Call for Benchmarks

[Grumpy]

Yes, I have been wondering about the New 800 FSB/Chipset performance, but even this does not explain the increase in Phase II Have to upgrade to AMD64 Boxes

[rsbriggs]

Originally posted by ddn


I'm sure you would. If you were on Ars, I'd even tell you.

Like I said, you gotta step out of the nursery before you can play with the big boys.

And like I asked before, just where is it exactly your name shows up in the folding stats? Unless your username is Bguinto1, Lemonsqzz, IronBits, PCZ, or Condor, you're just talk (and I know you aren't either of the last three.)

[Grumpy]

Is that DDN who is 878 on the individual Stats ?

[ddn]

Yup, ddn. My output is down pretty low right now, I'll have more to work with tomorrow.

My output doesn't change the fact that this project is a half-assed and most of you are jack asses.

[rsbriggs]

Well, I guess that we all can consider the source of these insults, and be moderately amused by them now. Feel free to speak up again when you hit the top ten producers. Or top 100... Or top 250.... Or maybe even top 500....

Personally, I'd say you have singlehandedly done more to tarnish the reputation of ARS Technica than anyone else I've run across lately. And if I were really in a nasty mood, I'd make a parting personal comment, not associated with either this project or FreeDC : Go away little boy - and take your temper tantrums elsewhere. But I'm not in a bad mood at the moment, so I won't say that...

[tpdooley]

What exactly is wrong with you, ddn? Others of us have made suggestions to the project and managed to do so quietly and calmly, without the need to jump up and down insulting everyone that didn't share our view. Even when we've been told by Howard why our suggestions won't work at present. You're doing an incredible disservice to Ars by acting the way you are. Are there new guidelines on Ars instructing the newest members how to alienate the projects that the team is donating cycles to?

There is skill and technique in writing suggestions; as there are ways of writing constructive criticism. I may not be the best in either field; but if this isn't just an attempt at trolling, you've got a lot of studying to do before you can create something even remotely resembling a working suggestion or constructive criticism.

[Brian the Fist]

Originally posted by ddn
At the prospect of offending anyone I haven't offended yet: Howard's code sucks. His vast experience has led to PowerPC routines that are broken (try -bench) which indicates to me even the whole PPC client is broken. The code is obviously faster on Intel hardware, because either it is optimized for that, or isn't optimized at all and just runs faster on Intel than AMD.

Look at SETI@Home for a serious computing project. The clients are uber-optimized for each hardware platform by the best people on each respective platform. Do you really think that Howard can write better routines on Sparc than a compiler geek from Sun. I already spoke of the horrid PPC code. If you all, especially Howard, would give up your unrelentingly pompous attitudes, some people with SERIOUS experience (dtj) would be willing to optimize your code.

You, like everyone else here, are entitled to your opinion. allow me to just point out that, unlike SETI, we have one programmer me (until just recently anyhow). And how many project managers? One, me. How about scientists? Well, me, and my boss Chris Hogue aka FEEDB0B0. While we compile for close to 16 distinct operating systems, we cannot possibly test everything on all of them. We rely on you, the users to inform us of such problems. If you think you can do better, perhaps you should take over this project, I could use a break.

We normally test Windows and usually Intel Linux only after making major changes (like adding the benchmark). I am always prompt to look into errors such as this one and if you'd been around here for more than a week you'd know Ill have the Mac benchmark fixed for the next update (since its not critical).

As for code optimization, the code is not optimized for any specific platform but the C code itself has been hand-optimized and profiled to achieve decent speedup from the original implementation. I do not doubt that it could be further tweaked on inidividual platforms but estimate this would achieve less than 10% improvement at best and is not worth the trouble. If someone else (such as dtj you mention) is interested in having a go at it and is willing to sign a NDA and so forth, we may be able to supply him/her with the source to tinker with (this is up to Chris as well as the Hospital). However if he is as rude as you I don't think I want to deal with him.

[Grumpy]

And for those who want the Readers Digest version:



We are all on the one Team if you were unaware, and for such an extremely small staffed project support/response is excellent. No further admonishment is needed, I am sure you are already feeling the heat from Senior ARS Members

[Morphy375]

Maybe this powercruncher should go back to shool and learn how adults should behave.....

