SR5, 5.01 Credits down from SR4

ohiomike
ohiomike
Joined: 4 Nov 06
Posts: 80
Credit: 6,453,639
RAC: 0
Topic 194141

Just finished up my first couple of new WUs (MacPro, Intel).
Crunch time is down 4%, credit is down 19%. (Averages)
Slight adjustment needed.


Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3,516
Credit: 485,748,266
RAC: 1,359

SR5, 5.01 Credits down from SR4

Quote:
Just finished up my first couple of new WUs (MacPro, Intel).
Crunch time is down 4%, credit is down 19%. (Averages)
Slight adjustment needed.

At least for Core2 boxes like yours, the average crunch time is definitely down by more than just 4%, should actually be close to 40% or 50% reduction. Have a little patience and see runtime going down for other WUs (runtime variation is much greater now).

CU
Bikeman

ohiomike
ohiomike
Joined: 4 Nov 06
Posts: 80
Credit: 6,453,639
RAC: 0

RE: RE: Just finished up

Message 90087 in response to message 90086

Quote:
Quote:
Just finished up my first couple of new WUs (MacPro, Intel).
Crunch time is down 4%, credit is down 19%. (Averages)
Slight adjustment needed.

At least for Core2 boxes like yours, the average crunch time is definitely down by more than just 4%, should actually be close to 40% or 50% reduction. Have a little patience and see runtime going down for other WUs (runtime variation is much greater now).

CU
Bikeman


Not Core2, Intel X5150 Xeon's in a Mac Pro.
Average of the first 8: they are averaging almost exactly the same times for the S5 WU's that they did for the S4's. That makes the 20% credit reduction hurt a little.
I'm thinking of pausing the Mac WU's and booting the machine under Linux to see if they run better.


Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3,516
Credit: 485,748,266
RAC: 1,359

RE: Not Core2, Intel X5150

Message 90088 in response to message 90087

Quote:

Not Core2, Intel X5150 Xeon's in a Mac Pro.
Average of the first 8: they are averaging almost exactly the same times for the S5 WU's that they did for the S4's. That makes the 20% credit reduction hurt a little.
I'm thinking of pausing the Mac WU's and booting the machine under Linux to see if they run better.

Xeon is the marketing name, it's a Core2 generation microarchitecture CPU nevertheless.

The Mac OS apps are usually the fastest, so I don't have high hopes you'll get better performance under Linux. The credit output is under constant observation and once there are enought datapoints in for various CPUs AND various WU frequency ranges, Bernd will make a decision if/how to re-calibrate. At the moment it looks to me like there will be some adjustments. Please bear with us :-)

CU
Bikeman

EDIT: After inspecting your results, it looks like you were lucky to have a long run of results near the runtime minimun near the end of S5R4, which makes the comparison to S5R5 credit a bit "unfair". Note that some of your S5R4 results took longer than 28000 seconds for a fixed 222 credits, and they were not even at the expected maximum of runtime for that frequency range. As I said, more datapoints are needed.

ohiomike
ohiomike
Joined: 4 Nov 06
Posts: 80
Credit: 6,453,639
RAC: 0

RE: RE: Not Core2, Intel

Message 90089 in response to message 90088

Quote:
Quote:

Not Core2, Intel X5150 Xeon's in a Mac Pro.
Average of the first 8: they are averaging almost exactly the same times for the S5 WU's that they did for the S4's. That makes the 20% credit reduction hurt a little.
I'm thinking of pausing the Mac WU's and booting the machine under Linux to see if they run better.

Xeon is the marketing name, it's a Core2 generation microarchitecture CPU nevertheless.

The Mac OS apps are usually the fastest, so I don't have high hopes you'll get better performance under Linux. The credit output is under constant observation and once there are enought datapoints in for various CPUs AND various WU frequency ranges, Bernd will make a decision if/how to re-calibrate. At the moment it looks to me like there will be some adjustments. Please bear with us :-)

CU
Bikeman

EDIT: After inspecting your results, it looks like you were lucky to have a long run of results near the runtime minimun near the end of S5R4, which makes the comparison to S5R5 credit a bit "unfair". Note that some of your S5R4 results took longer than 28000 seconds for a fixed 222 credits, and they were not even at the expected maximum of runtime for that frequency range. As I said, more datapoints are needed.


I agree, trying to extrapolate data from that few points is dangerous.


