed initially (although I'd admit that all statistics have been fed through the PUI filter ) is about 2-3 min for every percent finished so that means in the range of 3.5 to 5 hours saving per WU just by getting the CPU to crank up at full bore.

I'm trying to get the VMware software set up, but I don't know what to put in here:

ChronoReverse wrote:

F@H is unbelievably biased towards SMP. When running two instances of console, I get 300PPD but running the Linux x64 SMP client gives me 1900PPD

i'm a newbye
i would like to know if there is any site which report the statistic and comparison of the unit completation time for the intel or amd dual core cpu, for windows and linux 32/64, also using the smp program


i'm planning to build a low power economic pc for folding under linux now
given that it is possible to build a amd x2 45w or an intel coreduo like e2150 for few bucks.

i know i could use also a gpu, but i read an article that states that a gpu like an ati 9600 would produce 7 unit per day, and a dual core intel cpu a 8 unit per day.
maybe i misunderstood.

in my city there are many people affetteced by cancer,

thanks

themattman wrote:

I'm trying to get the VMware software set up, but I don't know what to put in here:

Did you ever figure this out? I know it was a few weeks ago.

You might be able to find the vmx file and run it instead of opening VMware without a login there. (C:\Virtual Machines?)

ati 9600 would produce 7 unit per day

?
I had to make sure I wasn't necro-posting.

The GPUv2 clients rock! Whether you go ATI or Nvidia, you will get thousands of PPD. Nothing beats them, you can get a decent Radeon 3850 / Nvidia 9600 GT for $150. Go higher and grab even greater performance.

Get a simple Core 2 Duo to feed the GPU, you should be good to go.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegrou ... -Linux.tgz

This is the new address for the .tgz file needed to install the folding application in the guide.

edit:

Also, in the install guide it should be changed so that the tar xzvf blahblahblah should be changed to the correct file name (FAH6.02-Linux.tgz).

And last but not least, during the creation of the startup script, when you save nano will ask you in the terminal to overwrite buffer changes (or something) and then asks you save the file name. This should be made more clear in the guide as the guide implies this part of the guide as only one action. That is, the guide should read something along the lines of

Original wrote:

Save the script by pressing CTRL-X and then answering Y to the editor's prompt.
Finally, at the command prompt type

Should be wrote:

Save the script by pressing CTRL-X, answering Y to the editor's prompt, and then hitting enter to save.
Finally, at the command prompt type

Thanks Nitrodist - 1st post is updated!
Are you or someone else interested in taking over this sticky thread? I'm not around very often anymore...
edit: to the post below, I redid the link, but it looks the same?

Excellent install guide. Thanks Trax. I was reading the instructions under Windows and installing under Lixux and this got me,
"wget http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegrou ... -Linux.tgz" This should be,
"wget http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegrou ... -Linux.tgz"

themattman wrote:

I'm trying to get the VMware software set up, but I don't know what to put in here:

i got the same problem too

Did you install this using the administrator account?
Did you follow the step exactly as mentioned in the 1st post?
Do you have a firewall blocking VMware somehow?
Check your services and make sure VMware Registration service and VMware Authorization service is running? (you did reboot after installing VMware?)
Finally can always try entering your computer name and the administrator account and password.

edit: some other threads on how to get VMware Server working on vista (for those that have trouble).
http://communities.vmware.com/thread/89353
http://www.cubert.net/2008/07/installin ... ndows.html
http://www.oracle-base.com/blog/2008/03 ... erver-105/
http://communities.vmware.com/thread/85434
http://www.serdarbulut.com/VMware-Serve ... Vista-Host
Let me know what helps so I can include it in the 1st post!

BTW, ver 2.0 of VMware server apparently does work fine with Vista, but I'd have to adjust the instructions regarding vmware use. If anyone is familiar with ver 2.0 of VMware server, can you please post some info on it.

all ive done so far is installed it and loaded it up, and i cant make a new virtual machine until i connect to this alleged host. im using vista though, is that the problem? i didnt go out of my way to install it in some sort of administrative way. i dont think anything is interfering with it. both of those services are running. is my pc the host its talking about? sorry this isnt my area of expertise.

Try entering localhost as the host name.

If that doesn't work... we'll have to dig deeper.

that gave me a different error message: "No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it"

This thread may help.

Apparently there are some issues with VMware and Vista's UAC and/or driver signing requirements.

VMware Server is not designed for Vista. Use the free VMware Player instead (link somewhere in this thread or some other post in the forum). Since the VMware Player cannot create VMs, use something like http://www.easyvmx.com.

that works and i got ubuntu installed but now all it is is a screen with a birdy on it and i dont know what to do with it. there's nowhere to input commands and no buttons to click on. i installed it and restarted the computer and loaded it back up and this is where i am.

skuj wrote:

that works and i got ubuntu installed but now all it is is a screen with a birdy on it and i dont know what to do with it. there's nowhere to input commands and no buttons to click on. i installed it and restarted the computer and loaded it back up and this is where i am.

Hmm that's odd. You should see a "task bar" and a "menu bar".

that's what it looks like

Just wondering, would one SMP client running on 4 cores (in Linux of course) be better PPD or two clients on 2 cores?

I'm thinking about trying out Hyper-V and it seems to have 4 core guest support!

ChronoReverse wrote:

Just wondering, would one SMP client running on 4 cores (in Linux of course) be better PPD or two clients on 2 cores?

I'm thinking about trying out Hyper-V and it seems to have 4 core guest support!

Gut feeling is that you'll probably get slightly more PPD with 2 clients, but the only way to know for sure is to try it.