(@grumpy: I am a real StatsHO )

[Grumpy]

Back to the Topic:

Tyan MPX Win 2K 2400 MP 1 Gig ECC

9.625 , 0.750, 65.219, 18.078 Client 1

9.605, 0.710, 65.267, 18.143 Client 2

Hmmmm, too much overhead going on here

:bs:

[TheOtherPhil]

I tend to agree with you Grumpy....dual AMD's don't seem that efficient. Here's the fastest of my dual's:

Iwill MPX2, Red Hat 9, 2x XP2500's @ 2.3GHz, 1GB

Client1: 3.900, 0.500, 52.320, 12.7
Client2: 3.74, 0.590, 52.060, 13.550


I wonder how the Opteron will fare as each CPU will have local RAM?

[pfb]

hmmm...

Gigabyte 7DPPXDW+, Dual MP2400+, 1GB ECC RAM, Windows XP Pro

CPU 0:

Summary
-------
          Usr time  Sys time
          --------  --------
Maketrj      9.516     0.484
Foldtraj    55.828     7.141

CPU 1:

Summary
-------
          Usr time  Sys time
          --------  --------
Maketrj      9.578     0.438
Foldtraj    56.109     7.594

[TheOtherPhil]

Well, just checked my dual XP2500 @ 2.1GHz running Win2K and it appears faster than my dual 2.3GHz box on Linux

Iwill MPX2, Dual XP2500's @ 2.1GHz, Win2K Pro SP4, 512MB:

1x DF client running normally, Client2: 7.859, 0.531, 52.344, 9.703


Now, when I assign affinity to the first client to limit it to a single CPU and then run the bench again on the second CPU, I get:

7.750, 0.563, 51.594, 7.359


So it seems it may be worth assigning each client to it's own CPU on Windows machines. I don't think you can assign affinity in Linux unless running kernel 2.6.

[TheOtherPhil]

I am just installing 2K Server on my dual 2.3GHz box for a direct comparison vs RH 9 results posted above. Back when this 40GB hd formats.....now I know why I love SCSI - IDE takes ages to format

[Darkness Productions]

Try this. Nobody gives a shit about your opinion. We run the client because we want to. I agree, that the performance probably isn't what it could be, but it's one person working on the project. Yes, I've asked before if he'd let me have the source to compile it on the Alpha that's sitting in my living room. He declined. I respect that.

On the subject of us being jackasses, well, hello pot, this is kettle. You've made yourself out to be an ignorant asshole that nobody wants to deal with, and you did it from the start. It's really annoying to hear people complaining about you.

So, either stop whining, or, well, stop whining.

Originally posted by ddn
Yup, ddn. My output is down pretty low right now, I'll have more to work with tomorrow.

My output doesn't change the fact that this project is a half-assed and most of you are jack asses.

[Richard Clyne]

Well, we have not had one for a while, so I suppose we were overdue for a complete tosser to come along and start talking through their arse.

So here's to "ddn" the "Tosser of the Week" Award.

[TheOtherPhil]

Hey ddn, the benchmark results for your Xeon 2.6.....is this with 2x clients running? I am not at all impressed with my dual AMD's (x4) for DF. If the Xeon is putting in those sort of numbers, it will be definitely worth putting my dual AMD's to rest.

[pointwood]

ddn: Be polite or shut up.

If you aren't capable of that, I would prefer if you would leave Ars, you're giving us a bad name

[TheOtherPhil]

OK, now this is interesting. Using the exact same machine and comparing RH9 to Win2K Server SP4:

Iwill MPX2, Red Hat 9, 2x XP2500's @ 2.3GHz, 1GB

Client1: 3.900, 0.500, 52.320, 12.7
Client2: 3.74, 0.590, 52.060, 13.550


Iwill MPX2, Win2K Server SP4, 2x XP2500's @ 2.3GHz, 1GB

Client1: 6.938, 0.406, 48.641, 5.922
Client2: 6.938, 0.406, 48.641, 5.922


What can I say? Win2K is faster for running DF on a dual AMD machine.

