Expected points for 8104

The most demanding Projects are only available to a small percentage of very high-end servers.

Moderators: Site Moderators, PandeGroup

Expected points for 8104

Postby spinecrawler » Tue Oct 29, 2013 2:51 pm


Just wondering what sort of points are typical for project 8104. I typically see well over 200K. Today I checked my output and I'm seeing only 17K.

Code: Select all
06:11:36:WU01:FS00:0xa5:Completed 247500 out of 250000 steps  (99%)
06:22:30:WU01:FS00:0xa5:Completed 250000 out of 250000 steps  (100%)
06:22:31:WU00:FS00:Connecting to assign3.stanford.edu:8080
06:22:32:WU00:FS00:News: Welcome to Folding@Home
06:22:32:WU00:FS00:Assigned to work server
06:22:32:WU00:FS00:Connecting to
06:22:40:WU00:FS00:Downloading 28.90MiB
06:22:41:WU01:FS00:0xa5:DynamicWrapper: Finished Work Unit: sleep=10000
06:22:44:WU00:FS00:Download complete
06:22:51:WU01:FS00:0xa5:Finished Work Unit:
06:22:51:WU01:FS00:0xa5:- Reading up to 64206000 from "01/wudata_01.trr": Read 64206000
06:22:52:WU01:FS00:0xa5:trr file hash check passed.
06:22:52:WU01:FS00:0xa5:- Reading up to 31546912 from "01/wudata_01.xtc": Read 31546912
06:22:52:WU01:FS00:0xa5:xtc file hash check passed.
06:22:52:WU01:FS00:0xa5:edr file hash check passed.
06:22:52:WU01:FS00:0xa5:logfile size: 205816
06:22:52:WU01:FS00:0xa5:Leaving Run
06:22:53:WU01:FS00:0xa5:- Writing 96119604 bytes of core data to disk...
06:23:08:WU01:FS00:0xa5:Done: 96119092 -> 91375906 (compressed to 5.6 percent)
06:23:08:WU01:FS00:0xa5:  ... Done.
06:23:11:WU01:FS00:0xa5:- Shutting down core
06:23:11:WU01:FS00:0xa5:Folding@home Core Shutdown: FINISHED_UNIT
06:23:12:WU01:FS00:FahCore returned: FINISHED_UNIT (100 = 0x64)
06:23:12:WU01:FS00:Sending unit results: id:01 state:SEND error:NO_ERROR project:8104 run:0 clone:58 gen:263 core:0xa5 unit:0x00000144088988e15161bfcbaa502fe7
06:23:12:WU01:FS00:Uploading 87.14MiB to
06:23:12:WU01:FS00:Connecting to
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:Running FahCore: /backup/jeremy/fahclient_7.3.6-64bit-release/FAHCoreWrapper /backup/jeremy/fahclient_7.3.6-64bit-release/cores/www.stanford.edu/~pande/Linux/AMD64/Core_a5.fah/FahCore_a5 -dir 00 -suffix 01 -version 703 -lifeline 26654 -checkpoint 15 -np 31
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:Started FahCore on PID 29264
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:Core PID:29268
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:FahCore 0xa5 started
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Folding@Home Gromacs SMP Core
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Version 2.27 (Thu Feb 10 09:46:40 PST 2011)
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Preparing to commence simulation
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:0xa5:- Looking at optimizations...
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:0xa5:- Created dyn
06:23:12:WU00:FS00:0xa5:- Files status OK
06:23:14:WU00:FS00:0xa5:- Expanded 30305209 -> 33158020 (decompressed 109.4 percent)
06:23:14:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Called DecompressByteArray: compressed_data_size=30305209 data_size=33158020, decompressed_data_size=33158020 diff=0
06:23:14:WU00:FS00:0xa5:- Digital signature verified
06:23:14:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Project: 8101 (Run 26, Clone 1, Gen 166)
06:23:14:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Assembly optimizations on if available.
06:23:14:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Entering M.D.
06:23:18:WU01:FS00:Upload 48.05%
06:23:21:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Mapping NT from 31 to 30
06:23:24:WU00:FS00:0xa5:Completed 0 out of 250000 steps  (0%)
06:23:30:WU01:FS00:Upload complete
06:23:31:WU01:FS00:Server responded WORK_ACK (400)
06:23:31:WU01:FS00:Final credit estimate, 17153.00 points

Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Expected points for 8104

Postby 7im » Tue Oct 29, 2013 3:13 pm

This is the base points for that Work unit. No bonus was credited. Did you go over the timeout? Did you use a passkey? Please post the log showing the download through the upload of that work unit. Also post the *** System *** config section.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
User avatar
Posts: 14648
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Expected points for 8104

Postby bollix47 » Tue Oct 29, 2013 3:15 pm

Welcome to the folding@home support forum spinecrawler.

The preferred deadline for P8104 is 1.8 days. According to our records you completed the work unit in 2.33 days:

Entered into logs at: 2013-10-29 00:04:26
WU assigned to donor at: 2013-10-26 16:07:52
Days taken to complete WU: 2.33
Error code: 0

Hi Spinecrawler (team 111065),
Your WU (P8104 R0 C58 G263) was added to the stats database on 2013-10-29 00:05:41 for 17153 points of credit.

Looking at the length of your last frame it should have taken less than a day so please check the log for any interruptions, restarts or a delay between downloading and actual processing. You may need to look at a previous log which will be stored in the logs sub-directory of the Data Directory.
Posts: 3513
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:04 am
Location: Canada

Re: Expected points for 8104

Postby spinecrawler » Tue Oct 29, 2013 3:40 pm

Wow 2.33 days! Whoops didn't notice that piece. Checked the logs as suggested and I noticed there was an interruption as well as a ~36 hour period with 60+ minutes between frames. I didn't notice the first 35% took nearly 1.5 days when I checked the nohup initially. Thanks for the quick replies folks, appreciated! Good to know nothing's wrong.
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Expected points for 8104

Postby PantherX » Sat Nov 02, 2013 4:37 pm

Please note that one possible cause for the 60 minutes plus TPF during the ~36 hours is that the CPU resources from folding was taken by another program. If any CPU cycles are taken constantly from folding, it will drastically slow down the CPU folding in a non-linear manner. Thus, if you have applications that require significant amount of CPU Usage frequently, you can configure F@H to use less resources to avoid CPU over-subscription.
Now ↞ Very Soon ↔ Soon ↔ Soon-ish ↔ Not Soon ↠ End Of Time

Welcome To The F@H Support Forum Ӂ Chrome Folding App (Beta) Ӂ Troubleshooting "Bad WUs" Ӂ Troubleshooting Server Connectivity Issues
User avatar
Site Moderator
Posts: 6321
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:33 am

Re: Expected points for 8104

Postby P5-133XL » Sun Nov 03, 2013 6:21 am

It is much better PPD/Frame-time wise to not use a HT core (adds little to the overall PPD) than to over-subscribe the CPU (which costs a great deal). If there is any significant risk of an application using a CPU core for an extended amount of time just fold with one less core and you'll be better for it.
Posts: 4034
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:36 am
Location: Salem. OR USA

Return to SMP with bigadv

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest