Gizmodo
This is freaking amazing. I was checking out some message boards last night at the Folding Forums at Stanford, a group that tracks the Folding at Home application. You know, that's the software that runs on Sony PS3 or PS2 gaming consoles, all linking up over the Internet and using their spare cycles to help the university process vast amounts of Alzheimers research data? To my astonishment, I discovered that a small legion of 13,000 PS3s running the Folding at Home app account for most of the computing power in the project, amounting to about 56 percent (PS3s = 316 measured TFLOPS) of the total.
On average, between the superfast and superslow PCs, 159,033 PCs are only doing about half that much. (151 TFLOPS). Essentially, 13,000 PS3s have just made the Folding at Home Project the fastest distributed computing project on the planet, ever. (I believe it used to be SETI @ Home, which was something like 280 TFLOPS.) This also means the PS3 met Stanford professor Vijay Pande's expected one-month goal in one day. (We'll update this post with confirmation once Dr. Pande gets back to us.)
The project just needs about 18,000 more PS3s participating to make the Folding at Home project the first distributed computing project to hit a Petaflop. To put that into perspective, the Japanese MDGRAPE-3, RIKEN's supercomputer, has about a Petaflop of computing power.
And the potential goes on from there. There are 2 million PS3s in the wild, and over 100 million PS2s shipped thus far. PS3 owners, what are you waiting for? Get the word out to other PS3 owners. Let's help cure Alzheimer's disease.
P.S. I'm sure there are CS majors out there who can fact-check this post. Post your updates in the comments.
Folding at Home Stats by OS [Stanford]
PS3 Folding [Gizmodo]
Comments
I assume you mean "petaflop" (as in PFLOPS in the title). A "petabye" is a unit of storage, not processing capacity.
alright so @Home uses idle computer power right? so why doesnt Sony just ship the damn thing to run @Home soon as you plug it into the wall? i mean most people wont even realize it and who really can say "no i dont feel like letting my PS3 cure a disease while i sleep at night"...
Wow. My father has alheizmer's, and I wouldn't wish that disease on my worst enemy (not even certain fanbois ;-)
Seriously, this is some really really good sh1t going on. Makes me think about adding a PS3 to my xbox 360 and wii collection (that, and "resistance").
@myself
whoops, petabyte* is what i meant to say.
But that's probably all the fact checking you are going to get out of this (extremely lazy) CS major.
13k PS3s? That's like the entire amount of PS3s bought in the US!
See. I knew the PS3 is good for something... (other than for games).
too bad the PS3 sucks down so much power.... what's the estimated cost to run the PS3 24 hours a day for a month?
I just hope this massive distributed computer is used for good and not evil.
Is this just a cover for Vijay calculating how building a black hole from common household materials? hey cool, where do I buy one?
Has anyone created a Folding at Home Gizmodo team?
I swear my sentence construction was alright when I hit 'submit'.
Having a muppet day.
TFIF.
No gizmodo team yet. I don't know if that matters.We shouldn't do it to make gizmodo look better. Maybe we should just do it. Anyhow, I made a promise at my first job at MaximumPC to always do distributed computing projects with them. So if I fold, I have to fold for them. (A small promise, but still a promise)
The post says you can run the folding@home on a PS2. Anyone know anything about that? I did a quick google search but didn't find anything.
nope, no ps2 folding.
I should set my computer up to do this (if I can). I meant to do it awhile ago but forgot to. I leave it on 24 hours a day so it might as well do something when I'm not using it.
Is that GPU score just for ATI GPUs? If so, they are doing a impressive amount of processing per unit. Over twice that of the PS3 and about 65x the amount of the average windows box hooked up. In fairness to the windows boxes, I wouldn't be surprised if a bunch of those weren't very old PCs that someone just hooked up for that reason alone.
This is good stuff. There are a number of distributed network computer projects out there, many of which use the open source BOINC interface: http://boinc.berkeley.edu/
To give an idea of recent performance gains, at the same clock speed, my Core 2 Duo crunches data 3.5x faster than my old P4.
