Windows S5R3 SSE power App 4.36 available

It happens that I have switched over whilst I am doing frequency 903.85 and sequence 420 (about 50% done with 4.32). This happens to be the trough of the cycle I am running down.

Sequence unit 421 done on 4.32 was under 27,000 seconds, which I was happy with, if this goes faster still I will be VERY happy.

A 10% improvement on say 26,500 seconds will lower the time to 23,850 seconds and a 20% improvement will lower to 21,200 seconds, so I will wait and see how it goes.

I will very happy with 10% improvement.
It also means my peak times are much lower as well.

Congratulations to the Einstein Project Team for the continued improvement to the programmes we are running for them.

First estimates from Mike's Ready Reckoner:

App 4.32:

		Estimated peak runtime = 28911
		Estimated average runtime = 24106
		Estimated trough runtime = 21363
		Estimated runtime variance = 0.261

App 4.36:

		Estimated peak runtime = 20473
		Estimated average runtime = 19143
		Estimated trough runtime = 18384
		Estimated runtime variance = 0.102

Same host, same frequency.

I've been wondering whether 4.36 gives a big reduction in variance. Your estimate suggests this is spectacular. (.261 going down to .102)

This morning I did some selective pausing to move a few results pretty near peaks into play. With that aid to accuracy, my E6600 shows:

          Estimated peak runtime = 16305
		Estimated average runtime = 14697
		Estimated trough runtime = 13779
		Estimated runtime variance = 0.155

for 4.36, compared to

		Estimated peak runtime = 23119
		Estimated average runtime = 19229
		Estimated trough runtime = 17008
		Estimated runtime variance = 0.264

for 4.32 which is almost a 31% improvement in estimated productivity, and considerable reduction, in variance, though not to so low a level as the estimate you show.

For my Q6600:

		Estimated peak runtime = 16923
		Estimated average runtime = 15232
		Estimated trough runtime = 14266
		Estimated runtime variance = 0.157

for 4.36

		Estimated peak runtime = 23909
		Estimated average runtime = 19926
		Estimated trough runtime = 17652
		Estimated runtime variance = 0.262

for 4.32

I have some reservations about the model fit, especially for the Q6600, where there is more noise in the CPU times than is good for Ready Reckoner's digestion, but I have no reservations about saying that for Conroe-type Windows XP hosts 4.36 is a major improvement over 4.32, by rather more than 20% on the average, and possibly near or even over the upper end of my first estimate of 20 to 30% productivity per hour improvement, with a considerable reduction of variance from recent versions.