Folding Contest: The Results Are In

[FritzEiv]

AnandTech soundly beat Tom's Hardware in the 2016 Folding For Charity competition. Wait till next year!

Folding Contest: The Results Are In : Read more

 

[AndrewJacksonZA]

Well done to both teams, and thank you for contributing to worthy causes in both compute power and dollars.

 

[StitchExperiment626]

Couldn't be gracious losers. AnAndtech wasn't dramatic about winning.

 

[greenmachineiijh]

To whom it may concern; WOW. Tom's IS being gracious. Do you really thing they are serious about Russian hackers? It is a very light-hearted joke at its most basic with a concede and congrats to AnandTech for a job well done. Almost even a poke at Tom's.

 

[bit_user]

I think "soundly spanked" is going too far. We got 71.7% as many points as they did. That's a clear victory, for sure. But they "soundly spanked" Hardware Canucks, who got only 31.7% of their score.

My rationale is that because the possible range of scores is so vast, you can't look at these like sports scores. IMO, being within half an order of magnitude is a fairly close race.

Next time, perhaps we should team up with the Canucks. Our combined score would've beaten Anandtech by about 3.4%.

 

[RomeoReject]

Bit_User, in defense of my country, we have about 10% of just America's population, 31.7% is pretty darn good for the size of the userbase. =P

 

[bentonsl_2010]

STITCHEXPERIMENT626 Dec 13, 2016, 12:08 PM
Couldn't be gracious losers. AnAndtech wasn't dramatic about winning.

LOL are you serious?....

"The same sentiment goes to the team over at Tom’s Hardware as well. Although their leadership under my counterpart, Fritz Nelson, turned out to be lacking"
by Ryan Smith on December 13, 2016 10:00 AM EST

 

[10esseetony]

Sorry BIT_USER, but 14,000,000 points per day CLEARLY is "soundly spanked". No amount of variation of points awarded per randomly assigned work unit can account for that.

GTX980- 350k-400k ppd.
GTX 980Ti- up to 500k-650k ppd.
GTX1070- up to 650-700k ppd.
GTX1080- 800k-1.1M ppd.

You were quite simply pummeled AND got your world ranking taken from you! Ah ha ha ha ha ah ha, cough cough, ugh, asthma kicked in with that maniacal laugh.

The good news for Tom's is that we (TeAm Anandtech) already did our upgrading for a few years. Now you guys get the advantage of the 1080Ti (possibly) coming out (pushing down 1070/1080 prices) along with new cards from AMD. So perhaps you guys will show up next year with some updated hardware, and show us what a sound spanking is all about.

***************
Indeed Tom's was gracious, Anandtech not as much.

Although, on a serious note, I worry that "AnandTech editor-in-chief Ryan Smith ...did he leave his massive stash of GPUs fired up and folding...?" might be taken seriously by those who STILL think Hillary won. I assure you Ryan did not. [At least not under a single username. hmmmm] Our top 3 contributors, who DO have massive stashes of (modern) GPU's, put out 8.2 million+, 6.3 million+, and 3.3 million+, per day. A few other new users hit 1 million or better, but not many.

 

[bit_user]

Bit_User, in defense of my country, we have about 10% of just America's population, 31.7% is pretty darn good for the size of the userbase. =P

Good point. I've got nothing but respect for Canada, BTW.

So, let's team up, next year. It'll be the "Hardware" sites vs. Anand.

 

[bit_user]

Sorry BIT_USER, but 14,000,000 points per day CLEARLY is "soundly spanked". No amount of variation of points awarded per randomly assigned work unit can account for that.

I wasn't trying to detract from anyone's victory. Just pointing out that the contributions of various CPUs, GPUs, and phones varies so wildly, as does users' access to office or institutional machines. You could easily have competitions like this with disparities on the order of 10:1 or 100:1. So, that's why I think it's more appropriate look at it on a logarithmic scale.

In fact, If we do exactly that, the points totals come out as:

AnandTech:   8.47
Toms:        8.33
Canucks:     7.83

Still, no matter how you look at it, the rankings don't change. So, yours was a job well done. Congratulations.

 

[alextheblue]

Couldn't be gracious losers. AnAndtech wasn't dramatic about winning.

Warning! System fault detected in humor module.

 

[jungleboogiemonster]

I suspect this contest was great for bringing new people on board. I used to give out my spare processing resources when SETI first started, then later moved to BOINC. But, in those days BOINC's software sucked and my computer was loud and hot, so I gave up and never looked back. Now, probably a decade later I see Tom's is having a contest and I have a new build just sitting around, so why not use it to it's potential? The Stanford software is good and the days of Pentium heat are in the past. This folding stuff is fun!

 

[bit_user]

the days of Pentium heat are in the past.

A decent GPU churns out more heat than any P4 ever did. Just FYI.

 

[Kewlx25]

the days of Pentium heat are in the past.

A decent GPU churns out more heat than any P4 ever did. Just FYI.

Not mine. Nvidia 1070 @ 1.8ghz 0.83v is claiming about 68watts during Furmark. It actually runs stable(no issues for two weeks) @ 1.85ghz 0.812v, but I wanted to make sure it had some breathing room.

 

[bit_user]

Nvidia 1070 @ 1.8ghz 0.83v is claiming about 68watts during Furmark. It actually runs stable(no issues for two weeks) @ 1.85ghz 0.812v, but I wanted to make sure it had some breathing room.

Yeah, 1070 is at the lower end of what I had in mind.

I don't know how Furmark compares to folding, though. What does it say during folding? My 980 Ti stays between 205 - 225 W. If I scale that down by the relative TDP, then I'd expect a 1070 would be 123 - 135 W.

A P4 660 (3.4 GHz Prescott) had a TDP of only 115 W. Most Prescott P4's were much lower - only 84 W, while a few were 103 W.

 

[Kewlx25]

Nvidia 1070 @ 1.8ghz 0.83v is claiming about 68watts during Furmark. It actually runs stable(no issues for two weeks) @ 1.85ghz 0.812v, but I wanted to make sure it had some breathing room.

Yeah, 1070 is at the lower end of what I had in mind.

I don't know how Furmark compares to folding, though. What does it say during folding? My 980 Ti stays between 205 - 225 W. If I scale that down by the relative TDP, then I'd expect a 1070 would be 123 - 135 W.

A P4 660 (3.4 GHz Prescott) had a TDP of only 115 W. Most Prescott P4's were much lower - only 84 W, while a few were 103 W.

About 40 watts while folding. The 1070 is on the lower end? Some high standards there. It's already a $400+ videocard. You're not going to see much faster than a 1080 SLI which would be about 2.5x faster. Under-voltaging reduced the TDP by 50%, which fell in line with delta-power=(delta-voltage)^2

 

[bit_user]

About 40 watts while folding.

How is that measured?

The 1070 is on the lower end? Some high standards there.

Yeah, decent would be 1070, 1080, 1080 ti (just wait), or titan X. Once Vega hits the street, 1070's will be closer to $300, which is what I paid for my P4 CPU. Right now, Nvidia's prices are inflated by a lack of competition.

Under-voltaging reduced the TDP by 50%, which fell in line with delta-power=(delta-voltage)^2

So, you're saying that it should be ~80 W, in stock config? I wonder why it's so much less than expected. Anyway, that still puts it in the ballpark of most P4 models.