[Scoofy12]

<hotheaded post deleted>

[Welnic]

TheOtherPhil,

Maybe you could edit your post so we can see which run is actually on Windows? I assume it is the second one.

[CodeMonkey]

Perhaps we can put this whole DDN thing to bed now? I think everyone has gotten the true picture, and scoofy12 probably sums it up pretty well for everyone.

On another note - I don't have the benchmarks here, but on my Intel 2.8 Ghz HT box, Linux runs DF faster than Windows, either treating it as two separate processors, or just one.

Isn't this all very odd?
AMD based boxes working better under Windows.
Intel boxes running faster under Linux.
What's the world coming to ????

[TheOtherPhil]

Originally posted by Welnic
TheOtherPhil,

Maybe you could edit your post so we can see which run is actually on Windows? I assume it is the second one.

Er yeah....good idea

[Scoofy12]

perhaps that's because the linux client is compiled with the intel compiler?

[ddn]

Why would I have started this thread to begin with if I wasn't interested in gathering some info on what runs folding the fastest? Your comments are inane. If you would read my posts, and grasp what I'm trying to tell you, you wouldn't make these helpless retorts.

I am not a "most talented" programmer, nor do I have access to them directly. However, like I said before, if Howard were to open up a bit, there are people that would be willing to optimize the code. One such person has already rescinded his offer.

I do have access to some of the world's finest hardware, albeit indirectly. But that's not going to help much in this situation anyway. No one is going to baby-sit 256 clients (512 if they are dual-proc nodes) to keep them running.

I post a tarball of a broken directory, and I am mocked for the domain it is hosted on. Wow, you really showed me how to be mature and tactful. Did you ever consider that maybe it's a play on typical script k1dd13 sp34k?

[ddn]

First is GCC, second is Intel.

[root@server1 distribfold]# cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep "model name" -A2 | grep -v step
model name : AMD Athlon(tm) processor
cpu MHz : 1401.734
[root@server1 distribfold]# ./foldtrajlite -bench
One moment, opening rotamer library...
Predicting secondary structure and generating trajectory distribution...
Folding protein...
Benchmark complete.

Summary
-------
Usr time Sys time
-------- --------
Maketrj 8.000 0.730
Foldtraj 70.700 13.470

[root@server1 distribfold]# ./foldtrajlite -bench
One moment, opening rotamer library...
Predicting secondary structure and generating trajectory distribution...
Folding protein...
Benchmark complete.

Summary
-------
Usr time Sys time
-------- --------
Maketrj 7.190 0.640
Foldtraj 79.000 13.370

[Scoofy12]

ok, i guess my post was a bit uncalled-for (i'm having a crazy day, i apologize. i will delete it even though you quoted it). i have no problem with discussions of what hardware is best, or what software approach, or criticisms of the project. or any of that. what i do have a problem with is an attitude that insults people with no apparent provocation, calls names, etc. none of that is necessary, nor is it productive. the sentiment stands, theres no need to be caustic, especially if you are trying to get people to do something for you.

[ddn]

Originally posted by TheOtherPhil
Hey ddn, the benchmark results for your Xeon 2.6.....is this with 2x clients running? I am not at all impressed with my dual AMD's (x4) for DF. If the Xeon is putting in those sort of numbers, it will be definitely worth putting my dual AMD's to rest.

That's one client. Single processor, one client. Although you make a good point, now that you mention it I am going to go do a test with 2 -bench'es on the Xeon and see how they fare. It's possible that the Xeon could do enough in-chip to optimize the stream and do well with 2.

Here:
1x:
Maketrj 3.010 0.740
Foldtraj 25.120 11.240

2x:
-------- --------
Maketrj 5.110 1.030
Foldtraj 44.340 17.150

[root@linux1 distribfold2]# Benchmark complete.

Summary
-------
Usr time Sys time
-------- --------
Maketrj 4.990 1.240
Foldtraj 44.760 16.740


I guess I'll be running 2 from now on. This also does some validation of my argument that the code is not nearly as optimized as it could be.

