Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Nathan_P
Posts: 1180
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:22 pm
Hardware configuration: Asus Z8NA D6C, 2 x5670@3.2 Ghz, , 12gb Ram, GTX 980ti, AX650 PSU, win 10 (daily use)

Asus Z87 WS, Xeon E3-1230L v3, 8gb ram, KFA GTX 1080, EVGA 750ti , AX760 PSU, Mint 18.2 OS

Not currently folding
Asus Z9PE- D8 WS, 2 E5-2665@2.3 Ghz, 16Gb 1.35v Ram, Ubuntu (Fold only)
Asus Z9PA, 2 Ivy 12 core, 16gb Ram, H folding appliance (fold only)
Location: Jersey, Channel islands

Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by Nathan_P »

Came home from work this afternoon to find my 1070 stalled on the above WU. The log is showing the following

14:39:06:WU00:FS00:0x21:Project: 10496 (Run 158, Clone 16, Gen 66)
14:39:06:WU00:FS00:0x21:Unit: 0x000000548ca304f556bbb14e1ec6144f
14:39:06:WU00:FS00:0x21:CPU: 0x00000000000000000000000000000000
14:39:06:WU00:FS00:0x21:Machine: 0
14:39:06:WU00:FS00:0x21:Reading tar file core.xml
14:39:06:WU00:FS00:0x21:Reading tar file system.xml
14:39:07:WU00:FS00:0x21:Reading tar file integrator.xml
14:39:07:WU00:FS00:0x21:Reading tar file state.xml
14:39:07:WU00:FS00:0x21:Digital signatures verified
14:39:07:WU00:FS00:0x21:Folding@home GPU Core21 Folding@home Core
14:39:07:WU00:FS00:0x21:Version 0.0.18
14:39:16:WU00:FS00:FahCore returned: INTERRUPTED (102 = 0x66)

Looking back through the log this started at just before 5am so sitting idle for 9 hours. Tried restarting the slot, this didn't work so i removed the slot, restarted the client and created a new slot, the 1070 is now happily folding a a 9415 WU
Image
Joe_H
Site Admin
Posts: 7856
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: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by Joe_H »

Project: 10496 (Run 158, Clone 16, Gen 66) may just be a bad WU, there are multiple failure reports in the database with no successes so far.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
ComputerGenie
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:06 am

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by ComputerGenie »

As a general rule, Project 10496 sucks. Not sure if I've gotten stuck with this particular RCG, but I am sure that I'm about tired of being stuck with this project on all cards at the same time :(
Nathan_P
Posts: 1180
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:22 pm
Hardware configuration: Asus Z8NA D6C, 2 x5670@3.2 Ghz, , 12gb Ram, GTX 980ti, AX650 PSU, win 10 (daily use)

Asus Z87 WS, Xeon E3-1230L v3, 8gb ram, KFA GTX 1080, EVGA 750ti , AX760 PSU, Mint 18.2 OS

Not currently folding
Asus Z9PE- D8 WS, 2 E5-2665@2.3 Ghz, 16Gb 1.35v Ram, Ubuntu (Fold only)
Asus Z9PA, 2 Ivy 12 core, 16gb Ram, H folding appliance (fold only)
Location: Jersey, Channel islands

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by Nathan_P »

I've run it in the past without issues and am working on one now without issue, all projects have bad WU and this is one of the larger ones in terms of size.
Image
Duce H_K_
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 3:52 pm
Hardware configuration: MoBo•Gigabye X99 UD4-CF F24
CPU•<UPD 20.05.2023>Xeon V3 2680 V4 14c28t 35Mb L3
RAM•DDR4 Hynix 2133 CL14 4*16 DualRank Quad channel
HDD•ST1000DM003 Sata3 NCQ
GFX•GT220
PSU•Chieftec GPS750C 80+ Gold after repair
Cooling•Air 2xDeepCool UF120

Internet•200Mbit/s FTTB↓ white dynamic, ERTH, router RB951G-2HnD

Other•Redmi 7A <runs WUProp :-/>
Location: Russia
Contact:

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by Duce H_K_ »

ComputerGenie wrote:Project 10496 sucks.
Yep, +1. This project always heavily uses GPU resources and still not grateful when it comes to PPD. Max 670k on a GTX1070OC. Compare

Code: Select all

 Project ID: 13204
 Core: OPENMM_21
 Credit: 13541

 Name: Palit-1070OC2062 Slot 00
 Number of Frames Observed: 97

 Min. Time / Frame : 00:01:29 - 793 143,4 PPD
 Avg. Time / Frame : 00:01:30 - 779 961,6 PPD
Currently, I decided not to play hard with overclocking

