MS Windows Beta Test App 4.24 available

DanNeely
DanNeely
Joined: 4 Sep 05
Posts: 1364
Credit: 3562358667
RAC: 1580

RE: My A64x2 2.55gig has

Message 43447 in response to message 43421

Quote:
My A64x2 2.55gig has gone from 22credit/hour to 26credit/hour, which is only a 15% speedup. OTOH my box had a DCF of .5 using the stock app, which would imply that it's limitations hurt p4's more severely to begin with.

Bah! My PC decided to reset it's clocking during the reboot I made right after installing the new app. Running with it at normal speed I'm seeing the expected 35% drop in time. Or to put it the other way, it's a 50% increase in throughput.

With the S5 stock app crunching about 3.5x as fast as the stock s4 one this puts 4.24 at a 5.25x speedup over the s4 albert app, which means it's closed roughly half the remaining gap between 4.02 and akos's best s4 effort.

Tony DeBari
Tony DeBari
Joined: 29 Apr 05
Posts: 30
Credit: 38576823
RAC: 0

RE: First result (a long

Message 43448 in response to message 43427

Quote:

First result (a long WU) with 4.24 beta completed successfully, but is still awaiting validation. Completion time on my Athlon MP 2000+ (dual CPU) was just over 8 hours, compared to just over 12 hours with 4.02. Nice work!

-- Tony


Just thought I'd post an update. The above result has validated successfully, as has this one. Crunch time reduction is holding at ~33%.

I just switched over a P3/500 machine that's doing short WUs in about 5:40. I'll report results as soon as it completes some WUs.

-- Tony

MM
MM
Joined: 6 Jun 06
Posts: 3
Credit: 27255131
RAC: 0

oh my god, i screwed it

oh my god, i screwed it up...

i was really glad to see that something's going on to speed things up.

it was early in the morning, i read through bernd machenschalk's "Switching Apps half way trough a result" and did it that way. no probs at all...

then i started to think...that's when things went down the tube.

i decided to re-rename the beta app to 4.24 again, like "the app_info.xml will do the job". yeah right, end of story: six big fat compute errors.

sadly, i still do not know which malfunctioning part of my brain is to be held responsible for thinking that way.

so to all noobs like me, take your time, stick to the advice given here or set your manager to "no new work" and wait for your cache to drown...and then give it a try.

i'm so sorry for the client errors i caused...let's have a (written) speech act: i swear i won't mess things up the next time.

roadrunner_gs
roadrunner_gs
Joined: 7 Mar 06
Posts: 94
Credit: 3369656
RAC: 0

I only copied the

Message 43450 in response to message 43445

I only copied the application, the xml and the debugfile into the appropriate project folder and restarted the client with all the work in process, WUs in cache were finished with the old 4.02 application, all new queried WUs are now worked at with the new 4.24 application.
What have you done wrong?

Quote:

AMD Opteron 144@1800; 1024MB RAM; Windows XP SP2

WU: 178,76 Credits
4.02: ~ 39562 s
4.24: ~ 26343 s => 33.4% shorter time

AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+@2000; 512MB RAM; Windows XP SP2

WU: 176,90 Credits
4.02: ~ 34720 s
4.24: 23648 s => 31.9% shorter time

Intel Pentium M 1800; 1024MB RAM; Windows XP SP2

WU: 19.58 Credits
4.02: ~ 5378 s
4.24: ~ 3687 s => 31.4% shorter time

The first two clients are einstein@home only, the Pentium M is also used for other purposes i.e. internet surfing, software development, gaming.

Another one comes in:

Intel Pentium M LV 1200; 768MB RAM; Windows XP SP2

WU: 178.21 Credits
4.02: ~ 59654.69 s
4.24: 39516.14 s => 33.8% shorter time

This client now has the same WU-runtime as the Opteron 144 with the 4.02 client.
The speed gained with the 4.24-application is awesome!

As soon as i get to my server i would also enable the 4.24-application for my Pentium D 805 to see what it gets there, but i am in a good mood.

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3145
Credit: 7023494931
RAC: 1808886

RE: Execution time ratio

Message 43451 in response to message 43433

Quote:

Execution time ratio (4.24/4.02)
Banias 0.64
Gallatin HT with Simon's SETIenh 0.72
Coppermine #1 0.74
Coppermine #2 0.82 (estimate from result 51% complete so far)


With more data, some revision:
Banias 0.63
Gallatin HT 0.71
Coppermine #1 0.73
Coppermine #2 0.69

Both Coppermines are on Win98 SE systems. I failed to notice that my weekly antivirus scan had badly distorted reported CPU time on the first result on Coppermine #2--a standard Win98 BOINC problem.

Erik
Erik
Joined: 14 Feb 06
Posts: 2815
Credit: 2645600
RAC: 0

Pentium 4 (2.8) stock

Pentium 4 (2.8)
stock average: 43,500 - 45,000 sec.
beta: 27,800 - 29,100 sec. on 8 granted and 1 pending

[B^S] thierry@home
[B^S] thierry@home
Joined: 19 Feb 05
Posts: 35
Credit: 1250712
RAC: 0

Here are two results: -

Here are two results:

- Win XP Pro sp2
Pentium 4 3.0 HT
RAM 1Gb
Calculation time : 42750 sec

- Win XP Home sp2
Pentium D 2.8
RAM 1Gb
Calculation time : 30934 sec

[pre] [/pre]
Intel I7 930 - GTX 480 - Windows 7 64

Join BOINC Synergy, the best team in the galaxy!

Pepperammi
Pepperammi
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 131
Credit: 437943
RAC: 0

Something went very wrong

Something went very wrong here few hours in.

resultid; 38617164

on this host.

hostid; 544023

groundhog
groundhog
Joined: 11 Feb 05
Posts: 11
Credit: 69280
RAC: 0

Hi folks, a short

Hi folks,

a short question. I unzipped the 4.24-files to the einstein-folder and allowed new work to einstein.

Still my result-summarize shows app 4.02 and in boinc's work-tab as well.

Is this correct?

4343,9 sec CPU-Time for a short result on an XP2800+.

Thx + happy crunchin'

Groundhog


Stick
Stick
Joined: 24 Feb 05
Posts: 790
Credit: 31192054
RAC: 415

Is "Found app_info.xml; using

Message 43456 in response to message 43455

Is "Found app_info.xml; using anonymous platform" in your messages? It should show up in the group of messages written right after restarting BOINC. If it's not there, something went wrong.

Quote:

Hi folks,

a short question. I unzipped the 4.24-files to the einstein-folder and allowed new work to einstein.

Still my result-summarize shows app 4.02 and in boinc's work-tab as well.

Is this correct?

4343,9 sec CPU-Time for a short result on an XP2800+.

Thx + happy crunchin'

Groundhog


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.