Were they running F@H?

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Post Reply
zexmaxwell
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2020 5:20 pm

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by zexmaxwell »

that is Summit, IBM's supercomputer. It is a different project. One of the F@H researcher did talk about it during the AMA
My room is always Hot.
Jesse_V
Site Moderator
Posts: 2850
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:44 am
Hardware configuration: OS: Windows 10, Kubuntu 19.04
CPU: i7-6700k
GPU: GTX 970, GTX 1080 TI
RAM: 24 GB DDR4
Location: Western Washington

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by Jesse_V »

Fun fact: Summit currently sits at around 150 petaFLOPS from 2.4 million cores. A couple months ago, Folding@home was at about 95 petaFLOPS. This project is now at 958 x86-petaFLOPS from 2.97 million CPU cores and 270,000 GPUs. https://stats.foldingathome.org

We're all in this together and we will nail this thing. F@h's results are going to go out as quickly as possible.
F@h is now the top computing platform on the planet and nothing unites people like a dedicated fight against a common enemy. This virus affects all of us. Lets end it together.
Jonazz
Posts: 353
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:08 pm

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by Jonazz »

Jesse_V wrote:Fun fact: Summit currently sits at around 150 petaFLOPS from 2.4 million cores. A couple months ago, Folding@home was at about 95 petaFLOPS. This project is now at 958 x86-petaFLOPS from 2.97 million CPU cores and 270,000 GPUs. https://stats.foldingathome.org

We're all in this together and we will nail this thing. F@h's results are going to go out as quickly as possible.
Things can get really interesting when we reach a few exaflops. Imagine the science that can be done!
Azmodes
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:38 am
Location: Ob der Enns
Contact:

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by Azmodes »

Jesse_V wrote:Fun fact: Summit currently sits at around 150 petaFLOPS from 2.4 million cores. A couple months ago, Folding@home was at about 95 petaFLOPS. This project is now at 958 x86-petaFLOPS from 2.97 million CPU cores and 270,000 GPUs. https://stats.foldingathome.org

We're all in this together and we will nail this thing. F@h's results are going to go out as quickly as possible.
Just curious, how do you get those numbers from the stats? Can't find anything about FLOPS or number of processors anywhere.
Image
uyaem
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Esslingen, Germany

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by uyaem »

It's on the last tab (OS): https://stats.foldingathome.org/os
Image
CPU: Ryzen 9 3900X (1x21 CPUs) ~ GPU: nVidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Asus)
Azmodes
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:38 am
Location: Ob der Enns
Contact:

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by Azmodes »

ah, thanks. Unfortunately that tab does not seem to load for me. I only see the description, but no results.
Image
uyaem
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Esslingen, Germany

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by uyaem »

Screenshot from a few minutes ago:

Image
Image
CPU: Ryzen 9 3900X (1x21 CPUs) ~ GPU: nVidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Asus)
Azmodes
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:38 am
Location: Ob der Enns
Contact:

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by Azmodes »

Cheers!

Almost a billion billion FLOPS. Amazing.
Image
Neil-B
Posts: 1996
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 5:52 pm
Hardware configuration: 1: 2x Xeon [email protected], 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, Win10 Ent 20H2, Quadro K420 1GB, FAH 7.6.21
2: Xeon [email protected], 32GB DDR4, NVME, Win10 Pro 20H2, Quadro M1000M 2GB, FAH 7.6.21 (actually have two of these)
3: [email protected], 12GB DDR3, SSD, Win10 Pro 20H2, GTX 750Ti 2GB, GTX 1080Ti 11GB, FAH 7.6.21
Location: UK

Re: Were they running F@H?

Post by Neil-B »

… and three days later current Total showing 767,977 TFLOPS and 1,554,728 x86 TFLOPS
2x Xeon E5-2697v3, 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, W10-Ent, Quadro K420
Xeon E3-1505Mv5, 32GB DDR4, NVME, W10-Pro, Quadro M1000M
i7-960, 12GB DDR3, SSD, W10-Pro, GTX1080Ti
i9-10850K, 64GB DDR4, NVME, W11-Pro, RTX3070

(Green/Bold = Active)
Post Reply