Information about the new S5 workunits

Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3522
Credit: 744040503
RAC: 987074

RE: Hey guys, just a quick

Message 37857 in response to message 37856

Quote:
Hey guys, just a quick update. My WU has about 2 hours left; total crunching time should amount to between 20.5 and 21 hours. I still don't know the exact credit value, though. Btw, I'm getting a friend from Uni to check this with one or two of his AMD boxes, so we'll get some more results. Mailing Bernd is a great idea imo.

Hi Annika!

OK, so please stay home, don't go out, and let us know in 2 hours time :-) :-) :-)

Your friends AMD boxes support SSE2?

CU

BRM

Annika
Annika
Joined: 8 Aug 06
Posts: 720
Credit: 494410
RAC: 0

I got him to check on his

I got him to check on his Opteron X2... being quite new (goodness, that box made me drool when he bought it) this box supports anything you might want ;-) Plus, I have results under both Windows and Linux in my spreadsheet, so comparing will be easy. That was the box which got the huge 70% penalty, btw.

Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3522
Credit: 744040503
RAC: 987074

RE: I got him to check on

Message 37859 in response to message 37858

Quote:
I got him to check on his Opteron X2... being quite new (goodness, that box made me drool when he bought it) this box supports anything you might want ;-) Plus, I have results under both Windows and Linux in my spreadsheet, so comparing will be easy. That was the box which got the huge 70% penalty, btw.

Excellent! I would expect the gap to narrow significantly, but it won't be closed completely.

CU

BRM

Annika
Annika
Joined: 8 Aug 06
Posts: 720
Credit: 494410
RAC: 0

Results for my WU are just

Results for my WU are just in... 310 credits in 21.4 hours, so, about 14.5 credits/hour. Now I need your help interpreting this, since I don't have results with the "normal" Windows app from that box. It can do 18.3 C/H under Linux, so, Linux would still be 26% faster. But I guess the penalty would have been greater with the standard app?
Btw, first (very rough) estimates for the Opteron show that it is about 20% faster after patching.

M. Schmitt
M. Schmitt
Joined: 27 Jun 05
Posts: 478
Credit: 15872262
RAC: 0

RE: Results for my WU are

Message 37861 in response to message 37860

Quote:
Results for my WU are just in... 310 credits in 21.4 hours, so, about 14.5 credits/hour. Now I need your help interpreting this, since I don't have results with the "normal" Windows app from that box. It can do 18.3 C/H under Linux, so, Linux would still be 26% faster. But I guess the penalty would have been greater with the standard app?
Btw, first (very rough) estimates for the Opteron show that it is about 20% faster after patching.

Have a look at this post. To compare, just divide your c/h values through cpu clock rate.

cu,
Michael

Annika
Annika
Joined: 8 Aug 06
Posts: 720
Credit: 494410
RAC: 0

Running at 2.2 GHz, it would

Running at 2.2 GHz, it would be a ratio of 6.6 (C/H)/clock speed. This certainly looks better than your results with the unpatched app :-) As the WU was already a few % (not more than 10 or 12, maybe less) finished when I applied the hack it might even be a bit better than that.

Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3522
Credit: 744040503
RAC: 987074

RE: Results for my WU are

Message 37863 in response to message 37860

Quote:
Results for my WU are just in... 310 credits in 21.4 hours, so, about 14.5 credits/hour. Now I need your help interpreting this, since I don't have results with the "normal" Windows app from that box. It can do 18.3 C/H under Linux, so, Linux would still be 26% faster. But I guess the penalty would have been greater with the standard app?
Btw, first (very rough) estimates for the Opteron show that it is about 20% faster after patching.

I googled around (all the results pages are indexed :-) ) to find similar hosts, e.g. this one

http://einsteinathome.org/host/930888/tasks

And what I got was 10.5 to 11.5 CCH , which would mean a ca 30 % speedup just as expected :-). So, still no reason to crunch under Windows when Linux is available, but the diff between Win and Linux was reduced from a rediculous runtime factor of 1.6 to a more acceptable 1.3 on your machine.

CU

BRM

Annika
Annika
Joined: 8 Aug 06
Posts: 720
Credit: 494410
RAC: 0

This sounds good. I mean,

This sounds good. I mean, personally, I still won't be using Windows much for crunching, but it's great we figured this out :-) and if it could be made available to everyone, e.g., all the 80% who can't or don't want to use Linux, the project could benefit quite a lot...

M. Schmitt
M. Schmitt
Joined: 27 Jun 05
Posts: 478
Credit: 15872262
RAC: 0

RE: This sounds good. I

Message 37865 in response to message 37864

Quote:
This sounds good. I mean, personally, I still won't be using Windows much for crunching, but it's great we figured this out :-) and if it could be made available to everyone, e.g., all the 80% who can't or don't want to use Linux, the project could benefit quite a lot...

2 team mates have already patched there AMDs, in one case 19 x A64 and 6 x A64 X2. :-))

cu,
Michael

Annika
Annika
Joined: 8 Aug 06
Posts: 720
Credit: 494410
RAC: 0

Goodness, huge farms :-D

Goodness, huge farms :-D makes my single AMD box (and even my friend's three, two of which are SSE2 capable) pale in comparison. Of course with so many boxes the effect will be much more noticeable; I'm sure it will pay of for both the team and the project. Still, what about the "not so many patched clients" policy?

Comment viewing options

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