S39L Observation Thread

Stef
Stef
Joined: 8 Mar 05
Posts: 206
Credit: 110,568,193
RAC: 0

Here are the results for my

Here are the results for my P3s comparing S39L to S39:

P3mobile 1GHz: 2.9% faster
P3T 1.26GHz: 5.5% faster

bloed_brot
bloed_brot
Joined: 5 Apr 05
Posts: 70
Credit: 91,124,558
RAC: 0

On Dothan 1,73: -

On Dothan 1,73: - ~6,4%

great work akosf!

:
your thoughts - the ways :: the knowledge - your space
:

DanNeely
DanNeely
Joined: 4 Sep 05
Posts: 1,364
Credit: 3,562,358,667
RAC: 0

About 5% better on my a64x2

About 5% better on my a64x2 2.4gig.

Is the smaller working set size showing itself in reduced 'register misses', or less data needing pulled from the L2 cache/ram after a different app is ran. With my machine being dualcore, if the cores don't share cache that could be some of the gain as well, but couldn't explain why single core procs also saw a gain.

Akos Fekete
Akos Fekete
Joined: 13 Nov 05
Posts: 561
Credit: 4,527,270
RAC: 0

RE: Here are the results

Message 26326 in response to message 26323

Quote:

Here are the results for my P3s comparing S39L to S39:

P3mobile 1GHz: 2.9% faster
P3T 1.26GHz: 5.5% faster

The second surprise.
I was waiting these results, but I expected bigger difference before them.
Thanks Stef!

Quote:
great work akosf!

Thank all crunchers!

anders n
anders n
Joined: 29 Aug 05
Posts: 123
Credit: 1,656,300
RAC: 0

AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor

AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3400+ comparing S39L to S39: -5%
Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz : -5,5%

Great work akosf :)

Anders n

Rojer
Rojer
Joined: 2 Apr 05
Posts: 23
Credit: 49,400,244
RAC: 0

A64 3200+ @2.5GHz from

A64 3200+ @2.5GHz
from 3388s(s39) down to 3270s(s39L)
:)

Wish you can understand my English:)

BulldogMcC
BulldogMcC
Joined: 7 Mar 06
Posts: 3
Credit: 108,214
RAC: 0

~13K seconds C37 ~11K seconds

~13K seconds C37
~11K seconds S38 = ~85% of the C37 Time
~7.8K seconds S39L = ~60% of the C37 time, ~71% of the S38 time

I never tried the standard client nor the S39. These times are on a P4 520 Prescott 2.8 that has only a 16K L1 cache.

My Laptop however, a Pentium M Banias 1.4GHz with 32K L1 cache is flying through the results ad did the first unit in 1797.5 seconds, the second unit is going much slower so we will see what the average is.

How can we tell if we are getting the small or large work units?

Santas little helper
Santas little helper
Joined: 11 Feb 05
Posts: 36
Credit: 6,047,527
RAC: 21,035

RE: How can we tell if we

Message 26330 in response to message 26329

Quote:

How can we tell if we are getting the small or large work units?

I suggest that this occurs because of the two different ligo sites. So there are "r" units and "z" units. I experienced the r wus to be smaller so they are getting done earlier but tell me if I'm wrong.

Greetings, Santas little helper

Michael Roycraft
Michael Roycraft
Joined: 10 Mar 05
Posts: 846
Credit: 157,718
RAC: 0

RE: How can we tell if we

Message 26331 in response to message 26329

Quote:
How can we tell if we are getting the small or large work units?

The name of the small one starts with "z"

microcraft
"The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice" - MLK

Elphidieus
Elphidieus
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 245
Credit: 20,603,702
RAC: 0

RE: RE: How can we tell

Message 26332 in response to message 26330

Quote:
Quote:

How can we tell if we are getting the small or large work units?

I suggest that this occurs because of the two different ligo sites. So there are "r" units and "z" units. I experienced the r wus to be smaller so they are getting done earlier but tell me if I'm wrong.

i doubt that this is accurate.....

Currently I do have "r" units which are larger and "z" units which are smaller....

Comment viewing options

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