Dave and Honza, you're wellcome if you want to help us to support users in the internationnal part of BS support forum.
I will gladly offer assistance where I can. I am no programming expert, but I should be able to help a bit... I'm sure I'll be asking questions as well.
I just registered and took a quick look around, very nicely done. I think having on-line documentation and support will help BS grow to be more popular among non French speaking users out there. Keep up the good work!
Dave
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
Running a laptop, dual T2400, Boinc 5.4.9, Rosetta 5.25. I am getting a credit correction for this box{see asterisks}. If I try to enabled credit correction for my two 840ees, ht enabled, BS will not allow it. I this a bug?
27441758 23389886 7 Jul 2006 11:43:44 UTC 7 Jul 2006 17:22:32 UTC Over Success Done 10,637.28 70.97 70.97 ****27439969 23388152 7 Jul 2006 11:28:40 UTC 14 Jul 2006 11:28:40 UTC In Progress Unknown New --- --- --- 27437778 23386089 7 Jul 2006 11:08:29 UTC 7 Jul 2006 17:05:41 UTC Over Success Done 10,573.63 19.23 19.23 27435662 22443923 7 Jul 2006 10:47:58 UTC 7 Jul 2006 17:22:31 UTC Over Success Done 9,261.53 13.59 13.59 27432868 23381448 7 Jul 2006 10:21:38 UTC 7 Jul 2006 17:05:41 UTC Over Success Done 11,079.59 20.15 20.15 27431658 23380321 7 Jul 2006 10:11:13 UTC 7 Jul 2006 16:34:19 UTC Over Success Done 10,530.23 70.26 70.26 ****27431315 23380059 7 Jul 2006 10:08:02 UTC 7 Jul 2006 16:43:50 UTC Over Success Done 10,272.00 15.07 15.07 27429071 23377909 7 Jul 2006 9:46:47 UTC 7 Jul 2006 16:13:10 UTC Over Success Done 10,152.98 18.47 18.47 27426789 23375748 7 Jul 2006 9:24:11 UTC 7 Jul 2006 15:17:07 UTC Over Success Done 10,318.22 15.14 15.14 27424868 23373975 7 Jul 2006 9:09:06 UTC 7 Jul 2006 16:13:10 UTC Over Success Done 10,351.91 18.83 18.83 27422274 23371500 7 Jul 2006 8:47:14 UTC 7 Jul 2006 15:17:07 UTC Over Success Done 10,399.39 15.25 15.25 27421030 23370310 7 Jul 2006 8:37:51 UTC 7 Jul 2006 14:25:08 UTC Over Success Done 10,694.91 71.33 71.33 ****27419085 23368532 7 Jul 2006 8:20:46 UTC 7 Jul 2006 14:00:22 UTC Over Success Done 10,317.89 18.77 18.77 27416518 23366062 7 Jul 2006 7:58:38 UTC 7 Jul 2006 15:17:07 UTC Over Success Done 11,209.42 16.44 16.44 27413972 23363655 7 Jul 2006 7:35:07 UTC 7 Jul 2006 14:00:22 UTC Over Success Done 10,443.95 19.00 19.00 27412502 23362243 7 Jul 2006 7:22:17 UTC 7 Jul 2006 13:42:34 UTC Over Success Done 10,145.22 14.88 14.88 27411744 23361562 7 Jul 2006 7:15:08 UTC 7 Jul 2006 13:38:05 UTC Over Success Done 11,009.58 73.46 73.46 ****
Running a laptop, dual T2400, Boinc 5.4.9, Rosetta 5.25. I am getting a credit correction for this box{see asterisks}. If I try to enabled credit correction for my two 840ees, ht enabled, BS will not allow it. I this a bug?
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
Sorry to dig this thread up again but I believe Intel’s NDA for the Core 2 Duo ended today, so if you see this Honza (or anyone else who was lucky enough to get their hands on one of these chips), I was wondering if you might share some performance results you found for BOINC.
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
Yeah, I hope it's correct...have been quite bussy during the weekdays so haven't had a chance to monitor NDA etc.
During the time I've tested X6800, some results are already purged from db but some still remains.
Generally, Long WU from S5 series was usually done in 15k seconds. Here might be an interesting comparation with Opeteron 175 which Bruce runs under Linux. Win box with Intel X6800 was ~ 38% faster.
