Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Linux Benchmark script

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    England, near Europe
    Posts
    211

    Linux Benchmark script

    Hi there, I remember that Dyyryath posted a benchmark script a while ago for Linux. I have looked in that thread but the attachment isn't there anymore. I'd appreciate it if somebody who has a copy could post it. I'd like to see just how RH8 compares to WinXP on identical hardware (dual XP1800's).

    Thanks,
    Phil.
    Train hard, fight easy


  2. #2
    Ancient Programmer Paratima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    West Central Florida
    Posts
    3,296
    #!/usr/bin/perl
    #
    # This PERL script should be run in the same directory as your Distributed
    # Folding files. The script can only be run while the DF client is running.
    #
    use strict;
    system("cls");

    if (!(-e "foldtrajlite.lock"))
    {
    print "ERROR: foldtrajlite.lock file not found! Client must be running...\n";
    exit(-1);
    }

    my $seconds = (time() - (stat("foldtrajlite.lock"))[9]);

    open(IN,"<progress.txt");
    <IN>=~/(\d+)/;
    my $progress = $1;
    close(IN);

    my $workPerSecond = sprintf("%.2f",($progress/$seconds));
    my $workPerMinute = sprintf("%.2f",($progress/($seconds/60)));
    my $workPerHour = sprintf("%.2f",($progress/($seconds/3600)));
    my $workPerDay = sprintf("%.2f",($workPerHour*24));

    print "-" x 60 . "\n";
    print "Distributed Folding Windows Benchmark Script V1.0\n\n";

    print "Sample Size: $progress structures over $seconds seconds.\n\n";

    print "Structures Per Second:\t\t\t$workPerSecond\n";
    print "Structures Per Minute:\t\t\t$workPerMinute\n";
    print "Structures Per Hour:\t\t\t$workPerHour\n";
    print "Structures Per Day:\t\t\t$workPerDay\n";

    print "-" x 60 . "\n";

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    England, near Europe
    Posts
    211
    Thanks, it works great. I am seeing a good difference in speed by using Linux :shocked:

    Code:
    CPU0
    Distributed Folding Linux Benchmark Script V1.0
    
    Sample Size: 4356 structures over 1148 seconds.
    
    Structures Per Second:                  3.79
    Structures Per Minute:                  227.67
    Structures Per Hour:                    13659.93
    Structures Per Day:                     327838.32
    Code:
    CPU1
    Distributed Folding Linux Benchmark Script V1.0
    
    Sample Size: 4158 structures over 1097 seconds.
    
    Structures Per Second:                  3.79
    Structures Per Minute:                  227.42
    Structures Per Hour:                    13645.21
    Structures Per Day:                     327485.04
    Dual XP1800's, Tyan Tiger S2460, 768Mb....Win2K results to follow.
    Last edited by TheOtherPhil; 01-26-2003 at 01:36 PM.
    Train hard, fight easy


  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    England, near Europe
    Posts
    211
    OK, using the exact same hardware as the Linux box but with Win2K Pro I get:

    Code:
    CPU0
    Distributed Folding Windows dfGUI v1.7 Benchmark
    
    Sample Size : 5200 structures over 1537 seconds.
    Protein Size: 108AA
    
    Structures Per Second: 3.38
    Structures Per Minute: 203.0
    Structures Per Hour  : 12180
    Structures Per Day   : 292310
    
    OS : Microsoft Windows 2000    MHz: 1533
    CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) MP 1800+
    Code:
    CPU1
    Distributed Folding Windows dfGUI v1.7 Benchmark
    
    Sample Size : 4950 structures over 1534 seconds.
    Protein Size: 108AA
    
    Structures Per Second: 3.23
    Structures Per Minute: 193.6
    Structures Per Hour  : 11617
    Structures Per Day   : 278801
    
    OS : Microsoft Windows 2000    MHz: 1533
    CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) MP 1800+
    Over both CPU's, that is an approximate 84,000 structure per day advantage just by running Linux on that one box.

    /me looks at my 5 dual AMD boxen and ponders whether to swap them all to Linux
    Last edited by TheOtherPhil; 01-26-2003 at 02:18 PM.
    Train hard, fight easy


  5. #5
    Ancient Programmer Paratima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    West Central Florida
    Posts
    3,296
    There's a question here?

