I'm now seeing completed quora for my S39L WUs. Claimed credits are peanuts. Actuals are typically 3.5 to 4 times the claims! I'm starting to feel guilty...
I run trux's calibrating client for this reason. Otherwise folks running the distributed ap will start to get caught in quora with folks running the optimized ap and be discouraged by the sudden drop in their credit. If you are interested, see truXoft Calibrating Client
I'm curious and confused actually..., I still fail to see what the calibration client really does even out the claims, when in fact the optimised client crunches WU in a far shorter amount of time, the overall RAC of the optimised clients is still theoretically, increases, relative to the quora of distributed clients...
unless this is made beneficial to those running multiple projects.....
I still fail to see what the calibration client really does even out the claims, when in fact the optimised client crunches WU in a far shorter amount of time, the overall RAC of the optimised clients is still theoretically, increases, relative to the quora of distributed clients...
unless this is made beneficial to those running multiple projects.....
When an infinitesimal number of folks are running low-claiming setups, their result is always the low claim in the quorum and gets discarded, so the effect is just selection bias--though still not zero. But when the fraction rises, others start noticing that low claims are dragging down their results.
This happened on SETI when P4 chips and others with better crunch relative to benchmark showed up. It got much more so with the "optimized" science applications. Based on posted comments, this effect directly influenced many decisions to leave the project.
The calibrating client is an attempt to claim in line with the useful science performed. While it is not entirely successful (for one thing, it takes about 30 results to train itself when started up fresh on a stable setup, and longer than that to react to a drastic shift such as the recent 4x improvement going for dist to S39L) but better than other solutions I know of.
Yes. Rytis wanted to forbid me because my Duron was faster than others.
His goal was to do a working BOINC application, not a faster one. :)
Your comment about this project being a planetheater is indeed an ironic one! The fossil fuel consumption necessary to run this project by powering all the computers crunching at less than maximum effiency will contribute to the greenhouse gases that are warming the planet..... :(
SETI has some very good optimised code.
I spent an afternoon to optimise it, and I could get just 10% improvement. (Crunch3r's Athlon XP SSE 2.09)
You mean, you had squeezed out another 10% out of a binary from Crunch3r? *wow*
Can I download that modified binary somewhere ;) ? Ten percent better is a good reason for me to try it :))
I upload to here. It was optimised to Duron (64+64kB cache), so don't rely on better time on other processors.
But, I think it will catch up the SSE3 code on A64 and P4.
SETI has some very good optimised code.
I spent an afternoon to optimise it, and I could get just 10% improvement. (Crunch3r's Athlon XP SSE 2.09)
You mean, you had squeezed out another 10% out of a binary from Crunch3r? *wow*
Can I download that modified binary somewhere ;) ? Ten percent better is a good reason for me to try it :))
I upload to here. It was optimised to Duron (64+64kB cache), so don't rely on better time on other processors.
But, I think it will catch up the SSE3 code on A64 and P4.
I tested it on my AMD XP 2100+, but it errored out within 2 seconds:
24.03.2006 20:32:09 Unrecoverable error for result 20dc98aa.10638.6706.36084.1.235_2 ( - exit code -1073741819 (0xc0000005))
I guessing c39L only works on certain computers? I have been running the c37 version on all four computers, today I saw c39L listed and thought I'd give it a try on a couple of units. Both are AMD K7's, 1.2g and 1.3g. After inserting the new albert, both started having "computation errors". So, I went back to c37 and all is well again.
For us bozo's that just install whatever is posted as the latest whizbang, maybe you should post some info as to what (in bozo terms) computers the program with operate with.
RE: RE: I'm now seeing
)
I'm curious and confused actually..., I still fail to see what the calibration client really does even out the claims, when in fact the optimised client crunches WU in a far shorter amount of time, the overall RAC of the optimised clients is still theoretically, increases, relative to the quora of distributed clients...
unless this is made beneficial to those running multiple projects.....
RE: I still fail to see
)
When an infinitesimal number of folks are running low-claiming setups, their result is always the low claim in the quorum and gets discarded, so the effect is just selection bias--though still not zero. But when the fraction rises, others start noticing that low claims are dragging down their results.
This happened on SETI when P4 chips and others with better crunch relative to benchmark showed up. It got much more so with the "optimized" science applications. Based on posted comments, this effect directly influenced many decisions to leave the project.
The calibrating client is an attempt to claim in line with the useful science performed. While it is not entirely successful (for one thing, it takes about 30 results to train itself when started up fresh on a stable setup, and longer than that to react to a drastic shift such as the recent 4x improvement going for dist to S39L) but better than other solutions I know of.
RE: Incredible! Did you get
)
Yes. Rytis wanted to forbid me because my Duron was faster than others.
His goal was to do a working BOINC application, not a faster one. :)
RE: Yes. Rytis wanted to
)
Your comment about this project being a planetheater is indeed an ironic one! The fossil fuel consumption necessary to run this project by powering all the computers crunching at less than maximum effiency will contribute to the greenhouse gases that are warming the planet..... :(
RE: SETI has some very
)
You mean, you had squeezed out another 10% out of a binary from Crunch3r? *wow*
Can I download that modified binary somewhere ;) ? Ten percent better is a good reason for me to try it :))
Maybe it's imaginable for you to work closely with Crunch3r to build a ultimate fast client for the upcoming Seti Enhanced ? :)
CU HiNuN
RE: My AMD XP 2600+ has
)
Follow-up:
First 'pure' S39L WU for my XP 1600+ went from ~7550 sec. (S38) to 6627 sec. A 'mixed' s38/s39L WU ran 7070 sec.
Seti Classic Final Total: 11446 WU.
Statisticks for CPU Pentium
)
Statisticks for CPU Pentium Xeon 2,4GHz (core Prestonia)
C37: Avarage time = 10125 sec (from 8 WU's)
S39: Average time = 5587 sec (from 12 WU's)
S39L: Average time = 5530 sec (from 12 WU's)
RE: RE: SETI has some
)
I upload to here. It was optimised to Duron (64+64kB cache), so don't rely on better time on other processors.
But, I think it will catch up the SSE3 code on A64 and P4.
RE: RE: RE: SETI has
)
I tested it on my AMD XP 2100+, but it errored out within 2 seconds:
24.03.2006 20:32:09 Unrecoverable error for result 20dc98aa.10638.6706.36084.1.235_2 ( - exit code -1073741819 (0xc0000005))
Staying with crunch3rs opt. app. :-)
AndyK
Want to know your pending credit?
The biggest bug is sitting 10 inch in front of the screen.
I guessing c39L only works on
)
I guessing c39L only works on certain computers? I have been running the c37 version on all four computers, today I saw c39L listed and thought I'd give it a try on a couple of units. Both are AMD K7's, 1.2g and 1.3g. After inserting the new albert, both started having "computation errors". So, I went back to c37 and all is well again.
For us bozo's that just install whatever is posted as the latest whizbang, maybe you should post some info as to what (in bozo terms) computers the program with operate with.