[Shaktai]

Team MacNN is making some real inroads in the Folding@home project. We are currently at #88. Just a few days ago we weren't even in the top 100. We are climbing fast. Got some CPU cycles to spare and want to contribute to science that can benefit all humankind? Consider Folding at home. OS-X is required. There are GUI, CLI and just released today, a new screensaver version.

MacAddict4Life and Macphilez are both still ahead of us, but we are making progress. Join the fun.

Don't have OS-X? Well the SETI and RC-5 teams can still use your help. Don't waste those CPU cycles, jump in and join one of the MacNN teams. If Folding protein molecules doesn't tickle your fancy, the Ubero team is #1 and seeking to build on their lead over Team Chili Pepper (Ars).

If you haven't seen it yet, hop over to and check out the Apple article on Folding@home They are actively looking for more Mac users.

Hey, we may only be be 5% of the market, but we do more than our share of the work. Come join the fun.

[ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: Shaktai ]

[Scotttheking]

Hey, not bad, not bad at all.

If you don't mind I'll see about getting this on the main page of macnn.

You interested in being in charge of recruiting?

--Scott

[Shaktai]

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
<STRONG>Hey, not bad, not bad at all.

If you don't mind I'll see about getting this on the main page of macnn.

You interested in being in charge of recruiting?

--Scott</STRONG>

I'll think about it.

The first post could use some cleaning up and refinement. Feel free to use it if it helps. Modify it if necessary. Otherwise I can come up with a better version tomorrow evening. (yawn -what am I doing awake at this hour?)

[ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: Shaktai ]

[gumby5647]

[side note]

when i downloaded and ran F@H on my Rev A. iMac (433Mhz G4) It did not display the protien graphic. It still ran and processed it, but there was no protien. Then i read in that Apple article that the graphic uses OpenGL....which of course isn't supported on my machine or card. So, if you are a Rev. A-D iMac users running F@H and not getting a graphic, that is probably why.


of course i could be WAY wrong...
[/side note]


EDIT: *sits waiting for my Rage drivers.....* **crickets chriping**

[ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: gumby5647 ]

[Shaktai]

Originally posted by gumby5647:
<STRONG>[side note]

when i downloaded and ran F@H on my Rev A. iMac (433Mhz G4) It did not display the protien graphic. It still ran and processed it, but there was no protien. Then i read in that Apple article that the graphic uses OpenGL....which of course isn't supported on my machine or card. So, if you are a Rev. A-D iMac users running F@H and not getting a graphic, that is probably why.


of course i could be WAY wrong...
[/side note]</STRONG>

Thanks Gumby, that is helpful info. It seems like a logical explanation for something that other people have experienced.

On another note, Team Mac OS-X has also nearly reached the top 100 out of more than 2800 Folding teams. That will place 4 Mac Teams in the top 100. MacNN is getting closer to matching the production of Teams MacAddict and MacPhilez, but for now, both of those teams are still pulling away from us at a gradual rate. We need to increase our production by a score of 20-30 (40-60 work units) per day so that we can begin to close the gap. MacAddict4Life has taken note of the fact that our production is increasing.

At Team MacAddict4life's website you can view the progress of all 6 of the top Mac teams. Just remember to come back to Team MacNN. Team #16 if you are just joining us.

Currently Mac users account for more than 12% of the Folding@Home production. Our total score as of this AM is 2079. The top team (HardOCP) has a score of 251485, so it will be a long road to the top, but we can get there. Ars Technica Team Egg Roll has a score of 112541, so we will have to pass them on our way to the top.

[ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: Shaktai ]

[reader50]

There are at least 4 more Mac teams that they are not tracking, including Apple Computer, Inc.

Now that we have real ranks, the idea of a custom Mac-team Ranks no longer seems as important. How much interest would there be in such a listing? It could still be done, if enough people wanted it.

[ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: reader50 ]

[Arkham_c]

Since F@H has a CLI client, should we add it to MDC3?

[Bockie]

Absolutely!

[Shaktai]

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
<STRONG>Since F@H has a CLI client, should we add it to MDC3?</STRONG>

If you can do it without a lot of problems, great!

[Shaktai]

Originally posted by reader50:
<STRONG>There are at least 4 more Mac teams that they are not tracking, including Apple Computer, Inc.

Now that we have real ranks, the idea of a custom Mac-team Ranks no longer seems as important. How much interest would there be in such a listing? It could still be done, if enough people wanted it.

[ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: reader50 ]</STRONG>

Unless there is significant interest, it probably wouldn't be worth the work. I think what you have now is adequate.

[Michael A. Peters]

The only teams we (macaddict4life) are tracking are the ones that looked like they were the top six back when i searched for teams with "mac" or "osx" in the name.

