This machine has been running for almost 2 years at this point and this is the first time this has happened. Honestly did a spit-take when I saw the 477M PPD number
System is a 3990X with three 2080ti's. Any tips on how to avoid this from happening in the future?
TPF Calculation Error
Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2022 4:45 pm
TPF Calculation Error
My opinions are my own and are not affiliated with or attributed to Micro Center or Micro Electronics Inc.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7951
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:41 pm
- Hardware configuration: Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp4
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp2 - Location: W. MA
Re: TPF Calculation Error
This can happen shortly after resuming a WU, especially if its last checkpoint was close to a full percent. It takes a very short time to complete, and the TPF calculation is over less than a full frame. About the only thing you can do is ignore any TPF or PPD estimates shown after running for a short time.
iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
-
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:22 pm
- Hardware configuration: ASRock X370M PRO4
Ryzen 2400G APU
16 GB DDR4-3200
MSI GTX 1660 Super Gaming X
Re: TPF Calculation Error
I recently had an error that caused a temporary points glitch. It was a clock skew error, and increased my estimated points by around 33% while that frame was processing. I was folding only on a single GPU at the time, and as of the next frame the estimated points were back in line.
This was the first time I've ever encountered this error code, and I really have no idea what caused it. The system remained stable and kept folding just fine when it took place. It might be worth looking at your logs to see if you get a similar code.
But then again it's also very possible that with three top producing cards you are breaking a server or something. The easiest way to fix this would be to send me one of the cards.
Your accurate estimate is about a year's worth of folding on my little integrated graphics Ryzen system. It's great to see users like yourself and dedicate so much in resources.
Edited to add the error code info.
This was the first time I've ever encountered this error code, and I really have no idea what caused it. The system remained stable and kept folding just fine when it took place. It might be worth looking at your logs to see if you get a similar code.
Code: Select all
23:04:41:WU00:FS01:0x22:Completed 12500 out of 1250000 steps (1%)
23:29:17:WU00:FS01:0x22:Completed 25000 out of 1250000 steps (2%)
23:29:19:WU00:FS01:0x22:Checkpoint completed at step 25000
23:51:36:WARNING:WU00:FS01:Detected clock skew (4 mins 04 secs), I/O delay, laptop hibernation or other slowdown noted, adjusting time estimates
23:51:36:ERROR:Receive error: 10053: An established connection was aborted by the software in your host machine.
23:53:36:WU00:FS01:0x22:Completed 37500 out of 1250000 steps (3%)
00:18:08:WU00:FS01:0x22:Completed 50000 out of 1250000 steps (4%)
But then again it's also very possible that with three top producing cards you are breaking a server or something. The easiest way to fix this would be to send me one of the cards.
Your accurate estimate is about a year's worth of folding on my little integrated graphics Ryzen system. It's great to see users like yourself and dedicate so much in resources.
Edited to add the error code info.
Fold them if you get them!
Re: TPF Calculation Error
FYI, your cpu is overextended and will result in lower PPD overall. You have a 64 core processor running 3 GPUs which will use at least 3 cores but even if they don't use all 3 cores, you've allocated 69 cores for cpu folding. Your total cpu cores for cpu folding should be 61 or less.
You might want to consider using just one slot for cpu folding using 54 cores which I've used on a 64 core system ... it works well and is more efficient than using 6 slots the way you're using them. You may even get more PPD.
You might want to consider using just one slot for cpu folding using 54 cores which I've used on a 64 core system ... it works well and is more efficient than using 6 slots the way you're using them. You may even get more PPD.