I'd like to see the PS3 compared head-head with a Core 2 Duo (pick the clock speed) to get a more realistic idea of how fast it is.
I haven't done the Folding project, I did do the SETI for a short while, but the one of done for years now is the United Devices. They are searching for cures for cancer and I don't know how many FLOPs they are using or anything, and I'm too lazy to go search. I just know that I've given them over 8 years of CPU time with just a handful of machines.
Doesn't running the CPU that hot for that long reduce it's lifespan?
digitalpoet: To get an idea of the comparison of PS3 vs. Core2Duo, look at the Intel Macs. IIRC, none of those are on pentium...they're all on either CoreDuo or Core2.
PS3 still looks to be about a factor of 10 faster per machine...
The game developers aren't able to take advantage of all the CBE processor's power, so why not cure some diseases and have fun at the same time. Multitasking at it's best.
P.S. How bout that all you PS3 naysayers.
Thats great! Now, can it play video games??
Whammo...I'm with you on that question. I'm definitely planning on downloading the Folding@Home for my PS3, but am kind of hesitant to leave it on all the time. Anybody have any sense of whether or not its OK to run the PS3 so much? The little black beast can get pretty hot after a couple hours of gaming...
Intel Macs 7/2704 = 0.0025887573964497041420118343195266
PS3 0.0027572872864769106953221359214054
Only seems to be about 6% faster than the the macs per processor. I guess the power is just having more cores.
Another thing that comes to mind is.. how the hell are there so many PS3 being wasted for this application? Aren't they suppose to be fairly hard to find on the shelves?
I downloaded the Folding@Home client on my PS3 last night and left it running overnight.
The PS3 was definitely running warm, but not too bad...in vertical position the front vents were cold, top and back pretty warm. My gaming laptop runs MUCH hotter.
Urban_ninjya, you did the mat hwong there.
yes 7/2704 = .00259
but 338/13807 = .0245
It is indeed running faster by a factor of 10.
urban_ninjya you need to check your decimel places. The PS3 is currently @ .024480 vs Intel mac @ 0.002577 that puts it at 9.499 times more powerfull.
it uses idle processing power to run so it isn't even going all out. When I was running it last night the fan for the ps3 slowed down quite a bit while that was running so that would mean it isn't running all that hot. These are amazing results very cool stuff.
urban_ninjya, your math is flawed.
Intel Macs - 0.002588
PS3 - 0.024480
This is 9.45 X faster.
urban_ninjya: I think your calculations are off somehow for the PS3. Using your same Math for the PS3, you should get: 338/13807 = 0.024.... vs your 0.0025 for the Intel Macs (note the factor of 10 difference).
I like simpler numbers though:
2700 active IntelMacs vs 14000 PS3's -- say there are 5x as many PS3's.
7 TFLOPS Total for the Intel Macs -- multiply that by 5 to get the result for if there were the same number of Intel Macs as there are PS3's -- that gives you 35 TFLOPS if there were 14000 Intel Macs.
So, if with the same number of Intel Macs and PS3's, you'd get 35 TFLOPS total for the Macs, and nearly 350 TFLOPS total for the PS3's -- a factor of 10 different.
urban_ninjya...you think curing diseases is a waste of time? you need help. as far as PS3 availabilty, have you walked into a retail store lately? there are plenty.
is it just me or is the ratio for the GPU more than twice that of the PS3? Screw the PS3 lets all get the GPU software and put our beasts to work!
PS3 = 0.024480 est.
GPU = 0.058908 est
I can verify that those stats are in the correct range. The per user output of the PS3 is just over 25x that of the PC in those numbers.
We all know that the Cell has 9 cores, which immediately gives a 9x multiplier over a PC. Further, each core is very fast, such that it's not unreasonable to say that a Cell core is 2x faster than a PC's. That gets you to 18x. Factor in more idle time for PS3s and low output by older PC boxes and the 25x figure is believable.