  6. #6
    Psycho Penguin dnar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    111
    Phil, did you ever doubt this?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    England, near Europe
    Posts
    211
    Originally posted by dnar
    Phil, did you ever doubt this?
    LOL, no but I didn't expect such a difference
    Train hard, fight easy


  8. #8
    Target Butt IronBits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Morrisville, NC
    Posts
    8,619
    Does this script still work correctly for Phase II ?

  9. #9
    Stats Developer magnav0x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,747
    I sure hope so. I want to test out this gentoo performance! Spent all weekend getting it set up the way I want.

  10. #10
    This is the title that appears ECL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Nothing to see here, move along...
    Posts
    147
    I've been looking into the difference between the perl script and the built-in benchmarking tool (.\foldtrajlite.exe -bench). The built-in feature should be more objective, since it'll theoretically be more representative of actual folding performance after generation 0, and it doesn't depend on flags or other tweaks.

    The output gives User and System timings in seconds. "Foldtraj" is supposedly more important than "Maketraj" but the "Maketraj" numbers are large enough to be non-trivial.

    Here are sample timings from two of my systems:

    Usr time Sys time
    -------- --------
    Maketraj 10.545 1.152
    Foldtraj 38.495 22.032 (P4 2.4 / WinNT4)
    Maketraj 8.750 1.359
    Foldtraj 48.609 9.984 (XP 2400 / WinXP)

    According to this, I'm likely to get approximately 1 structure every 70 seconds out of either box. According to Howard's readme, that's a baseline figure and could be comparable across machines.

    In the real world, I'm using dfGui and have "Use extra RAM" and "Quiet Mode" checked, and my actual numbers are somewhat different. Using the time graph, a calculator and an ancient technology known as a "pencil" I have figured that my real average time per generation on the XP2400 is ~11 minutes, or 13.2 seconds per structure. Using the benchmark.txt output by dfGui, I find that my average time on the current gen is 22.96 seconds per structure (25 structures over 574 seconds).

    I'd like to see some other Foldtraj/Maketraj timings from others on the team. There might turn out to be interesting CPU vs OS patterns in the data. Or not.

  11. #11
    Administrator Dyyryath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,850
    Originally posted by IronBits
    Does this script still work correctly for Phase II ?
    Probably not. With the different generations, it'd be easy to come up with extremely skewed results. I'd use the built in one now days.

    magnav0x: Welcome to the light, brother! Can I get an 'emerge!'?
    "So utterly at variance is destiny with all the little plans of men." - H.G. Wells

  12. #12
    Ancient Programmer Paratima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    West Central Florida
    Posts
    3,296
    With a bit of fussing around (which I'm not interested in doing just now), you could get that script to give you good numbers during Generation 0 only. The problem is that you don't get a very large sample that way.

    When we were using this script for a benchmark, we encouraged users to run it for at least a couple of hours, and preferably a day or longer. That way you would smooth over the occasional peaks and valleys of the algorithm and actually get representative performance numbers. Today, Gen 0 doesn't last long enough on the faster machines most of us use and the results would be skewed.

    Sorry! dfGUI forever!!

    ECL: There's a thread for this over here.

  13. #13
    Stats Developer magnav0x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,747
    magnav0x: Welcome to the light, brother! Can I get an 'emerge!'?

    OMG, I couldn't believe this emerge thing. It's friggin awesome. All my other linux distros are now coasters! I've been messing with the framebuffering and bootsplash all day today. Seems to be a problem with the 2.4.20-gentoo-r5 gentoo sources, but I think I've got it all worked out after some kernel patching. I didn't want to switch to the vanilla or ck sources.

  14. #14
    Vorlon Ambassador to F-DC Kosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    88
    Originally posted by magnav0x
    OMG, I couldn't believe this emerge thing. It's friggin awesome. All my other linux distros are now coasters! I've been messing with the framebuffering and bootsplash all day today. Seems to be a problem with the 2.4.20-gentoo-r5 gentoo sources, but I think I've got it all worked out after some kernel patching. I didn't want to switch to the vanilla or ck sources.
    Good to hear ... if you are feeling really adventurous try development-sources or mm-sources. And welcome to Gentoo


  15. #15
    Stats Developer magnav0x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,747
    I just may. I'm still working on getting everything in that I want to use. Gentoo is blowing my mind!
    Warning this Post is Rated "M" for Mature

    -Contains Harsh Language
    -L337 HaX0r W3RD2!
    -Partial Nudity

    I haven't lost my mind; it's backed up on tape drive somewhere.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •