Optomized S5 SSE3

Skip Da Shu
Skip Da Shu
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 151
Credit: 1042252761
RAC: 722161

RE: Dont�think so.

Message 39118 in response to message 39115

Quote:
Dont�think so. S5S0007 is an optimization for SSE. And S5T0709 is an optimization for SSE3.

Oh, OK. Thanx

Pepperammi
Pepperammi
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 131
Credit: 437943
RAC: 0

Valid and credit

Valid and credit granted
http://einsteinathome.org/task/34966235
S5T0301 finished with S5S0007. Updating to newer patch now

Pepperammi
Pepperammi
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 131
Credit: 437943
RAC: 0

I'm going to give letting a

Message 39120 in response to message 39119

I'm going to give letting a seti unit work and see if theres any noticeable diffrence in speed. Shouldn't be on the dual core but maybe the HT pc.

Kratylos
Kratylos
Joined: 23 Nov 05
Posts: 28
Credit: 1669914
RAC: 0

Both mixed results are

Both mixed results are valid:

Patch: S5T0307 + S5T0709

34468379

34468377

Speed: ca. 13 - 15 % faster.

Dronak
Dronak
Joined: 21 Mar 05
Posts: 28
Credit: 10402879
RAC: 0

Here's the work unit I just

Here's the work unit I just completed. It used S5T0004 to start, but as soon as I heard about that giving invalid results, I switched over to the stable S5S0003, so hopefully it will validate. It took about 14.5 hours to finish, and I think only about 1 hour was with the test version. BTW, my other unit done about half and half with the stock and S5T0004 applications is still pending, but given other comments here, I'm guessing it won't validate.

My next work unit is another long one. *sigh* I was going to use the latest stable S5S0007 version for this, but saw a few SSE3 optimized test versions here that my computer could use. Recent posts seem to indicate that S5T0710 gives invalid results, but S5T0709 gives valid results. It may be too early to draw conclusions on these versions though. I don't mind running test versions, but would like the results to have a good chance at validating, so I'm thinking of using the S5T0709 version next. Suggestions on what patch/version I should run for the next work unit?

Crunchers For More Power
Crunchers For M...
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 69
Credit: 1071273
RAC: 0

If you have a CPU with SSE3,

If you have a CPU with SSE3, then the S5T0709 is the fastest/best version for you.

Pepperammi
Pepperammi
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 131
Credit: 437943
RAC: 0

finally validated .Few

finally validated .Few seconds with S5T0001, rest S5T0301
http://einsteinathome.org/task/34951516

Skip Da Shu
Skip Da Shu
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 151
Credit: 1042252761
RAC: 722161

RE: please read the post 6

Message 39125 in response to message 39116

Quote:

please read the post 6 posts before yours...

greets

Sry thought I'd been thru them all... obvioulsy missed that one.

Dronak
Dronak
Joined: 21 Mar 05
Posts: 28
Credit: 10402879
RAC: 0

RE: If you have a CPU with

Message 39126 in response to message 39123

Quote:
If you have a CPU with SSE3, then the S5T0709 is the fastest/best version for you.

Thanks, Crunchers For More Power. That's what I thought from what I read here, but figured it wouldn't hurt to check. I'll let the S5T0709 version run all of my next unit and after it's done, I'll decide what to do next. Take it one unit at a time. :) Oh, I've just given this project a somewhat higher resource share to compensate for the increased work units. This should also help me return the next work unit sooner.

_heinz
_heinz
Joined: 4 Jan 06
Posts: 79
Credit: 130476
RAC: 0

Pentium4, 2.66MHz,

Pentium4, 2.66MHz, WinXPHome
S5S0007
34695109 1h 21min 25sec
34699121 1h 21min 21sec
standard client
1h 41min 22sec

that means S5S007 is 20min faster for the short h1 Wu´s
S5S0007 is ~20% faster than standard client on this machine
thanks to akosf
britta

Comment viewing options

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