Code: Select all

04:29:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:Project: 10496 (Run 110, Clone 6, Gen 49)
04:29:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:Unit: 0x0000003a8ca304f556bbaddff3e4aa0e
04:29:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:CPU: 0x00000000000000000000000000000000
04:29:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:Machine: 0
04:29:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:Reading tar file core.xml
04:29:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:Reading tar file system.xml
04:29:36:WU00:FS00:0x21:Reading tar file integrator.xml
04:29:36:WU00:FS00:0x21:Reading tar file state.xml
04:29:38:WU00:FS00:0x21:Digital signatures verified
04:29:38:WU00:FS00:0x21:Folding@home GPU Core21 Folding@home Core
04:29:38:WU00:FS00:0x21:Version 0.0.18
04:30:16:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 0 out of 2000000 steps (0%)
04:30:17:WU00:FS00:0x21:Temperature control disabled. Requirements: single Nvidia GPU, tmax must be < 110 and twait >= 900
04:32:14:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 20000 out of 2000000 steps (1%)
04:34:10:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 40000 out of 2000000 steps (2%)
04:36:06:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 60000 out of 2000000 steps (3%)
04:38:01:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 80000 out of 2000000 steps (4%)
04:39:57:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 100000 out of 2000000 steps (5%)
04:41:53:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 120000 out of 2000000 steps (6%)
04:42:37:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
04:43:56:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 140000 out of 2000000 steps (7%)
04:45:50:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 160000 out of 2000000 steps (8%)
04:47:48:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 180000 out of 2000000 steps (9%)
04:49:46:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 200000 out of 2000000 steps (10%)
04:51:43:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 220000 out of 2000000 steps (11%)
04:53:40:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 240000 out of 2000000 steps (12%)
04:54:53:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
04:55:45:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 260000 out of 2000000 steps (13%)
04:57:40:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 280000 out of 2000000 steps (14%)
04:59:37:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 300000 out of 2000000 steps (15%)
05:01:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 320000 out of 2000000 steps (16%)
05:03:31:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 340000 out of 2000000 steps (17%)
05:05:28:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 360000 out of 2000000 steps (18%)
05:07:11:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
05:07:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 380000 out of 2000000 steps (19%)
05:09:31:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 400000 out of 2000000 steps (20%)
05:11:27:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 420000 out of 2000000 steps (21%)
05:13:24:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 440000 out of 2000000 steps (22%)
05:15:21:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 460000 out of 2000000 steps (23%)
05:17:18:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 480000 out of 2000000 steps (24%)
05:19:14:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 500000 out of 2000000 steps (25%)
05:19:29:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
05:21:20:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 520000 out of 2000000 steps (26%)
05:23:17:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 540000 out of 2000000 steps (27%)
05:25:13:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 560000 out of 2000000 steps (28%)
05:27:10:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 580000 out of 2000000 steps (29%)
05:29:08:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 600000 out of 2000000 steps (30%)
05:31:05:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 620000 out of 2000000 steps (31%)
05:31:33:WU00:FS00:0x21:Bad State detected... attempting to resume from last good checkpoint. Is your system overclocked?
05:33:30:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 520000 out of 2000000 steps (26%)
05:35:27:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 540000 out of 2000000 steps (27%)
05:37:24:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 560000 out of 2000000 steps (28%)
05:39:21:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 580000 out of 2000000 steps (29%)
05:41:18:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 600000 out of 2000000 steps (30%)
05:43:15:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 620000 out of 2000000 steps (31%)
05:44:07:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
05:45:28:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 640000 out of 2000000 steps (32%)
05:47:25:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 660000 out of 2000000 steps (33%)
05:49:22:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 680000 out of 2000000 steps (34%)
05:51:19:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 700000 out of 2000000 steps (35%)
05:53:17:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 720000 out of 2000000 steps (36%)
05:55:15:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 740000 out of 2000000 steps (37%)
05:56:31:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
