What type of RAM are you using with the P4?
I've noticed that my boxes with sdram aren't keeping up with my single () ddr box.
Some quick and dirty tests show some interesting results I think.
Both systems using W2k, client switches -df -qt -g 100 -it
3 hour runs stopped and rerun
Both using -rt
AMD 1700xp @1463 82100/day
Intl P4 1.6a @1.6 65500/day
Both using -rf
AMD 1700xp @1463 42000/day
Intl P4 1.6a @1.6 43000/day
Previous protein
AMD 1700xp@1463 118000/day
Intl P4 1.6a@1.6 132000/day
Note the larger gain using -rt with the AMD
Anybody else see this?
AMD users be happy I guess.
P4 users
What type of RAM are you using with the P4?
I've noticed that my boxes with sdram aren't keeping up with my single () ddr box.
The P4 is *really* crippled by memory bandwidth in just about everything.
The 533 DDR is better - the RD800 is MUCH better - but I've not profiled in DF - just in compiling and in video compression/image processing.
We've done substantial profiling in real-world applications for 4th gen settop boxes.
From web-surfing to video compression/decompression, realtime image processing, rich-text editing - you know - the kinda stuff you would do with a computer-vis-television... The P4 just gets its little booty stomped by the AMD in ever conceivable way... (yes - that's SSE2 versus SSE on the AMD. We've not optimized to 3DNow2 yet)
The depressing thing is that the P3/512k often humiliates a northwood...
Very interesting I was just going to post a message about my observations with the P4 and the new speed increase.
All my P3 machines seemed to have doubled in speed with the new RAM option. But my P4 (1.5 GHz) using RDRAM (PC800) went from 40413 structs/day with -rf to 60909 struct/day with -rt so only about a 50% increase in speed.
Jeff.
Sorry, the memory on both systems was DDR, P4 was CL2.
As for the P4 being crippled, see the numbers from the previous protein, quite respectable vs 1700xp yes?( and I don't need a screamer fan and 10ton airconditioner to keep it cool).
Don't want to start a cpu war here just wanted to see if anyone else saw this or just my systems or if there was/is a problem.
It seems Jeff is seeing the same thing, only 50% increase with P4.
Willeben
yes ,now my AMD tbred 2200 @1880 whit fonction -rt is more quickly of my p4@2652mhz.
Last edited by baja27; 07-24-2002 at 05:30 PM.
Franc-O-Bec
29 top 1000
Approx 35.000MHZ
Using the -rt switch on the latest protein, I can fold 33,000 proteins in one day.
I am running a Power Mac G4 with a PowerPC 7400 chip clocked at 466 MHz. I have 384 MB of RAM.
Derek
Is it just me, or is this new protein a bit slower ?
Derek
s l o w e r
Use the right tool for the right job!
Just was wondering if this ever panned out.
Just was wondering if this ever panned out.
Yep.. we got a client that you can turn the "use extra ram" switch on, and if you have at least 256Megs, it puts it to use, and folds almost twice as fast as the client without the switch.
That's why we were all running around adding extra ram to our machines...
actually, depending on the OS and how you use the box, you don't really need 256MB
if you run a "lite" OS, like many linux versions or Windows 95/98 on boxes with 128MB AND it is just a cruncher (nobody useing the computer for non-DC stuff) then the -rt switch can also be successfully employed for 2X production
Windows XP is too fat, even if the box is only a DC cruncher, there isn't enough of the 128MB left over to use -rt
Use the right tool for the right job!
I belive the rule of thumb is 96mb for the OS (w2k/XP) +8mb per application you want open all at the same time... with only 128mb, you barely have enough for the basics...