Now, as a Computer Scientist, I have to point out that the Cell is not a magic box - programming for that architecture is immensely difficult. Dr. Dobb's wrote an article about it, and the bottom line is that a 60-line program required 1200 lines to adapt to the Cell. Lines of code isn't a perfect measure of complexity, but 60x the code for 9x the processing power is pretty painful. It's also important to keep in mind that not all applications are parallelizable.
Regardless, Sony obviously has taken the time to write an optimized folding program, and the benefits are clear. For highly parallelizable problems that require intense computational horsepower, the investment in code overhead can be worth it.
http://www.ddj.com/dept/64bit/197801624
Oops.. I guess did plug the wrong number in. Pretty good number from a scientific mindset. I stand corrected.
like it says, it uses IDLE cpu power. people are running this in the background on their computers, while theyre using it...no wonder computer processing is lower...
while on the other hand, you have the PS3 owners, with no good games, probably pissed off they paid $600 for it, with the software using up all of the processing power of the PS3, because the owners dont want to play it.
I fold@home on my computer but this sounds like a great idea. Now the PS3 has launched over here (in the UK) I have even more reason for getting one soon. Also does anyone know if you can put a PS3 folding account under your PC folding account?
Jeezus, your a little bitter, IDIOT ism, aren't you? The PS3 is brand new, yet it's already taking a major step toward helping cure one of the most crippling and dehumanizing diseases known to man. Still, you make a point of bashing it, and by showing your cute little Mario avatar, we know where your true alliance lies.
Aren't you a proud little fanboy, IDIOT ism? We're glad to see your priorities are in the right place.
I'm glad to see the PS3 being utilized in the folding@home project. The performance increase it offers to the network is astounding. Hopefully, more and more PS3 owners will participate in the program.
Not to ruin your enthusiasm for distributed computing projects or anything, but characterizing the folding of proteins is a LONG way from curing diseases.
I find it amusing that there was a big fuss about how the PS3 had 2 Tflops (compared to 360's 1 Tflops) right before it launched in the US. Amazing how real-world performance is only 1% of claimed...
kingofgrills, idiotism is probably a member of MS FUD team. Only they will view something this good in a negative perspective.
ACTUAL POWER USAGE = 211 Watts while running Folding@Home on my PS3. I measured this with Folding@Home running on the PS3 plugged directly into my trusty Kill-A-Watt. Other stats from the Kill-A-Watt regarding the power:
120.1 volts
1.77 amps
60 hertz
Of course these values fluctuate +/- 1% or 2% based on powerline quality... and in Florida, that ain't so good :-)
When the PS3 is idle and sitting at the XMB the power usage is 191 watts. Sittin on a static browser page (google.com) the power usage is 182 watts.
I'll admit it, I'm not a fan of the PS3.
But this is cool. I knew the cell proc was awesome, I just think Sony's implementation sucks.
Hello,
My name is Frank Pages (aka C4Diver) and I'm the Clan Leader of AFK (305 BOYZ / AFK) for the the PS3. My clan is composed of over 120 members from accross the US as well as a few from Mexico and Canada. Check out our website for more information: www.305boyz.tk.
The folding@home program was recently brought up to my attention by one of my clan leaders. I researched it and thought this was a great thing for the AFK clan to become involved with as well as an opportunity for us to give back to the worldwide community as a whole. As soon as the Download became available for PS3 I created a folding team account, #55059.
Last night emails were sent out to all clan members registered in our website asking for their support in this cause(as well as that from their friends and family). As of last night we had 8 members sign up via their PS3s and after a recent check 15 work units have been completed thus far. I would like to take this opportunity to extend my invitation to anyone else out their who would like to work with Team AFK. Just follow the directions as indicated (http://folding.stanford.edu/FAQ-PS3.html) for your PS3/PC and just enter 55095 when asked if you want to join a team.
Everyone has something to offer, so join AFK in this great cause.