Elphidieus
Elphidieus
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 240
Credit: 18,086,033
RAC: 9,261

RE: Xeon is the marketing

Message 90090 in response to message 90088

Quote:

Xeon is the marketing name, it's a Core2 generation microarchitecture CPU nevertheless.

The Mac OS apps are usually the fastest, so I don't have high hopes you'll get better performance under Linux. The credit output is under constant observation and once there are enought datapoints in for various CPUs AND various WU frequency ranges, Bernd will make a decision if/how to re-calibrate. At the moment it looks to me like there will be some adjustments. Please bear with us :-)

A lot of recalibration I would say. I did my own comparison, and I have my doubt about Mac OS apps being the fastest if you were to compare Windows and Linux crunch boxes on top 20 hosts, particularly with R5s... Peanut's Xeon for example, his R5 units are worst off than R4s. I'll soon see my RAC spiraling downwards...

peanut
peanut
Joined: 4 May 07
Posts: 162
Credit: 9,644,812
RAC: 0

It is early in the SR5 game.

It is early in the SR5 game. I haven't been watching things too close lately. But, I think my core duo (not core 2 duo) mac minis are running the new WUs better than my mac pro is. The mac minis seem to be running SR5 WUs faster than they ran the SR4 ones. My Pro does seem to be worse off with the new WUs. Kind of odd that the minis like them and the Pro seems not to. Oh well. With the variations in run times its hard to be sure anything I say is right.

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

Just a rough guess here, but

Just a rough guess here, but it seems like a 10% boost in credit awards would keep cr/hr rates in line with S5R4 rates... I was getting about 25/hr with S5R4 and about 22/hr now...

Sabroe_SMC
Sabroe_SMC
Joined: 9 Oct 06
Posts: 26
Credit: 264,481,923
RAC: 71

It makes me depressive when I

It makes me depressive when I see the credits going down. On my quad it went from about 33 cr/h (S5R4)over 30 cr/h and 27 cr/h to 25 cr/h.
look here and ongoing
The runtimes went down also.

How is the way the creditcalculation is made?

th3
th3
Joined: 24 Aug 06
Posts: 208
Credit: 2,208,434
RAC: 0

RE: It makes me depressive

Message 90094 in response to message 90093

Quote:

It makes me depressive when I see the credits going down. On my quad it went from about 33 cr/h (S5R4)over 30 cr/h and 27 cr/h to 25 cr/h.
look here and ongoing
The runtimes went down also.

How is the way the creditcalculation is made?

I dont care if the credit is down a bit, but i do care about the runtime variation and the credit variation between WUs. Heres the seconds/credit for some of your results:

TaskID WU-ID CPUtime CreditGranted CPUSecPrCredit
115124389 47237042 14925.04 92.03 162.18
115120633 47179809 12520.16 102.97 121.59
115116352 47233275 14404.18 92.52 155.69
115113612 47216963 15116.29 93.51 161.65
115106226 47228509 14584.95 92.89 157.01
115074043 47213773 13856.07 93.97 147.45
115063739 47209043 14847.05 94.21 157.60
115043841 47199929 12279.29 95.83 128.14
115038561 47197496 11525.28 96.76 119.11
115031899 47190761 16104.83 98.11 164.15
115030568 47193797 15750.27 97.08 162.24
115030552 47193789 14310.52 97.42 146.90
115020998 47189336 12151.87 98.47 123.41
115020811 47189245 14968.00 98.83 151.45
115019898 47188807 15761.61 99.21 158.87
115016792 47187359 11606.37 99.59 116.54
115015949 47186962 16561.00 99.99 165.63
115012582 47185399 13464.71 100.39 134.12

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 8,790
Credit: 924,811,891
RAC: 3,068,268

RE: It makes me depressive

Message 90095 in response to message 90093

Quote:

It makes me depressive when I see the credits going down. On my quad it went from about 33 cr/h (S5R4)over 30 cr/h and 27 cr/h to 25 cr/h.
look here and ongoing
The runtimes went down also.

How is the way the creditcalculation is made?

There are sooooo many things that affect how many resources your computer gives to Boinc that there are many things you need to do first. Like rebooting the pc, checking for spyware, etc, etc, etc. Each of those things can slow down your pc. In Windows if you don't reboot about once a month it tends to have too many stuck resources that Windows isn't releasing, which in turn gives Boinc less and can cause a slowdown in crunching time.

Comment viewing options

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