Folding on an Athlon

Discussion in 'Distributed Computing' started by brap, Jun 12, 2004.

Most Liked Posts
  1. brap, Jun 12, 2004

    brap macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Location:
    Nottingham
    #1
    Hi.

    I dumped my P4 2.4GHz for an Athlon XP last week, and all I can say is damn, does this thing suck. Great for games, but my folding output has dropped by a mad crazy 60% -- I was averaging 110-120points/day on the P4, now with this Barton piece of crap I'm getting 60 at best, 45 at worst.

    Anyone else found this trend? I was under the impression Gromacs and Tinker were only optimised for AltiVec/SSE/3DNow+, and not Intel SSE2. I'm a bit p**sed, I'm getting overtaken by people I creamed 2 weeks back :(
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  2. Nanuq, Jun 12, 2004

    Nanuq macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Location:
    Near Millville, DE
    #2
    I believe gromacs are optimised for all the advanced codes you listed (depending on what core they use, core 78 for the Altivec, SSE, and 3DNOW!, and core 79 for SSE2) and Tinkers are not optimised for advanced code.

    If I'm wrong about that, someone please chime in.

    Although I hear that AMD chips are better at running the Tinker WUs...

    But even still I would think that Tinkers would slow down your production no matter what processor you use. Maybe you've just gotten a rash of Tinkers?

    Also you never mentioned what Athlon XP you got. That's useful information to have in helping to determine your production loss.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  3. brap, Jun 12, 2004

    brap thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Location:
    Nottingham
    #3
    Hm, I do seem to remember core 79 being used on the P4. Gah.
    Nope. 250-and 500-step Gromacs cores. It now takes between 5 and 7 minutes to complete a step, used to be 4.5. Must be this damn SSE2. This will probably be my shortest-ever lived 'upgrade'!
    See my sig ;) Used to have a Nw'd 2.4 533 Pentium 4 :(
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  4. Vlade, Jun 12, 2004

    Vlade macrumors 6502a

    Vlade

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Location:
    Meadville, PA
    #4
    If you were getting the double gromacs units, the P4s have SSE2 so they are way faster, but for all other WUs the athlon should be way faster... download SISandra benchmarks or something to see whats wrong.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  5. brap, Jun 12, 2004

    brap thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Location:
    Nottingham
    #5
    OK, done. Even with the P4 2.4's SSE2, the Athlon is alleged rated quicker with 3DNow+ (see the comparisons in the MM bechmark). I guess this is why they call them synthetic...

    I dont get it. :confused:
     

    Attached Files:

    share
    + Quote Reply
  6. bhertz, Jun 12, 2004

    bhertz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2004
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    #6
    I thought that I saw a good leap in production when I added a AMD Barton 2500+ but I have never payed too much attention to the details. It would be nice if someone who knows could post a quick run down on the types of units and what they perform well on. I'm looking to build a new machine :) and I'm hoping that the AMD 64 prices drop soon.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  7. cjc343, Jun 12, 2004

    cjc343 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    In the apple store, in front of a G5.
    #7
    Performance varies from WU to WU. I can get very few/no points per week, or around 600. All depends on what WUs I get.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)

Share This Page