I need to check to see that they are still the top six.

I don't want to track to many because I have grab each team individually, and the more teams increases the liklihood of a network error (and the time) in the stats gen. As the teams get bigger, the time for gen gets bigger too.

I don't want to track Apple.
It looks like the team isn't well promoted within Apple, but is mostly joe user getting Apple some free advertisement as they move up.

Nothing wrong with that- but Apple *could* be promoting it within.

Besides- if people who came to our site *knew* there was an Apple Computer, Inc team then they just might join that team instead.

[Shaktai]

We still haven't matched MacAddict4Life's production, but we are getting closer. Today looks like it will be our best day yet in Folding@Home. Welcome to all the new folks (too many to mention) and thanks for the help.

Let's all keep an eye on Ubero and whoever can, chip in when Ars makes their run. Until then just keep crunching on whatever team meets your fancy. We have enough of a lead in Ubero, that we should have time to respond when the moment comes.

Special thanks to those Ubero loyalists who keep building our production well ahead of Team Chili Pepper. We currently have a lead of 184,000 plus, and are outcrunching them by about 13,000 units per day and should be able to build that to more than 200,000 by the weekend. We can't take our lead in Ubero for granted though. We all know that TCP can mount a major assault on demand. Sunday and Monday are the most likely days to watch for their move, but they could start at any time.

Our SETI team is cranking up production nicely, but still can use more help. RC-5 is holding their own and greatly out producing everyone in striking distance.

Life is good for all our MacNN teams. Let's all raise a glass or two for Reader 50 and scotttheking who keep us going. Of course we can't forget Arkham_C and all his work on MDC3.

Totally Awesome Teams!!

[ 03-29-2002: Message edited by: Shaktai ]

[krove]

I'm nearing completion of iFold, an AppleScript Studio app that controls F@H and tracks stats (what proteins, frame time info, unit time info, rates) independently of what you send.

Check out this thread for more info (and pics): [Fold] In the works...



Beta testing should commence in a week or two...

[Shaktai]

We are making small but steady gains in Folding, but Team MacAddict4Life is increasing their lead and out producing us. They are the only team of the next 20 teams ahead of us that is outproducing us. Team OS-X is nearly matching our production and poses a credible threat. We could use some more help here.

Current Mac team ranks are:
Team Macphilez -- #52
Team MacAddict4Life -- #62
Team MacNN -- #72
Team MacOS-X -- #82

(interesting each Mac team is seperated by 10 spots.)

Barring any sudden changes in production, we should break into the upper 50's among all teams within a week. Currently Team MacNN only has 5 members who have scores in excess of 100. Team MacAddict have 6 in that territory and Team MacOS-X has 2.

Let's see how many members can move into the 100+ score in the next 30 days. (I intend to be one of them).

For those of you who are new to distributed computing, Folding at Home is almost virgin territory. You can stake your claim and move up the ladder quickly if you are persistent, unlike a lot of other projects where the road is long and littered with burned out CPU's.
All it takes is OS-X on the Mac or any Windows / Linux OS.

Don't waste those CPU cycles, put them toward a good cause. You may just play a pivotal role in the next great medical breakthrough that improves the lives of millions.

[reader50]

Originally posted by Shaktai:
<STRONG>... Team OS-X is nearly matching our production and poses a credible threat. We could use some more help here...
Barring any sudden changes in production, we should break into the upper 50's among all teams within a week...</STRONG>

You can use the Top 100 ranks page as a projection to the Top 50. Look over the intercept times leading up to the #50 spot. Be sure to allow for teams in between that are outproducing us. Using that method, I would guess 25 days to the Top 50.

I've been watching the "yesterday production" figures for each team, available on Advanced and T100 ranks pages. For the past 2 days, Team OSX has outcrunched us. This morning, they have outcrunched us by 1 score since last night's ranks run. They have as many active members as we have total members.

The sky isn't really falling, we are passing many other teams. But if current trends continue, within a few more days Team OSX will show as a threat in the ranks. And they will pass us sometime around when we break into the Top 50.

Something has to be done, preferably before they get really close. So, I've moved my Macintosh Supercomputer (G4 350) over to Folding. That should make the difference.

[Shaktai]

Originally posted by reader50:
<STRONG>
Something has to be done, preferably before they get really close. So, I've moved my Macintosh Supercomputer (G4 350) over to Folding. That should make the difference. </STRONG>

Hey, every little bit helps. The ranks don't yet reflect my increased crunching, but the fact remains that Team MacOS-X is coming on hard, and MacAddict4life is pulling away.

