I got a couple which took about 50 hours on my 1.6 GHz C1D- also quite fat little WUs I would say ;-) But I don't really mind as I use this notebook daily, for uni and so. I'm curious if the one I recently downloaded on my desktop PC (3500+) is really going to take 80 hours or if the estimate was off. That would be a new record for me; 50 is the longest I had so far.
Btw, Telchar, nice overclock. How did you get the CPU to run at that speed; did you use the "official" tools? Mine only runs at the standard 2200 MHz...
But i had to raise the vcore from 1.4 to 1.5 Volt, what needs a more or less good cooling and some testing. Without raising the vcore i can run it at 2350 Mhz (214 Mhz HT (FSB)). I didnt use any tools, just set this in my BIOS, then set down the RAM Multiplicator (so the RAM isnt overclocked too much) and thats it... Its just important not to set it from 2200 MHz to 2300 or so in one Step, but take little step and test if everythings runs fine... (specially Prime95)
I'm curious if the one I recently downloaded on my desktop PC (3500+) is really going to take 80 hours or if the estimate was off.
My guess is that the estimate is off. Even doubling my time would only get you up to around 186000 seconds, or 51.67 hours. I doubt that your 3500 will be half as fast as my 3700, even considering that I have a more substantial overclock than Telchar (my 3700+ is running at 2750, up from the default of 2200). I would guess that it will probably run about 32-34 hours...
Edit: I should note that the 93000 seconds is for a 391.16 credit result, which is one of the largest results that I've seen...
So far I have completed 4 that all produced just over 205 pts in approx. 18.75 hrs and 1 produced approx. 165 pts. in about 15.75 hrs on an Athlon 64 XP 3200.
The credits given per unit of time was only about 60% of what I got when running the R1s.
Gary
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.....Douglas Adams
... I'm an aging baby boomer who graduated with a minor in physics and astronomy many, many years ago, and still like to take my C-8 out at least once a month, but sometimes I wish to h*ll I could figure out what you youngsters are talkin' about.. ...
@F. Prefect... only 60% is really not great. I fear it comes from running Windows; atm the science app has some problems under Windows. Intel chips cope quite okay, AMDs don't. The crunchers with Linux experience mostly took pains to have their boxes run Linux, the others just hope for a really quick fix...
I've got a strange WU. Both hosts have returned successful results,
but instead of granting credit a third host was issued the same WU a few minutes after the 2nd result was returned.
Any ideas?
I've got a strange WU. Both hosts have returned successful results,
but instead of granting credit a third host was issued the same WU a few minutes after the 2nd result was returned.
Any ideas?
In the result detail for each of the two results returned so far it says
Checked, but no consensus yet
So the validation process deemed the two results insufficiently similar.
I'll speculate that at least one of the two CPUs committed error, but not of a kind that generated a access violation or one of the (few) other things that get caught at run time.
I got a couple which took
)
I got a couple which took about 50 hours on my 1.6 GHz C1D- also quite fat little WUs I would say ;-) But I don't really mind as I use this notebook daily, for uni and so. I'm curious if the one I recently downloaded on my desktop PC (3500+) is really going to take 80 hours or if the estimate was off. That would be a new record for me; 50 is the longest I had so far.
Btw, Telchar, nice overclock. How did you get the CPU to run at that speed; did you use the "official" tools? Mine only runs at the standard 2200 MHz...
hmm, thats not too much
)
hmm, thats not too much overclock i think.
But i had to raise the vcore from 1.4 to 1.5 Volt, what needs a more or less good cooling and some testing. Without raising the vcore i can run it at 2350 Mhz (214 Mhz HT (FSB)). I didnt use any tools, just set this in my BIOS, then set down the RAM Multiplicator (so the RAM isnt overclocked too much) and thats it... Its just important not to set it from 2200 MHz to 2300 or so in one Step, but take little step and test if everythings runs fine... (specially Prime95)
RE: I'm curious if the one
)
My guess is that the estimate is off. Even doubling my time would only get you up to around 186000 seconds, or 51.67 hours. I doubt that your 3500 will be half as fast as my 3700, even considering that I have a more substantial overclock than Telchar (my 3700+ is running at 2750, up from the default of 2200). I would guess that it will probably run about 32-34 hours...
Edit: I should note that the 93000 seconds is for a 391.16 credit result, which is one of the largest results that I've seen...
So far I have completed 4
)
So far I have completed 4 that all produced just over 205 pts in approx. 18.75 hrs and 1 produced approx. 165 pts. in about 15.75 hrs on an Athlon 64 XP 3200.
The credits given per unit of time was only about 60% of what I got when running the R1s.
Gary
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.....Douglas Adams
RE: ... I'm an aging baby
)
Halloween 1958 rollout here :-)
@F. Prefect... only 60% is
)
@F. Prefect... only 60% is really not great. I fear it comes from running Windows; atm the science app has some problems under Windows. Intel chips cope quite okay, AMDs don't. The crunchers with Linux experience mostly took pains to have their boxes run Linux, the others just hope for a really quick fix...
I've got a strange WU. Both
)
I've got a strange WU. Both hosts have returned successful results,
but instead of granting credit a third host was issued the same WU a few minutes after the 2nd result was returned.
Any ideas?
Regards, Dick
http://einsteinathome.org/workunit/33216888
Wow.... the Floating Point
)
Wow.... the Floating Point Speed is taking a steep dive...!!!
Any ideas why?
Since the einstien app isn't
)
Since the einstien app isn't a flop counter I assume it's based on benchmarks and DCF in some manor. s5r2 has a much higher DCF than s5r1 did.
RE: I've got a strange WU.
)
In the result detail for each of the two results returned so far it says
Checked, but no consensus yet
So the validation process deemed the two results insufficiently similar.
I'll speculate that at least one of the two CPUs committed error, but not of a kind that generated a access violation or one of the (few) other things that get caught at run time.