# cpu folding using a vm!



## Easy Rhino (Nov 21, 2009)

so who else is using vmware to get some real folding out of their cpu?

i followed this guide provided by the enemy and it s very straight forward. took less than 10 minutes to get 2 instances up both running 2 cores of the 4 core cpu. it should double your typical CPU PPD!


----------



## parelem (Nov 21, 2009)

rather than running two VMs you can run just one using and use all four cores by changing numvcpus = "2" to numvcpus = "4" in the .vmx file. you'll see the same, if not more, ppd by doing that. 

i saw more ppd off my cpu by running one instance rather than two, you might want to check that out.


----------



## mosheen (Nov 21, 2009)

or simply use virtualbox limit is 32 cores


----------



## mstenholm (Nov 21, 2009)

Did everything, including stopping my folding just to find out it only runs on 64 bit systems.  I have to settle with my 13.000 PPD.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 21, 2009)

parelem said:


> rather than running two VMs you can run just one using and use all four cores by changing numvcpus = "2" to numvcpus = "4" in the .vmx file. you'll see the same, if not more, ppd by doing that.
> 
> i saw more ppd off my cpu by running one instance rather than two, you might want to check that out.



ok ill give that a try. what is the preferred way of shutting down the VMs? i only ask because i know they are in the middle of folding and i dont want them to shutdown without cleaning closing the folding program so the work is saved. 

edit: even when i make the vcpu change to 4 and only run 1 instance it only used 50% cpu. so i have to run 2 or something.


----------



## parelem (Nov 21, 2009)

vm > power > power off and exit


----------



## mstenholm (Nov 21, 2009)

Easy Rhino said:


> ok ill give that a try. what is the preferred way of shutting down the VMs? i only ask because i know they are in the middle of folding and i dont want them to shutdown without cleaning closing the folding program so the work is saved.
> 
> edit: even when i make the vcpu change to 4 and only run 1 instance it only used 50% cpu. so i have to run 2 or something.



Why would you want it to shut down ?  I'm going to snap your place in the ranking soon (OK not soon-soon)


----------



## parelem (Nov 21, 2009)

Easy Rhino said:


> edit: even when i make the vcpu change to 4 and only run 1 instance it only used 50% cpu. so i have to run 2 or something.



that's because of the core you're running. the 1.74 or whatever core doesn't fully utilize the cpu. vm always downloads a 1.74 to start, once you finish that you'll get some 2.10 cores which will fully utilize your cpu when you do 1 instance with the numvcpus = "4"


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 21, 2009)

hrm even with 2.10 core it still only using half cpu


----------



## El Fiendo (Nov 22, 2009)

You need the latest version of VMware player. I believe its version 3.0, and its just added support for up to 4 cores, where prior versions only supported 2 cores. It can be found here.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 22, 2009)

El Fiendo said:


> You need the latest version of VMware player. I believe its version 3.0, and its just added support for up to 4 cores, where prior versions only supported 2 cores. It can be found here.



i have the latest version of vmware player. it says it is using all 4 cores which it is but only using half the power of each core.


----------



## Disparia (Nov 22, 2009)

Did you change the configuration of "SMP instance per" to 4 CPU's? (Diskless Folder configuration page)


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 22, 2009)

Jizzler said:


> Did you change the configuration of "SMP instance per" to 4 CPU's? (Diskless Folder configuration page)



yup. smp instances per 4 cpus...Setting up 1 instance.


----------



## Disparia (Nov 22, 2009)

Then parelem probably has the answer... it might be trying to finish an old core before downloading a new 4 core opt'd work unit.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 22, 2009)

Jizzler said:


> Then parelem probably has the answer... it might be trying to finish an old core before downloading a new 4 core opt'd work unit.



yea something has to be messed up cause it takes almost 24 hours to complete a 1920 point project using a q9650...