05:57:25:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 760000 out of 2000000 steps (38%)
05:59:22:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 780000 out of 2000000 steps (39%)
06:01:20:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 800000 out of 2000000 steps (40%)
06:03:17:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 820000 out of 2000000 steps (41%)
06:05:15:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 840000 out of 2000000 steps (42%)
06:07:12:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 860000 out of 2000000 steps (43%)
06:09:11:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
06:09:33:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 880000 out of 2000000 steps (44%)
06:11:30:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 900000 out of 2000000 steps (45%)
06:13:27:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 920000 out of 2000000 steps (46%)
06:15:24:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 940000 out of 2000000 steps (47%)
06:17:22:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 960000 out of 2000000 steps (48%)
06:19:19:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 980000 out of 2000000 steps (49%)
06:21:16:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1000000 out of 2000000 steps (50%)
06:22:07:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
06:23:17:WU00:FS00:0x21:Bad State detected... attempting to resume from last good checkpoint. Is your system overclocked?
06:25:17:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1020000 out of 2000000 steps (51%)
06:27:15:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1040000 out of 2000000 steps (52%)
06:29:13:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1060000 out of 2000000 steps (53%)
06:31:10:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1080000 out of 2000000 steps (54%)
06:33:07:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1100000 out of 2000000 steps (55%)
06:33:20:ERROR:Receive error: 10054: ?????????????????? ???????? ?????????????????????????? ???????????????? ???????????????????????? ??????????????????????.
06:35:04:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1120000 out of 2000000 steps (56%)
06:37:47:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
06:39:12:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1140000 out of 2000000 steps (57%)
06:41:10:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1160000 out of 2000000 steps (58%)
06:43:07:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1180000 out of 2000000 steps (59%)
06:45:04:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1200000 out of 2000000 steps (60%)
06:47:01:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1220000 out of 2000000 steps (61%)
06:48:57:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1240000 out of 2000000 steps (62%)
06:50:53:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
06:51:44:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1260000 out of 2000000 steps (63%)
06:53:39:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1280000 out of 2000000 steps (64%)
06:55:34:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1300000 out of 2000000 steps (65%)
06:57:28:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1320000 out of 2000000 steps (66%)
06:59:22:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1340000 out of 2000000 steps (67%)
07:01:17:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1360000 out of 2000000 steps (68%)
07:03:31:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
07:03:53:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1380000 out of 2000000 steps (69%)
07:05:47:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1400000 out of 2000000 steps (70%)
07:07:42:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1420000 out of 2000000 steps (71%)
07:09:36:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1440000 out of 2000000 steps (72%)
07:11:30:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1460000 out of 2000000 steps (73%)
07:13:26:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1480000 out of 2000000 steps (74%)
07:15:20:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1500000 out of 2000000 steps (75%)
07:15:39:WARNING:FS00:Size of positions 18935 does not match topology 18851
07:17:26:WU00:FS00:0x21:Completed 1520000 out of 2000000 steps (76%)
07:18:39:WU00:FS00:0x21:Bad State detected... attempting to resume from last good checkpoint. Is your system overclocked?
07:18:39:WU00:FS00:0x21:ERROR:114: Max Retries Reached
07:18:40:WU00:FS00:0x21:Saving result file logfile_01.txt
07:18:40:WU00:FS00:0x21:Saving result file badstate-0.xml
07:18:52:WU00:FS00:0x21:Saving result file badstate-1.xml
07:19:06:WU00:FS00:0x21:Saving result file badstate-2.xml
07:19:18:WU00:FS00:0x21:Saving result file log.txt
07:19:19:WU00:FS00:0x21:Folding@home Core Shutdown: BAD_WORK_UNIT
07:19:31:WARNING:WU00:FS00:FahCore returned: BAD_WORK_UNIT (114 = 0x72)
07:19:31:WU00:FS00:Sending unit results: id:00 state:SEND error:FAULTY project:10496 run:110 clone:6 gen:49 core:0x21 unit:0x0000003a8ca304f556bbaddff3e4aa0e
07:19:31:WU00:FS00:Uploading 17.75KiB to 140.163.4.245
07:19:31:WU00:FS00:Connecting to 140.163.4.245:8080
07:19:31:WU00:FS00:Upload complete
07:19:31:WU00:FS00:Server responded WORK_ACK (400)
07:19:32:WU00:FS00:Cleaning up
P.S. none of 10496 WUs I saw were bad due to non-OC reasons.
   510 290 819 pts earned in Folding@home project
Nathan_P
Posts: 1180
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:22 pm
Hardware configuration: Asus Z8NA D6C, 2 x5670@3.2 Ghz, , 12gb Ram, GTX 980ti, AX650 PSU, win 10 (daily use)

