Preparing S5R4 - No new Apps for S5R3

Byron S Goodgame
Byron S Goodgame
Joined: 16 Jan 06
Posts: 187
Credit: 56,581
RAC: 0

RE: @Byron: I really can't

Message 82111 in response to message 82110

Quote:

@Byron: I really can't make a prediction, as I cannot speak for the official dev team. I personally would *not* expect this to happen in the next 3 or 4 weeks or so.

CU
Bikeman


Thanks again Bikeman.

Winterknight
Winterknight
Joined: 4 Jun 05
Posts: 1,281
Credit: 337,452,043
RAC: 499,421

It would, in my opinion be a

It would, in my opinion be a good idea to put more thought into getting a Win SSE2 version out asap, considering that, according to BOINCStats, there are 50% more windows computers that all other operating systems.
Any increase in windows performance will give a bigger increase in Einsteins throughput, than concentrating on 'nix or its close cousin version for the macs.

Some of us are stuck with windows, whether we like it or not.

Richard Haselgrove
Richard Haselgrove
Joined: 10 Dec 05
Posts: 2,142
Credit: 2,793,618,257
RAC: 695,161

RE: It would, in my opinion

Message 82113 in response to message 82112

Quote:

It would, in my opinion be a good idea to put more thought into getting a Win SSE2 version out asap, considering that, according to BOINCStats, there are 50% more windows computers that all other operating systems.
Any increase in windows performance will give a bigger increase in Einsteins throughput, than concentrating on 'nix or its close cousin version for the macs.

Some of us are stuck with windows, whether we like it or not.


But if the reference app shows almost no difference between the speed of SSE and SSE2 under Linux (green and purple lines), what makes you think there'll be a big improvement under Windows?

I think it would be a better use of scarce developer time to continue to migrate the code-base to a cross-platform compiler, and then continue hand-crafting the "hotloos" (as Bikeman called them - love it. Makes 'em run.) to the benefit of all.

M. Schmitt
M. Schmitt
Joined: 27 Jun 05
Posts: 478
Credit: 15,872,262
RAC: 0

Sorry, but the ref-app does

Sorry, but the ref-app does not meet the reality. While the SSE-app mostly speeds up the longer WUs, the SSE2 app gives an additionaml kick to the shorter WUs, but also speeds up the longer ones an bit more.

cu,
Michael

Brian Silvers
Brian Silvers
Joined: 26 Aug 05
Posts: 772
Credit: 282,700
RAC: 0

RE: Using gcc for *all*

Message 82115 in response to message 82110

Quote:
Using gcc for *all* major platforms would be nice (in my opinion) mainly because it simplifies the development environment.

At one point, Bernd made some sort of statement about considering ICC/IPP/MKL

Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3,522
Credit: 692,137,310
RAC: 27,643

RE: RE: Using gcc for

Message 82116 in response to message 82115

Quote:
Quote:
Using gcc for *all* major platforms would be nice (in my opinion) mainly because it simplifies the development environment.

At one point, Bernd made some sort of statement about considering ICC/IPP/MKL

Yes, but I think this one is more recent and reflects current preferences.
CU
Bikeman

Winterknight
Winterknight
Joined: 4 Jun 05
Posts: 1,281
Credit: 337,452,043
RAC: 499,421

RE: RE: It would, in my

Message 82117 in response to message 82113

Quote:
Quote:

It would, in my opinion be a good idea to put more thought into getting a Win SSE2 version out asap, considering that, according to BOINCStats, there are 50% more windows computers that all other operating systems.
Any increase in windows performance will give a bigger increase in Einsteins throughput, than concentrating on 'nix or its close cousin version for the macs.

Some of us are stuck with windows, whether we like it or not.


But if the reference app shows almost no difference between the speed of SSE and SSE2 under Linux (green and purple lines), what makes you think there'll be a big improvement under Windows?

I think it would be a better use of scarce developer time to continue to migrate the code-base to a cross-platform compiler, and then continue hand-crafting the "hotloos" (as Bikeman called them - love it. Makes 'em run.) to the benefit of all.


All the evidence from the linux hosts compared to win hosts during latter stages of S5R3, running proper tasks, not test apps. I did a run of about 20 tasks with the same wingman who was going about 8% faster than me on an 8 core e5430 Xeon running linux, pity, but all wiped away now from my results page.

Brian Silvers
Brian Silvers
Joined: 26 Aug 05
Posts: 772
Credit: 282,700
RAC: 0

RE: But if the reference

Message 82118 in response to message 82113

Quote:

But if the reference app shows almost no difference between the speed of SSE and SSE2 under Linux (green and purple lines), what makes you think there'll be a big improvement under Windows?

That graph does explicitly show the significant difference between the Windows and Linux SSE apps though. Whatever the difference between those two lines (red and green) is what the focus needs to be. If that is achieved by migrating the code-base to a cross-platform complier, then by all means, let's Git R Done... Hopefully that will bring the Windows and Linux apps much closer to each other instead of the 20%+ advantage the Linux app currently enjoys.

MEX
MEX
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 7
Credit: 7,632
RAC: 0

RE: ... Hopefully that

Message 82119 in response to message 82118

Quote:
... Hopefully that will bring the Windows and Linux apps much closer to each other instead of the 20%+ advantage the Linux app currently enjoys.

In the good old days of CLASSIC SETI@home I was able to get up to 30% advantage when switching to a lower runlevel ( no Xserver ! ) while running the client when I was away from my computer.

As long as you don't measure the CPU time scheduled to the application, there will always be differences as some OS are more efficient than others ( even if you install the same OS to the same hardware, other programs installed by admins and/or users will lead to noticeable differences :rollingeyes: )

Quote:

... Note that the new stock apps come in bundles of two or three executables:

einstein*_0 is for legacy PCs (no SSE support)
einstein*_1 is used for SSE enabled PCs
einstein*_2 (Linux only at the moment) is for SSE2 enabled PCs

Intel-Macs are all SSE2 enabled...

What about apps for my PS3 with Fedora 9 ?
will then stand _0 for legacy PPC (without Altivec), _1 for PPC64 with Altivec and _2 for cell specific code using the 6 available SPU of my PS3 instead of only the PPC core ?

MfG, MEX

Brian Silvers
Brian Silvers
Joined: 26 Aug 05
Posts: 772
Credit: 282,700
RAC: 0

RE: RE: ... Hopefully

Message 82120 in response to message 82119

Quote:
Quote:
... Hopefully that will bring the Windows and Linux apps much closer to each other instead of the 20%+ advantage the Linux app currently enjoys.

In the good old days of CLASSIC SETI@home I was able to get up to 30% advantage when switching to a lower runlevel ( no Xserver ! ) while running the client when I was away from my computer.

As long as you don't measure the CPU time scheduled to the application, there will always be differences as some OS are more efficient than others ( even if you install the same OS to the same hardware, other programs installed by admins and/or users will lead to noticeable differences :rollingeyes: )

True enough, but that's why I'm also willing to accept a target range. Preferred range (for me) is 3-5%. My XP installation is tweaked to have only the absolute required services running. I don't run out and install "Mega-Cool" freeware / shareware applications which can have "hidden treasures" in them...

Also, SETI Classic had a Windows command line app as well. I'd be curious if you are meaning 30% runtime improvement over a Windows host with the exact same hardware specs as your system running the Windows command line app...or if you were comparing something else...

Comment viewing options

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