Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Post Reply
slowbook
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:42 pm

Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by slowbook »

I noticed when receiving a WU for project 13850 last night that the time from assignment to timeout is one day, whereas CPU projects within a similar amount of base credit would have a period around five days (e.g. 13807 et seq.). I can get the WU done fast enough (the points are irrelevant), but I thought I would inquire to make sure this is intentional for COVID-19 projects. For example, I might be a little more worried about getting a WU from 13834 (1 day period, 2750 points) done before it times out.
davidcoton
Posts: 1094
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by davidcoton »

There are two time limits, the shorter one (timeout) is only the limit for bonus points. Work will still be returned up to the second limit (expiration).
The timeout has been reduced to reflect the faster average processor and the urgency of the work.
Image
slowbook
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:42 pm

Re: Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by slowbook »

Makes sense. I do want to try to beat the timeout so the WU doesn't get needlessly handed out to someone else (I only run with one thread on my laptop so the fan doesn't run too loudly). Thanks!
davidcoton
Posts: 1094
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by davidcoton »

Yes, the timeout can be challenging for a single-thread slot. IIRC the aim is that a full-time single thread on a typical PC will make the timeout, but older/slower PCs may struggle.
Image
Dinkydau
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 10:55 am
Hardware configuration: Ask me if you need more information.
CPU: Intel q6700 (~2673 MHz core speed, 4 cores)
GPU: Nvidia 8800 GTS (CUDA, 512 MB GDDR3, 41,5 GTexel/s, 650 MHz GPU, 1620 MHz shader)
RAM: Corsair RAM, 8192 MB (4 × 2048 MB DDR2, 400 MHz, DIMM)

Re: Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by Dinkydau »

The timeouts are too short for the amount of work. My computer is currently busy with a WU for Project 14412. The timeout is only 24 hours later, while it takes 6 hours to finish. I don't want to run folding@home 24/7, only when I already use my computer, so with such a short deadline and so much work I can't guarantee to be able to finish the work in time.

I think I will just stop running folding@home altogether if there is no solution. I already removed my GPU slot because it couldn't keep up with the timeouts at all, but that's to be expected because I don't have a good GPU. My CPU though is a xeon e5-4667 v3 (16 cores at 2,97 GHz). Is this normal? I would expect a 16-core CPU from 2014 to be able to keep up given that most people still have 4 to 8 cores.

I see pretty high kernel times of around 20 - 30% while running folding@home. I normally use my CPU for other compute tasks (mostly fractal rendering) and kernel time is usually close to 0%. I would expect folding@home to be similar in the sense that it's also a number crunching process.
PantherX
Site Moderator
Posts: 6986
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:33 am
Hardware configuration: V7.6.21 -> Multi-purpose 24/7
Windows 10 64-bit
CPU:2/3/4/6 -> Intel i7-6700K
GPU:1 -> Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti
§
Retired:
2x Nvidia GTX 1070
Nvidia GTX 675M
Nvidia GTX 660 Ti
Nvidia GTX 650 SC
Nvidia GTX 260 896 MB SOC
Nvidia 9600GT 1 GB OC
Nvidia 9500M GS
Nvidia 8800GTS 320 MB

Intel Core i7-860
Intel Core i7-3840QM
Intel i3-3240
Intel Core 2 Duo E8200
Intel Core 2 Duo E6550
Intel Core 2 Duo T8300
Intel Pentium E5500
Intel Pentium E5400
Location: Land Of The Long White Cloud
Contact:

Re: Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by PantherX »

Dinkydau wrote:...I don't want to run folding@home 24/7, only when I already use my computer, so with such a short deadline and so much work I can't guarantee to be able to finish the work in time... My CPU though is a xeon e5-4667 v3 (16 cores at 2,97 GHz). Is this normal? I would expect a 16-core CPU from 2014 to be able to keep up given that most people still have 4 to 8 cores.

