Wu size difference between chrome and native client
Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team
Wu size difference between chrome and native client
Is there a difference in the size of WU between the desktop client and the chrome app? When I was using chrome on light I used to finish a WU in about an hour, but using the desktop app on light its taking 10 hours. Any explanation?
-
Joe_H
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7878
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:41 pm
- Hardware configuration: Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp4
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp2 - Location: W. MA
Re: Wu size difference between chrome and native client
Welcome to the folding support forum.
Yes, there is a difference in the size of WU's. The Chrome client was specifically created with smaller, shorter WU's to be processed. In part this was so a contributor could connect, process folding for as long as they wanted, and if there would be a gap before they would be able to fold it would not leave a WU partly processed.
With the assignment model used for the original desktop client a WU is assigned to a single folder and does not get reassigned until after the preferred deadline listed in the Project Summary has passed. That can leave a WU in limbo if the system is not folding for a while for any reason. Basically the desktop client was designed to work best for systems that would be folding for lengthy periods of time, if not all of the time.
The size difference can also be seen in the points awarded. The WU's for the chrome app get a fixed number of points - 125 for the current WU's. The desktop app WU's get a number of base points that varies depending on their size, and are eligible for a Quick Return Bonus that increases the points given depending on how fast the WU is returned. Looking at the Project Summary page linked at the top of the Forum will show the different projects and the associated points and deadlines.
Yes, there is a difference in the size of WU's. The Chrome client was specifically created with smaller, shorter WU's to be processed. In part this was so a contributor could connect, process folding for as long as they wanted, and if there would be a gap before they would be able to fold it would not leave a WU partly processed.
With the assignment model used for the original desktop client a WU is assigned to a single folder and does not get reassigned until after the preferred deadline listed in the Project Summary has passed. That can leave a WU in limbo if the system is not folding for a while for any reason. Basically the desktop client was designed to work best for systems that would be folding for lengthy periods of time, if not all of the time.
The size difference can also be seen in the points awarded. The WU's for the chrome app get a fixed number of points - 125 for the current WU's. The desktop app WU's get a number of base points that varies depending on their size, and are eligible for a Quick Return Bonus that increases the points given depending on how fast the WU is returned. Looking at the Project Summary page linked at the top of the Forum will show the different projects and the associated points and deadlines.
iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
Re: Wu size difference between chrome and native client
Projects for the desktop client are a bit more efficient because (hopefully) there are fewer interruptions to upload/download. The overall project is made up of a large number of parallel paths, each consisting of a large number of segments which are stitched together over a period of many months. (You are assigned one such segment.)
Projects for the Chrome client are similar, but they consist of an even larger number of shorter segments. As Joe has said, there's a smaller cost in terms of a shorter loss progress when an individual segment is not completed promptly, but that comes with the extra overhead of uploading/downloading more frequently.
The "best" client for your machine depends both on its processing power and your pattern of computer use. Stanford is attempting to give a wider choice of clients to meet the needs of a wider audience.
Projects for the Chrome client are similar, but they consist of an even larger number of shorter segments. As Joe has said, there's a smaller cost in terms of a shorter loss progress when an individual segment is not completed promptly, but that comes with the extra overhead of uploading/downloading more frequently.
The "best" client for your machine depends both on its processing power and your pattern of computer use. Stanford is attempting to give a wider choice of clients to meet the needs of a wider audience.
Posting FAH's log:
How to provide enough info to get helpful support.
How to provide enough info to get helpful support.
Re: Wu size difference between chrome and native client
With my laptop I would have preferred the web client. Its better for my low powered machine. But the web version didn't allow me to select what type of research I wanted to focus in.
-
Napoleon
- Posts: 887
- Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 2:31 pm
- Hardware configuration: Atom330 (overclocked):
Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
Intel Atom330 dualcore (4 HyperThreads)
NVidia GT430, core_15 work
2x2GB Kingston KVR1333D3N9K2/4G 1333MHz memory kit
Asus AT3IONT-I Deluxe motherboard - Location: Finland
Re: Wu size difference between chrome and native client
I'm not 100% sure about the current status, but the "Cause Preference" choice might still be just eyecandy. Originally the feature was added only to the client, to be implemented on the server side later on. Plus, the choice was never intended to guarantee anything. If there isn't work available for a given Cause Preference - or maybe if your choice is low priority for FAH - they may send you something else.