So, where Opteron 175 can do 7.2 WUs of that kind per day, X6800 can do exactly 10 of that kind.
To put it another way:
Opteron 175 runs 2.2 GHz, X6800 runs at 2.93 GHz, it's 33% difference,
Opteron did in 23k82 secs, X6800 did in 17k24, it's 38% difference.
So, it's about the same performance per clock, but Opteron 175 has TDP of 110 watts, whereas X6800 only 75 and lower models only 65 watts, which makes Intel a leader in "performance per watt" as Intel likes to stress this measurement.
I know this comparation does not serve well since X6800 was running Win XP x64 and Opeteron 175 was under Linux.
Updated BOINC table is here. There is a thread on BOINC Synergy forum that deals with all the data in the table: RAM, HD space, internet traffic (which I miss in BOINC or Boinc Studio), timer per WU for selected CPU types, deadline, quota, quorum, app version number and damn credit for ALL BOINC projects. It also contain detailed explanation of all column in the table and people should post any updates there. But BS forum - in my not so humble opinion - went down in quality and people are not much interested in other aspects of BOINC project than credit so I'm considering to 'move' the thread elsewhere (perhaps BOINCStats or maybe BOINC.CZ).
Anyway, feel free to post comments about Conroe, provide run times for other projects etc.
In the updated table, you will find Conroe run times for CPDN projects.
I suggest that a moderator spit this thread from Dave's post and create a new thread for Conroe and make thread on topic.
RE: RE: Hi everybody We
)
Read this explanation on how to register and automatically switch the forum language to English
http://forum.boincstudio.boinc.fr/boincstudio/support-international/How-register-this-forum-sujet-6-1.htm
Note : available languages for the forum are French and English only
RE: Dave and Honza, you're
)
I will gladly offer assistance where I can. I am no programming expert, but I should be able to help a bit... I'm sure I'll be asking questions as well.
I just registered and took a quick look around, very nicely done. I think having on-line documentation and support will help BS grow to be more popular among non French speaking users out there. Keep up the good work!
Dave
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
05/07/2006 22:09: Unknown
)
05/07/2006 22:09: Unknown Pirates@Home client md5: d187713730a18ec77faf4ed3b141c64a for file projects/pirates.spy-hill.net/hello_5.07_windows_intelx86.exe
05/07/2006 22:09: Adding d187713730a18ec77faf4ed3b141c64a for file projects/pirates.spy-hill.net/hello_5.07_windows_intelx86.exe. Please report
me-[at]-rescam.org
RE: 05/07/2006 22:09:
)
Thanks.
MD5 reported. May I ask you to post any future new MD5s on the boincstudio support forum ? please.
Running a laptop, dual T2400,
)
Running a laptop, dual T2400, Boinc 5.4.9, Rosetta 5.25. I am getting a credit correction for this box{see asterisks}. If I try to enabled credit correction for my two 840ees, ht enabled, BS will not allow it. I this a bug?
27441758 23389886 7 Jul 2006 11:43:44 UTC 7 Jul 2006 17:22:32 UTC Over Success Done 10,637.28 70.97 70.97 ****27439969 23388152 7 Jul 2006 11:28:40 UTC 14 Jul 2006 11:28:40 UTC In Progress Unknown New --- --- --- 27437778 23386089 7 Jul 2006 11:08:29 UTC 7 Jul 2006 17:05:41 UTC Over Success Done 10,573.63 19.23 19.23 27435662 22443923 7 Jul 2006 10:47:58 UTC 7 Jul 2006 17:22:31 UTC Over Success Done 9,261.53 13.59 13.59 27432868 23381448 7 Jul 2006 10:21:38 UTC 7 Jul 2006 17:05:41 UTC Over Success Done 11,079.59 20.15 20.15 27431658 23380321 7 Jul 2006 10:11:13 UTC 7 Jul 2006 16:34:19 UTC Over Success Done 10,530.23 70.26 70.26 ****27431315 23380059 7 Jul 2006 10:08:02 UTC 7 Jul 2006 16:43:50 UTC Over Success Done 10,272.00 15.07 15.07 27429071 23377909 7 Jul 2006 9:46:47 UTC 7 Jul 2006 16:13:10 UTC Over Success Done 10,152.98 18.47 18.47 27426789 23375748 7 Jul 2006 9:24:11 UTC 7 Jul 2006 15:17:07 UTC Over Success Done 10,318.22 15.14 15.14 27424868 23373975 7 Jul 2006 9:09:06 