U41.xx Observation Thread

Akos Fekete
Akos Fekete
Joined: 13 Nov 05
Posts: 560
Credit: 4,510,638
RAC: 0

report on

report on U41.02/03/04:

valid:17
invalid:0

Dave Burbank
Dave Burbank
Joined: 30 Jan 06
Posts: 275
Credit: 1,548,376
RAC: 0

U41.02/.03/.04 (more done

Message 30167 in response to message 30166

U41.02/.03/.04 (more done with .02/.03 than .04)

valid: 51
invalid: 0

Akos, looks like you solved the ivalid result problem nice and quick!
Excellent work.

There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers. - Richard Feynman

MecRipper
MecRipper
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 5
Credit: 3,063,368
RAC: 0

my Result with "Pentium 4 -

my Result with "Pentium 4 - 630" :

U41.04 = 9,838.84 sec
S40 = 8,634.41 sec

best version is S40 ;)

i wait new version... :/

MecRipper
MecRipper
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 5
Credit: 3,063,368
RAC: 0

sorry... 2 post.... for lag

sorry... 2 post.... for lag :/

Jayargh
Jayargh
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 64
Credit: 1,205,159
RAC: 0

RE: RE: It would seem

Message 30170 in response to message 30165

Quote:
Quote:
It would seem that Intels sse3 library takes to these opts very poorly compared to the improvements the AMD's are reporting, Is it possible akosf that something in the setup of the Intel is missing that AMD has and needs to be compensated for?
I often discovered that AMD's float-point unit are more flexible than Intel's one. I hope that it will changed by the 'Core'.
Probably i will adjust S41.07 on a Northwood to get higher speed. -> S41.07i
(Sorry but i don't have SSE3 capable intel processor, but i will buy a Conroe.)

Thank-you akosf as my 2.8 Northwood is the slowest comparably to everything else I have as it takes 8-9k secs in HT mode using S39L. My P3 using S41.06 does them in 11k secs. So it would appear there is much room for improvement for sse2. Thanks again akosf for all you do

LucaB76 - BOINC.Italy
LucaB76 - BOINC...
Joined: 16 Jan 06
Posts: 14
Credit: 754,232
RAC: 0

Stats for my Intel P4 3.0Ghz

Stats for my Intel P4 3.0Ghz Prescott (with SSE3) Hyper-Threaded:

S41.06 => 5273s (mean of 12 results) => 1.00
U41.04 => 4868s (mean of 4 results by now) => 0.93 (7% gain)
S41.07 => To test soon!

One thread on Einstein and the other one on Seti to reduce overhead and bottlenecks... it works!! All valid results!

Should I try even the S39L in your opinion?

Thanks for your precious work, Akos!
And see you later for more stats!

Akos Fekete
Akos Fekete
Joined: 13 Nov 05
Posts: 560
Credit: 4,510,638
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: Is it

Message 30172 in response to message 30170

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Is it possible akosf that something in the setup of the Intel is missing that AMD has and needs to be compensated for?
Probably i will adjust S41.07 on a Northwood to get higher speed. -> S41.07i
Thank-you akosf as my 2.8 Northwood is the slowest comparably to everything else I have as it takes 8-9k secs in HT mode using S39L. My P3 using S41.06 does them in 11k secs. So it would appear there is much room for improvement for sse2. Thanks again akosf for all you do

So, I did a speed-test on my Pentium4-M Northwood 1,8GHz with the same workunit. The result didn't surprise me.

S39L: 7493 sec
S40.4: 6675 sec
S41.07: 5351 sec (~40% faster than S39L)

Akos Fekete
Akos Fekete
Joined: 13 Nov 05
Posts: 560
Credit: 4,510,638
RAC: 0

RE: Stats for my Intel P4

Message 30173 in response to message 30171

Quote:

Stats for my Intel P4 3.0Ghz Prescott (with SSE3) Hyper-Threaded:

S41.06 => 5273s (mean of 12 results) => 1.00
U41.04 => 4868s (mean of 4 results by now) => 0.93 (7% gain)
S41.07 => To test soon!

Should I try even the S39L in your opinion?

It would be really good to clarify the speedups (or speeddowns) on Prescotts. Thanks.

B52
B52
Joined: 19 Feb 05
Posts: 45
Credit: 273,899
RAC: 0

RE: RE: Stats for my

Message 30174 in response to message 30173

Quote:
Quote:

Stats for my Intel P4 3.0Ghz Prescott (with SSE3) Hyper-Threaded:

S41.06 => 5273s (mean of 12 results) => 1.00
U41.04 => 4868s (mean of 4 results by now) => 0.93 (7% gain)
S41.07 => To test soon!

Should I try even the S39L in your opinion?

It would be really good to clarify the speedups (or speeddowns) on Prescotts. Thanks.

Hi akosf

As stated earlier by other, and tested by me, then its an HT penalty. Running HT on my Prescott 3.0 ghz, I found that S39L and S40.04 was the fastest ones. ALL other bins were slower.

So Mr. Pernod suggested that I updated my einstein prefs to say "use only 1 cpu" and in that way allocate all resources (cpu cycles, L1 and L2 cache) to a single exe. I did that and at once I had amazing speedups. Later I upgraded from S40.04 to S41.06 and had even greater speedups.

Running S40.04 in HT mode, a wu took approx. 2.30 hours. After "disabling" HT mode S41.06 took 55 mins.

This means that in HT mode a wu took approx. 1.15 mins, now 55 mins.

Hope this clarifies my situation.

BTW, I'm currently testing 41.04 on this Prescott, and it seems faster than S41.06 in this configuration (a single exe running)

LucaB76 - BOINC.Italy
LucaB76 - BOINC...
Joined: 16 Jan 06
Posts: 14
Credit: 754,232
RAC: 0

RE: It would be really good

Message 30175 in response to message 30173

Quote:
It would be really good to clarify the speedups (or speeddowns) on Prescotts. Thanks.


It would be a pleasure!! ;-)
The wu running at the moment is crunched with U41.04. Next I'll try a run of at least 5 wu with S41.07. This evening I'll post the results!

Comment viewing options

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