Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby calxalot » Fri Dec 24, 2021 11:06 pm

The efficiency cores just slow down the performance cores. You should set the slot to cpu:8.

You should get a passkey if you haven’t already. Once you complete 10 WUs, you should get more than 150k ppd.
calxalot
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 456
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 2:33 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby vzim » Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:56 pm

I've managed to max out m1 pro (10 core) CPU.
Configure -> Slots -> 8 CPUs (= number of P-cores)
Configure -> Advanced -> Priority slightly higher (to avoid E-cores)

Output is 145k PPD at 20W SoC power

Some observations:
P-cores are running at 2.1 GHz, fans are nearly inaudible at 1500 rpm, looks like OS throttled performance down
On cold start cores are running at 3 GHz and initial PPD estimation was around 300k PPD

P.S. it's still an emulated x86 process. When do we get native arm64 support?
vzim
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:36 pm

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby Joe_H » Wed Dec 29, 2021 9:57 pm

vzim wrote:P.S. it's still an emulated x86 process. When do we get native arm64 support?


My guess is sometime in 2022, but no idea on exactly when during the year that will happen.

For the client it will probably be when they release the next version of the client. Work was resumed recently on version 8, it had been halted in early 2020 as F@h started its response to COVID. I am also aware of some work being done towards creating an Apple Silicon version of the CPU folding core, but testing and distribution of that may take a while. Some changes on the server end may also need to be made.

There is already an ARM64 version of the CPU folding core out for ARM systems running Linux.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
Joe_H
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7193
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: W. MA

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby vzim » Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:01 pm

+ Macs Fan Control to force min 2500 rpm
Final WU score: 227k PPD @30W or 7566 PPD/W
Properly optimized native version will be around 10k PPD/W
vzim
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:36 pm

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby Joe_H » Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:21 pm

vzim wrote:Properly optimized native version will be around 10k PPD/W


Maybe. Rosetta 2 is pretty good at translating Intel code to the ARM code used on Apple Silicon, and it caches the translated code so it is not continuously incurring the overhead of translating running code. So it remains to be seen just how much overhead gets removed by running a native folding core.
Joe_H
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7193
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: W. MA

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby vzim » Sat Jan 08, 2022 11:29 am

It's possible to run FAHClient exclusively on E-cores.

This involves some QoS magic and LaunchDaemons/org.foldingathome.fahclient.plist editing
macbook air m1
PPD est: ~24k (most likely overestimated)
Package power: 465 mW

At this power level I can keep it running 24/7 even on battery power
vzim
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:36 pm

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby Neil-B » Sat Jan 08, 2022 12:45 pm

vzim wrote:At this power level I can keep it running 24/7 even on battery power

How well does it do with completing wus within timeout?
2x Xeon E5-2697v3, 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, W10-Ent, Quadro K420
Xeon E3-1505Mv5, 32GB DDR4, NVME, W10-Pro, Quadro M1000M
i7-960, 12GB DDR3, SSD, W10-Pro, GTX1080Ti
i9-10850K, 64GB DDR4, NVME, W11-Pro, RTX3070

(Green/Bold = Active)
Neil-B
 
Posts: 1980
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:52 pm
Location: UK

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby vzim » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:33 pm

Neil-B wrote:
vzim wrote:At this power level I can keep it running 24/7 even on battery power

How well does it do with completing wus within timeout?


It haven't completed single WU yet. After running WU 16955 overnight it's at 30% and 1.26 days left (ETA) with 4.46 days left to complete.
Upd on power and PPD: 3.5k @ 0.33W
vzim
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:36 pm

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby Neil-B » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:55 pm

16955 timeout is three days with 5 day expiration ... completion within the timeout rather than expiration is preferable as at timeout the wu is assigned to another folder ... from your figures it looks like it will complete in 1.86 days and so within the timeout which is great :)
Neil-B
 
Posts: 1980
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:52 pm
Location: UK

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby vzim » Sat Jan 08, 2022 3:56 pm

Recipe for cooking on E-cores
Edit the /Library/LaunchDaemons/org.foldingathome.fahclient.plist
Code: Select all
   <key>ProgramArguments</key>
   <array>
      <string>/usr/sbin/taskpolicy</string>
      <string>-c</string>
      <string>background</string>
      <string>/usr/local/bin/FAHClient</string>
   </array>

Configure cpu slot in FAH Control to use proper number of cores (4 in my case)
Restart the folding service
Code: Select all
sudo launchctl unload /Library/LaunchDaemons/org.foldingathome.fahclient.plist
sudo launchctl load /Library/LaunchDaemons/org.foldingathome.fahclient.plist
vzim
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:36 pm

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby calxalot » Sun Jan 09, 2022 12:32 am

Interesting.

Do you get the same result using ProcessType Background?
Does FAHControl work properly with the background clamped client?
What app do you use to get cpu core usage and clock speeds?

Thanks.
calxalot
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 456
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 2:33 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby vzim » Sun Jan 09, 2022 2:21 pm

calxalot wrote:Do you get the same result using ProcessType Background?

I haven't tested it. I suppose it should be an equivalent in terms of CPU cores scheduling. Not sure if there additional restrictions applied by OS for "background" daemons

calxalot wrote:Does FAHControl work properly with the background clamped client?

I see no difference in FAHControl operation

calxalot wrote:What app do you use to get cpu core usage and clock speeds?

sudo powermetrics
vzim
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:36 pm

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby MeeLee » Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:51 pm

vzim wrote:+ Macs Fan Control to force min 2500 rpm
Final WU score: 227k PPD @30W or 7566 PPD/W
Properly optimized native version will be around 10k PPD/W


Are you measuring SOC power, or total system power?
The PPD values in PPD/W should be measured at the power socket, not from a program like HWMonitor that gets SOC power consumption.

It would be interesting to see which GPU system would be matching it in terms of PPD/W.
I would guess if the above watt ratings is SOC, and not total system power, that you're closer to 8PPD/W, which should be close to the PPD/W of an RTX 1660, paired with a 35W Intel Celeron CPU, running a total system power of 150W.
The desktop would be crunching out closer to 1,2M PPD though.
MeeLee
 
Posts: 1308
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Initial impressions for fast ARM hardware

Postby vzim » Mon Jan 24, 2022 3:10 pm

I measure SoC power impact w/ FAH process active.
Power at wall (with screen sleep) is usually 2-5W higher
vzim
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:36 pm

Previous

Return to Software for ARM hardware

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron