I was just cruising around and noticed F@H has redone their website. The new v7 is out, and was curious about it because there's very little documentation about it.
There is no list of supported gpu's (or even gpu support!). So it begs the question, "Is it worth it?"
 

I thought it was worth it while I was still actively folding. Simple and easier to setup than the command-line console clients. There is also functionality to monitor and control network clients.

Is this a production release of v7, then?
 
It's out of beta, finally?  I've been using the beta version of v7 for a looong time, now.  Seems to work pretty well.
 
Definitely allows for GPU Folding without issue - much easier to set up, in fact, than v6.
 

Attachment(s)

Attachments are not available: Download requirements not met

Just to make sure that everyone is talking about the same application.
 
Yes, FAH has released V7.1.5. It is no longer in beta.
I am going to test this out and see if it can run the older (non fermi) gpu's.

Confirmed, and its folding on my ION II gpu :D
Interestingly enough, the TPF is roughly 5 mins.

Looks like I'm still on 7.1.43, myself - last beta, IIRC.
 
Suppose it's time to upgrade, then!

Sort of odd, but if I have this, do I really need to keep HFM.net?

stonerhino
Sort of odd, but if I have this, do I really need to keep HFM.net?

I personally found V7 Client sufficient for a replacement to HFM.net. 

Now what about as a replacement for GPU Tracker V2, ive been using the tracker for a long time now and it seems to do what I need, is their any advantage to switch to this new client?

In comparison to GPU tracker, you get the same remote control features over the core, and it autodetects.
The machine ID seems to have been eliminated in this version as I see no place to set this.
Supports networking natively and no need to have SMB shares to access the log files on other machines.
 
Its like FAH, HFM, and GPU Tracker in the same app.

Now setting something like -oneunit or -advmethods is going to be difficult. Cant find the place to input something like that. I dont always want the cpu folding on my rig at home.

stonerhino


Now setting something like -oneunit or -advmethods is going to be difficult. Cant find the place to input something like that. I dont always want the cpu folding on my rig at home.

Are you using the 'Expert' view of the interface?
 
If so, when you go to the 'Configure' page, you can add advanced options for each 'slot'.  As you can see from my screenshot above, I have three 'slots' configured - one CPU, and two GPU.  At the moment, all are Folding, but you do have control over them individually, and can set many of the previous advanced options per-slot.

Ok! That's good to know. I was worried those were for something else.
This is the screen you are talking about?
 

Attachment(s)

Attachments are not available: Download requirements not met

Yup - the "Extra slot options", below, are for exactly what you are looking for.
 
There may be some syntax differences in how the settings are applied - so do check out their site.  But that would be the area you want.

Note, specifically, that there is this post over on the Stanford forums describing how to set the new flags, and what the options are for the v7 client.

Awesome, thanks for that bit of info :D
 
v7 still lacks 64bit windows optimizations. great...

Oh, finally out of beta... time to update! Thanks for the heads up!
 
You can just right-click the client and select "finish" instead of using -onunit flags, much much simpler. It'll do the same function.
 
As for advmethods, does that even affect clients on v7 anymore? I thought that flag was deprecated since that sticky thread was made over a year ago. Or maybe it was that  it didn't matter with GPU clients...

Hmm, it doesnt seem to be letting me connect two machines together. This is on LAN with no firewalls, everything disabled. I think i need to read up on this or something.

<Rages>
Grr... accidently goofed up everything.
 
If you have multiple machines on the same LAN, dont change anything other than adding the controling pc's IP to BOTH boxes after the "127.0.0.1" All worker machines should look like the image attached. Replace 192.168.0.133 with whatever your local PC's IP is.
 
DO NOT REMOVE 127.0.0.1!!
Removing the local loopback address will disable access to the client and possibly never restart the fahclient exe.
 
Once you've added your ip to the allow lists, make sure you use the "Stop" button on the connection tab, and then start the client using the same button. You MUST wait for the button to say "Start" in order to access via remote.

Attachment(s)

Attachments are not available: Download requirements not met

kougar

As for advmethods, does that even affect clients on v7 anymore? I thought that flag was deprecated since that sticky thread was made over a year ago. Or maybe it was that  it didn't matter with GPU clients...

It's still there, just set differently - one of the slot options is 'client-type', which you can set to 'advanced'.

The advanced methods seem to be doing late-stage beta cores that could apparently crash. I was reading on the link you posted xanderf that there has been one or two new projects that are dead-locking the cpu causing a protection fault.
Personally, I will be avoiding the advanced option for a while.

Think I will be staying with the old GPU sys tray client from Stanford instead of upgrading to V7 as the folding time for the WUs seemed faster on the old V6.41 GPU client in comparison. Unless drivers are a factor in that. Maybe I should update my drivers from the 285 to the 296.

I think the time to complete with the new version is rather off. I like the indications of HFM.net, but one of my workers is a dual core Xeon 2GHz and its TPF has cone completely to hell.
 
I also think the new v7 has problems with virtualized hardware. Two of my workers are now having strange symptoms. One of them is claiming its running, has high cpu usage as supposed to, but not even budging from 0.00%.
What is also bizzare is the fact that my Pentium 4 D, 2.8GHz is outrunning both my E6300 and Xeon 2.0GHz

Still no movement on this one server. Guess the xenserver's are going to be running classic clients still :(
 
**Edit**
After leaving one server alone for over 3 hours, it finally jumped from 0.00% to 1.29%.
Its TPF is spot on for what its supposed to be.

Seems HFM.net v0.9 doesnt play well with v7's. They keep loosing connection, not updating some (or all) workers, and finally becoming completely unresponsive after a while.
As far as v7 is concerned, I'm happy to report no other major problems other than the first frame of your WU taking a long time to update on virtualized hardware.

I have both Tracker and the v7 client on my machine.
Personally I think the v7 is still way to complicated for something that was supposed to be designed to make it easier for computer illiterate people to set up Folding,
Sure it's easier than using the old command line clients, but it is still miles behind in terms of simplicity and usability compared to Tracker.
Plus I have found that the PPD on the CPU projects that are specific to v7 is quite a bit lower than the units on the older client.

stonerhino
Seems HFM.net v0.9 doesnt play well with v7's. They keep loosing connection, not updating some (or all) workers, and finally becoming completely unresponsive after a while. 
As far as v7 is concerned, I'm happy to report no other major problems other than the first frame of your WU taking a long time to update on virtualized hardware.

 
Not had any issues with HFM .9 and any of the v7 clients. You're making sure to use the loopback address rather than the system IP, right? 127.0.0.1
 
Soon as I powered up the new v7 I got a 4.5 hour GPU project, on my 480.... yeowch! Completion times match between HFM and v7.

Yeah, I've been getting a lot of LOOONG projects on v7 in the last few days.
 
Just finished a 14 hour project for one of my 560 Tis yesterday.  For, like, 7000 pts.  Lame.

You should be able to avoid those 7718pt WUs by removing advanced client type flag (unless they were release from advanced to full release).
 
How is the v7 client as far as CPU folding goes? Better or worse than VMWare w/ Ubuntu?

werty316


You should be able to avoid those 7718pt WUs by removing advanced client type flag (unless they were release from advanced to full release).

Wow, no kidding - removing the advanced client flag on my CPU and GPU (that had it) caused my PPD estimate to jump from ~40k to ~60k.  We'll see if that pans out in reality, but if so...yikes!  They need to re-spec those beta units...