firedfly

Before the competition started this month, I was debating which card to use: 3080ti or gtx 960. Since the rules indicated that I can make 1 hardware swap during the month, I decided to start with the 3080ti. If that rule had not been in place, I likely would have used the gtx 960. I'd say it would be 80% likely that is the decision I would have made. However, since I wasn't required to make a decision for the entire month, I'm not 100% sure what I would have decided. If I had been using the gtx 960 since the start of the competition, would you still have problems with me using the card?

Until all the work units have been completed? From my understanding, Moonshot projects go in cycles. Once the current work is finished, there is a lull for a while before the next round of work is ready. I think this last lull was around 6 weeks with no moonshot projects? That's just a guess on my part. I haven't been folding enough in recent days to know the pattern for the Moonshot projects. When I started folding again in May, I think most projects I folded were Moonshot projects. I didn't know this was abnormal until that work went away and my ppd plummeted.

I have three GPUs folding in Windows with the cause preference set to COVID-19. All three are reliably getting moonshot projects right now (either P13456 or P13457 depending on the GPU). The ppd for the GTX 1660 is slightly higher than normal. The same for the RX 480. However, the GTX 960 went from 300-350k ppd to 525-550k ppd once it started folding the moonshot project. The GTX 960 is the only one folding P13457 (as opposed to other moonshot projects), so perhaps that has something to do with it. For what it's worth, the moonshot projects are not the best type of project for my 3080TI. When the 3080TI was last folding a moonshot project, it would generally get 7-7.3 million ppd. There are some Alzheimer's projects (P18201 and P18202) that get the 3080TI about 9-9.3 million ppd. So, my 3080TI is currently set to prefer Alzheimer's projects.

There have been a few concerns brought up. These are the ones I recall: LARs database is not accurate enough Hardware swapping mid-month to use a better performing card (better performing for ETF points) Custom FAH settings to influence which projects you fold (e.g. setting cause preference to COVID-19 for the moonshot projects with higher ppd) I think the biggest issue is that the extra points you get from overclocking pails in comparison to choosing a card with a low LARs average ppd versus what the card can actually do. Additionally, some cards/os are able to take advantage of the higher ppd moonshot projects and others aren't. You can OC your card 50% and still perform worse in the competition than a card like the 960 which loves the moonshot projects. I agree that changes to the rules has a chance of making more people drop out of the competition. Or it might make it that much more difficult to find new people to join the competition. The team captains will take this into consideration before making any rule changes. Once we have a better idea of what rule changes *might* be made, I'll be communicating with my team to get their opinions. So far a few ideas have been floated amongst the team captains, but no discussion has been made.

They update every 3 hours (about 30 minutes after EOC). They recalculate the averages then, but only use up to the most recent 500 submissions. If a card has fewer submissions, then all submissions will be used to calculate the average. Additionally, the Chrome extension submits PPD samples about every 30 minutes--not when a WU is completed. At least that was the case when I investigated this a month or two ago. These details are all based on my own observations and some comments on the LAR's site. I don't have any official knowledge. This is from the GTX 570 that I'm populating in LARs right now. It has fewer than 500 samples and notes that in the average calculation: This is from the RTX 3080TI that has more than 500 samples:

LAR's only uses the most recent 500 ppd samples to calculate averages. We could limit cards to the ones with at least 500 samples in LARs. That may mean someone needs to fold on a card at stock settings for about two weeks with the LAR's chrome extension running to fill in the required samples. This is also an interesting idea. I would make a small twist to it and say that the ETF stats need to have a month of stock clocked folding for the card to be eligible. I think the same card from anyone would be fine. e.g. if I fold at stock clocks on a 960, then others can use those stats as well--we don't need to benchmark every card. I think that both of these ideas have merit to make the competition more competitive. However, both of these options also make it more difficult to find new members to join the competition due to the extra overhead. It would also be more difficult to replace failed hardware. These would also both require more work by @BWG or others to keep up with the new restrictions. I'm undecided on what would be best for the competition and look forward to more discussion about this.

P13457 on the 960. Has a tpf of around 24 seconds on that card. I've never seen it on my faster cards.

If this boosts you to 600k ppd, it will be the last time I help you!

As you said, we don't know each other. I only recognize your name from these forums. I've never been in the OCN forums to know your background. Even if I did know your background and experience, I would have still made the same suggestions. I do dumb simple things all the time. When someone asks me if I made sure something simple was configured correctly, I'd still appreciate it. Sometimes that IS the issue. Additionally, if you only wanted @BWG to respond, I would have expected a PM instead of a public forum post. I know @BWG has been a bit slower to respond the last few days, so I was attempting to help while you waited for him to chime in. I hope you get the issue resolved.

It should be reflected in the ETF stats site within three hours of the WU being completed. I would verify that you have the correct passkey specified for the new card slot. The passkey configured for you on the stats site starts with 79f83656************************. @BWG may have more insights when he has a chance to respond.

In FAHControl, go to the configuration screen, Advanced tab and set the Cause Preference to COVID-19. That is pretty reliable right now on getting those projects. Though, it does vary.

My 960 is currently doing about 35 work units a day with the covid moonshot projects. That likely explains the larger number of work units.

They might. I have some old Quadro P400 cards that normally do around 30k ppd. They get about 90k ppd on some of the moonshot projects.

folding.extremeoverclocking.com has been down all day. Once the site is back up, the F@H sig images should return.

Sorry, I didn't realize you had PM'd him. I was just looking at what the manual said. I'll ping him on discord as well to make sure he's aware of your request. From the ETF Manual, it says the current multipliers are based off of: 3090 - 5,350,108 K4000 - 87,898 It looks like the 3090 has dropped a bit which is why the multiplier I came up with was a bit lower.

You need to PM @BWG with the request per Hardware Swapping section in the first post here: From my understanding, the multipliers are set at the start of the month. The Extreme Team Folding Manual that I referenced above has a list of all cards from LARS that is used to determine multipliers. I calculated your multiplier to be 60.87, but I'm not an official source.

If you want to stick with Ubiquiti, I have a USG that I'm not using. I can send it to you if you cover shipping costs.

Windows. Current WU is P17745.

I'd hope so! My stock gtx960 is doing around 300k right now!

Do we have NSFW tags on the forums? Or spoiler tags? That image should not be shown without proper warning! Ouch!

I ordered some more parts for the folding rig last night. I plan to order a Spotswood case soon. Then I'll just need to acquire another card (or two). Another Super Flower Leadex Titanium 1000w: A PSU daisy chain adapter for using two PSUs in one system (per @BWG this one will work): Two PCIe 4.0 x16 riser cables (also per @BWG this was the one to get):

Unless I'm missing something, that 12 hours that is shown is to complete the last 39.84% of the current work unit. That would put the total time for this work unit at about 30.5 hours. Still seems like an improvement over what you had before!

Have you used this method to fix the hang after rdp disconnects? I wouldn't expect this to help, but I could be wrong. Either way, those commands are useful to have.

It does something so the current WU will finish but the next won't start after you disconnect RDP. I found that as long as an RDP session is active, folding will work fine. I can't reliably keep an RDP connection from my desktop to one of my Windows folding systems. I've worked around this by using a third system that can keep a reliable connection. The third system RDPs into the folding system. I can then RDP into the third system and connect/disconnect as needed. As long as the third system keeps the RDP session active, then folding will continue. I believe this is the same solution that @pioneerisloud is using. @BWG mentioned that using a dummy plug in one of the graphics ports might work around the issue as well (I don't have a monitor connected to the folding system).