Posted on 01/02/2006 9:53:26 AM PST by systematic
New thread for this week.
Congrats to all new members who joined this week!
We've made excellent progress so far and have smoked the DUmmies and Kossacks. Let's keep folding!
I find that that is essentially true.
Most windows users have a couple dozen frickin-useless doodads in their system tray sucking up cycles.
Apple users only have half a dozen.
FReepFolders...Unchained!
FReepers, gone wild!
Ex-communicated FReepers.
FReepFolding, for fun and profit.
FReep'd from disease
FReepers, kinder, gentler...NOT!
FReepers saving the world, one protien ata time.
O.K., anybody in a better mood now?
:O)
P
Sure, because they're running the exe under VM or WINE. LOL
:O)
P
The funny thing is that I've never run into these particular Luddites before either.
I can understand JR's lack of interest in somthing relatively divergent from the basic function/mission of the website.
Windows: 1052 CPUs per teraflop
Linux: 821.5 CPUs per teraflop
Mac: 1762 CPUs per teraflop
I.e., it takes twice as many Macs as it does Linux machines to produce the same amount of work. Not that this really means much - it probably reflects how well optimized each client is, rather than real raw performance.
I don't think refusing to participate is bad PR.
But taking part definitely would be good PR.
I guess if PR is not a priority, it doesn't matter anyway.
Maybe I'd better check my reading comprehension - upon re-reading your post, it looks like we said the same thing, in two different ways. LOL. I'm on a roll, what can I say? ;)
I'd guess that the average Linux user has faster hardware than the average Windoze user. I shouldn't really speculate about the Apple users beyond noting that they may have [had] excess money.
I believe we've done the same math only using inverse divisions. Linux computers do twice as much useful work as do Apples. Linix is stwice as good as Apple.
Where were you when the Krauts attacked Pearl Harbor? LOL
Type | Active | Active % | All | All % |
Pentium | 21 | 0.0 | 1276 | 0.0 |
Pentium MMX | 66 | 0.0 | 3103 | 0.2 |
Athlon | 56131 | 26.4 | 409036 | 30.4 |
Unknown ** | 30403 | 14.3 | 212404 | 15.8 |
Pentium 2 or 3 | 26721 | 12.5 | 290016 | 21.6 |
Pentium Pro | 35 | 0.0 | 993 | 0.0 |
Pentium 4 | 98907 | 46.5 | 424791 | 31.6 |
Total | 212284 | 100 | 1341619 | 100 |
Type | Active | Active % | All | All % |
Windows | 181998 | 85.7 | 1164961 | 84.6 |
Mac OS X | 10574 | 4.9 | 65298 | 4.7 |
Other | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
Linux | 19716 | 9.2 | 146075 | 10.6 |
Total | 212288 | 100 | 1376334 | 100 |
Type | Active | Active % | All | All % |
Win 95 | 59 | 0.0 | 3122 | 0.2 |
Win 98 | 344 | 0.1 | 13241 | 1.2 |
Win 95_OSR2 | 9 | 0.0 | 410 | 0.0 |
Win ME | 649 | 0.3 | 24577 | 2.2 |
Win 98_SE | 2632 | 1.5 | 62925 | 5.7 |
Win 2000 | 23142 | 13.2 | 251674 | 22.8 |
Win NT | 454 | 0.2 | 16081 | 1.4 |
Win XP | 147789 | 84.4 | 730224 | 66.2 |
Total | 175078 | 100 | 1102254 | 100 |
Last updated at Tue, 03 Jan 2006 15:53:41 |
DB date 2006-01-03 16:13:33 |
Active CPUS have returned WUs within 50 days. |
** CPU Type is not detected for OSX or Linux |
Yes, it seems to run pretty much the same speed that way. Just set your screen-saver to go to a blank screen and not spend cycles drawing pictures. :-)
:^)
My only screensaver is a "sleep mode" for the monitor. So I'm golden.
I did shut down the nightly antivirus scans....I haven't found a virus in years anyway.
I don't know exactly why, but they've intentionally limited their x86 clients by not compiling in SSE2 optimizations, instead sticking to SSE only. If they chose to, they could boost the performance of their Windows and Linux clients quite easily - maybe something similar is playing into the relative slowness of the Mac clients.
I'm with you, let's go!
It's "estimated" by what, I don't know, that the command line version might get you up to 5% performance increase, but I don't think anyone has stopped folding, long enough to benchmark that, and prove it right or wrong. If you've got a powerhouse video card, that offloads some of the processing from the cpu, I wouldn't think that there would be much difference at all.
And yes, closing the drawing window, removes a lot of overhead from the client, and is "close" to the speed of the command line version. But all computers are not alike, so actual mileage may vary :) But I would think that a 5% increase, would be the MAXIMUM performance gain you could expect, and realistically, a lot less.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.