Windows Vs. Linux

kdog
kdog
Joined: 6 Jan 06
Posts: 7
Credit: 398,563
RAC: 0
Topic 190593

I have read that work times on a linux based system is longer than the windows OS. I would like to set up a couple of linux machines, I have been using mandriva, how much slower should I expect it to be if at all. Also I am new to linux and was wondering how complicaded these Bionc apps are to install..thx

tullio
tullio
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 2,022
Credit: 32,517,759
RAC: 10,728

Windows Vs. Linux

Quote:
I have read that work times on a linux based system is longer than the windows OS. I would like to set up a couple of linux machines, I have been using mandriva, how much slower should I expect it to be if at all. Also I am new to linux and was wondering how complicaded these Bionc apps are to install..thx


I am running BOINC on a SuSE 9.3 Linux box, Pentium II CPU, with no problem for installing it, Einstein@home and Seti@home run for 3 clocktime hours and 1 hour alternatively, with share of 300 and 100. An Einstein WU was completed in abouut 50 hours of CPU time, a Seti in 13 hours. An Albert WU is completed.in a time from 30 to 40 hours. Of course my CPU clock is a ridiculous 400 MHz by modern standard, but both deadlines are easily met. My Albert client is standard, my Seti client is optimized for FFT. Cheers.
Tullio

Michael Karlinsky
Michael Karlinsky
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 888
Credit: 22,245,334
RAC: 0

There is no significant

There is no significant difference in runtime anymore and installation,
if it can be called that, is no more than running a shell script, the one you
download, once.

Welcome to E@H

Michael

Paul D. Buck
Paul D. Buck
Joined: 17 Jan 05
Posts: 754
Credit: 5,385,205
RAC: 0

There is an install guide in

There is an install guide in the Wiki for Linux. YMMV ... but it is a start ...

Robert Somerville
Robert Somerville
Joined: 11 Nov 04
Posts: 27
Credit: 21,819
RAC: 0

RE: RE: There is no

Message 24017 in response to (parent removed)

Quote:
Quote:

There is no significant difference in runtime anymore and installation,
if it can be called that, is no more than running a shell script, the one you
download, once.

Welcome to E@H

Michael


is this really true??? I gave up on E@HOME because of very poor Linux performance, & i got sick of running it under Wine emulator .

Robert Somerville

Jordan Wilberding
Jordan Wilberding
Joined: 19 Feb 05
Posts: 162
Credit: 715,454
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: There is no

Message 24018 in response to message 24017

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

There is no significant difference in runtime anymore and installation,
if it can be called that, is no more than running a shell script, the one you
download, once.

Welcome to E@H

Michael


is this really true??? I gave up on E@HOME because of very poor Linux performance, & i got sick of running it under Wine emulator .

There isn't a need to run under wine anymore, the linux binaries are finally optimized to where they run perfectly well on their own.

such things just should not be writ so please destroy this if you wish to live 'tis better in ignorance to dwell than to go screaming into the abyss worse than hell

Michael Karlinsky
Michael Karlinsky
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 888
Credit: 22,245,334
RAC: 0

This is confirmed for Intel

This is confirmed for Intel CPUs at least. Needs to be confirmed
for AMD, see thread1 and thread2.

Michael

Jordan Wilberding
Jordan Wilberding
Joined: 19 Feb 05
Posts: 162
Credit: 715,454
RAC: 0

RE: This is confirmed for

Message 24020 in response to message 24019

Quote:

This is confirmed for Intel CPUs at least. Needs to be confirmed
for AMD, see thread1 and thread2.

Michael

I use several AMD chips, the performance without wine is just as good, if not better than with it.

such things just should not be writ so please destroy this if you wish to live 'tis better in ignorance to dwell than to go screaming into the abyss worse than hell

Comment viewing options

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