Any solid reasons for running v6?

[codysluder]

[As] long as it runs all the cores why should i, change for the sake of change for an existing user makes no sense

Does V6 actually run all the cores? I though the support for AMD was more limited (even in Windows).

[mmonnin]

It just works for linux SMP folding without any dependancy nonsense.
For a 4xx or 5xx card it just works no white list nonsense
For smp folding it just works
For uni proc it just works.

V7 is great, i use it and i like the ease of setup - ON WINDOWS - but i have been around 4 years, had lots of different hardware and have not had any issues setting up v6, and long as it runs all the cores why should i, change for the sake of change for an existing user makes no sense

I posted 1 line you can copy and pasted into a Ubuntu terminal and FAH will be up and running. Can't get any simpler than that.

v6 used to be a pain in the arse. v7 is the easiest client ever I've used.

[Rattledagger]

Does V6 actually run all the cores? I though the support for AMD was more limited (even in Windows).

Correct, FAH v6 can't use Amd-cards at all, but with the current state of FAH-Amd-performance this isn't really a big reason to not continuing running v6.

[Hyperlife]

Until Ticket 584 is resolved (which ain't gonna happen anytime soon, it seems), V7 doesn't run at all under FreeBSD with built-in Linux emulation.

I couldn't get V7 to work with Wine for SMP folding either, so all my FreeBSD servers run V6.

[powerarmour]

We need the v6 client for GPU folding under Wine for Linux, until the v7 client provides that functionality natively, we should still ideally have that option if possible. Not everyone can afford Windows licenses just to fold on spare machines they have.

[ford316]

Any solid reasons for running v6? yes for my laptop as v7 crashes windows 8 and really does nothing v6 runs fine without any problems... will work on the reason more later

[bruce]

Any solid reasons for running v6? yes for my laptop as v7 crashes windows 8 and really does nothing v6 runs fine without any problems... will work on the reason more later

What kind of messages are associated with the crashes?

Without any additional information, the first guess is that the laptop cannot dissipate all the heat that comes from running it at 100% utilization. You'll find many forum discussions of that issue with laptops.

[ford316]

Any solid reasons for running v6? yes for my laptop as v7 crashes windows 8 and really does nothing v6 runs fine without any problems... will work on the reason more later

What kind of messages are associated with the crashes?

Without any additional information, the first guess is that the laptop cannot dissipate all the heat that comes from running it at 100% utilization. You'll find many forum discussions of that issue with laptops.

Only has it setup as 1 core and it was only running at about 50% so heat was not the issue or atleast I don't think it was... I tried it to do gpu first with no go don't remember the message at the moment then tried smp and all windows said was it just recovered from a crash nothing else didn't find anything in the fah log except it was starting... when this work unit is done I will reinstall v7 and see what happens... and will let ya know bruce work unit on laptop is named Gromacs which is 2000 which I have at this moment 41% or 820/2000 so when its done I will recheck it out

[kiore]

I run v7 in windows with multi GPUs and SMP, the only times I want to return to v6 is when I have internet connection issues and have multiple work units waiting to send, on v6 I could quit all but one of the clients until the work unit had sent then start up another one, on v7 I had all trying to send at the same time and when I was still on a restricted data plan this was painful.. Having said that v7 a serious step forward as far as I am concerned. Fortunately the days of having 4 or more workunits trying to send at the same time are over for me as I have a new wimax connection rather than the old vsat.

[bruce]

There have been many changes incorporated into V7.2.9 which were not in the first public beta. I think I can safely predict that whenever the next version is released, it, too, will have changes that address some of these issues and other criticisms may have to wait for other things that have been mentioned. In other words, this topic will become obsolete and restarted based on the progress of V7.

Until a few minutes ago, this topic included any off-topic discussions aimed more at helping people with a problem than actually answering the original question. I'm going to take the liberty of summarizing what people have said up to this point. If I missed your main point, feel free to explain yourself more clearly or correct me (or add new answers).

1. V6 is like an old pair of shoes. Familiar, comfortable, and effortless. V7 is new and takes more effort during the "break-in" period.
2. Clear documentation of V7 needs additional "polish" so I can find things I need.
3. GPU support for Linux is only possible with the 3rd-party code that requries V6.
4. V7 starts folding when I install it and uses too many resources and I don't know how to manage it. (See soe answers in the external topic.)
5. After an internet outage, V7 tries to upload/download everything immediately.
6. Some folks want to manage each WU separately by starting/stopping individual clients. Others are comfortable starting/stopping individual slots within one control program.
7. Installation on Linux is too hard.
8. I'm not much of a fan of running F@h as a service.
   • Concept: For the novice, the F@h software is actually FAHControl, not FAHClient. The F@h software happens to be supported by a service that performs whatever actions are requested by the user interface of F@h.
   • Issue: GPU support.

I'm still updating this post.

[Patriot]

V6 control by default is in given to the User.
V7 control by default is taken away from the User.

Having pause enabled by default would go a long way to helping change that.

So why V6? It does what I tell it to do when I tell it to. V7 has a mind of its own.
IMO when I launch the client I should be able to configure it and then decide if I want to run the cores.
Downloading cores and starting folding before I have asked it to do so resembles a malicious program.

I also tend to run V6 in command line on a back term in linux... if you want to make it more powerful and give me the option to start it on boot by adding a cron entry... go ahead.
But taking control away from the user is not what I consider a good design choice.

[7im]

v6 starts folding at full power. The latest version of V7 starts crippled, using half or less than your total processing power.

[Nathan_P]

v6 starts folding at full power. The latest version of V7 starts crippled, using half or less than your total processing power.

Thats fine for the casual folder and people that still want responsive systems, for full time power folders its full power all the way

[PantherX]

...Thats fine for the casual folder and people that still want responsive systems, for full time power folders its full power all the way

Yep, we are aware of it and we specifically mentioned that the current V7.3.6 was targeted towards new donors. However, it doesn't mean that advanced/experts are ignored, instead the next version (No ETA) will address the issues raised here on the forums

[bruce]

...Thats fine for the casual folder and people that still want responsive systems, for full time power folders its full power all the way

Yep, we are aware of it and we specifically mentioned that the current V7.3.6 was targeted towards new donors. However, it doesn't mean that advanced/experts are ignored, instead the next version (No ETA) will address the issues raised here on the forums

Let's look at the same information another way. FAH wants to attract more donors. Many of those donors will NOT be technically oriented, so simple is good. For them, FAH has to meet the oritginal definition of FAH V1 / V2 that it will not impact your use of your computer for other things. The V6 GPU client does NOT meet this requirement due to problems with screen-lag and various clients competing for the exact same resources. Should FAH require them to learn enough to resolve those problems or can there be a simple way to get moderate performance without a lot of extra work?

Now the most important part: Should an advanced or expert user be smart enough to figure out how to get maximum performance out if his system if he chooses to accept some degree of degraded foreground performance?

Yes, V6 is like an old pair of shoes. Those who already know it can continue to use it. Those who are new to FAH probably like V7. The latest version of V7 is aimed squarely at the novice. Hopefully, the next version will bring simpler choices for the Expert but I don't accept that they can't make it work for them, only that they choose not to -- with some very good reasons. This topic is my way of making sure we understand those reasons, most of which we have either discovered for ourselves or have heard before.

PLEASE: let's try to focus on mentioning reasons which have not already been stated above.