I see pretty high kernel times of around 20 - 30% while running folding@home. I normally use my CPU for other compute tasks (mostly fractal rendering) and kernel time is usually close to 0%. I would expect folding@home to be similar in the sense that it's also a number crunching process.
It could be possible that you're running additional CPU intensive tasks that is causing significant slow down? for CPU folding, if you assign 16 CPUs to the CPU Slot and you're consistently using 2 CPUs (Chrome, OS, etc.), it will drastically impact the performance since F@H will need to wait for all 16 threads to processing data before processing the next set of data (that's the percentage change from 1% to 2%).

I would suggest that you see what your daily baseline CPU usage is and then adjust your CPU slot accordingly.
ETA:
Now ↞ Very Soon ↔ Soon ↔ Soon-ish ↔ Not Soon ↠ End Of Time

Welcome To The F@H Support Forum Ӂ Troubleshooting Bad WUs Ӂ Troubleshooting Server Connectivity Issues
Dinkydau
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 10:55 am
Hardware configuration: Ask me if you need more information.
CPU: Intel q6700 (~2673 MHz core speed, 4 cores)
GPU: Nvidia 8800 GTS (CUDA, 512 MB GDDR3, 41,5 GTexel/s, 650 MHz GPU, 1620 MHz shader)
RAM: Corsair RAM, 8192 MB (4 × 2048 MB DDR2, 400 MHz, DIMM)

Re: Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by Dinkydau »

Okay, that's good to know. Yes, I'm consistently using the CPU for other things such as watching videos on youtube. Because of hyperthreading the CPU actually has 32 threads. I set folding@home to use 28. Let's see if it helps.
Last edited by Dinkydau on Sat Apr 04, 2020 9:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.
PantherX
Site Moderator
Posts: 6986
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:33 am
Hardware configuration: V7.6.21 -> Multi-purpose 24/7
Windows 10 64-bit
CPU:2/3/4/6 -> Intel i7-6700K
GPU:1 -> Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti
§
Retired:
2x Nvidia GTX 1070
Nvidia GTX 675M
Nvidia GTX 660 Ti
Nvidia GTX 650 SC
Nvidia GTX 260 896 MB SOC
Nvidia 9600GT 1 GB OC
Nvidia 9500M GS
Nvidia 8800GTS 320 MB

Intel Core i7-860
Intel Core i7-3840QM
Intel i3-3240
Intel Core 2 Duo E8200
Intel Core 2 Duo E6550
Intel Core 2 Duo T8300
Intel Pentium E5500
Intel Pentium E5400
Location: Land Of The Long White Cloud
Contact:

Re: Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by PantherX »

The other thing to think about it if you allocate 28 CPUs, the work allocated to your CPU would be catered towards the beefier hardware where the expectation is that it runs 24/7 as opposed to a 8 CPU system which is a typical house-hold system.

If 28 CPUs don't work, try 8 CPUs or 12 CPUs and see if that works well in your situation.
ETA:
Now ↞ Very Soon ↔ Soon ↔ Soon-ish ↔ Not Soon ↠ End Of Time

Welcome To The F@H Support Forum Ӂ Troubleshooting Bad WUs Ӂ Troubleshooting Server Connectivity Issues
Dinkydau
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 10:55 am
Hardware configuration: Ask me if you need more information.
CPU: Intel q6700 (~2673 MHz core speed, 4 cores)
GPU: Nvidia 8800 GTS (CUDA, 512 MB GDDR3, 41,5 GTexel/s, 650 MHz GPU, 1620 MHz shader)
RAM: Corsair RAM, 8192 MB (4 × 2048 MB DDR2, 400 MHz, DIMM)

Re: Project 13850 - Shorter than expected timeout

Post by Dinkydau »

It helps a lot. At this pace the whole WU could have finished in under 2 hours. I'll try lowering the thread count a little more to find the optimum.
Post Reply