[Richard Clyne]

Originally posted by ddn
Why would I have started this thread to begin with if I wasn't interested in gathering some info on what runs folding the fastest? Your comments are inane. If you would read my posts, and grasp what I'm trying to tell you, you wouldn't make these helpless retorts.....

I post a tarball of a broken directory, and I am mocked for the domain it is hosted on. Wow, you really showed me how to be mature and tactful. Did you ever consider that maybe it's a play on typical script k1dd13 sp34k?

Sorry ddn this is the only response I can think of to this post. Read you own posts and see what a total prat you are.

[derek]

Actually the uberh4x0r domain ddn posted is my domain. If you don't get the joke - that's your loss. If you have silly attacks you can direct them to me. (Silly rabbit, quit trying to detract from the argument, especially on something aestetic.)

He asked for legit benchmarks, many people gave; several people attacked him because he is rather brash in his statements. Don't like it? Move on, and quit your bitching. Also quit whining about his results, judging from the results many of you are posting, it's none to impressive.

The project could have benefited tremendously from the gentleman (whom I know very well) who offered his help.

I would consider (maybe) donating some time to the sparc client. This is actually dependent on my work load. Perhaps all I can contribute is optimized 64 bit bins for a UltraSPARC III and UltraSPARC II. If I have time, I could even take a look at the OS X client.

Perhaps a call to arms from Howard would benefit the project. It's been said before, and its entirely true. One man can make a cavalier effort with the code, however, it will not produce the best results.

If Howard wants help on the Sparc client (or the OS X client), he can email me directly.

- Derek

[Paratima]

Originally posted by derek
The project could have benefited tremendously from the gentleman (whom I know very well) who offered his help.

What gentleman?

[rsbriggs]

There is a distinct difference between being "brash", and saying that the entire project is "half-assed" and that everyone involved with it is a "jackass". That crosses over the line into rudeness in my book.... Enough said....

[derek]

Originally posted by Paratima
What gentleman?

dtj. It was actually in my initial thread abotu requests to the client.

- derek

[Grumpy]

Well, this proves my Tyan is as they say, the slowest MPX MB..Stability over Speed :sleepy: Mind you, in the real world the Duallie runs a lot faster than the Benchmark shows...

[TheOtherPhil]

Originally posted by Grumpy
Well, this proves my Tyan is as they say, the slowest MPX MB..Stability over Speed :sleepy: Mind you, in the real world the Duallie runs a lot faster than the Benchmark shows...

Actually Grumpy, I am not convinced that it does. I am estimating that a dual AMD is something like 70% efficient for DF....if that. I'm personally running 4x dual AMD's and a P4 (~19.6GHz). 24/7 power is 2x duals and the P4 (11.8GHz). The part time dual's (~7.8GHz) run ~8hrs a day. All run as a service with useram=1.

My daily output is ~240K/ day. I really should be getting much higher than that I feel with the power I have invested in this project.

I am going to conduct a small test within the next few weeks where I remove the procs from my 2x full time dual's and run them in uni-processor boards for a while. I am expecting to see significantly higher numbers (~+30%).

[Grumpy]

Hmmm, I would estimate my Dual 2400's are equal in output to 2 X 2100 -2200XPs. During Phase I my 2400s were both getting on a certain protein 120K a day and the 2100XP 105K, now it seems a lot slower. Phase II, as far as I can tell, is not handling AMD SMP as well

[Welnic]

I had 4 2000MPs and 5 2100XPs during phase I and they were really close on their output. I remember when I first got the 2100s being disappointed that they didn't have a bigger advantage than they did. I don't remember the exact numbers.

I don't have any idea of how individual machines are doing during phase II. I do seem to have the wrong setup with AMD linux boxen in my farm and borged Intel XP boxen.

[Grumpy]

Just hope the Opteron does not get slowed down like the MPX does. I am waiting for someone to post some Benches soon, PLEASE.

[TheOtherPhil]

Intel, P4, 3668MHz, WinXP Pro SP1, 1GB

5.875, 0.500, 20.672, 7.797

[Grumpy]

So close to breaking 20