Folding a dual G4

[AmigoThree]

My friend's mom has a dual G4, I think it is dual 1.2ghz not sure, it may be dual 1.0 or 1.42. But anyway I want to get this sucker folding and I have never really used a mac except with OS 9 at school, but even then I never got to play around with it because they lock everything down so you can only use the programs that are installed and you cant change any settings or save to the hard drive.

So what do I need to know to get this folding. I would like it to be non visible for the most part. But what do I run? Do I run the console version, if so can I minimize it? Or graphical, but will there be a system tray type thing on there that I can put it in? And can and/or should I fold gromacs, if so how?

Thanks for the help

[pip]

The graphical client will probly hide into the "Finder" it's sorta like a system tray. I'm ashamed of how much I know about macs

[Zerileous]

macs=yuck, dual procs folding =yum even if they are power PC. Dont really know anything about macs though;

Todays spam has been brought to you by the letter B and the word Board.

[zhoelpqldk]

there are the two options, run the graphical client and it will appear as just another icon in the dock at the bottom of the screen, or you can run the command line version.

graphical version all you do is double click and it will run for you - you can also set it up to 'run and autohide' on computer startup by System Preferences >> Login >> Login Items >> Add.. button.
make sure that you click the hide box on the left also.

if you do the command line version you must use the application called 'terminal' (applications >> utilities) from there I assume you know what to do - it even gives directions at folding.stanford.edu.

if you need more help let me know

-J

[emericanchaos]

if it's OS X than the terminal would be like UNIX. wouldn't need to know alot about macs to do it that way.

[AmigoThree]

Well I found out that it is a dual G4 1.2ghz with 768mb of ram. We installed FAH on it and I guess we will see how it does over the next few days.

[Is_907]

dual 1.2... as in it has two 600mhz CPU's or two 1.2ghz CPUs? (I'm assuming two 600mhz but i just want to clarify ;)

[zachj]

Dual 1.2GHz processors. Or 2.4GHz total.

I here tell that Macs really suck at folding. I tried it on a 350G4. A K6-2 kicked its a**. It lapped the mac like three or four times. This isn't a crap on Macs (if you look around, you'll find a thread on Mac Vs. PC where I apparently go against everyone there . . .), I'm just saying that Macs aren't good at it.

Z

[zhoelpqldk]

zachj is very correct. Macs do terrible jobs at folding - it is because of all the backwards instruction sets. My Dual 450 is slower than an 800 duron by a decent amount. Never had the luxury of testing on a dual 1.42 with 166 bus tho :D.

Then again my FBSD box running on 1800xp is much faster per frame compared to windows. Maybe it is just the wu's I have been getting recently... but it seems faster.

- J

[bobatola]

Let me know if you can get a work unit done. I set up two instances of FAH on my dual G4 1 GHz machine and it was taking 24 hrs to process one frame! That's 1 frame out of 400! At that rate it would have taken over a year to finish 1 WU. I gave up on the mac.

[OC-NightHawk]

Originally posted by zachj
Dual 1.2GHz processors. Or 2.4GHz total.

I here tell that Macs really suck at folding. I tried it on a 350G4. A K6-2 kicked its a**. It lapped the mac like three or four times. This isn't a crap on Macs (if you look around, you'll find a thread on Mac Vs. PC where I apparently go against everyone there . . .), I'm just saying that Macs aren't good at it.

Z

Yeah well I'm only against macs as they stand now. When new hardware is realesed I'll give it a fair shot. But as it stands now they are grossly overpriced dinosaurs.

[zhoelpqldk]

without resorting to namecalling of products, i would much rather have facts stated instead of opinions. but what are forums for anyway, right?

as far as a mac finishing a wu, yes, i've had many wu's finished on the mac. taking 24 hours to finish a frame? you sure you are reading that correctly?

- J

[OC-NightHawk]

Originally posted by zhoelpqldk
without resorting to namecalling of products, i would much rather have facts stated instead of opinions. but what are forums for anyway, right?

as far as a mac finishing a wu, yes, i've had many wu's finished on the mac. taking 24 hours to finish a frame? you sure you are reading that correctly?

- J

That was a fact. The G4 is a dinosaur that was supposed to be retired by now. The G5 was almost done then got scrapped and now I believe IBM is the one working on the next generation chip. As its stands the macs are expensive obsolete toys currently. They use DDR that they don't need just to make it sound better on paper

[zhoelpqldk]

the g4 is still a good chip in graphic arts applications - namely photoshop and final cut pro. i do agree on the age of it, but the architecture would have changed very little in the next generation of chips (g5).

motorola, one of the players in the chip making, is being pushed aside by apple. there are rumors of going to an intel based chipset (which I'd rather see amd out of this). Motorola's main customer base is embedded chips, which run cool and have low failure rates. The g4, 1.42ghz, is really just an overclocked lower ghz chip.

IBM is not working on the next chip. They are just trying to get mobile versions of both a high speed g3 and low power g4 for laptops and accessories.

In the next few quarters we might see the powerpc die off. Also, finding ddr ram is getting cheaper and easier when compared to pc133.

