NEW: WINDOWS TEST APPLICATION FOR EINSTEIN@HOME

Udo
Udo
Joined: 19 May 05
Posts: 203
Credit: 8,945,570
RAC: 0

I have access to 3 different

I have access to 3 different CPUs and here are the first results:
1.) Pentium 4 2GHz
E@H 4.79: average 43178 (24 values from 42972 to 43740)
E@H 0.03: average 42060 (04 values from 41529 to 42558)
that is 2.5% faster
2.) Pentium III Xeon 1.4 GHz (dual CPU Server System)
E@H 4.79: average 40856 (24 values from 40746 to 40964)
E@H 0.03: average 44869 (02 values from 44822 to 44916)
that is 10% slower
3.) AMD Athlon XP1700+
E@H 4.79: average 32471 (03 values from 32357 to 32567)
E@H 0.03: no WU finished yet, but estimated usage: 35400
that is 9% slower

Udo

Ocean Archer
Ocean Archer
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 92
Credit: 368,644
RAC: 0

Only running one machine on

Only running one machine on the 0.03 test application -- Celeron 1.0gig with 524meg memory, WindowsME for OS and an nVidia TNT M64 video card ... using the "run always" option in BOINC Manager.

Completed first WU in 84,945.

This is about 20% slower than previous WUs, but since this is only the first result, that figure may change (based on additional returns). Next WU is in process, but estimated time to complete is of similar duration.

ScreenSaver is visible and stable when called (no dropouts), but I don't normally use it in day to day operation here. I'll post again when more data is available.


If I've lived this long - I gotta be that old!

Seaeagle
Seaeagle
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 3
Credit: 118,957
RAC: 0

Completed 3 WU's. All were

Completed 3 WU's. All were between 35 and 40 minutes slower. My average before was 7 hours. CPU is AMD Athlon XP 2500+.
Gregg

Udo
Udo
Joined: 19 May 05
Posts: 203
Credit: 8,945,570
RAC: 0

RE: I have access to 3

Message 12965 in response to message 12962

Quote:
I have access to 3 different CPUs and here are the first results:
...
3.) AMD Athlon XP1700+
E@H 4.79: average 32471 (03 values from 32357 to 32567)
E@H 0.03: no WU finished yet, but estimated usage: 35400
that is 9% slower

The result is indeed 35488 (9.3% slower).

Udo

Don Wright
Don Wright
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 2
Credit: 142,383
RAC: 0

First results of 0.03

First results of 0.03 test:

System is an Athlon XP 2200+ (1800MHz), 512MB; video card is ATI Radeon 7500 series, 64MB RAM. OS is WinXP Pro.

Computed and returned three results, average time 28,660 seconds. Previous results were in 26,100 range.

Can [Show graphics] at will. No graphics seen under previous version.
Can select BOINC screensaver and [Preview] at will.
Screensaver activates and deactivates normally.

No problems noted. --Don

Divide Overflow
Divide Overflow
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 91
Credit: 183,220
RAC: 0

RE: RE: It would be cool

Message 12967 in response to message 12961

Quote:
Quote:
It would be cool if you could eventually compile an SSE, SSE2, SSE3 version for Windows.

I once compiled the code with SSE optimization and found it to be about 1% faster than without, so there's not much in the normal code that the compiler found to be suitable for SSE.

Over at SETI@home, there has been some significant success increasing the performance of their application by using a modern, up-to-date compiler (Intel C++ v9.0). They were able to furhter increase performance by utilizing FFTW / IPP library v4.1. I'm not aware of the data processing methods the Einstein@home application is executing, but perhaps there's some value in exploring the same approach?

Vid Vidmar*
Vid Vidmar*
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 25
Credit: 191,816
RAC: 0

My first WU done with v. 0.03

My first WU done with v. 0.03 validated ok and finished a couple of hundred seconds faster than stock client.

Happy crunching,

Ocean Archer
Ocean Archer
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 92
Credit: 368,644
RAC: 0

Only running one machine on

Only running one machine on the 0.03 test application -- Celeron 1.0gig with 524meg memory, WindowsME for OS and an nVidia TNT M64 video card ... using the "run always" option in BOINC Manager.

Completed second WU in 84,213.

Looks like as long as I keep crunchin' 24/7, I'll be the high side limit for claimed credit. Elapsed time remains at 20% above previously reported values, so to get close to everybody else I can only hope that someone puts together an 'optimized' version for us users with old PIII machines ....


If I've lived this long - I gotta be that old!

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,136
Credit: 230,728,144
RAC: 18,065

RE: My first WU done with

Message 12970 in response to message 12968

Quote:
My first WU done with v. 0.03 validated ok and finished a couple of hundred seconds faster than stock client.

Oh - faster? What machine (CPU)?

BM

BM

Jord
Joined: 26 Jan 05
Posts: 2,952
Credit: 5,779,100
RAC: 0

Okay, I just ended crunching

Okay, I just ended crunching my one unit with the normal client. Will now crunch one with the 0.03 client and check results afterwards. It's nice to see that the graphics are working again, but I do miss the interactive keys we had in Pirates. :(

Comment viewing options

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