S39 Observation Thread

My diverse Intel fleet has S-39 full results on all four types I own without error. Also each has completed at least one mixed S-38, S-39 result without error.

No validations yet to report.

Speedup initial observations are somewhat variable, with my P4 HT EE (original Northwood-derived type, not Prescott-derived) seeing .70 CPU time on S-39 compare to S-38, my Pentium M (Banias) seeing about .80, but my Pentium III and Pentium II seem somewhat slowed down. As the last two were the most improved by S-38, this means all four now have a more closely matched improvement relative to the project distributed science application.
[pre]
CPU S-39/S-38 S-39/dist
P4 .70 .30
Banias .80 .22
PIII 1.05 .27
PII 1.07 .28
[/pre]

My initial results from my PII and PIII suggest that S-39 actually slowed them down by 5 to 7% compared to S-38. I would be eager to hear from others running these older CPUs, which were so hugely helped by C-37 and S-38. Possibly akosf's S-39 trick is less suitable to those older machines.

Should you check my computers yourself, here are two cautions:
1. I use trux's calibrating client, and it is just kicking in with adjustments, rapidly changing from results to result--making the the summary table CPU times unsuitable for this comparison. One can get the unadjusted CPU time to the nearest second from the individual result report. (very roughly it has taken about 30 results since my original conversion to C-37 from dist for the calibrating client to hit breakeven--the P4 got there a while ago, but the others are just getting there now. With the lag time of the calibration, and further akosf version improvement, none are anywhere stable. I should start another thread to discuss this, but I feel that using the calibrating client will help reduce penalizing non-converted users and the project as a whole for this improvement.)
2. The major datafile in use has switched back and forth--making result sample selection for comparison critical. Ignoring this, or just demarking them as "long" vs. "short" is not adequate for even modestly accurate comparison.

First result on my Sempron 3000+ validated fine against 2 windows host running the standard client.
S39/S38=0.93

It appears that by bad luck your disk usage exceeded the limit you set in your preferences at this point. You may wish to go to the general preferences link on your account page and adjust the disk limits, assuming your system has room for more. You appear to be allowing 100 Megabytes.