UTC 7 Jul 2006 16:13:10 UTC Over Success Done 10,351.91 18.83 18.83 27422274 23371500 7 Jul 2006 8:47:14 UTC 7 Jul 2006 15:17:07 UTC Over Success Done 10,399.39 15.25 15.25 27421030 23370310 7 Jul 2006 8:37:51 UTC 7 Jul 2006 14:25:08 UTC Over Success Done 10,694.91 71.33 71.33 ****27419085 23368532 7 Jul 2006 8:20:46 UTC 7 Jul 2006 14:00:22 UTC Over Success Done 10,317.89 18.77 18.77 27416518 23366062 7 Jul 2006 7:58:38 UTC 7 Jul 2006 15:17:07 UTC Over Success Done 11,209.42 16.44 16.44 27413972 23363655 7 Jul 2006 7:35:07 UTC 7 Jul 2006 14:00:22 UTC Over Success Done 10,443.95 19.00 19.00 27412502 23362243 7 Jul 2006 7:22:17 UTC 7 Jul 2006 13:42:34 UTC Over Success Done 10,145.22 14.88 14.88 27411744 23361562 7 Jul 2006 7:15:08 UTC 7 Jul 2006 13:38:05 UTC Over Success Done 11,009.58 73.46 73.46 ****
BOINC Wiki
RE: Running a laptop, dual
)
Take a look here at the official BoincStudio Support forum
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
Sorry to dig this thread up
)
Sorry to dig this thread up again but I believe Intel’s NDA for the Core 2 Duo ended today, so if you see this Honza (or anyone else who was lucky enough to get their hands on one of these chips), I was wondering if you might share some performance results you found for BOINC.
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
Yeah, I hope it's
)
Yeah, I hope it's correct...have been quite bussy during the weekdays so haven't had a chance to monitor NDA etc.
During the time I've tested X6800, some results are already purged from db but some still remains.
Generally, Long WU from S5 series was usually done in 15k seconds.
Here might be an interesting comparation with Opeteron 175 which Bruce runs under Linux. Win box with Intel X6800 was ~ 38% faster.
So, where Opteron 175 can do 7.2 WUs of that kind per day, X6800 can do exactly 10 of that kind.
To put it another way:
Opteron 175 runs 2.2 GHz, X6800 runs at 2.93 GHz, it's 33% difference,
Opteron did in 23k82 secs, X6800 did in 17k24, it's 38% difference.
So, it's about the same performance per clock, but Opteron 175 has TDP of 110 watts, whereas X6800 only 75 and lower models only 65 watts, which makes Intel a leader in "performance per watt" as Intel likes to stress this measurement.
I know this comparation does not serve well since X6800 was running Win XP x64 and Opeteron 175 was under Linux.
Updated BOINC table is here. There is a thread on BOINC Synergy forum that deals with all the data in the table: RAM, HD space, internet traffic (which I miss in BOINC or Boinc Studio), timer per WU for selected CPU types, deadline, quota, quorum, app version number and damn credit for ALL BOINC projects. It also contain detailed explanation of all column in the table and people should post any updates there. But BS forum - in my not so humble opinion - went down in quality and people are not much interested in other aspects of BOINC project than credit so I'm considering to 'move' the thread elsewhere (perhaps BOINCStats or maybe BOINC.CZ).
Anyway, feel free to post comments about Conroe, provide run times for other projects etc.
In the updated table, you will find Conroe run times for CPDN projects.
I suggest that a moderator spit this thread from Dave's post and create a new thread for Conroe and make thread on topic.
Honza, the workunit you
)
Honza, the workunit you linked have one Opteron and one Athlon X2... no Conroe in there.
I skimmed the hosts table and found two machines running Conroe-based Xeons, marvel on the timing here http://einsteinathome.org/host/673206/tasks
1,500 RAC on a single box is rather impressive.
More
)
More Xeons:
http://einsteinathome.org/host/659586 Xeon 5160 (3000 MHz) - but rather poor performance, ~30k
http://einsteinathome.org/host/664021 Xeon 5150 (2666 MHz) - more like it, ~19k
http://einsteinathome.org/host/624590 Xeon 5150 (2666 MHz) - good performance with 15,100s/result.
No idea why the performance differs so wildly.
I can't find any E6xxx chips in hosts table - how are they identified?