ARM CPUs (not yet)

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

MeeLee
Posts: 1375
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:16 pm

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by MeeLee »

ARM might become more interesting in the future, if X86 CPUs will start to hit their physical limitations, at ~5nm.
Then there's no room to optimize x86 CPUs anymore with current silicon technology.
That's when either ARM at 7nm could bounce head to head with x86 at 5nm, or x86 CPUs will start implementing ARM/RISC cores in their design, in an attempt to do light calculation on those CPUs, while the heavy x86 oriented workload is distributed over a few x86 cores on the package.

More than likely, ARM might slowly develop their core count, address their high idle TDP problem, and make a chip that's totally competitive in the market.
But until then, AMD has a few generations more experience. And ARM chips of today, would have made great CPUs 5 years ago!
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by bruce »

To support both FP32 projects and FP64 projects, changes must be made at the server level so those who can't support FP64 won't get assignments they can't process. Then the science team will also mange their projects in separate streams.
_r2w_ben
Posts: 285
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 3:11 pm

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by _r2w_ben »

Hardware without a FP64 FPU can still do double-precision math in software mode. It will be more than 2x slower but it's still possible. Just like there is an SSE2 and an AVX_256 version of the CPU core compiled with different flags, there would need to be an ARM core with and another without native FP64.
MeeLee
Posts: 1375
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:16 pm

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by MeeLee »

I'm sure software mode can 'borrow' 1 core for FP64 computations, while doing the rest in 32bit
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by bruce »

_r2w_ben wrote:Hardware without a FP64 FPU can still do double-precision math in software mode. It will be more than 2x slower but it's still possible. Just like there is an SSE2 and an AVX_256 version of the CPU core compiled with different flags, there would need to be an ARM core with and another without native FP64.
The real question is whether a programmer using OpenCL 1.2 needs to revise the API calls to OCL code or whether the drivers recognize that they need to manually inject an extra macro into the processing.

In fact, it is MORE THAN 2x slower. Even when the hardware supports the operations, some GPUs benchmark FP64 results as much as 12x slower that FP32 but FAH doesn't need to build a new FAHCore for that. The FAHCore works with MIXED precision or it works with SINGLE precision. The science team needs to segregate the distribution of their projects into SINGLE or MIXED precision paths.
toTOW
Site Moderator
Posts: 6296
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France
Contact:

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by toTOW »

ARM CPUs support might be closer than we think :
Neocortix wrote:On April 16, Neocortix completed a build of FaHCore with the new Gromacs 2020.1 engine, for both x86_64 and aarch64 targets, with SIMD optimization (AVX2_256 and ARM_NEON_ASIMD, respectively). On April 20, Neocortix completed a build of FaHClient. With these milestones reached, the project is now transfered to the Folding@Home team for review, verification, testing and publication.
From : https://www.neocortix.com/coronavirus
Image

Folding@Home beta tester since 2002. Folding Forum moderator since July 2008.
MeeLee
Posts: 1375
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:16 pm

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by MeeLee »

I think x86 has a longstanding record of optimizing performance;
While ARM has a long standing record of keeping power limits low.
When ARM is going to tune for performance, it will more and more become like x86.
Less power efficient than ARM, and less performance than x86.
Even with their excellent power efficiency, ARM is no match for x86, just like x86 is no match for GPUs.
It's just that ARM has not grown as much as x86 architecture. They don't have power saving C-states, turbo boost frequencies (or very few have them), etc...

I want to see an 80 core ARM cpu crunch, but I think it'll be slower than a 64 threaded Threadripper.
oreggin
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2020 10:35 am

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by oreggin »

ARM64 client is done on beta lane but I can't get any WUs for my ARM64 machines:

Code: Select all

ERROR:WU00:FS00:Exception: Could not get an assignment
Joe_H
Site Admin
Posts: 7856
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:41 pm
Hardware configuration: Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp4
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp2
Location: W. MA

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by Joe_H »

oreggin wrote:ARM64 client is done on beta lane but I can't get any WUs for my ARM64 machines:

Code: Select all

ERROR:WU00:FS00:Exception: Could not get an assignment
The ARM client has not been released. The persons who made announcements elsewhere were premature and not part of the F@h Consortium administration group. There are bugs that need to be fixed before work for ARM will be released.

When released ARM processing will be Beta. Membership in the Beta Team is strongly recommended - viewtopic.php?f=66&t=18031
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
Foliant
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed May 13, 2020 4:39 pm
Location: Bavaria

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by Foliant »

Joe_H wrote:[...]ARM processing [...] Membership in the Beta Team is strongly recommended - viewtopic.php?f=66&t=18031
Is there any *minimum* Hardware requirement to be part of this?
I only could contribute a Raspberry Pi3 B but im not familiar with performance on ARM Hardware.