Asus Z87 WS, Xeon E3-1230L v3, 8gb ram, KFA GTX 1080, EVGA 750ti , AX760 PSU, Mint 18.2 OS

Not currently folding
Asus Z9PE- D8 WS, 2 E5-2665@2.3 Ghz, 16Gb 1.35v Ram, Ubuntu (Fold only)
Asus Z9PA, 2 Ivy 12 core, 16gb Ram, H folding appliance (fold only)
Location: Jersey, Channel islands

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by Nathan_P »

given the avge PPD of a 1070 at stock is 600k, 670k does not suck. The fact that you have a very heavily clocked 1070 displaying the PPD from one of the highest scoring projects out there is irrelevant.

PPD from my 1070 (slot 0) and 1080 (slot 1)

Name: Hermes Slot 00
Path: 192.168.1.136-36330
Number of Frames Observed: 300

Min. Time / Frame : 00:01:54 - 696,142.6 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:01:57 - 669,539.9 PPD


Name: Hermes Slot 01
Path: 192.168.1.135-36330
Number of Frames Observed: 300

Min. Time / Frame : 00:01:53 - 705,404.1 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:01:56 - 678,216.5 PPD
Image
ComputerGenie
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:06 am

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by ComputerGenie »

Nathan_P wrote:I've run it in the past without issues and am working on one now without issue....
Nathan_P wrote:[1070]
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:01:57 - 669,539.9 PPD
[1080]
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:01:56 - 678,216.5 PPD
These comments seem to contradict each other. :e?:
JonasTheMovie
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:16 am
Location: Northern Sweden

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by JonasTheMovie »

690k is about what I get on my watercooled 1080 FTW at 2100Mhz when assigned 10496 WUs. Interresting that a 1070 gets about the same.
Image
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by bruce »

JonasTheMovie wrote:690k is about what I get on my watercooled 1080 FTW at 2100Mhz when assigned 10496 WUs. Interresting that a 1070 gets about the same.
2560 cores @1733 should be faster than
1920 cores @1683
(unless the number of atoms in the project(s0 forces additional synchronization)

YMMV
Ricky
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:34 am
Hardware configuration: 1. 2 each E5-2630 V3 processors, 64 GB RAM, GTX980SC GPU, and GTX980 GPU running on windows 8.1 operating system.
2. I7-6950X V3 processor, 32 GB RAM, 1 GTX980tiFTW, and 2 each GTX1080FTW GPUs running on windows 8.1 operating system.
Location: New Mexico

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by Ricky »

I find it interesting that this project does about the same with these two cards. I believe the 1080 usually gets about 20% better PPD.

GTX1080FTW, Win 8.1

Min. Time / Frame : 00:01:56 - 678,216.5 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:02:00 - 644,590.2 PPD


GTX980tiFTW, Win 8.1

Min. Time / Frame : 00:01:56 - 678,216.5 PPD
Avg. Time / Frame : 00:02:01 - 636,615.8 PPD
Ricky
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:34 am
Hardware configuration: 1. 2 each E5-2630 V3 processors, 64 GB RAM, GTX980SC GPU, and GTX980 GPU running on windows 8.1 operating system.
2. I7-6950X V3 processor, 32 GB RAM, 1 GTX980tiFTW, and 2 each GTX1080FTW GPUs running on windows 8.1 operating system.
Location: New Mexico

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by Ricky »

Four of my five GPU cards right now are running project 10496. Is there a push to get this project further along?
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by bruce »

Ricky wrote:Is there a push to get this project further along?
Do you mean: More so that usual????
Maybe: maybe not.

The fact that bonus points are awarded non-linearly implies that there's always a push to get active projects further along. Assignment priorities can be adjusted to favor some projects at the expense of assignments of lower priority projects but it doesn't seem fair to reduce the bonuses for those lower priority tasks.
SteveWillis
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 12:42 am
Hardware configuration: PC 1:
Linux Mint 17.3
three gtx 1080 GPUs One on a powered header
Motherboard = [MB-AM3-AS-SB-990FXR2] qty 1 Asus Sabertooth 990FX(+59.99)
CPU = [CPU-AM3-FX-8320BR] qty 1 AMD FX 8320 Eight Core 3.5GHz(+41.99)

PC2:
Linux Mint 18
Open air case
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair V Formula-Z AM3+ AMD 990FX SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD
AMD FD6300WMHKBOX FX-6300 6-Core Processor Black Edition with Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO - CPU Cooler with 120mm PWM Fan
three gtx 1080,
one gtx 1080 TI on a powered header

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by SteveWillis »

I don't understand how bonuses can affect project progress since we can't choose which projects we fold.
Image

1080 and 1080TI GPUs on Linux Mint
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by bruce »

Changing a CPU slot from a single slot with the maximum number of CPUs to multiple slots, each with fewer CPUs will run more projects concurrently and all will be slower and earn fewer bonus points. There may be a similar [bad] choice you can make for GPUs, but if so, I'm not sure what it is.
JonasTheMovie
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:16 am
Location: Northern Sweden

Re: Project 10496 (158,16,66)

Post by JonasTheMovie »

Is it just me, or have we seen the end of this project? My PPD has picked up alot lately.
Image
Post Reply