I have two a64's and a c1d machine. Both A64's are getting about 60% the credit they did under s5r1, the c1d is getting 75%. The developers are waiting until they're sure all the bugs are worked out before replacing the c++ hot loops with assembly code which should even out the difference. Akos has described the compiler output as being very ugly and aparently intels on chip otimizer is managing to do a better job of sorting it out.
I have two a64's and a c1d machine. Both A64's are getting about 60% the credit they did under s5r1, the c1d is getting 75%. The developers are waiting until they're sure all the bugs are worked out before replacing the c++ hot loops with assembly code which should even out the difference. Akos has described the compiler output as being very ugly and aparently intels on chip otimizer is managing to do a better job of sorting it out.
Akos has described the compiler output as being very ugly and aparently intels on chip otimizer is managing to do a better job of sorting it out.
Well I guess I'll have to give credit when credit is due. Once upon a time an Intel will manage to get something right.
If you follow through to the detailled pages on BOINCStats you'll find:
You can see the code format by clicking 'reply' to this message: but if you plan to use it permanently, please put the code into the 'signature' section of your forum preferences (it's much kinder for dial-up users: they - or anyone else - can filter the images out so the pages load quicker).
Seems like I got lost in the shuffle on this (I don't have a lot of spare time to invest, just spare computing power).
I didn't realize there was a changeover happening...last task was taking over 30 hours and I thought something was wrong so I aborted the task. Since then I've tried to get more work but it isn't happening.
I'm running 5.8.8 on XP 64, athlon processor. Is this part of my problem? Can somebody give me a simple answer what I need to do to get back on board with this?
I have a WU crashed too.... In my case, it crashed when it was as a screensaver. When I went back to the machine, and touch a key, it crashed...
Hey, last time we had a sort of a beta E@H program, it was shutdown with somewhat bad manners because they said that Akosf efforts and all the betas he made where hurting the program and compromised it... which was completely wrong... now they do a beta run for the whole community!!!!
Seems like I got lost in the shuffle on this (I don't have a lot of spare time to invest, just spare computing power).
I didn't realize there was a changeover happening...last task was taking over 30 hours and I thought something was wrong so I aborted the task. Since then I've tried to get more work but it isn't happening.
I'm running 5.8.8 on XP 64, athlon processor. Is this part of my problem? Can somebody give me a simple answer what I need to do to get back on board with this?
Thanks, Dennis
Nope, not your problem. But using an AMD chip may very well be. I have 5 of them, but only one is a 64bit, but from reading several of the posts in this thread as well as others, running these jobs may be significantly faster with an Intel. Oh well, they have to get something right every now and then.
Gary
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.....Douglas Adams
Nope, not your problem. But using an AMD chip may very well be. I have 5 of them, but only one is a 64bit, but from reading several of the posts in this thread as well as others, running these jobs may be significantly faster with an Intel. Oh well, they have to get something right every now and then.
Gary
Well, I do this because I like being part of something bigger than myself but Intel aint gonna happen here. Ill just periodically keep trying to connect until this straightens out then.
The developers are waiting until they're sure all the bugs are worked out before replacing the c++ hot loops with assembly code which should even out the difference.
The bugs that are currently on display should have caused a waiting period before replacing S5RI with S5R2. S5R2 in its' current state is clearly a beta product.
The bugs that are currently on display should have caused a waiting period before replacing S5RI with S5R2. S5R2 in its' current state is clearly a beta product.
No one is forcing you to run S5R2.
Then again, there are no S5R1 and S5RI results anymore, but for a couple of resents, so what do you want? To have the big group of Einstein's volunteer crunchers to wait around for that other smaller group of volunteer crunchers to Beta test S5R2? ;-)
After sometime I terminated the first unit with S5R2.
I need a long time, about 12 hours (51.900 sec). So I needed about 5,4 times
more than normal. So I am a little bit disapointed that I get only 113 points.
The double of the normal units.
I've just started my first S5R2 WU. It's behaving like Rosetta, i.e. the "time remaining" increments along with the CPU time. Is this to be expected. The estimated time for the WU was around 12 hours. It's done 3.33 hours (16%) but the "to completion" time is showing 11:17:43...all OK? I think not!!
I have two a64's and a c1d
)
I have two a64's and a c1d machine. Both A64's are getting about 60% the credit they did under s5r1, the c1d is getting 75%. The developers are waiting until they're sure all the bugs are worked out before replacing the c++ hot loops with assembly code which should even out the difference. Akos has described the compiler output as being very ugly and aparently intels on chip otimizer is managing to do a better job of sorting it out.
RE: I have two a64's and a
)
Akos has described the compiler output as being very ugly and aparently intels on chip otimizer is managing to do a better job of sorting it out.
Well I guess I'll have to give credit when credit is due. Once upon a time an Intel will manage to get something right.
BTW, What is the URL that allows you to view your stats in that small rectangular box in your post? I can find all of that data at
http://www.boincstats.com/search/all_projects.php?cpid=e13c95468dd08fb861911e0947bc99e2 but have yet to come up with my stats in the above form that can be added to a post.
Gary
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.....Douglas Adams
RE: BTW, What is the URL
)
If you follow through to the detailled pages on BOINCStats you'll find:
You can see the code format by clicking 'reply' to this message: but if you plan to use it permanently, please put the code into the 'signature' section of your forum preferences (it's much kinder for dial-up users: they - or anyone else - can filter the images out so the pages load quicker).
Hi.... Seems like I got
)
Hi....
Seems like I got lost in the shuffle on this (I don't have a lot of spare time to invest, just spare computing power).
I didn't realize there was a changeover happening...last task was taking over 30 hours and I thought something was wrong so I aborted the task. Since then I've tried to get more work but it isn't happening.
I'm running 5.8.8 on XP 64, athlon processor. Is this part of my problem? Can somebody give me a simple answer what I need to do to get back on board with this?
Thanks, Dennis
I have a WU crashed too....
)
I have a WU crashed too.... In my case, it crashed when it was as a screensaver. When I went back to the machine, and touch a key, it crashed...
Hey, last time we had a sort of a beta E@H program, it was shutdown with somewhat bad manners because they said that Akosf efforts and all the betas he made where hurting the program and compromised it... which was completely wrong... now they do a beta run for the whole community!!!!
RE: Hi.... Seems like I
)
Nope, not your problem. But using an AMD chip may very well be. I have 5 of them, but only one is a 64bit, but from reading several of the posts in this thread as well as others, running these jobs may be significantly faster with an Intel. Oh well, they have to get something right every now and then.
Gary
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.....Douglas Adams
RE: RE: Nope, not your
)
Well, I do this because I like being part of something bigger than myself but Intel aint gonna happen here. Ill just periodically keep trying to connect until this straightens out then.
Dennis
RE: The developers are
)
The bugs that are currently on display should have caused a waiting period before replacing S5RI with S5R2. S5R2 in its' current state is clearly a beta product.
RE: The bugs that are
)
No one is forcing you to run S5R2.
Then again, there are no S5R1 and S5RI results anymore, but for a couple of resents, so what do you want? To have the big group of Einstein's volunteer crunchers to wait around for that other smaller group of volunteer crunchers to Beta test S5R2? ;-)
RE: RE: After sometime I
)
I've just started my first S5R2 WU. It's behaving like Rosetta, i.e. the "time remaining" increments along with the CPU time. Is this to be expected. The estimated time for the WU was around 12 hours. It's done 3.33 hours (16%) but the "to completion" time is showing 11:17:43...all OK? I think not!!