Regards,
Patrick
24/7
1x i5 3470 @2Cores
1x GTX750 (GM107)
2x GTX750Ti (GM107)
PantherX
Site Moderator
Posts: 7020
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:33 am
Hardware configuration: V7.6.21 -> Multi-purpose 24/7
Windows 10 64-bit
CPU:2/3/4/6 -> Intel i7-6700K
GPU:1 -> Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti
§
Retired:
2x Nvidia GTX 1070
Nvidia GTX 675M
Nvidia GTX 660 Ti
Nvidia GTX 650 SC
Nvidia GTX 260 896 MB SOC
Nvidia 9600GT 1 GB OC
Nvidia 9500M GS
Nvidia 8800GTS 320 MB

Intel Core i7-860
Intel Core i7-3840QM
Intel i3-3240
Intel Core 2 Duo E8200
Intel Core 2 Duo E6550
Intel Core 2 Duo T8300
Intel Pentium E5500
Intel Pentium E5400
Location: Land Of The Long White Cloud
Contact:

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by PantherX »

Foliant wrote:...Is there any *minimum* Hardware requirement to be part of this?
I only could contribute a Raspberry Pi3 B but im not familiar with performance on ARM Hardware...
There isn't any minimum hardware, you can look at the requirements here: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=8
ETA:
Now ↞ Very Soon ↔ Soon ↔ Soon-ish ↔ Not Soon ↠ End Of Time

Welcome To The F@H Support Forum Ӂ Troubleshooting Bad WUs Ӂ Troubleshooting Server Connectivity Issues
Joe_H
Site Admin
Posts: 7856
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:41 pm
Hardware configuration: Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp4
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp2
Location: W. MA

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by Joe_H »

Once they are ready to announce the ARM beta test, minimum hardware requirements should also be part of hat announcement.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by bruce »

Part of FAH's problem is the wide variety of hardware that people want to donate. Either they have to establish minimum requirements so everybody can meet them while maintaining a reasonable range of PPDs (given the way the bonus points work on fast hardware) or they somehow have to maintain various classes of projects and an assignment logic that gives reasonable assignments to both fast and slow hardware (ugh).

They're working on a plan to benchmark every different hardware platform on a variety of projects. Then the work out a complex assignment process that sends work to the fastest GPUs and different work to the slowest iGP or slowest Arm device and never interchanges those assignments. BIG JOB.

I want a client that will run on my Android phone without overheating it, but it's really, really slow compared to the top hardware platforms. My desires are probably unrealistic.
oreggin
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2020 10:35 am

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by oreggin »

Thanks for all. I mean ARM64 beta is available: https://foldingathome.org/beta/ Not others announcements elsewhere ;)
I have two SBCs, OdroidC2 and a Pine Rockpro64, I set client-type=beta on both and now I get a8 core and 16810 project WUs. Started with light folding power to prevent overheating.
What is not clear to me: "Beta Team Membership". Its mean I should change team number ID in Fahclient config? Or it is a privileged membership in Beta section of this forum?
Neil-B
Posts: 2027
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 5:52 pm
Hardware configuration: 1: 2x Xeon E5-2697v3@2.60GHz, 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, Win10 Ent 20H2, Quadro K420 1GB, FAH 7.6.21
2: Xeon E3-1505Mv5@2.80GHz, 32GB DDR4, NVME, Win10 Pro 20H2, Quadro M1000M 2GB, FAH 7.6.21 (actually have two of these)
3: i7-960@3.20GHz, 12GB DDR3, SSD, Win10 Pro 20H2, GTX 750Ti 2GB, GTX 1080Ti 11GB, FAH 7.6.21
Location: UK

Re: ARM CPUs

Post by Neil-B »

the links on that page are for invited devs and testers ... If no formal announcement has been made then they aren't intended for full public beta testing.

Membership of the Beta Team allows post privileges for the Beta Forum ... This allows folders who wish to commit to helping test and reporting issues with new Projects and Cores to assist the FaH Team with focused Beta Testing ... The use of Beta Flag in the slot configuration allows the Beta Team to access Projects under test before they are released to Advanced and then full access ... see viewtopic.php?f=66&t=18031

You continue to use your username/team/passkey as currently - you simply get to commit to help/report .. You stand a greater risk of getting issues and it isn't necessarily the best thing to do if Points are what drives you ... and it really helps if you know your kit is stable and has no inherent weaknesses.

At the moment with no ARM Client/Cores released there isn't a dedicated pool of ARM testers (though no doubt some existing testers probably have ARM kit ... If you look at the Beta Forum and want to commit the instructions are there on how to apply to join (iirc).

If I have anything wrong here one of the mods will correct me :)
2x Xeon E5-2697v3, 512GB DDR4 LRDIMM, SSD Raid, W10-Ent, Quadro K420
Xeon E3-1505Mv5, 32GB DDR4, NVME, W10-Pro, Quadro M1000M
i7-960, 12GB DDR3, SSD, W10-Pro, GTX1080Ti
i9-10850K, 64GB DDR4, NVME, W11-Pro, RTX3070

(Green/Bold = Active)
Locked