I realize that but this is in fact a documented problem.
Here's the Folding/Gromacs faq page.
http://folding.stanford.edu/gromacs.html
Number 13 on the page says.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Poll: Are you Folding?
- Thread starter Zeke
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I realize that but this is in fact a documented problem.
Here's the Folding/Gromacs faq page.
http://folding.stanford.edu/gromacs.html
Number 13 on the page says.
Re: Used to.
I run it all the time and notice no speed hit. The only time I noticed a hit at all is with UT2003 and then it was only about 3FPS. I that when there is a lack of snap with the GUI it's due to either permissions or prebinding. If those don't fix it it's because you've upgraded from a prior system using the updater and didn't reinstall the system from scratch prior to doing so.
I run it all the time and notice no speed hit. The only time I noticed a hit at all is with UT2003 and then it was only about 3FPS. I that when there is a lack of snap with the GUI it's due to either permissions or prebinding. If those don't fix it it's because you've upgraded from a prior system using the updater and didn't reinstall the system from scratch prior to doing so.
Re: Used to.
They claim it only takes unused CPU cycles, but thats wrong. I was unstuffing a large file, and it stuffit was only getting 60% CPU, while folding was taking 15%
They claim it only takes unused CPU cycles, but thats wrong. I was unstuffing a large file, and it stuffit was only getting 60% CPU, while folding was taking 15%
Re: Re: Used to.
I've never seen it do that I run folding on both processors and when I have other programs going folding is usually occupying 1-2% at the most on both processors.
I've never seen it do that I run folding on both processors and when I have other programs going folding is usually occupying 1-2% at the most on both processors.
Seriously people, it doesn't affect CPU speed, I mean if your looking at an app use 100% CPU, yes folding will eat 1-3% CPU because it wants to keep itself running, but it is a low priority app, heck even checking using 'top' will use CPU so...
Yup exactly. Top uses more CPU cycles when I open it then folding does becaue it kicks folding into a background process.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Used to.
The way to do it is to open the terminal and run top then go back to photoshop and run the filter and then wait a minute or so then take the screenshot while photoshop is in the foreground and working. If you do it any other way then photoshop will not have preference.
Originally posted by Vlade
I will post a screenshot today with a large photoshop filter running
The way to do it is to open the terminal and run top then go back to photoshop and run the filter and then wait a minute or so then take the screenshot while photoshop is in the foreground and working. If you do it any other way then photoshop will not have preference.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Used to.
Exactly my point, I wasn't unstuffing in the foreground, but it should be more important than folding if they are both background tasks
Exactly my point, I wasn't unstuffing in the foreground, but it should be more important than folding if they are both background tasks
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Used to.
Read My Lips :
There is no lower priority then folding, none zippo, nada, nothing.
If you hide something (I think) it had the same as folding, it aint 50/50 folding takes even less.
Maybe a Super-low priority mod?
No, I don't think it will happen.
Read My Lips :
There is no lower priority then folding, none zippo, nada, nothing.
If you hide something (I think) it had the same as folding, it aint 50/50 folding takes even less.
Well tell that to *nix, maybe you can create the next version?
Maybe a Super-low priority mod?
No, I don't think it will happen.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Used to.
If you the top program in the background and unstuffing in the forground then you should see unstuffing taking like 98% of cpu cycles after a few seconds. Every once and a while folding will pop up the chart but will go back down. Remember the sampling time of top isn't all that quick so you have to give things time to react.
My point of putting photoshop in the foreground was not to give it priority over folding as it already has that it was to make sure it had priority over the terminal app with top running. I've seen top take as much as 10% if the terminal is in the foreground. There's also that strong possibility that on a single processor machine that you will never see you primary task take more the 90-95% of cpu cycles due to tasks being performed by the system. In any situation folding is given the lowest priority possible this means that even if you were to find a way to make it a foreground task it would still take priority behind any other task currently running. It may show in top that it's taking as much as 30% cpu time on a rare occasion when you are performing other tasks remember that top samples this means that it could have taken 30% for less then a nanosecond just at the time that top was taking it's sample. I think that if you if you perform a test using a program like photoshop with a filter with folding running and with folding off that a filter that takes 10 minutes to render will take at the most 5-10seconds longer with folding running. The benefit to all humans in general far out weight those the minute you might lose in 10 hours of processing.
If you the top program in the background and unstuffing in the forground then you should see unstuffing taking like 98% of cpu cycles after a few seconds. Every once and a while folding will pop up the chart but will go back down. Remember the sampling time of top isn't all that quick so you have to give things time to react.
My point of putting photoshop in the foreground was not to give it priority over folding as it already has that it was to make sure it had priority over the terminal app with top running. I've seen top take as much as 10% if the terminal is in the foreground. There's also that strong possibility that on a single processor machine that you will never see you primary task take more the 90-95% of cpu cycles due to tasks being performed by the system. In any situation folding is given the lowest priority possible this means that even if you were to find a way to make it a foreground task it would still take priority behind any other task currently running. It may show in top that it's taking as much as 30% cpu time on a rare occasion when you are performing other tasks remember that top samples this means that it could have taken 30% for less then a nanosecond just at the time that top was taking it's sample. I think that if you if you perform a test using a program like photoshop with a filter with folding running and with folding off that a filter that takes 10 minutes to render will take at the most 5-10seconds longer with folding running. The benefit to all humans in general far out weight those the minute you might lose in 10 hours of processing.
Wow, I thought my post was detailed enough.
Thanks again MacBandit.
pssssttt maybe we can add this to FAQ?
Thanks again MacBandit.
pssssttt maybe we can add this to FAQ?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Used to.
sudo renice -20 <pid>
u could give the core a different priority with the renice command. you have to be a superuser to screw with processes, so u can prefix the command with sudo. the range is from -20 <-> 20 with -20 being more CPU.
sudo renice -20 <pid>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Used to.
Background tasks should already have priority over folding. The only way they couldn't be is if the program was given a priority of nice +20 and that hasn't happened because the user doesn't know how to. Even with nice +20 it will only be on par with folding on less then it. There is no way to make a task have less of a priority then folding that is what I was trying to explain in my last post.
Background tasks should already have priority over folding. The only way they couldn't be is if the program was given a priority of nice +20 and that hasn't happened because the user doesn't know how to. Even with nice +20 it will only be on par with folding on less then it. There is no way to make a task have less of a priority then folding that is what I was trying to explain in my last post.
Royal Pineapple
macrumors 65816
Originally posted by Royal Pineapple
Yes, for Team MacRumors
just started today, what do you think of that
Thats cool.
i know i'm going to sound like a complete idiot here.. but how can i set folding to start up automatically? i am using the terminal version. adding the 'osx-3.25' file to login items doesn't work for me. how do i set a unix process to start on startup? thanks.
tempatino-
Check out mc68k's install/setup scripts. You can choose to have F@H run at startup.
SP is for single processor and DP is for duals.
http://homepage.mac.com/mc68k/
Check out mc68k's install/setup scripts. You can choose to have F@H run at startup.
SP is for single processor and DP is for duals.
http://homepage.mac.com/mc68k/
Well since I visit the MacRumors site regularly, I thought it would be nice to join the team. I downloaded and installed the folding software last week and I am now chugging along for the MacRumors site.
I am ranked around 280something, but I hope to increase that in the upcoming days.
*waves hi to everyone*
I am ranked around 280something, but I hope to increase that in the upcoming days.
*waves hi to everyone*
Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
Yep - not much of a contributor - low power compared to some
D
Ever hear about those killer red ants in Africa? Hundreds of little creatures can devastate entire country sides! (or something like that...so I've been told).
Every little bit helps.
- bert