----------



## El Fiendo (Nov 23, 2009)

Ok, just to double check:

Latest version
Edited the '.vmx' file, the line that reads numvcpus = "x" (x should be changed to 4 in this case)
Reconfigured the diskless folder by going to its IP address, and changing SMP per instance value to 4

That should be all that's required. It's been awhile since I set it up though.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 23, 2009)

El Fiendo said:


> Ok, just to double check:
> 
> Latest version
> Edited the '.vmx' file, the line that reads numvcpus = "x" (x should be changed to 4 in this case)
> ...



yup, that is how i have it setup. it is using all 4 cores but only at 50% capacity.


----------



## El Fiendo (Nov 23, 2009)

Very weird. Wait until the latest work unit completes, remove it all and reinstall it from scratch. Before you boot it up, change the .VMX file to read '4' and then boot it up and reconfigure it first thing to '4' CPUs via the IP address. 

I had a similar issue when I first started running VMs. Though it was running 1 processor trying to get it to run 2, not 2 processors trying to run 4. I suspect its a saved setting / user config file issue, as I seem to recall my issue being solved with a clean install. Though I can't say for certain. I'll rack my brain on this one, or at least its on the list to be racked.

Also, do you have any affinity / priority managers running that could be capping it at 50% as an old setting? I used to lock my VMs to specific cores (which would give you the 50%) until I realized I actually got more letting it run un-affinitied. 

(Sorry, I'm in a word making up mood today)


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 23, 2009)

everything is setu properly, not sure but it doesnt really matter. two vms are doing the job regardless.


----------



## El Fiendo (Nov 23, 2009)

Ok. I had just read in the setup guide linked in the first post that he mentions a few methods of controlling affinity. If you'd changed the .VMX to include any of the processor'X'.use = "FALSE" flags, or you use Win-AFC / Prifinity, or have changed the affinity via task manager, all would cap the cores.

As you said it doesn't matter too much. You'd likely see ~200-500 points increase (estimate) for the sole reason that 2 VMs tend to trip over each other a bit. It wouldn't be too huge a gain though.


As for me, I think that I'm going to OC my i7 and then set my rig up to run the big WUs that run on 8 cores. They were meant for physical cores and used to be Linux only, but they've found that the new VM Player and an OC'ed i7 can finish it with its virtual cores, even though it'll take a bit of a performance hit not using 8 real cores. Should improve my PPD somewhat though.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 23, 2009)

El Fiendo said:


> Ok. I had just read in the setup guide linked in the first post that he mentions a few methods of controlling affinity. If you'd changed the .VMX to include any of the processor'X'.use = "FALSE" flags, or you use Win-AFC / Prifinity, or have changed the affinity via task manager, all would cap the cores.
> 
> As you said it doesn't matter too much. You'd likely see ~200-500 points increase (estimate) for the sole reason that 2 VMs tend to trip over each other a bit. It wouldn't be too huge a gain though.
> 
> ...



go for it. i just have the smp client running on my linux box and it does well at stock settings using all 4 cores. i tried getting the gpu2 client to work in linux by using wine but it wouldnt work properly. it would run but then not compile the core right or something. with an 8800gts coming to me id like to keep the linux installed on it but i may have to instal windows server 2008 and just use a vm for all my linux server needs.


----------



## El Fiendo (Nov 23, 2009)

Yea, Linux GPU folding is an absolute atrocity to the cards you're trying to fold on. Its very much like how Windows is for its standard CPU client in terms of efficiency for those that actually get it working. 

The first step in my master plan is seeing how far I can get this D0 on my NHU12P and its dual Noctua fans. It seems the magic number to reach for this to work, and work well, is 3.8GHz.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Nov 23, 2009)

El Fiendo said:


> Yea, Linux GPU folding is an absolute atrocity to the cards you're trying to fold on. Its very much like how Windows is for its standard CPU client in terms of efficiency for those that actually get it working.
> 
> The first step in my master plan is seeing how far I can get this D0 on my NHU12P and its dual Noctua fans. It seems the magic number to reach for this to work, and work well, is 3.8GHz.



you know if they got a real gpu client working with linux people's folding numbers would most likely increase by 5-10% because of the small footprint.


----------