Sincerly,
Frank Pages,
305 BOYZ / AFK Clan Leader
aka: C4Diver
I did for this type of programs 10 years ago in my college days. It is not that hard to do a new program. To port a serial program to this architecture is very difficult. Comparing 60 lines of serial program code to 1200 lines of parallel code is unfair. Some problem can not be efficiently done on a parallel architecture.
Contributing to distributed computing projects is cool.
It's not what most people buy a game console for.
You have to realize that there are massive numbers of POS junk pc's that are set up for folding at home farms. These aren't all 4GHz pc's that cost 3 grand each. It's not so hard to think that the cell is 10x faster than an old 1.6GHz P4.
Anyways good numbers none the less. I wonder how many people will still be running F@H application when the newness and novelty wears on the the realization of the electric bill sets in.
Wow, as someone who Alzheimer's hits close to home, that is very cool. I just downloaded the client and will start running it on all my PCs now. It almost makes you want to go out and get a few PS3s and just let them run this all the time! :-)
Any info on what kind of wear and tear F@H causes on your CPU running full blast all the time?
I am verying interested in folding to cure diseases for mankind. I have donated as many as 50 CPU's at a time for the Folding@Home project.
Did you guys know that there are "teams" for Folding@Home ?? I belong to Team #1971 "Team Mac OSX" and am currently ranked 5th on our team and 256th in the the whole project.
Please seriously consider using all your computational resources (Mac, PC, Linux, GPU and PS3) for the Folding@Home Project.
Stop on by our forums at www.teammacosx.com and check us out. We have our own installer scripts, support, and some of the best folders on the planet.
If you would be interested in folding for Team MacOS X, just come up with a username at Stanford and enter "1971" as your team designation on your computers or PS3's. The teams make it fun, but we fold for the benefit of the science.
Thanks for your time, and I hope you will at least stop by the forums at www.teammacosx.com, all are welcome anytime.
J.R.
Windows:
159113 active / 151 TFLOPS = approx 0.95 GFLOPS per client
Mac OS X (All):
11417 active / 14 TFLOPS = approx 1.23 GFLOPS per client
Mac OS X (Intel Only):
2704 active / 7 TFLOPS = approx 2.59 GFLOPS per client
Analysis
It would seem that, all-in-all, Mac OS X machines contribute approximately 30% more computing power per active client. I certainly wouldn't have guessed that.
Also impresive: Intel-based Mac OS X machines blow away the Windows average, offering 164% more computing power.
Conclusion:
More Mac users need to be running F@H, especially if they've got an Intel box.
@ urban_ninjya
The PS3 is not hard to find on store shelves at all. There are few electronics or game stores (online or brick-and-mortar) which do not have them readily available. Most stores in my area have stacks of them.
So when are they going to adapt F@H to utilize the PS3's GPU? If GPU cores are that much better at folding, couldn't they milk even more power out of the PS3? I'm hoping to see updates on F@H and seeing it become more and more efficient in the future.
My local Best Buy had a stack of like 20-25 60GB PS3s set up near the entrance a few days ago, I'd be fairly confident in saying they're probably still there right now.
@MacServ
Part of the reason the Intel-based macs are so much better on average is probably because an Intel Mac is, at most, 2 years old, and based on the Core architecture, which blows the old Pentium 4's away. PC's include pretty much anything, ranging from an old Pentium 2 that folds all day because it has nothing else to do, to the state of the art quad core server. Most PCs are older, because not everyone can afford to buy a new computer all the time.
It'd be interesting to see how the G5 Macs and earlier look without the Intel Macs averaged in. I have a feeling they'd be comparable to PC. I think this is a fair comparison, because there was a surge in Mac purchases when Intel came out, but there wasn't one on PC's with the Core processors (Or at least not as big of one).
Somehow, I don't believe these across the board comparisons of an "average PC" versus Mac, et al.
Why? Consider the fact that the PC base on F@H encompasses pretty much any CPU capable of completing a work unit in time. I run 10 to 12 machines 24/7 for F@H and two of them are 200 MHz Pentiums. The rest are made up of AMD an