LyNx_G

Well, not sure what it is, but the F@H client has crashed/frozen my Brave browser every night that it's been running after 9pm like something is happening that shouldn't be.

Hey Guys, since last night Bit Defender has blocked the Oracle1 F@H Server/ IP 150.136.14.110 as a "infected web resource". Anyone have any insight into this and is this in fact a true report? Thanks for any help.

K. Well not sure if it's the same, probably an advanced option, but in the standard tools I have my priority set to "Slightly Higher" in the advanced tab, don't/haven't messed around with the Expert tab at all.

Is that IF you are running a GPU as well, or anytime? Because I run my 9600k at 100% on all 6 cores and have never had a problem in the about 7 months I've been Folding with it like this. Running it like this actually reduces my overall clock speed, which consumes less power and creates less heat, but WUs take only about 2/3 the time compared to running at medium, so cost per WU is cheaper and when my system needs CPU cycles, it gets them easily (talking basic web browsing, mail, watching videos etc, not actual CPU intensive stuff). Started running the BOINC client to run Rossetta@Home while waiting on WUs from the F@H server and it's not that nice, it ramps my cores all up to max boost, normally 4.3Ghz and uses about 15-20W more power than F@H. I even tried running them both at the same time and still haven't had any system issues or instability (clocks drop to about 4-4.1Ghz) and I'm in the Caribbean with avg room temp of 26C> and only a CoolerMaster Hyper 212 cooler with 2x120mm fans, 3 120mm intake fans and 1 120mm exhaust fan at the top of my CoolerMaster NR600 case and max temps with Rossetta of about 77C.

Not sure if this is the right place, but here goes. Am running the Brave browser and it does not seem to like to play nice with the web control. I have other browsers installed (Firefox, Vivaldi, Opera) and they all load the web control without issue, but the Brave browser (especially right now with the huge influx of traffic for Covid-19) does not seem to want to work, doesn't matter if I select it to let everything possible run (Java, Cookies, Location etc). Any one with any ideas would appreciate it as I really do like how the browser works other than this.

Yes, there are CPU WUs out there as well, or at least I would assume so given the size of them that I've had recently. Just got one last night that said it'd take 18 hours to complete and that's on a 9600K running at 90-100% CPU usage at around 4-4.1Ghz. Unfortunately don't have a GPU right now, plan was to just get a system up and running last year when my old 2600K went down and then later get a GPU, but with how things went with my recovery and now this pandemic, think it'll be a good while until I can afford that, BUT, I'll keep trying to do my little part and help as much as I can.

Thanks again guys, have settled on running at 100% with lower overall temps and overall faster processing of the WU for less total power consumption than running less than 100%. Another benefit of running at 100% is temps staying about the same throughout, not fluctuating up and down depending on how the cores are being switched/used. Will be fun to play with a GPU like a 1650 Super or such when I can get one.

Hey and thanks for the welcome. Unfortunately no discrete GPU yet, just needed to get a new system built after my trusty 2600K system finally bit the bullet beginning of summer, so just using the onboard graphics for now until I can afford and decide on what card I want. I have used CPUID HW Info and Windows Task Manager to monitor the power draw, temps and clock speeds running at the different settings and to me, the most cost effective is running at the lower boost speeds at 100% as it's showing the CPU only using 70W or under and taking about 2/3 the time as running at medium with about 80% CPU usage and 73-76W draw. Was just curious what thoughts were on CPU/System longevity running the CPU at 100% pretty much all the time, as I have it set to Fold always and just give up CPU cycles when I need them and haven't found it to cause any issues so far just watching movies, browsing the web and doing some light image editing.

Hey guys and gals, just recently started back Folding again after many, many years, running an Intel i5 9600K at stock speeds and the question is as in the title - should I run the client at the Full setting so it uses 100% CPU usage on all cores, but runs at a lower boost clock of between 3.8-3.95Ghz with temps staying at or below 71C/160F or should I run it at the medium setting where it uses about 80% CPU and runs boost at 4.3Ghz and temps in the 76C/169F or lower range? Little info about myself - I live in the Caribbean, avg room temps varies between 26C/79F to 30C/86F in the cooler times of year and 28C/82F to 32C/89F in the hotter times. System is an Intel 9600K on a Gigabyte H370 HD3 MB running a Coolermaster 212 cooler with a push/pull setup, 2 120mm intake fans in the front, 1 120mm fan exhausting out the top (2nd fan on cooler pushes air out the rear exhaust area because of it's close proximity), so air flow is good. Thanks for any help and/or thoughts. Was just curious which would be better for the longevity of my system and was thinking running it cooler at lower clocks would be it.