|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
07-02-2004, 04:45 PM
|
#1 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
  |
p212_villinURE212
Is this the slowest protein you've ever encountered? It has been working at 29:49 per step... on my P4 2.4C ! It's worth 135 pts, but that's still a long time to work. I've restarted the client a couple of times to see if it was hanging, but that's the rate it's working. Anyone else ever have one of these?
__________________
Kov Are You Foldin'? Join PCMech's Folding@Home Team and Help Save Lives! Click Here!
|
|
|
|
07-02-2004, 08:38 PM
|
#2 |
|
HOT ROD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 4,565
|
I'm getting between 25:00 and 26:00 on my P4's with HT running 2 instances and with my 2.4B it takes 20:21 a step.
__________________
Fast enough 2 get by.....old enough 2 know what not 2 try -You know it was me 
|
|
|
|
|
07-03-2004, 07:48 AM
|
#3 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
|
That's good, at least I'm somewhat on target. It's running at 24:49 now. I was wondering if it was a bad work file or something. Is there another protein that goes any slower than this one, tho?
|
|
|
|
|
07-03-2004, 11:04 AM
|
#4 |
|
HOT ROD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 4,565
|
Right now I it looks to be the biggest on the block. Looking through my EM protien log there was the "p1109_Kiefhaber_28" that took about 36:00 but was only 20 steps and not very high in value either. I haven't seen one of these since 05/01/2004 according to my records.
|
|
|
|
|
07-03-2004, 02:45 PM
|
#5 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
|
I don't understand why it's worth 100 pts less than one of the big Tinkers, when they take about the same overall amount of time to complete... Ah well.
|
|
|
|
|
07-03-2004, 05:14 PM
|
#6 |
|
HOT ROD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 4,565
|
I'm not 100% sure bout this but if my memory serves me correctly the p212_villinURE212 was worth 239 points during the first week it was available then the value of them dropped with the introduction of some of the newer tinkers that were being distributed at the time. It doesn't make sense to me, but a WU is a WU in terms of the project even though it takes some of the fun out of the competitive side of it.
|
|
|
|
|
07-04-2004, 12:09 PM
|
#7 |
|
Wrench Bender
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Plymouth,MN
Posts: 5,961
|
My machine is just finishing up P638_L939_K12M_ext.(400 steps). And I started on yesterday morning. This is the longest so far in time to complete.
__________________
"When sliding down the banister of life; look out for splinters pointing up."
|
|
|
|
|
07-04-2004, 03:17 PM
|
#8 |
|
HOT ROD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 4,565
|
The P638_L939_K12M_ext.(400 frames, 239 points) is one of the largest tinkers work units and that time is around normal for completion, but the p212_villinURE212 (100 steps, 135 points) is the biggest gromac work units. They both take about the same time to complete (+/- 3 hours) for me but the p212_villinURE212 puts a hurt on the averages
|
|
|
|
|
07-14-2004, 10:33 PM
|
#9 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
|
I've found an even bigger slowpoke, I think, as far as Gromacs are concerned... I have a p264_ch3oh that's running at 40:55 per step on my 2.4C. It is HT'ing, but it's also oc'ed to 2.89. EMIII is not listing a point total for it, for some reason.
|
|
|
|
|
07-14-2004, 11:40 PM
|
#10 |
|
HOT ROD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 4,565
|
Don't think I've seen that WU yet.
As for EM not giving the point value you might try updating the emprotx.dat file. The latest update is dated 7/13/04 and the point value is 206 according to the Stanford project page. |
|
|
|
|
07-15-2004, 12:59 AM
|
#11 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
|
The protein .dat files seem to be updated all the time. I guess they're always adding new proteins to be folded, but are they constantly playing around with point values, too?
|
|
|
|
|
09-13-2004, 09:55 PM
|
#12 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
|
Unless there's something wrong with my stuff, I think I have a hands-down winner. Protein 748, named p295_ , is taking 2h26m per frame over 100 frames on my Celery 2.4GHz. Yikes! EMIII lists points for it as a lowsy 234...
 
Last edited by Kov-Ice; 09-13-2004 at 09:58 PM. |
|
|
|
|
09-13-2004, 11:23 PM
|
#13 |
|
HOT ROD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 4,565
|
1:47:00 a frame on a 2.6C with 2 instances, I just hope it makes you feel a lil better.
|
|
|
|
|
09-14-2004, 12:00 AM
|
#14 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
|
I shoulda checked my log sooner... It said:
[20:29:01] Preparing to commence simulation [20:29:01] - Ensuring status. Please wait. [20:29:18] - Looking at optimizations... [20:29:18] - Working with standard loops on this execution. [20:29:18] - Previous termination of core was improper. I restarted it and got the extraSSE boost, so we'll see what per frame times are down to in a little while, I guess. |
|
|
|
|
09-15-2004, 09:08 PM
|
#15 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
|
Settled down to 54min per after optimizations kicked in. Finished and sent finally.
|
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Linear Mode