[Shaktai]

Well as of tonight, I have added a 1.4 ghz Athlon to the fray. That should help some. Total on Folding now is Power Mac 800, iBook 600, 1 gig Celeron and 1.4 gig Athlon for a total of 3.8 ghz crunch power. That ought to make a dent somewhere. Just hope the cheap E-Machines will hold up under the constant use.

Currently the Celeron and Athlon are both crunching some big proteins, so I won't see anything more from them until tomorrow, but should get some big scores when they are finally done. The Celeron is taking about 21 minutes per frame and the Athlon has started out at 11.5 minutes per frame. The 1 gig Celeron would normally crunch the smaller proteins in about 3 to 3.5 minutes per frame.

Uh, scotttheking! I think I might pass you up tomorrow when those big proteins are completed. Hope you don't mind. Of course I know you have been putting most your power towards Ubero and SETI, not folding.

Average times for smaller proteins so far are:

Power Mac 800 6.3 to 6.6 hours -- Score .5 (this is my main work machine, so it never runs its best times due to frequent interruptions) GUI client running hidden.

iBook 600 7.5 to 7.7 hours -- Score .5
GUI Client running hidden.

Celeron 1 gig 5.4 to 5.6 hours -- Score .6
Athlon 1.4 gig -- no data yet.
Both running the windows console client.

[ 04-04-2002: Message edited by: Shaktai ]

[Grozni Majmun]

Originally posted by Shaktai:
<STRONG>
Average times for smaller proteins so far are:

Power Mac 800 6.3 to 6.6 hours -- Score .5 (this is my main work machine, so it never runs its best times due to frequent interruptions)
iBook 600 7.5 to 7.7 hours -- Score .5
Celeron 1 gig 5.4 to 5.6 hours -- Score .6
Athlon 1.4 gig -- no data yet.</STRONG>

Wau, that is a LOT faster than my iBook 600. Are you running the CLI version? Perhaps I should look into that, I am using the GUI client, but usually it is hidden, so I hear that shouldn't decrease performance. Maybe there are tweaks I don't know of?

[Shaktai]

Originally posted by Grozni Majmun:
<STRONG>

Wau, that is a LOT faster than my iBook 600. Are you running the CLI version? Perhaps I should look into that, I am using the GUI client, but usually it is hidden, so I hear that shouldn't decrease performance. Maybe there are tweaks I don't know of?

</STRONG>

I have ran both the CLI and GUI, but found no substantial time difference with either one, as long as the GUI was ran "hidden". When the GUI shows the graphics, it really slows down the iBook. Also, I pretty much don't try to use the iBook and process at the same time. Doing anything at all, pretty much brings folding to a halt. The times I listed are running uninterrupted, except for the Power Mac, which gets used a lot. Oh, my iBook is the 14 inch model, and it does have 256k RAM. Don't know if that is a factor.

[Grozni Majmun]

When you say the GUI is hidden, do you mean the way it is when the app starts up (there is no window at all), or is it the same to choose "show protein" and then do apple-H to hide it (which is what I do).

Sure, I have to use my iBook too (can't afford to buy one solely for crunching, like you have , and that probably slows it down, but today I was away all day, and it didn't crunch anywhere near the speeds you posted

[Shaktai]

Originally posted by Grozni Majmun:
<STRONG>When you say the GUI is hidden, do you mean the way it is when the app starts up (there is no window at all), or is it the same to choose "show protein" and then do apple-H to hide it (which is what I do).

Sure, I have to use my iBook too (can't afford to buy one solely for crunching, like you have , and that probably slows it down, but today I was away all day, and it didn't crunch anywhere near the speeds you posted</STRONG>

Hmmm! Could you have some other background processes going also? Is classic running in the background, or some other program? Classic running in the background will slow it down. Take a look at the process viewer and see what else might be going on that may be stealing cpu cycles. Also, check your energy saver control panel, to make certain that your system is not powering down the hard drive or going to sleep.

As for my iBook, it does get used, but I don't try to run Folding when I am using it. I got a couple of cheap PC's that I bought just for crunching, but my macs get a lot of use.

[Grozni Majmun]

Originally posted by Shaktai:
<STRONG>

Hmmm! Could you have some other background processes going also? Is classic running in the background, or some other program? Classic running in the background will slow it down. Take a look at the process viewer and see what else might be going on that may be stealing cpu cycles. Also, check your energy saver control panel, to make certain that your system is not powering down the hard drive or going to sleep.
</STRONG>

Well now I have downloaded the CLI version and started that up. It is taking 85% or so in top, so that should be fine. I'll keep an eye on it for a few days to see if my crunch rate improves. Classic is not running and it is not set to go to sleep.