Parallella, Raspberry Pi, FPGA & All That Stuff

Ian&Steve C.
Ian&Steve C.
Joined: 19 Jan 20
Posts: 3,925
Credit: 45,430,042,642
RAC: 63,194,545

Keith Myers wrote: I average

Keith Myers wrote:

I average right around 650 seconds on my Jetson Nano on BRP4 tasks which is only using Cortex-A57 cores.

huh? that's using the GPU

https://einsteinathome.org/task/1544106224

_________________________________________________________________________

stfn
stfn
Joined: 7 Jun 21
Posts: 24
Credit: 90,981,092
RAC: 9,370

Keith Myers wrote: I too was

Keith Myers wrote:

I too was VERY underwhelmed by your runtimes.  I don't see the 3 - 4X improvement over the Pi4.

I just finished doing the same comparison with Asteroids@Home, and wow, with that project the Pi 5 is actually three times faster. Soon I should have a full blog post on it. I wonder what is causing such a massive difference between projects.

Ian&Steve C.
Ian&Steve C.
Joined: 19 Jan 20
Posts: 3,925
Credit: 45,430,042,642
RAC: 63,194,545

stfn wrote:Keith Myers

stfn wrote:

Keith Myers wrote:

I too was VERY underwhelmed by your runtimes.  I don't see the 3 - 4X improvement over the Pi4.

I just finished doing the same comparison with Asteroids@Home, and wow, with that project the Pi 5 is actually three times faster. Soon I should have a full blog post on it. I wonder what is causing such a massive difference between projects.

probably differences in how the app is coded to take advantage of the hardware. did you compare and verify that the Pi5 received the same application as the Pi4b from the project? Asteroids has several different ARM/Pi applications listed.

did you, or will you, do a similar comparison for Universe@home?

_________________________________________________________________________

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 12,627
Credit: 1,839,012,099
RAC: 6,342

stfn wrote: Keith Myers

stfn wrote:

Keith Myers wrote:

I too was VERY underwhelmed by your runtimes.  I don't see the 3 - 4X improvement over the Pi4.

I just finished doing the same comparison with Asteroids@Home, and wow, with that project the Pi 5 is actually three times faster. Soon I should have a full blog post on it. I wonder what is causing such a massive difference between projects. 

Please post a link to your blog about all of the tests you are doing.

stfn
stfn
Joined: 7 Jun 21
Posts: 24
Credit: 90,981,092
RAC: 9,370

Ian&Steve C. wrote: probably

Ian&Steve C. wrote:

probably differences in how the app is coded to take advantage of the hardware. did you compare and verify that the Pi5 received the same application as the Pi4b from the project? Asteroids has several different ARM/Pi applications listed.

did you, or will you, do a similar comparison for Universe@home?

For both Pis the application name was "Period Search Application v102.14", however, for the Pi 5 it was just that, and for the Pi 4 it was "Period Search Application v102.14aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu'. Not sure if that makes any difference, I need to ask that on the A@H forums.

I will do it for U@H, but for that I need to work out how to run 32 bit apps on my 64 bit Pi OS.

And here's the link to my E@H comparison: https://stfn.pl/blog/17-rpi4-rpi5-boinc/

 

 

Keith Myers
Keith Myers
Joined: 11 Feb 11
Posts: 4,952
Credit: 18,590,149,057
RAC: 5,645,197

Ian&Steve C. wrote:Keith

Ian&Steve C. wrote:

Keith Myers wrote:

I average right around 650 seconds on my Jetson Nano on BRP4 tasks which is only using Cortex-A57 cores.

huh? that's using the GPU

https://einsteinathome.org/task/1544106224

Ok, my goof.  Still my Pi4 has better times and it IS NOT using any gpu cores. Running on 3 of the core at the same time.

 

Keith Myers
Keith Myers
Joined: 11 Feb 11
Posts: 4,952
Credit: 18,590,149,057
RAC: 5,645,197

stfn wrote:Ian&Steve C.

stfn wrote:

Ian&Steve C. wrote:

probably differences in how the app is coded to take advantage of the hardware. did you compare and verify that the Pi5 received the same application as the Pi4b from the project? Asteroids has several different ARM/Pi applications listed.

did you, or will you, do a similar comparison for Universe@home?

For both Pis the application name was "Period Search Application v102.14", however, for the Pi 5 it was just that, and for the Pi 4 it was "Period Search Application v102.14aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu'. Not sure if that makes any difference, I need to ask that on the A@H forums.

I will do it for U@H, but for that I need to work out how to run 32 bit apps on my 64 bit Pi OS.

And here's the link to my E@H comparison: https://stfn.pl/blog/17-rpi4-rpi5-boinc/

As long as your distro has the 32 bit libraries available for installation, you can run the U@h apps on a 64 bit Pi.

sudo dpkg --add-architecture armhf

sudo apt update

sudo apt install libstdc++6:armhf libgomp1:armhf libboinc7:armhf

sudo reboot

add this to cc_config.xml.

<alt_platform>arm-unknown-linux-gnueabihf</alt_platform>

 

stfn
stfn
Joined: 7 Jun 21
Posts: 24
Credit: 90,981,092
RAC: 9,370

Hmm, that did not work for

Hmm, that did not work for me, I did those steps and I am not receiving tasks for U@H, I'm just getting Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks in the Event Log. I wonder if it is because I am using Bookworm? Which Pi OS version are you using?

 

Keith Myers
Keith Myers
Joined: 11 Feb 11
Posts: 4,952
Credit: 18,590,149,057
RAC: 5,645,197

I'm running Debian Bullseye

I'm running Debian Bullseye on the Pi4 and Raspbian Bullseye on the Pi 3B+

Here they are at Universe.

Pi4

PI 3B+

Should work from this link.

ARMv7 (EABI hard-float ABI, armhf)

 

stfn
stfn
Joined: 7 Jun 21
Posts: 24
Credit: 90,981,092
RAC: 9,370

Thank you for sharing this,

Thank you for sharing this, but after consideration I just went with the simplest option, I reflashed the SD cards with 32 bit Bookworm and now I'm crunching Universe@Home. Depending on task speed I should have an update in a week or two. Thank you again for inspiring me :)

Comment viewing options

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