- J

[xsquared_uk]

To add my tuppence worth - I would imagine that one of the reasons Macs aren't as quick for folding as PC's is that the Motorola processors in them are RISC based as I recall - meaning they have a Reduced Instruction Set. In a nutshell, they have less processor 'commands' than a CISC (or normal) processor, but the ones they do have are optimised for speed. I would guess that on a Mac these aren't targeted at the kind of calculations Folding needs. When a RISC processor doesn't have dedicated instruction sets for something, I seem to remember it has to build them by combining other instructions which will obviously be slower than CISC. I also very much doubt that Macs have the kind of FPU power that modern PC's have.

So the upshot is - Macs will be 'faster' at some things than others. Just like PC's. They may be overpriced and currently underpowered, but having USB ports on the keyboard as standard is still a superb idea!

[nikhsub1]

Please lets not get into Mac bashing here... I have 3 folding, and yes, they fold reallllllllllly sloooooooow. But guess what? THEY FOLD!

[Zoilo]

Seriously, I like Macs. The G4 is not a dinosaur, and sure, it folds slow, but it gets the job done. I think the frame in 24 hours was a result of you running 2 instances of FAH.

[bobatola]

Originally posted by Zoilo
Seriously, I like Macs. The G4 is not a dinosaur, and sure, it folds slow, but it gets the job done. I think the frame in 24 hours was a result of you running 2 instances of FAH.

Yes I was running two instances of FAH, but when I ran only one I was only using 50% of each processor and the frame rates were not any better. Is there a problem with OSX Jaguar and folding?

[zachj]

I don't believe it's OSX's fault. I think it's just the architecture of the G4.

If you want to have a discussion on which is better (Mac or PC) or say why Macs are no longer viable, etc., there's a thread on the forums. Make your comments there.

Z

[zhoelpqldk]

1 frame every 24 hours is still a little hard to understand for me. the dual 450 gets a wu done roughly in 36 hours or less.

dual 450, 1.2gb pc133, 240gb hd

- J

[zachj]

single 350 with 768MB of RAM (100MHz bus) and 50GB (total) hard drive wouldn't do it in the week I gave it. It never finished the WU. It had like 25% of the frames done.

Z

[KLowD9x]

Do Macs have the P4 style thermal slowdown? Becuase, they have ONE fan and a massive heat sink, I dont think they would let it sit there and over heat. I know that when those are IDLE they pump out some heat, you should try putting a nice HSF and a more powerful exhaust on it. If anything itll extend the life of your moms mac.

[KLowD9x]

buMp, I want more information

[KLowD9x]

awww cmon, someones gotta have some information on thermal throttleing and G4s?

[zhoelpqldk]

my dual 450 runs at a nice 95F full cpu load. like i said before, all the new faster g4's are just oc'd quite a bit - hence the huge amount of heat they generate.

[zhoelpqldk]

Oh, also, to let you know - there is no throttle on the g4. the chip is quite happy to overheat itself and die.

- J

[zachj]

Just to let you know, not that this is a flame or anything, but when somebody doesn't answer your question 5 minutes after you post it, you don't need to bump the thread and insist that somebody knows the answer and simply won't post. I realize to waited a few hours, but most people don't bump a thread unless they REALLY need to know NOW or unless the thread has been inactive for a day or more.

To answer your question, my 350G4 runs at around 30C full load. New Macs have more than one fan, so the heat output of the higher end G4s is still controlled. Also, I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that the newer (not newEST) G4s put out boatloads of heat. I think that a lot of processors start out at higher voltages, followed by revisions that lower voltage. Then, in Apple's case, I'm sure somewhere along the line, they HAD to increase the voltage because they weren't able to overclock them well enough without more volts. I wouldn't really accept any argument on heat outputs until I see a chart of either the heat output or the voltage of the processors.

Z

[zhoelpqldk]

what people also have to remember is that a dual 1.25 is 4 times faster than a dual 450, but yet it does not put out 4 times the heat...

- J

[zachj]

Where do you get four times faster? If you're going by a benchmark, that doesn't apply to ALL things, just what was tested. And dual 450s are less than 3 times a 1.25 if you're using math to figure out how much faster a 1.25 is (2.77777 to be exact). But, as you stated, speed increases are not equivelant to heat increases and they do not necessarily go together.

Z

[zhoelpqldk]

i was also factoring in estimation. dual 450 has bus of 100 so... heh.

900 mhz @ 100 bus vs 2500mhz @ either 133 or 166 depending on config.

I know, it is rough math and nothing to really back it up with (ie numbers) but I can still make judgment calls.

- J

[zachj]

Just trying to figure out where you came up with that.

No offense intended

Z

[zhoelpqldk]

yeah cool - every computer has it's own thing. i'm starting to hate computers and stuff from working all day with them, and then coming home to more computers...

heh, thats why i drive around.

J

[zachj]

Both are frustrating for me. Computers are too expensive to be toys, and I'm terrified EVERY single time I drive that I've hit somebody. I seriously stare in my rear-view mirror most of the way to wherever I'm going . . .:rolleyes: I should stop. Hell, if I wasn't looking in the mirror, I might be less convinced that I'd hit somebody because I'd have seen everything in front of me.:rolleyes:

BAH!

Driving used to be fun

Z

[OC-NightHawk]

Who here wants to try out the upcoming G5 as a folding beast? As usual for a Mac its ungodly expensive and sounds a lot like an opteron, but 1GHz FSB, my god. Not a bad showing if they can get it out and have it perform like they said it would in there benches for real, before intel or AMD steal their thunder.